RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03979 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His under other than honorable conditions (UOTHC) discharge be upgraded to general. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: It has been over ten years and he has carried the shame of his actions over this discharge. He is in need of medical attention and needs the discharge upgraded to able to receive medical benefits. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 9 Mar 88. On 1 Mar 96, the applicant was tried by special court-martial on the charge wrongfully using marijuana from on or about 7 Nov 95 to on or about 7 Dec 95, in violation of Article 112a, Uniform Code of Military (UCMJ). He pled guilty and was found guilty. The applicant was sentenced by a military judge to confinement for one month, reduction to the grade of E-1, and discharged with a bad conduct discharge (BCD). On 4 Apr 96, according to Special Court-Martial Order No. 2, the action was approved with the exception of the bad conduct discharge was not executed. On 17 Apr 96, according to the DD Form 2330, Waiver/Withdrawal of Appellate Rights in General and Special Courts-Martial Subject to Review by a Court of Military Review, found in the applicant’s official military personnel record, he waived all of his appellate rights to appeal in writing. On 23 Apr 96, the convening authority approved the sentence as adjudged-the bad conduct discharge was executed in light of the applicant’s appellate review waiver. On 20 May 96, the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions and was credited with 8 years and 22 days of active service. On 30 Sep 14, a request for post-service information was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. The punishment adjudged at the court- martial and approved by the convening authority was within the range of permissible punishments. The applicant waived, in writing, all of his appellate rights. In accordance with 10 USC 1552(f), the Board has no authority to overturn the court- martial conviction but may only on the basis of clemency, correct the actions taken by the reviewing authorities, i.e., the sentence. (In this case the applicant submitted no evidence in clemency.) Additionally, ordinarily, an applicant must file an application within three years after an error or injustice is discovered or, with due diligence, should have been discovered. The applicant’s courts-martial occurred in 1996 with final action in 1996. Therefore, this application is untimely. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 23 Feb 15 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We note that this Board is without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a court-martial conviction. Rather, in accordance with Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552(f), actions by this Board are limited to corrections to the record to reflect actions taken by the reviewing officials and action on the sentence of the court-martial for the purpose of clemency. We find no evidence which indicates the applicant’s service characterization, which had its basis in his court- martial conviction and was a part of the sentence of the military court, was improper or that it exceeded the limitations set forth in the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). We have considered the applicant’s overall quality of service, the court-martial conviction which precipitated the discharge, and the seriousness of the offenses to which convicted. However, in the absence of any evidence related to the applicant’s post- service activities that would enable us to determine if his accomplishments since his discharge are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which he was discharged, we find no basis upon which to favorably consider this application. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03979 in Executive Session on 9 Jul 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03979 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 Sep 14. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Sep 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 26 Nov 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Feb 15.