RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00527
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. His Article 15 be reduced to a lesser form of punishment.
2. His forfeiture of pay in the amount of $1,181.00 for two
months be decreased.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He believes the punishment imposed was unjust and
disproportionate to the offense committed. His duty performance
has been exceptional. The punishment will inflict a severe
hardship for which he may not be able to overcome. He does not
want to get into further trouble or bring discredit to the Air
Force by not paying his bills on-time. He accepts full
responsibility for the consequences of his actions; however, he
does not feel that the punishment matches the accusations.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal
statement, a copy of the Report of Investigation from Office of
Special Investigations (OSI), excerpts from his military
personnel records, a copy of his financial statement, and copies
of letters of support.
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 senior airman (E-4).
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air
Force, which is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
_
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial. The applicant was offered
nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniformed Code of
Military Justice (UCMJ), for being charged with one
specification of violating paragraph 4.3.3 of the Air Education
and Training Command Instruction 36-2909, Professional and
Unprofessional Relationships, by wrongfully conducting a
personal relationship with one of his trainees, in violation of
Article 92, UCMJ. The applicant does not allege an error or an
injustice in the processing of the nonjudicial punishment
against him. He just asks that the punishment received to be
proportional with the misconduct that he committed. However,
the commander at the time had the best opportunity to evaluate
the evidence in the case. Therefore, with that perspective, the
commander exercised the discretion that the applicant granted
him when the applicant accepted the Article 15 and found the
nonjudicial punishment to be appropriate in this case. Further,
the legal reviewed revealed that the commander did not act
arbitrarily or capriciously in making his decision.
The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C.
AFPC/DPSOE defers to the JAJM recommendation.
The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant on 6 Apr 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. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. After careful
consideration of the available evidence, we found no indication
the actions taken to effect his UCMJ punishment was improper or
contrary to the provisions of the governing regulations in
effect at the time, or the actions taken against the applicant
were based on factors other than his own misconduct. Therefore,
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. Consequently, we conclude that
no basis exists to grant favorable action on his 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-2013-00527 in Executive Session on 17 Oct 13, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Jan 13, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 15 Mar 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 22 Mar 13.
Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 13.
Panel Chair
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 05137
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05137 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His selection for promotion to the grade of master sergeant (E-7) during cycle 13E7 be reinstated. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant provides two new documents in support of his arguments: a memo for record from the first...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 00903
His Article 15 received on 3 Jan 13 be set aside and Unfavorable Information File (UIF) be removed from his record. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the grade of staff sergeant (E-5). The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility, which are attached at Exhibits C, D, and...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02987
His Article 15 received on 22 Apr 13 be set aside. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOE indicates no equity in the decision regarding the removal of the applicants Article 15, indicating AFLOA/JAJM has reviewed the case and found the Article 15 punishment legally sufficient, and recommended denial of the applicants request to have it set aside. Although, the commander was to only examine all the statements and other evidence upon which he would rely...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 05820
In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a personal statement, and, copies of his Article 15; response to the Article 15; Area Defense Counsels response to the Article 15; request for suspension of nonjudical punishment; witness statements; referral EPR; career EPRs; awards, decorations, and recognitions; and character references. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIM agrees with AFLOA/JAJMs recommendation to deny the relief sought to set aside the nonjudicial...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05825
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-05825 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Article 15 imposed on 4 Mar 13 be removed from his records. However, this error does not warrant setting aside the entire NJP as the applicant requests. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03139
On 19 May 08, the applicants commander denied her appeal and on 21 May 08, the appellate authority denied the appeal. A complete copy of the AFLOA/JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSID recommends denial of the applicants request to remove the contested EPRs from her military record, indicating there is a lack of corroborating evidence provided by the applicant. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit...
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-2012-01138
The Article 15 punishment imposed on her on 27 Apr 09 be removed from her records. The witness statements that formed the basis of the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) action were dated 7 to 14 days after the alleged false official statements were made. The complete DPSOE evaluation is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ 3 APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 11 Sep 12, copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant for...