RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04010 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

1. His Article 15 effective 23 May 12 be set aside. 

 

2. His referral Enlisted Performance Report (EPR) with a closeout 
date of 30 Jun 12 be set aside. 

 

3. His pay grade of airman and forfeiture of $250.00 be set 
aside. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He did not receive the benefit of legal counsel which was through 
no fault of his own. He was never told that he was suspected of 
giving a false official statement; however, it was recorded on 
his reprimand portion of the AF Form 3070A, Record of Nonjudicial 
Punishment Proceedings (AB thru TSgt). He was not found guilty 
of this offense. 

 

In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of AF 
IMT 1168, Statement of Suspect/Witness/Complainant, a copy of AF 
Form 3070A, a copy of his Appeal to Non-Judicial Punishment 
memorandum, a copy of AFLOA/ADC memorandum, a copy of his AF Form 
910, Enlisted Performance Report (AB thru TSgt), a copy of his 
Response to Referral EPR memorandum, and a copy of his 
commander’s Response to Referral EPR memorandum. 

 

His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in 
the grade of airman first class. 

 

On 10 May 12, the applicant received an Article 15 under the 
Uniform Code of Military Justice (UMCJ). The specific charge was 
for violation of Article 92, UCMJ: For failing to follow the 
lost tool protocol as it was his duty to do so. 

 


The AF Form 3070A, Record of Nonjudical Punishment Proceedings, 
reflects the following: 

 

 Block 3.a. He did not consult a lawyer. 

 Block 3.b. He waived his right to court-martial and accepted 
nonjudicial punishment proceedings. 

 Block 3.c. He attached a written presentation. 

 Block 3.d. He requested a personal appearance before his 
commander; however, his request was denied. 

 

He was reduced to the grade of airman, suspended through 28 Nov 
12, after which time it was remitted without further action; 
forfeited $250.00 pay, suspended through 28 Nov 12, after which 
time it was remitted without further action; 24 days extra duty, 
and a reprimand. 

 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFLOA/JAJM recommends lining through the language consisting of 
“and false statement” as well as “When you lie, you erode trust 
that is necessary for successful mission accomplishment,” in the 
applicant’s reprimand and recommends no other relief be granted. 
The applicant’s assertion is correct in noting that the language 
in his reprimand concerning a false statement is inappropriate, 
as he was not charged with or found guilty of making a false 
statement. Nevertheless, this error does not rise to a level of 
an injustice that warrants setting aside the Article 15. 
Further, a review of the available documentation in the 
applicant’s records indicates that his rights were observed 
throughout the process of the Article 15. He was afforded the 
right to counsel and was informed of his right to reject the 
Article 15 and demand trial by court-martial; however, he 
declined to do so and accepted the Article 15. The commander’s 
action to render the Article 15 on the applicant was well within 
the limits of his authority and discretion. 

 

The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. 

 

AFPC/DPSID recommends denying the applicant’s request to remove 
his contested report. The applicant received the Article 15 for 
actions which were completely within his control; specifically 
for dereliction in the performance of duties in that he willfully 
failed to follow the lost tool procedures listed in the Wing 
instructions. It was ultimately the applicant’s responsibility 
as an airman in the Air Force to consistently demonstrate 
integrity and trustworthiness. Additionally, the evaluators were 
in the best position to evaluate his performance during the 
reporting period in question and they chose to document his 
behavior on the EPR. They agree with JAJM’s recommendation of 
not overturning the commander’s original nonjudicial punishment 
decision on the basis of justice. Therefore, based on the lack 
of corroborating evidence provided by the applicant, and the 
presumed legal sufficiency pertaining to the issuance of the 


Article 15 as commented upon in the contested EPR, they recommend 
that the report not be voided from the applicant’s records. 

 

The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 

AFPC/DPSOE does not provide a recommendation. The applicant’s 
reduction in grade was suspended; therefore, he did not lose rank 
or pay nor was he eligible for promotion during the suspension 
period. He will be eligible for promotion to senior airman 
effective 11 May 13; however, the fact that his current EPR is a 
referral renders him ineligible for promotion until he receives a 
nonreferral report. If the applicant receives a nonreferral EPR, 
his Date of Rank (DOR) and effective date of promotion will be 
the closeout date of the report. 

 

The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit E. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 Feb 13 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice to warrant 
changing the language in the applicant’s reprimand. We agree 
with the AFLOA/JAJM assessment that due to the applicant not 
being charged with or found guilty of making a false statement 
the comments rendered on the letter of reprimand should be 
removed. Therefore, we recommend his records be corrected to the 
extent indicated below. 

 

4. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice to set aside 
his Article 15, EPR, pay grade and forfeiture of $250.00. 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 the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. 
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no 


compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this 
application. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

 

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 

 

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force 
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that the nonjudicial 
punishment imposed on 13 July 2012, under the provisions of 
Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, block 14, reprimand 
portion, be amended by deleting the words “and false statement” 
and “When you lie you erode the trust that is necessary for 
successful mission accomplishment…” 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04010 in Executive Session on 29 May 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

, Panel Chair 

, Member 

, Member 

 

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 21 Aug 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 16 Oct 12. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSID, dated 7 Jan 13. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFPC/DPSOE, dated 25 Jan 13. 

 Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Feb 13. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair