RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02888
                                  (Case 3)

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  YES


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The Article  15,  Uniform  Code  of  Military  Justice  (UCMJ),  dated
25 February 2003, be removed  from  his  records  and  the  punishment
imposed upon him be set aside.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The Article 15 was initiated for an improper purpose and the  imposing
commander was disqualified from acting in that capacity and improperly
gathered evidence against him without his knowledge and affording  him
an opportunity to respond.

The contested Article 15 was not offered to maintain  good  order  and
discipline or promote rehabilitation.  The  purpose  admitted  by  his
immediate commander was to ensure that alleged bad  checks  that  were
dismissed by the military judge at his court-martial were made part of
his record to be used against him at an already-planned administrative
discharge board--to ensure that the board members would recommend  his
administrative discharge from the Air Force.

Not so long ago,  he  was  a  successful  master  sergeant  and  first
sergeant, but he fell into the grips of a gambling addiction that  put
his finances in disarray and ultimately put him behind bars.  He knows
he can recover from his addiction and his  court-martial  if  given  a
fair opportunity.

In support of his request, applicant  submits  a  personal  statement,
copies of the contested Article 15, the Report of Result of Trial,  an
Article 15, dated  13  January  2003,  an  AF  Form  3112  (Record  of
Supplementary Action under Article 15, UCMJ)  concerning  the  January
2003  Article  15   action,   the   Administrative   Discharge   Board
notification and additional documents associated with the issues cited
in  his  contentions.   The  applicant’s  complete  submission,   with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s Total Active Federal Military Service Date (TAFMSD) is
24 June 1985.  He was progressively promoted to the  grade  of  master
sergeant (E-7).  However, pursuant to an Article 15, the applicant was
reduced to the grade of senior airman (E-4), with a new date  of  rank
(DOR) of 7 March 2003.

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFLSA/JAJM recommends the application be denied.  JAJM states that the
evidence presented by the applicant is insufficient to warrant setting
aside the Article 15 action and  does  not  demonstrate  an  equitable
basis for relief.  The applicant has provided no evidence of  a  clear
error or injustice related to the nonjudicial punishment action.   The
AFLSA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  applicant  on  3
October 2003 for review and response.  As of this  date,  no  response
has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of error or  injustice.   We  thoroughly  and  carefully
reviewed the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits  of
his case.  However, after reviewing the applicant’s submission and the
evidence of record,  we  agree  with  the  comments  and  opinions  of
AFLSA/JAJM and adopt their rationale as the basis for  our  conclusion
that the applicant has not been the victim of an error  or  injustice.
We are not convinced by the applicant’s submission  that  the  Article
15, UCMJ, action was unjust or unwarranted for the offenses committed.
 When initiating the Article 15 action and  imposing  the  nonjudicial
punishment, we believe the commander acted on the basis of information
he determined to  be  reliable.   We  are  of  the  opinion  that  the
applicant’s  commander,  being  aware  of  all  of  the  circumstances
involved, was in the best position to determine whether the  applicant
should receive the Article 15 and what resultant punishment he  should
render.  Although the applicant presents detailed  arguments,  he  has
failed to provide compelling evidence to show error  or  injustice  in
the initiation of the Article 15 action, that the commander abused his
discretionary authority when he imposed  the  nonjudicial  punishment,
that the punishment was too harsh, or that he  was  not  afforded  all
rights granted by statute and regulation.  Since  the  respective  Air
Force office (AFLSA/JAJM) has sufficiently addressed  the  applicant’s
contentions, we see no reason to further expand on these  issues.   In
view of the foregoing and in the absence of persuasive evidence to the
contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought  in
this application.

4.  The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not  been
shown  that  a  personal  appearance  with  or  without  counsel  will
materially  add  to  our  understanding  of  the  issue(s)   involved.
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of material error  or  injustice;  that  the
application was denied without a personal  appearance;  and  that  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  this  application  in
Executive Session on 14 January 2004, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                  Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., Panel Chair
                  Ms. Ann-Cecile McDermott, Member
                  Mr. Charlie E. Williams Jr., Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in  connection  with
AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-02888.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 19 Aug 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFLSA/JAJM, dated 11 Sep 03.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 3 Oct 03.




                                   ROSCOE HINTON JR.
                                   Panel Chair