RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03254 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP) under Article 15 imposed on 3 Nov 09, be removed from his Officer Selection Record (OSR). ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Article 15 and subsequent consequences like being subject to a RIF relieving him from active duty, has been punishment enough. He discusses his record of performance and achievements since receiving the Article 15 as well as his dedication to the service of the United States. He was never advised he could have received board counseling after his first non-selection for promotion. Had he been advised, he would have been able to request that his Article 15 be removed from his OSR for the second promotion board. In support of his request, the applicant provides a personal statement, letters of support and character reference letters. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the applicant’s military personnel records, on 28 May 03, he enlisted in the Regular Air Force and is currently serving in the Air National Guard (ANG) in the grade of Captain (Capt, O-3). On 3 Nov 09, the applicant received an Article 15 for fraternization with an enlisted person, in violation of Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). As a result, his punishment consisted of forfeiture of $2,474 pay per month for 2 months and a reprimand. On 6 Nov 09, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the Article 15 punishment and, on 10 Nov 09, elected not to appeal the punishment or submit matters on his OSR. On 12 Nov 09, his commander elected to file the Article 15 in his OSR. On 13 Nov 09, the Article 15 was reviewed and determined to be legally sufficient. On 1 Mar 12, the applicant was released from active duty under the Reduction in Force (RIF) and was credited with 8 years, 9 months and 4 days of total active service. On 2 Mar 12, the applicant was appointed by the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF) to the Air Force Reserves (AFRES) in the grade of captain. On 10 Oct 12, the applicant was honorably discharged from the Rhode Island ANG and appointed to the New York ANG, effective 11 Oct 12. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFLOA/JAJM recommends denial, indicating the applicant has not shown a clear error or injustice. The applicant's argument centers on his record of performance and achievements since receiving the Article 15 as well as his dedication to the service of the United States. He argues that the Article 15 and subsequent consequences like being subject to a RIF relieving him from active duty, has been punishment enough. However, the applicant had the ability to consult counsel on his Article 15 and could have continued to seek counsel for collateral matters stemming from his Article 15. The best way to remove the Article 15 from the OSR would have been to appeal to the commander or his equivalent before he met his promotion board. While the applicant’s personal and professional achievements are laudable and should be considered by the Board, there was no legal error or injustice with the Article 15 process or the placement in his OSR which would warrant recommending removal of the Article 15 from his OSR. The complete JAJM evaluation is at Exhibit C. ARPC/PBP does not make a recommendation but indicates if the Board agrees with JAJM’s recommendation to deny relief, no further action should be taken regarding Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration for the applicant. The applicant was considered but not selected by the CY13 (A0413A) ANG Line and Nonline Major Promotion Selection Board and the CY14 (A0414A) ANG Line and Nonline Promotion Selection Board convened on 8 Apr 13 and 7 Apr 14, respectively. The applicant states that he was not aware post board counseling was available for members who have been non-selected for promotion and had he known, he would have requested counseling after the CY13 board. However, post board counseling is not an entitlement but a benefit afforded to members who have been non- selected for promotion. Information about post board counseling is available on the myPers website and sent to the field prior to each board. The complete ARPC evaluation is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 10 Feb 15 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit E). ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinions and recommendations of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the application was denied without a personal appearance; and the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03254 in Executive Session on 8 Apr 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Panel Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 Aug 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Available Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. Letter, AFLOA/JAJM, dated 4 Nov 14. Exhibit D. Letter, ARPC/PBP, dated 17 Dec 14, w/atchs. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 10 Feb 15.