RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02096
INDEX CODE: 126.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 15 JANUARY 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
a. The nonjudicial punishment imposed upon her under Article
15, Uniformed Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), dated 13 October 2005,
be removed from her records.
b. Correction be made to an addendum submitted by an Air
Force Psychiatrist to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time she was absent without leave (AWOL), she was undergoing a
psychotic episode.
In support of her appeal, applicant submitted Veterans Affairs (VA)
records, and an MEB addendum.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant enlisted in the Regular Air Force (RegAF) on 27 August
2002 for a period of four years as an airman first class (A1C).
The applicant was hospitalized on three occasions from March 2005
through July 2005 for suicidal ideations. She was diagnosed with
Borderline Personality Disorder and dysthymia/mixed
depression/anxiety. The applicant’s symptoms worsened after reporting
she was sexually assaulted (three times) and memories of childhood
trauma diagnosed as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) and Borderline Personality Disorder interfering with the
performance of her duty.
In June 2005, the applicant was transferred to the medical center at
Travis AFB, CA for continued evaluation, treatment and an MEB. The
applicant underwent an MEB on 4 August 2005.
On 29 August 2005, the applicant was offered nonjudicial punishment
for being absent from her appointed place of duty without authority
from 1 to 3 August 2005 and failure to go to her appointed place of
duty on 27 September 2005.
Applicant’s performance report profile is listed below.
PERIOD ENDING OVERALL EVALUATION
15 Jan 04 3
1 Dec 04 4
The applicant was relieved from active duty on 27 December 2005 and
placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL) on 28 December
2005. She served 2 years, 11 months and 23 days of active duty
service.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends the requested relief be denied. They state
commanders can dispose of allegations against a servicemember by many
means, including no action, administrative action, nonjudicial
punishment or trial by court-martial. Each commander exercises his or
her own best judgment, after reviewing all the facts, in determining
how to appropriately handle a case in the best interest of justice.
Commanders who consider disposing of a case with an Article 15
exercises personal discretion in evaluating the case, both as to
whether nonjudicial punishment is appropriate, and, if so, as to the
nature of and amount of punishment. Unless the commander’s authority
to act in a particular case is properly withheld, that commander’s
discretion is unfettered so long as the commander acts within the
limits and parameters of the commander’s legal authority.
Furthermore, the applicant signed the Air Force Form 3070 and
initialed each step in the process indicating she was actively
participating. The applicant had the opportunity to present evidence
to the commander, and she did in fact make a written
presentation through her counsel. The commander had the facts before
her that the applicant and her counsel elected to present. The
applicant’s commander considered all the matters presented and
concluded that the applicant committed the alleged offenses, and was
indeed capable and made a deliberate decision to be AWOL, and that
nonjudicial punishment was proper.
The applicant appears to argue that an evaluation of her at a Boston
Veteran’s Administration hospital during the 1 to 3 August timeframe
provides “supportive contradictory evidence” that she “suffered a
dissociative state.” The applicant does not assert that she was
unable to present this or any other relevant evidence. The written
presentation the applicant and her counsel signed reflects a
deliberate decision to not attach supporting mental health records but
would present those records to the commander if requested. The
applicant specifically argued in her presentation that she may have
disassociated during her absence. The applicant’s dissatisfaction
with the nonjudical punishment proceedings does not constitute an
error or an injustice.
JAJM further notes the applicant contests the action taken by the
Inspector General in response to a complaint she filed concerning the
level of action taken by the Air Force against a person she alleged
raped her. She complains that the alleged rapist received an Article
15 punishment and was separated with an honorable discharge. The
applicant provides no documentation with respect to the action taken
by the Air Force against the alleged rapist. Furthermore, there is no
indication that the Inspector General complaint or any matters
addressed therein are relevant to the merits of the applicant’s
nonjudicial punishment.
AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant recommends the requested relief be
denied. The Medical Consultant states the psychiatry documentation at
the time of the applicant’s unauthorized departure and afterwards
indicates her actions were planned in advance and that there was no
evidence of psychotic disorder, dissociative state or mental illness
so severe that would impair her ability to know right from wrong and
choose the right.
The AFBCMR Medical Consultant’s evaluation is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on
11 May and 13 June 2007, for review and response within 30 days. 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 an injustice. The applicant is
requesting the nonjudicial punishment she received be removed from her
records and correction to the addendum submitted by an Air Force staff
psychiatrist to a Medical Evaluation Board. After a review of the
evidence offered, the Board majority does not feel inclined to disturb
the discretionary judgment of commanding officers who was closer to
situation at that time. The Board majority notes the evidence of
record reflects the applicant’s commander determined she had committed
the alleged offense of being absent from her appointed place of duty
without authority, and that the applicant signed and initialed the Air
Force Form 3070 indicating she was acknowledging and participating in
the nonjudicial process. The applicant’s psychiatric documentation at
the time of her unauthorized leave and afterwards reflects her actions
were planned in advance and there was no evidence of psychotic
disorder, dissociative state or mental illness so severe that would
impair her ability to know right from wrong. Therefore, in the
absence of evidence which would show to the Board majority’s
satisfaction that the applicant’s substantial rights were violated,
she was coerced to waive any of her rights, or the commander who
imposed the nonjudicial punishment abused his discretionary authority,
the Board majority concludes that no basis exists to recommend
favorable action on the applicant’s request.
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 issues 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2006-02096 in Executive Session on 18 July 2007, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Mr. Richard K. Hartley, Member
By majority vote, the Board recommended denying the application. Mr.
Markiewicz voted to grant partial relief but does not desire to submit
a Minority Report. The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jun 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 22 Aug 06.
Exhibit D. Letter AFBCMR Medical Consultant, dated
11 May 07.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 May 07.
THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01124
Although the IO found there were problems in the professional working relationships between flight members, this allegation was not substantiated. The applicant does not allege error in how the Article 15 was processed. As such, based on the authority granted to this board pursuant to Title 10, U.S.C., Section 1034, we reviewed the complete evidence of record to determine whether the applicant has been the victim of reprisal.
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-03886
At the time of the incident which resulted in his NJP, he was serving in the grade of TSgt with the 78th Security Forces Squadron, Robins AFB, GA. On 12 May 2005, the applicant’s commander offered him NJP under Article 15, UCMJ, for disorderly conduct and assault. We find no evidence of error in this case and after thoroughly reviewing the documentation applicant submitted in support of his appeal, we do not believe he has suffered from an injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01924
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01924 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 26 December 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her general (under honorable conditions) discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge and remove the Article 15 dated 11 July 2000 from her records. In the case of nonjudicial...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03555
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03555 INDEX CODE: 110.02 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 4 MARCH 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. In support of her request, applicant provided copies of the letter denying her the AFGCM and AF Form 3070, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceedings. A commander’s action should...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00707
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2009-00707 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Article 15, nonjudicial punishment (NJP), and all actions associated with the punishment be removed; she be reinstated to active duty with her original date of rank; and her reentry (RE) code be changed to one that would allow her to return to...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-03361
DPPPWB states JAJM has reviewed the applicant’s case and determined that there were no legal errors requiring corrective action regarding his non-judicial punishment and recommended the Board deny his request. Evidence of record clearly shows he was on a “4T” profile for over a year, yet he got an assignment. Furthermore, in May 2005 he did not even have enough retainability in the Air Force to be reassigned to Korea.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03325
The applicant also says her defense counsel said she was too busy to provide legal advice to the applicant or to research her concerns. The applicant is requesting her nonjudicial punishment (Article 15), dated 23 Feb 11, be removed from her record. Furthermore, the remaining charge the discharge board determined she was guilty of was an action she undertook only after first seeking advice from a field grade officer and a security forces NCOIC, and then following the advice she received.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03012
Indeed, the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces has upheld the lawfulness of anthrax vaccination orders. DPPPWB states JAJM has reviewed the case and determined there were no legal errors requiring corrective action regarding the nonjudicial punishment and recommends the Board deny the applicant’s request. __________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02664
The remaining 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: HQ AFOLA/JAJM recommends denial. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00538
The commander at the time of this nonjudicial punishment action had the best opportunity to evaluate all the evidence in this case. The punishment was severe for the offense of failure to maintain accountability of the fund cites that amounted to $2,086.47. The punishment she received would have been warranted had the unaccounted amount resulting from her failing to account for the fund cites amounted to $32,636.07.