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 November 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 November 2012, the following Airmen received nonjudicial punishment here:

1. A 379th Expeditionary Aircraft Maintenance Squadron technical sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, sexual harassment in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, engaging in an unprofessional relationship in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, adultery in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ, indecent language in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ, and communicating a threat in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. The sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to staff sergeant, forfeiture of $1,506 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

2. A 379th EAMXS senior airman was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The airman was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to airman first class, forfeiture of $250 pay and a reprimand.

3. A 379th EAMXS airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The airman was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to airman, forfeiture of $250 pay and a reprimand.

4. A 379th Expeditionary Force Support Squadron master sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to technical sergeant and a reprimand.

5. A 379th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron master sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ and for making a false official statement in violation of Article 107 of the UCMJ. The sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to technical sergeant and a reprimand.

6. A 379 ELRS senior airman was offered nonjudicial punishment for dereliction of duty in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ and for assault consummated by a battery in violation of Article 128 of the UCMJ. The airman was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to airman first class and a reprimand.

7. A 379 Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron staff sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the threshold rule as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, for failing to adhere to the curfew for off-base travel in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, and for providing incorrect information about intended travel locations on an off-base travel pass in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to senior airman and a reprimand.

8. A 64th ESFS airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for dereliction of duty in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The airman was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to airman, forfeiture of $835 pay and a reprimand.

9. A 71st Expeditionary Air Control Squadron airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for larceny in violation of Article 121 of the UCMJ. The airman was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to airman and a reprimand.

10. A 7th Expeditionary Air Command and Control Squadron 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 and for making a false official statement in violation of Article 107 of the UCMJ. The sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to senior airman 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.