2.  The applicant requests that the record of a 1987 nonjudicial punishment imposed under Article 15, UCMJ be expunged from his Official Military Personnel Record (OMPF), both his performance and restricted fiche.

3.  The applicant states that his record of service after receiving the Article 15 has been impeccable, that he realizes the severity of his actions which led to the Article 15, and regrets having this blemish on his record.  He requests that his outstanding service be considered when adjudicating his case.  He is considering applying for warrant officer candidate school and feels that the Article 15 in his record will prejudice his chances.

4.  The applicant entered the Army in 1985 and has remained on continuous active duty.

5.  On 18 August 1987, while serving in pay grade E-4, the applicant received nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, for wrongful use of marijuana between 6 June and 
6 July 1987.  He was reduced to pay grade E-3, required to perform 14 days of extra duty, and to forfeit $200.00 for one month (suspended for six months).  The applicant did not appeal this punishment.  The officer imposing the punishment directed that the Article 15 record of proceedings be filed in the restricted fiche of his official file.

6.  The Article 15 record of proceedings is contained in the applicant’s performance fiche of his official file.  This information was verified with an official of the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center at Fort Benjamin Harrison, who also indicated that the Article 15 was not on his restricted fiche; however, that official stated that she was going to move it from the applicant’s performance to his restricted fiche. 

7.  The applicant has attained the rank of staff sergeant pay grade E-6, received four awards of the Army Commendation Medal and four awards of the Army Achievement Medal, numerous certificates of achievement, and excellent evaluation reports.  He has an excellent record.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The subject record of NJP is improperly filed in the applicant’s performance fiche of his official file, in contravention to the directive from the officer who imposed the nonjudicial punishment, and should be removed.

2.  The NJP was apparently imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies.  The punishment imposed was neither unjust nor disproportionate to the offense, and there is no evidence of any substantive violation of any of the applicant's rights.  

3.  Careful consideration has been given to the applicant's service subsequent to the NJP.  However, the offense in question is too serious for equitable relief to be appropriate.  Therefore, removal of the nonjudicial punishment from his restricted fiche of his official file is not warranted.    

4.  In consideration of the foregoing findings and conclusions it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by expunging the record of the 
18 August 1987 NJP from the performance fiche of the OMPF of the individual concerned.

2.  That so much of the application as in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION


NOTE:  FONCECON w/Mrs. McDonald, EREC, 28 September 1997.  She is going transfer (not expunge) the NJP and associated documents (denial of GCM) to the restricted fiche.  Aucock.

		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON