RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF: 			DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04313

					COUNSEL:  NONE

					HEARING DESIRED:  NO 



APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded.


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She made mistakes almost 18 years ago but has grown up since her 
court-martial.  She acknowledges that her behavior was 
unacceptable but is requesting her discharge be upgraded in 
order for her to have better job opportunities.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to the applicant’s DD Form 214, Certificate of Release 
or Discharge from Active Duty, on 26 Jul 95, she enlisted in the 
Regular Air Force.

On 6 May 97, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty of 
one specification of wrongfully making and uttering checks 
without sufficient funds, one specification of wrongful use of 
marijuana, and one specification of wrongfully distributing 
marijuana in violations of Articles 123a and 112a, respectively, 
of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ).  She was 
sentenced at a General Court-Martial to a BCD, confinement for 
nine months, and forfeiture of all pay and allowances. 

On 13 Mar 98, the applicant received a BCD, and was credited 
with two years and two days of total active service.

On 13 Nov 14, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 
30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this 
office (Exhibit C).





AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial.  The applicant’s has not supplied 
any evidence of injustice.  To upgrade the applicant’s discharge 
now would require the Board to substitute its judgment for that 
rendered by the trial court, the convening authority and the 
appellate courts almost 18 years ago when the facts and 
circumstances were fresh.  Not only was the applicant found 
guilty of the offenses, her sentence was then affirmed by the 
appellate courts and executed.  She would have also been 
afforded all appellate rights.  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 court-martial occurred in 1997 with 
final action in 1998.  The application is untimely.

Under 10 U.S.C. § 1552(f), the Board’s ability to correct 
records related to courts-martial is limited.  Specifically, 
section 1552(f)(1) permits the correction of a record to reflect 
actions taken by a reviewing authority under the UCMJ. 
Additionally, section 1552(f)(2) permits the correction of 
records related to action on the sentence of courts-martial for 
the purpose of clemency.  Apart from these two limited 
exceptions, the effect of section 1552(f) is that the Board is 
without authority to reverse, set aside, or otherwise expunge a 
court-martial conviction that occurred on or after 5 May 
1950 (the effective date of the UCMJ).  The applicant provides 
no additional evidence or clemency to help support her claim.

The complete 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 Dec 14 for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.


FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE BOARD:

After careful consideration of applicant’s request and the 
available evidence of record, we find the application untimely.  
The applicant did not file within three years after the alleged 
error or injustice was discovered as required by Title 10, 
United States Code, Section 1552 and Air Force Instruction 36-
2603.  The applicant has not shown a plausible reason for the 
delay in filing, and we are not persuaded that the record raises 
issues of error or injustice which require resolution on the 
merits.  Thus, we cannot conclude it would be in the interest of 
justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to file in a timely 
manner.  


THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The application was not timely filed and it would not be in the 
interest of justice to waive the untimeliness.  It is the 
decision of the Board, therefore, to reject the application as 
untimely.


The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2014-04313 in Executive Session on 10 Jun 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	                   , Panel Chair
	                  , Member
	                        , Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Oct 14, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Nov 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 15 Dec 14.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Dec 14.