RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00028 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her bad conduct discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under honorable conditions) discharge. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her punishment did not fit the crime and although it has been 28 years, it has always bothered her. She has always regretted making bad decisions as a young adult. She could have made so much out of her opportunity in the air force. She is an administrative assistant and would like to be able to seek employment with the city, state, or federal government, which requires a good discharge. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 1 February 1984. On 11 April 1986, the applicant pled guilty and was found guilty at a Special court-martial (SPCM) for one charge and specification of failure to go, in violation of Article 86, of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); one charge and specification for use of marijuana, in violation of Article 112a, UCMJ; and one charge and specification of fraudulent obtaining dining hall services, of a value of about $.70, in violation of Article 134, UCMJ. She was sentenced to confinement for six months, forfeitures of $200.00 per month for six months, reduction in grade to Airman Basic (E-1), and a BCD. On 5 May 1986, an AF Form 242, Staff Judge Advocate’s (SJA) Recommendations, was initiated in which the SJA stated the punishment adjudged was severe, particularly regarding confinement. He recommended to the convening authority that the unexecuted portion of the applicant’s sentence of confinement in excess of four months be remitted and to approve the remainder of the sentence as adjudged. On 22 July 1986, the convening authority agreed with the SJA’s recommendation. Specifically, only so much of the sentence as provides for a BCD, confinement for four months, forfeiture of $200.00 pay per month for six months and reduction to E-1 is approved and except for the part of the sentence extending to a BCD, will be executed. The time of confinement had been served. On 20 August 1986, the United States Air Force Court of Military Review concluded that the findings and sentence were correct in law and fact and that no error materially prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused was committed. Accordingly, the findings of guilty and sentence were affirmed. On 5 February 1987, the applicant’s BCD was executed. On 5 June 1991, the applicant initiated a DD Form 293, Application for Review of Discharge or Dismissal from the Armed Forces of The United States, requesting her BCD be changed to a general (under honorable conditions). 6 November 1992, the Air Force Discharge Review Board (AFDRB) considered the applicant’s request to upgrade her discharge and determined her punitive discharge by SPCM was appropriate under the facts and circumstances. There was insufficient basis as an act of clemency for change to her discharge. On 3 August 2015, a request for post-service information was forwarded to applicant for comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). 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 C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. The punishment adjudged by a military judge and approved by the convening authority was within the range of permissible punishments. The applicant was afforded all her appellate rights and indeed received some clemency in the reduction of her confinement. In accordance with 10 USC § 1552, 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. However, in this case the applicant submitted no evidence in clemency; she only stated she regrets her mistakes and believes the punishment was too harsh for the crimes. Therefore, recommendation is to not grant relief based on any error or injustice with the court-martial process. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6 March 2015 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 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 her 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 her accomplishments since her discharge are sufficient to overcome the misconduct for which she 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-2015-00028 in Executive Session on 17 September 2015 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2015-00028 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 16 November 2014. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 4 March 2015. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 March 2015. Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 August 2015, w/atch.