MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:           9 September 2003                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002082511

	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. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell 		Chairperson	
	Mr. Walter T. Morrison		Member	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan		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:  .  In effect, that a December 1983 record of nonjudicial punishment (NPJ) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) be expunged from his Official Military Personnel Record.

APPLICANT STATES:  That the NJP represents a single, isolated incident in his career.  Since that incident, he has had no disciplinary actions or any alcohol related incidents.               

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

He is a Regular Army sergeant first class (SFC) with approximately 21 years of total service in the Army Reserve, Army National Guard, and Regular Army and about 15 years of active duty service.

The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army and entered active duty on 22 September 1981.  On 14 December 1983, while he was stationed in Germany, the battalion commander, a lieutenant colonel, imposed NJP for drunk driving.  The punishment consisted of reduction to pay grade E-4 and the officer imposing the punishment directed that the record of the Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627) be filed in the restricted portion of the applicant's OMPF.  

There is no other discreditable information of record and no other documents in the restricted portion of the applicant's OMPF.  After attaining the rank of SFC in the Army National Guard the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army as a staff sergeant (E-6) in December 1996.  The applicant last reenlisted (in the Regular Army) on 4 January 1999 and was promoted to SFC effective 1 November 1999. He has been awarded numerous personal decorations, including the Meritorious Service Medal; several unit awards.  He holds the Military Free Fall Jumpmaster Badge and parachutist badges from four foreign countries.

Army Regulation 27-10 provides policy for the administration of military justice.  Chapter 3 provides that nonjudicial punishment is appropriate in all cases involving minor offenses in which non-punitive measures are considered inadequate or inappropriate.  It is a tool available to commanders to correct, educate and reform offenders whom the commander determines cannot benefit from less stringent measures.  It preserves a member's record of service from unnecessary stigma by a record of court-martial conviction; and furthers military efficiency by disposing of minor offenses in a manner requiring fewer resources than trial by court-martial.  The imposing commander is not bound by the formal 

rules of evidence before courts-martial and may consider any matter, including un-sworn statements the commander reasonably believed to be relevant to the case.  Furthermore, whether to impose punishment and the nature of the punishment are the sole decisions of the imposing commander.

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.  As its name indicates, nonjudicial punishment is different from a trial by court-martial.  A nonjudicial punishment hearing is a more informal proceeding where the rules of evidence need not be strictly applied.  Before he elected to accept nonjudicial punishment the applicant was made aware of these differences and of his right to demand court-martial where he would receive the protection of the rules of evidence.  Instead he chose to have the matter settled at nonjudicial punishment.  

2.  The NJP was 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.  The Army has an obligation to maintain a complete and accurate record of an individual's service.  The placement of a record of NJP on the restricted fiche enables the Army to maintain that historical record without unduly jeopardizing the individual's career.

4.  Careful consideration has been given to the applicant's subsequent service following NJP.  However, there is no available evidence that the existence of the record of this NJP on the applicant's restricted fiche has or will disadvantage him in any way.  Therefore, no injustice exists and granting the requested relief is not appropriate.

5.  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.

6.  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

__SLP__  __WTM __  __TAP__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002082511	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20030909	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	126.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.