RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 22 March 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070001080 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz Acting Director Ms. Wanda L. Waller Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Ms. Linda Simmons Chairperson Mr. John Meixell Member Mr. Roland Venable Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) imposed on 27 June 2005 be transferred from the performance section to the restricted section of her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 2. The applicant states that the DA Form 2627 in question is on the restricted and unrestricted sections of her OMPF. She contends that the DA Form 2627 should only be on one of her performance records. 3. The applicant provides two memorandums, dated 18 January 2007, from the President, Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB); her appeal to the DASEB, dated 3 January 2007; and a memorandum, dated 29 December 2005. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant served in Operation Iraqi Freedom. She is currently serving as a staff sergeant on active duty. 2. A DA Form 2627, dated 27 June 2005, shows that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for disobeying two lawful commands (to elaborate on her sworn statement and to be “at ease”). Her punishment consisted of a reduction to pay grade E-5 (suspended) and a forfeiture of $1,323 pay. The issuing commander directed that the original DA Form 2627 be filed in the performance section of the applicant’s OMPF. 3. A review of the performance section of the applicant’s OMPF on the Personnel Electronic Records Management System revealed a copy of the DA Form 2627 in question. The restricted section and the Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ) section of her OMPF also revealed the DA Form 2627 in question along with about 20 allied documents (e.g. counseling forms and sworn statement). 4. On 3 January 2007, the applicant submitted an appeal to the DASEB requesting the transfer of the DA Form 2627 to her restricted section. In summary, she stated that her company commander wanted her to change her sworn statement to his standard, that if she had elaborated on the statement it would have been a lie, and that the Article 15 was based on personality conflicts and had nothing to do with her job. 5. On 18 January 2007, the DASEB voted to deny the applicant’s request to transfer the DA Form 2627 in question from the performance section of the applicant's OMPF to the restricted section of her OMPF. The DASEB cited that the applicant maintained that the DA Form 2627 was unfairly rendered because she refused to “lie” on a sworn statement, that the incident occurred over 1 1/2 years ago, there were no memorandums of support from her chain of command, and that the applicant’s evaluations after the incident reflect solid performance. The DASEB concluded that the applicant failed to prove that the DA Form 2627 had served its intended purpose or that it was unfairly rendered and that it was not convinced that the applicant provided sufficient evidence to warrant transfer of the DA Form 2627 to her restricted section at this time. 6. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/Records) prescribes the policies governing the OMPF, the MPRJ, the Career Management Individual file, and Army Personnel Qualification Records. Table 2-1 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a DA Form 2627 will be filed in the performance or restricted section of the OMPF as directed by the issuing commander (item 5 on DA Form 2627). Allied documents accompanying the Article 15 will be filed in the restricted section. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The DA Form 2627 imposed on 27 June 2005 was properly filed in the performance section of the applicant’s OMPF. There is no evidence that it was improperly imposed. When an Article 15 is directed to be filed in the performance section, allied documents are required to be filed in the restricted section. Although not specifically mentioned, it is reasonable to presume the regulation also required the DA Form 2627 to be filed in the restricted section with the allied documents. The applicant has failed to demonstrate any undue harm or injustice as a result of a copy of the Article 15 being placed in the restricted portion of her OMPF with the allied papers. Therefore, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request at this time. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING LS_____ _JM____ __RV____ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _Linda Simmons________ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070001080 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070322 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 126.0500 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.