RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00742
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His Article 15 dated 14 Jul 08 be expunged from his records.
2. His Article 15 dated 19 Jan 10 be expunged from his records.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His Article 15 dated 14 Jul 08 was in error because the punishment
exceeded the one month (and/or 31 days), as prescribed by the
governing AFI, and was not attached to an Unfavorable Information
File (UIF). He should have held the rank of airman first class (E-
3) and would have been promoted to senior airman (E-4) in Jun 09.
Therefore, the Article 15 dated 19 Jul 10 is in error because the
rank listed is wrong due to an error in the first Article 15.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
nonjudicial punishment package w/atchs, a copy of his AF Form 910, Enlisted Performance Report, and a copy of his application for
correction/removal of evaluation reports.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
airman first class (E-3).
Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted
from the applicants military records, are contained in the letter
prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. JAJM states the applicant was
charged on two different occasions: 1) For violation of Article
92; for viewing pornography and 2) For violation of Article 92; for
wrongfully using his government travel card to make unauthorized
purchases. The applicants commander imposed nonjudicial
punishment; after consulting with counsel, the applicant accepted
the Article 15s and waived his right to trial by court-martial. He
submitted a written presentation and made a personal appearance
before the commander; however, the commander decided the applicant
committed the alleged offense and imposed punishment consisting
solely of reducing him to the grade of airman. The applicant did
not appeal. The commander did not file the first Article 15 in his
UIF; however, for the second Article 15, the applicant was reduced
to the grade of airman basic, suspended through 10 Jul 10;
forfeiture of pay of $56.00, suspended through 10 Jul 10; and a
reprimand. The applicant did not appeal. The commander filed the
second Article 15 in his UIF. A legal review of the nonjudicial
punishment was found to be legally sufficient.
JAJM states the applicants allegation of error in the nonjudicial
punishment action is focused on the fact that he was reduced in
rank, despite his commanders decision to not file the action in
the applicants UIF. JAJM believes the applicants assertion is
misplaced in this case. The governing AFI requires commanders who
impose nonjudicial punishment terms exceeding one month to file the
action in the members UIF; however, if the punishment does not
exceed one month, a UIF entry is optional. Although it may have
long-lasting collateral ramifications, an unsuspended reduction in
grade takes effect on the date the commander imposes punishment.
As a result of this immediate effect, the governing AFI lists
nonjudicial punishments consisting solely of an unsuspended
reduction in grade as an optional UIF entry. The punishment was
within the commanders discretion and legal limits; therefore, JAJM
cannot support the applicants request.
The AFLOA/JAJM complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 2 Apr 10 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
___________________________________________________________________
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. After a thorough
review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we
are not persuaded that his uncorroborated assertions, in and by
themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale
provided by the Air Force. Therefore, we agree with the opinion
and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary
responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for
our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden
of having suffered either an error or injustice. Therefore, in
the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no
basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2010-00742 in Executive Session on 14 Dec 10, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 19 Feb 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 26 Mar 10.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Apr 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04917
On 15 Jul 13, his commander requested he be reinstated to the grade of E-3; however, the commander relied upon incorrect information concerning how much time he had to wait before submitting the request, and therefore failed to submit it on time. The applicants commander and first sergeant submitted letters of support for the applicant requesting the Board restore the applicants rank of E-3 with an effective date of rank of 16 May 13. However, if the Board votes to grant this request, as...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04779
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-04779 ER COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His grade of airman first class (E-3) be reinstated as of 16 May 13. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) which are included at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01056
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01056 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Article 15 and Unfavorable Information File (UIF) be removed from his record and that his rank be restored. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends the Board not grant the relief sought regarding the Article 15 because there was no error or injustice with the process. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...
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 | CY2009 | BC-2008-01122
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2008-01122 INDEX CODE: 111.02, 126.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, imposed on 13 Jan 06, be declared void and expunged from his records, and his rank of staff sergeant be restored. On 26 Jun 06, the applicant's commander vacated the applicant’s...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00797
On 5 Nov 2012, he acknowledged receipt and indicated he had consulted a lawyer, was waiving his right to court-martial accepting nonjudicial punishment proceedings, had attached a written presentation, and requested a personal appearance. A member accepting Article 15 proceedings may submit written matters to, and have a hearing with, the commander imposing the punishment. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00034
JAJM states the applicant contends the injustice in this case are that the commanders did not follow the governing regulations for imposing nonjudicial punishment on a member in the grade of senior master sergeant and that he did not commit sexual assault against the accuser. The AFLOA/JAJM complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPSIDEP recommends denying the removal of the applicants referral EPR from his records. With regard to the EPR removal, we are not persuaded by the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01119
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-01119 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. According to the documentation provided by the applicant: a. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04128
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides copies of his AF Form 3070A, Record of Nonjudicial Punishment Proceeding, multiple witness statements from trainees and coworkers, excerpts from the training records of several trainees who reported him, documentation of his success as a Military Training Instructor, and documentation related to the administration of his NJP and referral EPR. The reasons for the action were as follows: Violation of Article 93 of the UCMJ 1. The remaining...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-03187
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicants master personnel records, are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of responsibility which are included at Exhibits C and D. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. The author of the legal office opinion noted that the LOD determination was most...