ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  99-00958
            INDEX CODE:  126.00, 111.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the  applicant’s  request  for  reconsideration,  he  requests  that  the
Article 15, dated 1  August  1996,  and  the  Enlisted  Performance  Reports
(EPRs) closing 30 September 1996 and 28 January 1997 be reviewed.

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade  of
staff sergeant.  His  Total  Active  Federal  Military  Service  Date  is  3
December 1990 and his High year of Tenure is 1 December 2010.

On 1 August 1996, he was given an Article 15 for disobeying a direct  order.
 He was fined $150.00 a month for two months, restricted to the base for  30
days, ordered to serve 30 days  of  extra  duty  and  received  a  suspended
reduction in grade to Airman First Class.

On 9 April 1999, the applicant submitted an application requesting that  the
Article 15, dated 1 August 1996, be  set  aside  and  the  EPRs  closing  30
September 1996 and 28 January 1997 be declared void or be upgraded.

On 23 February  2000,  the  Board  considered  and  denied  the  applicant’s
requests.  A complete copy of the  Record  of  Proceedings  is  attached  at
Exhibit E.

On 7 November 2002, the applicant submitted a request  for  reconsideration,
contending that he was punished under Article 15 for a  crime  that  he  did
not commit.   In  support  of  the  appeal,  applicant  submits  a  personal
statement and three character references, a copy of  three  nominations  for
awards, and copies of five thank you letters,  (Exhibit F).

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

In earlier findings in this case, the  Board  determined  that  insufficient
evidence had been  presented  to  demonstrate  the  existence  of  error  or
injustice.  After reviewing the information provided by the  applicant,  the
Board majority does not believe a revision of the earlier findings  in  this
case is warranted.  The Board majority does not believe  that  the  evidence
provided is  sufficient  to  show  that  the  imposition  of  the  contested
nonjudicial punishment on the applicant was contrary to  the  provisions  of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice or that it was  unjust.   In  cases  of
this nature, the Board majority does not believe it appropriate  to  disturb
the discretionary judgments of  commanding  officers  absent  a  showing  of
abuse of that authority.  The Board majority  does  not  believe  there  has
been such a showing here.   The  reason  the  nonjudicial  proceedings  were
initiated against the  applicant  is  clearly  stated  in  the  record.   It
appears the applicant was afforded every right to  which  he  was  entitled.
The applicant  waived  his  right  to  demand  trial  by  court-martial  and
accepted the nonjudicial proceedings.  After considering the  evidence,  the
commander determined he had committed  the  alleged  offense  and  that  the
punishment should be imposed.  A superior commander upheld  the  commander’s
decision, when that officer denied the applicant’s appeal.  Other  than  his
own assertions, the applicant has provided  no  evidence  showing  that  the
information considered by the commander was erroneous, that his  substantial
rights were violated,  that  the  punishment  was  excessive,  or  that  the
commanders abused their discretionary authority.  The Board  majority  noted
the only new evidence not seen by the commanders in  the  applicant’s  chain
of command when the punishment was imposed are  supportive  statements  from
officers  who  became  acquainted  with  the  applicant  in  his   follow-on
assignments.  While the authors  of  these  statements  think  well  of  the
applicant,  the  Board  majority  does  not  find  the  contents  of   their
statements relate any new information concerning the events which served  as
a  basis  for  the  nonjudicial  punishment  or  demonstrate  an  abuse   of
discretion on the part of the applicant’s superiors  occurred  at  the  time
the punishment was imposed.  Accordingly, the  Board  majority  declines  to
favorably consider the applicant’s request that the  Article  15  punishment
be set aside.

As to the  applicant’s  requests  concerning  the  contested  EPRs,  in  the
absence of persuasive evidence by  the  applicant  showing  the  information
contained in the reports is erroneous or that  the  reports  are  inaccurate
depictions of  his  performance  during  the  referent  periods,  the  Board
majority agrees with the AFPC/DPPPAB assessment of his  requests  concerning
the reports closing in 1996  and  1997  and  finds  no  basis  on  which  to
favorably consider their removal  from  the  records  or  to  upgrade  their
ratings.

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

A majority of the panel finds insufficient evidence of  error  or  injustice
and recommends the application be denied.

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application in  Executive
Session on 20 February 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Richard A. Peterson, Panel Chair
            Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
            Mr. Timothy A. Beyland, Member

By a majority vote, the Board recommended denial of  the  application.   Mr.
Beyland voted to correct the  records  but  does  not  desire  to  submit  a
Minority Report.  The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit E.  Record of Proceedings, dated 8 Mar 00, w/atchs.    Exhibit
F.  DD Form 149, dated 7 Nov 02, w/atchs.




                                   RICHARD A. PETERSON
                                   Panel Chair





AFBCMR 99-00958
INDEX CODE:  126.00, 111.02




MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD
                 FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR)

SUBJECT:  AFBCMR Application of

      I have carefully reviewed the evidence of record and the
recommendation of the Board members.  A majority found that applicant
had not provided sufficient evidence of error or injustice and
recommended the case be denied.  I concur with that finding and their
conclusion that relief is not warranted.  Accordingly, I accept their
recommendation that the application be denied.

      Please advise the applicant accordingly.




                                        JOE G. LINEBERGER
                                        Director
                                        Air Force Review Boards Agency