1.  The applicant requests that the letter of reprimand he received in 1978 be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  He states that the letter was only to be filed in his local Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) for one year.

2.  The applicant’s military records show he initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 March 1972 for 3 years.  He was honorably discharged and immediately reenlisted on 23 July 1974 for 5 years.

3.  On 17 November 1978, the applicant received a letter of reprimand from his battalion commander for falling asleep while on battalion staff duty.  The commander recommended to the commanding general that it be filed in his MPRJ for one year.  On 28 November 1978, the local Staff Judge Advocate clearly stated that the commanding general “has determined that this reprimand currently will not be placed in … Official Military Personnel File.  Accordingly, it is directed that this reprimand be temporarily placed in…Military Personnel Records Jacket until he departs this command   .”

4.  On 22 October 1979, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-6, after the completion of his normal expiration term or service.  On 16 May 1991,  he enlisted in the Army Reserve and at the time of his application was an Active Guard Reserve (AGR) soldier.

5.  Army Regulation 27-10 prescribes the policies and procedures pertaining to the administration of military justice.  In pertinent part, it states that commanding officers have authority to give admonitions or reprimands either as an administrative measure or as non-judicial punishment.  A commander’s decision whether to file a record of non-judicial punishment on the performance fiche of a soldier’s OMPF is as important as the decision relating to the imposition of    non-judicial punishment itself.  The commander must weigh carefully the interests of the soldier’s career against those of the Army to produce and advance only the most qualified personnel for positions of leadership, trust and responsibility.

CONCLUSIONS: 

1.  The applicant is correct in asserting that the letter of reprimand should not be filed on his OMPF.

2.  The imposing commander recommended it be filed only in his MPRJ; in reviewing the letter of reprimand, the commanding general directed it be filed only in his MPRJ.
3.  Phone conversation with Sergeant Young, Enlisted Promotions Branch, Office of Promotions, Reserve Components, Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) indicated the 1996 and 1997 E-7 Promotion Selection Boards did not see the three letter of reprimand documents.  She stated ARPERCEN blacked them out before his OMPF was sent before the boards because they were not supposed to be on his OMPF; however, ARPERCEN did not remove them because they had no authority to do so.

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by removing the three letter of reprimand documents (letter of reprimand, soldier’s acknowledgment, SJA’s letter of disposition) from the Disciplinary Data section of his OMPF.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

			                                                                         				 	                                    CHAIRPERSON