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 – December 2013

  • Published
  • 379th Air Expeditionary Wing Judge Advocate General
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 December 2013, the following Airmen received NJP at the 379th Air Expeditionary Wing:

1. A 577th Expeditionary Prime BEEF Squadron staff sergeant was offered NJP for one violation of Article 89, disrespect in language and behavior toward a commissioned officer; one violation of Article 91, disrespect in language and behavior toward a senior noncommissioned officer; one violation of Article 92, failure to obey a lawful order, by refusing to obey an order to put out a cigarette, leave the area, and go to bed; and one violation of Article 128, assault on a commissioned officer, by shoving the commissioned officer. The staff sergeant was found guilty of all charges except Article 91 and received punishment of a reduction to the grade of senior airman and a reprimand.

2. A 577th Expeditionary Prime BEEF Squadron senior airman was offered NJP for one violation of Article 92, dereliction of duty, for consuming more than three alcoholic beverages. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman first class, forfeiture of $200 pay, and a reprimand.

3. Another 577th Expeditionary Prime BEEF Squadron senior airman was offered NJP for one violation of Article 92, dereliction of duty, for consuming more than three alcoholic beverages. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman first class, forfeiture of $200 pay, and a reprimand.

4. A 64th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron senior airman was offered NJP for one violation of Article 86, absence without leave, and one violation of Article 92, dereliction of duty, for misusing a government travel card. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of a reduction to the grade of airman first class, suspended forfeiture of $1,007 pay, and a reprimand.

5. A 379th Expeditionary Security Forces Squadron senior airman was offered NJP for one violation of Article 113, misbehavior of a sentinel, for sleeping while on post. The senior airman was found guilty and received punishment of a suspended reduction to the grade of airman first class, forfeiture of $500pay for two months, and a reprimand.

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