MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            27 March 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002079254

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Joann H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Eloise C. Prendergast		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That a Record of Nonjudicial Punishment (DA Form 2627) dated in 1983 and any other Records of Nonjudicial Punishment over 10 years of age be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 

APPLICANT STATES:  That he has been unable to find a decent job because all of his employment applications have been rejected by law enforcement agencies.

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

He enlisted in the pay grade of E-3 on 15 March 1978 for a period of 3 years, training as an administrative specialist and assignment to Europe.  He completed his training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina and was advanced to the pay grade of E-4 on 15 July 1978.  He was transferred to Germany on 24 July 1978. 

He remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 19 February 1991.  

On 31 July 1998, he was honorably released from active duty in the pay grade of E-7 and was transferred to the Retired List effective 1 August 1998.

A review of the applicant's OMPF shows that he had NJP imposed against him on 3 September 1982, for unlawful possession of a locking blade knife in excess of three inches in length, unlawful possession of more than one identification card, willful and wrongfully exposing in an indecent manner to public view, his genitals, and wrongful possession of marijuana in hashish form.  His punishment consisted of a reduction to the pay grade of E-2 (suspended until 3 March 1983) and extra duty.  The DA Form 2627 was filed on the Performance fiche of his OMPF under "Disciplinary Data."

A review of the Restricted Fiche of his OMPF reveals that he received a Letter of Reprimand on 19 December 1990 and on 30 January 1991, NJP was imposed against him for two specifications of failure to go to his place of duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty and restriction. 

Army Regulation 27-10, in effect at the time, provided filing instructions for filing the DA Form 2627 in the OMPF.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the DA Form 2627 will be filed on the performance fiche of the OMPF unless the punishment was for minor offenses.  The regulation specifies that extra duty and restriction are those punishments which meet the criteria for punishment for minor offenses. Suspended reductions and forfeitures do not qualify as such.  

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.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

2.  It appears that the NJP's were imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies by a commander empowered to do so.  The records of NJP are properly filed on the performance fiche and the restricted fiche of his OMPF in accordance with the applicable regulation.

3.  The Board has noted the applicant's contentions that the presence of the NJP's in his OMPF affect his ability to obtain employment; however, that is not a basis to remove a duly imposed and properly filed record of NJP.

4.  While the Board understands the applicant’s concerns, the Army has an interest in maintaining such documents, and the applicant has not shown sufficient reasons why they should not remain a matter of record, even after considering his entire record.

5.  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

___jhl___  __elp____  __rvo ___  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002079254	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/03/27	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  328	134.0000/REM NJP	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.