RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02428
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code
of Military Justice (UCMJ), dated 24 May 10, be voided.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The Article 15 is based on a Commander-Directed Investigation
(CDI), which was merely hearsay.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of the
CDI Report from the 90 MW/JA.
His complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the grade of
staff sergeant (E-5).
Additional relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the
Air Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts
in this Record of Proceedings.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. The applicant was charged with one
specification of dereliction of duty for failing to maintain a
professional relationship with a subordinate airman; and one
specification of making statements to his subordinates that he
engaged in sexual relationships with women who were not his wife,
which were prejudicial to good order and discipline. The
applicant accepted the Article 15 and waived his right to demand
trial by court-martial after consulting with counsel. He
submitted written matters to the commander in appeal to the
Article 15; however, the commander decided the applicant
committed the offenses and imposed punishment. He was reduced in
grade from technical sergeant to staff sergeant and suspended
forfeiture of $1,462.00 pay per month for two months. Although
the applicant appealed to his commander, his appeal was denied.
A legal review was accomplished and it was determined to be
legally sufficient.
In this case, the applicant has not raised any genuine doubt as
to his guilt of the offenses for which he was punished, or
established any error or injustice in his Article 15 action such
that a removal of the Article 15 would be in the best interests
of the Air Force.
When the applicant waived his right to demand trial by court-
martial, he accepted that his commander would decide whether he
committed the offenses and what the appropriate punishment would
be. The applicant does not provide any additional evidence that
was not considered by the commander at the time of the non-
judicial punishment was rendered and the commander had sufficient
evidence available to find the applicant had committed the
charged offenses. Even the legal review points out, [t]he IOs
findings further show by a preponderance of the evidence that
[the applicant] engaged in other conduct prejudicial to good
order and discipline, including indicating to subordinates that
he engaged in adulterous affairs and engaged in an unprofessional
relationship with SrA T
The punishment imposed in the Article 15 was appropriate and not
overly harsh. The commander was in the best position to
carefully weigh all the evidence and make an informed decision.
The complete AFLOA/JAJM 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 9 Sep 11 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. 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 primary responsibility and adopt its
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has
not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the
absence of 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-2011-02428 in Executive Session on 24 Jan 11, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Apr 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 24 Aug 11.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Sep 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00737
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00737 INDEX CODE: 131.00, 126.00 XXXXXXX COUNSEL: DAVID PRICE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 SEP 2008 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The nonjudicial punishment imposed on 27 April 2005, be set aside and his rank be restored to...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2011-05044
The Article 15 she received on 5 April 2007 be removed from her records. The commander however, did find the violation of Article 92 as substantiated. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends a partial grant since the issuing commander found sufficient evidence did not exist to substantiate the three alleged violations of Article 134, UCMJ.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-03698
The victim in the case has come forward with a statement indicating he did not assault her, but instead was trying to restrain her for her own safety due to her intoxicated state. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to applicant on 23 Dec 09 for review and response within 30 days. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02000
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02000 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He did not submit written matters to the commander but requested a personal appearance before the commander. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
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.
On 8 Apr 99, the applicant’s commander notified him that he was considering whether he should recommend to the Commander, 11th Air Force (11 AF) that he should be punished under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) based on allegations that between on or about 1 Mar 98 and on or about 4 Mar 99, he was derelict in the performance of his duties in that he willfully failed to refrain from engaging in an inappropriate familiar relationship, to include hugging and kissing, with a...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00354
There is nothing wrong with an officer counseling an enlisted member. These facts are more than sufficient to allow his commander to have found that he engaged in the charged conduct. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01015
JAJM states AFI 36-2909 establishes command, supervisory and personal responsibilities for maintaining professional relationships between Air Force members. DPPPWB explains Air Force policy requires individuals selected to MSgt and SMSgt serve in these grades for two years before they may retire. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit E).
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00149
She was provided due process and her appeal of the punishment was reviewed by the Air Force Material Command Commander and the Article 15 was determined to be legally sufficient. She has not provided any evidence showing that the imposing commander abused his discretionary authority, that her substantial rights were violated during the processing of the Article 15 punishment, or that the punishment exceeded the maximum authorized by the UCMJ. ...