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.

The Justice Files: Nonjudicial Punishment for December 2012

  • Published
  • 379th Air Expeditionary Wing Legal Office
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 nonjudicial punishment has the right to either accept the offer of nonjudicial punishment or to demand a trial by court-martial. By accepting nonjudicial punishment, an Airman is not admitting guilt to the offense(s) for which the Airman has been offered nonjudicial punishment; 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 a commander may issue include reduction in grade, forfeiture of pay, extra duty, restriction and a reprimand.

In December 2012, the following Airmen received nonjudicial punishment here:

1. A 379th Expeditionary Aircraft Maintenance Squadron senior airman was offered nonjudicial punishment for destruction of military property in violation of Article 108 of the UCMJ. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of forfeiture of $1,078 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

2. A 379th EAMXS airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for wrongful use of over-the-counter medication in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, wrongful use of Ambien in violation of Article 112a of the UCMJ and incapacitation for duty because of the wrongful previous overindulgence in drugs in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. The airman first class was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to Airman, forfeiture of $250 pay and a reprimand.

3. A 379th Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron staff sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for absence without leave in violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ. The staff sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to senior airman and a reprimand.

4. A 379th Expeditionary Force Support Squadron chief master sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the limit of three alcoholic beverages within an 18-hour period in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ; diverting to other Airmen unauthorized alcoholic drinks in excess of the limit of three alcoholic beverages per 18-hour period in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ; dereliction of duty by abusing the authority of his assigned position by reserving certain types of alcohol for select individuals in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ; dereliction of duty by failing to adequately address allegations that at least one individual under his supervision was stealing alcohol, drunk on duty, and violating the limit of three alcoholic beverages per 18-hour period in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ; and engaging in an unprofessional relationship with lower-ranking 379th EFSS Airmen in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The chief master sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to senior master sergeant and a reprimand.

5. A 379th EFSS staff sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the limit of three alcoholic beverages within an 18-hour period in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, dereliction of duty by abusing the authority of her assigned position in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, engaging in an unprofessional relationship in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, making a false official statement in violation of Article 107 of the UCMJ, being drunk on duty in violation of Article 112 of the UCMJ, and larceny in violation of Article 121 of the UCMJ. The staff sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to Senior Airman, forfeiture of $1,181 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

6. A 379th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron senior master sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for sexual harassment in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, maltreatment of subordinates in violation of Article 93 of the UCMJ, and assault in violation of Article 128 of the UCMJ. The senior master sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to master sergeant, forfeiture of $1,000 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

7. A 609th Air Communications Squadron Det. 1 staff sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failure to obey a no-contact order in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The staff sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to senior airman, forfeiture of $250 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

8. A 609th Air and Space Operations Center major was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central Command General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, engaging in an unprofessional relationship in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ and adultery in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. The major was found guilty and received punishment of forfeiture of $2,000 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

9. A 609th AOC captain was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central Command General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, engaging in an unprofessional relationship in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ and adultery in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. The captain was found guilty and received punishment of forfeiture of $1,500 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

10. A 64th ESFS airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for dereliction of duty by failing to properly execute vehicle searches at the installation entrance in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The airman first class was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to airman, forfeiture of $835 pay and a reprimand.

For more information on nonjudicial punishment, refer to AFI 51-202, Nonjudicial Punishment, and Part V of the Manual for Courts-Martial.