RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2013-00780

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO 


________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) be upgraded to a general (under 
honorable conditions) discharge.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His BCD is preventing him from obtaining employment.  He is 
homeless and cannot support his family.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 27 Feb 01, the applicant commenced his enlistment in the 
Regular Air Force.

On 19 Apr 02, the applicant was tried and convicted by a general 
court-martial for two specifications of wrongful use of cocaine, 
one specification wrongful possession of cocaine, one 
specification of fraudulent enlistment.  The applicant was also 
charged with one specification of desertion, but was found 
guilty of a lesser included offense of absent without leave.  He 
was sentenced to a BCD, confinement for ten months, and 
forfeiture of all pay and allowances.  On 8 Jun 02, the 
convening authority approved the finding and the sentence for a 
BCD, seven months confinement and forfeiture of all pay and 
allowances.  On 13 Jul 02, the convening authority ordered the 
execution of the BCD.  He was furnished a BCD on 13 Jul 03, and 
credited with 3 years, 4 months, and 17 days of active service.  
The applicant was excess leave from 18 Jun 02 to 12 Jul 03.

On 16 Aug 04, a DD Form 215, Correction to DD Form 214, 
Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, was issued 
amending the applicant’s DD Form 214 to reflect he was 
discharged on 30 Jun 04, and was credited with two years, ten 
months and one day of active service.  His DD Form 214 was 
further amended to reflect he was on excess leave from 18 Jun 02 
to 30 Jun 04.

On 18 Nov 13, a request for post-service information was 
forwarded to the applicant for response within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  As of this date, no response has been received by 
this office.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of 
an error or injustice.  There was no evidence provided or 
located in records showing an error in the processing of the 
special court-martial; nor does the applicant contend there was 
an error in the processing of his court-martial or his 
conviction.  The applicant pled guilty to wrongful use of 
cocaine and being absent without leave.  He was represented by 
military counsel and had the opportunity to demand the 
government prove he committed the offenses against him.  Prior 
to accepting the applicant’s guilty plea, the judge ensured he 
understood the meaning and effect of his plea and the maximum 
punishment that could be imposed if his plea was accepted by the 
court.  In cases which include guilty pleas, the military judge 
ensures the accused understands the meaning and effect of his 
plea and the maximum punishment that could be imposed if his 
guilty plea is accepted by the court.  The military judge 
explains the elements and definitions of the offenses to which 
the accused plead guilty; and has the accused explain in his own 
words why he believes he is guilty.  Upon the court's acceptance 
of the guilty plea, it will receive evidence in aggravation, as 
well as in extenuation and mitigation, prior to crafting an 
appropriate sentence for the crimes committed.

The Rules for Courts-Martial states that a BCD "is designed as 
punishment for bad-conduct."  It also indicates that a bad 
conduct discharge is more than merely a service 
characterization; it is a punishment for the crimes the 
individual committed while a member of the armed forces.  The 
applicant's sentence was within the legal limits and was an 
appropriate punishment for the offenses committed.  A BCD was 
and continues to be part of a proper sentence and properly 
characterizes his service.

While clemency may be granted under 10 U.S.C § 1552(f)(2), 
clemency is not warranted in this case.  The applicant’s 
sentence to a BCD, reduction in rank, and confinement for four 
months was well within the legal limits and was an appropriate 
punishment for the offense committed.  Congress’ intent in 
setting up the Veteran’s Benefits Program was to express thanks 
for veterans’ personal sacrifices, separations from family, 
facing hostile enemy actions, and suffering financial hardship.  
All rights of a veteran under the laws administered by the 
Secretary of Veterans Affairs are barred where the veteran was 
discharged or dismissed by reason of the sentence of a general 
court-martial.  The applicant’s service time was punctuated by 
cocaine use, which should not be rewarded by the granting of 
veteran’s benefits.  Upgrading the applicant’s BCD is not 
appropriate.  

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 14 Apr 13 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 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 is 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-2013-00780 in Executive Session on 19 Dec 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Feb 13, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records
	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 29 Mar 13.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 13.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Nov 13, w/atch.




                                   
                                   Chair