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 September 2012

  • Published
  • By 379th Air Expeditionary Wing Judge Advocate 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 that a commander may issue include reduction in grade, forfeiture of pay, extra duty, restriction and a reprimand.

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

1. A 379th Expeditionary Civil Engineer Squadron airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to go to her appointed place of duty in violation of Article 86 of the UCMJ and for disobeying the order of and being disrespectful to a superior noncommissioned officer in violation of Article 91 of the UCMJ. The airman first class was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to airman, forfeiture of $225 pay and a reprimand.

2. A 379th Expeditionary Logistics Readiness Squadron airman first class was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the local off-base travel instruction and 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 first class was found guilty and received punishment of reduction to airman, restriction to the base for 60 days and reprimand.

3. A 379th Expeditionary Maintenance Squadron staff sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for dereliction of duty 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 $525 pay and a reprimand.

4. A 379th Expeditionary Maintenance Squadron senior airman was offered nonjudicial punishment for larceny in violation of Article 121 of the UCMJ. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to airman first class and a reprimand.

5. A 379th EMXS master sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for dereliction of duty in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ. The master sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of forfeiture of $525 pay per month for two months and a reprimand.

6. A 379th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron staff sergeant was offered nonjudicial punishment for making a false official statement in violation of Article 107 of the UCMJ. The staff sergeant was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to senior airman and a reprimand.

7. A 379th ESFS senior airman was offered nonjudicial punishment for failing to obey the prohibition on pornography as outlined in U.S. Air Forces Central General Order 1B in violation of Article 92 of the UCMJ, making a false official statement in violation of Article 107 of the UCMJ, and for invasion of privacy in violation of Article 134 of the UCMJ. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to airman first class 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.