An official website of the United States government
A .mil website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
A lock (lock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Justice Files - May 2013

  • Published
  • 379th Air Expeditionary Wing Public Affairs
SOUTHWEST ASIA --  Nonjudicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice enables commanders to maintain good order and discipline in a fair and swift process, without the negative implications for an Airman that are carried with a court-martial conviction.

An Airman who is offered NJP has the right to either accept the offer of NJP or to demand a trial by court-martial. An NJP offer is a 'forum' choice; the Airman offered NJP must decide whether he or she wants to let his or her commander act as 'judge and jury' instead of facing a court-martial. By accepting the offered NJP, an Airman is not admitting guilt to the offense(s) for which the Airman has been offered NJP; rather, the Airman is electing to allow the commander to decide whether the Airman is guilty and, if so, what the Airman's punishment should be.

Potential punishments that a commander may issue include reduction in grade, forfeiture of pay, extra duty, restriction and a reprimand. The commander may also decide to impose 'suspended' punishments, which can be 'vacated,' or implemented, upon discovery of subsequent misconduct following imposition of punishment for an Article 15. Commanders can 'vacate' a 'suspended' punishment and also offer a new Article 15 for the same additional misconduct.

In May 2013, the following Airmen received NJP at the 379th Air Expeditionary Wing:

1. A 379th Expeditionary Maintenance Squadron airman first class was offered NJP for violation of Article 92, failure to obey a general regulation, and Article 134, unlawful entry, for unlawfully entering the dorm room of a fellow airman. The airman was found guilty of both specifications, and received punishment of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman, forfeiture of $525 pay for one month and a reprimand.

2. A 379th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron staff sergeant was offered NJP for violation of Article 134, Adultery, and Article 92, failure to obey an order, for breaking a no contact order. The sergeant was found guilty of both specifications and received punishment of a reduction to the grade of senior airman, suspended forfeiture of pay ($300 per month for two months) and a reprimand.

3. A 577th Expeditionary Prime BEEF Squadron airman first class was offered NJP for violation of Article 92, dereliction of duty, for failing to properly handle and clear his weapon. The airman was found guilty and received punishment of suspended forfeiture of pay ($949 per month for two months) and a reprimand.

4. A 379th Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron staff sergeant was offered NJP for touching his roommate's buttocks and inner thigh, in violation of Article 120 (abusive sexual contact), and Article 112a, for wrongful use of Ambien. The sergeant was found guilty of the violation of Article 120, but not guilty for the violation of Article 112a. The sergeant received a punishment of a reduction to senior airman, suspended forfeiture of pay ($600 per month for two months) and a reprimand.

5. A 746th Expeditionary Airlift Squadron technical sergeant was offered NJP for failing to go to his place of duty at the prescribed time, in violation of Article 86; and for wrongfully consuming alcohol within 12 hours of performing aircrew duties; and for failing to report his consumption of alcohol within 12 hours to his superiors prior to working on the flight line, in violation of Article 92. The sergeant was found guilty of all specifications, and received a punishment of a suspended reduction to staff sergeant and a reprimand.

For information on NJP, refer to AFI 51-202, Nojudicial Punishment, and Part V of the Manual for Courts-Martial.