APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that a record of proceedings of nonjudicial punishment (NJP) be removed from his Official Military Personnel File.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the NJP has served its purpose and that his career should not be further hindered by a mistake that he made early in his career when he was unaware of the impact it would have on him.  He further states that he has since been promoted to the NCO ranks and other than the record of NJP, his career has been stable.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted on 2 February 1984 for a period of 3 years and has remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 1 September 1987.

On 10 August 1987, while serving in the pay grade of E-4, NJP was imposed against him for failure to go to his appointed place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of $212.00 (7 days pay).  The imposing commander directed that the record of proceedings of NJP (DA Form 2627) be filed on the performance fiche of the applicant’s OMPF.

On 19 January 1988 the applicant received a letter of reprimand for driving under the influence of alcohol.  This letter was also directed to be filed in the applicant’s OMPF.

There is no evidence in the available records to indicate that the applicant applied to the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board for transfer or removal of the NJP.

Army Regulation 27-10, in effect at the time, stated in pertinent part, that the decision to file DA Forms 2627 (Record of Proceedings of NJP) on the performance fiche or the restricted fiche in the OMPF (without regard to pay grade or time in service), would be determined by the imposing commander at the time the punishment was imposed.  The filing decision of the imposing commander was final and was to be indicated in item 5, DA Form 2627.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  The record of NJP was properly filed on the performance portion of the OMPF in accordance with regulations applicable at the time.

2.  The applicant has failed to provide substantiating evidence to convince the Board that removal of the record of punishment is in the best interest of justice.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT          

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

		Karl F. Schneider
		Acting Director