RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 26 June 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070007180 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. Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano Director Mr. Michael L. Engle Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: Mr. James E. Anderholm Chairperson Mr. Jerome L. Pionk Member Ms. Jeanette B. McPherson 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 the removal of a Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, nonjudicial punishment (NJP), Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) (DA Form 2627) dated 16 October 2003, from her Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 2. The applicant states, in effect, that she requested the NJP be moved from the performance section of her OMPF to the restricted section, which was accomplished. However, the OMPF format now used on-line (iperms) no longer hides a restricted portion of the OMPF. She further states that she does not believe the NJP to be unjust, but does believe that the length of her punishment has been long enough and she has continued to serve honorably. She feels that the NJP in her records is a constant punishment that has hindered her promotion to sergeant first class numerous times. She states that her performance evaluations show her commitment to duty and unwavering commitment to the United States Army and feels that the removal of the NJP would allow her to successfully continue her military career. 3. The applicant provides copies of her awards and performance evaluations since she received the NJP. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 5 June 1990, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for 4 years. She completed her initial training and served through a series of reenlistments. At the time of her application she was a staff sergeant, pay grade E6. She had completed over 16 years of creditable active duty. 2. On 8 October 2003, the applicant accepted NJP under the provisions of Article 15, UCMJ, for wrongful use of amphetamines. The punishment included reduction to sergeant, pay grade E5 (suspended), a forfeiture of $571.00 pay per month for 2 months, and 45 days extra duty. Her appeal of the punishment was denied on 16 October 2003. 3. The applicant has provided her last five noncommissioned officer evaluation reports covering her performance of duty from August 2003 to 30 November 2006. A review of these reports shows that the applicant’s performance of duty has received mostly excellent ratings and her potential for promotion has been rated among the best. Her overall performance and potential has consistently been rated in the “1” block. 4. The applicant has provided documentation of her five Army Good Conduct Medals, five Army Commendation Medals, two Army Achievement Medals, and several Certificates of Achievement presented to her during her career. 5. AR 27-10 (Military Justice) prescribes the guidelines for the filing of NJP. It states, in pertinent part, that the decision to file the original DA Form 2627 on the performance or restricted fiche of the OMPF will be determined by the imposing commander at the time punishment is imposed. Personnel serving in the pay grade of E-4 or below with less than 3 years of service will have the Record of NJP (DA Form 2627) filed in the local unit military justice files. Personnel serving in the pay grade of E-4 or above with 3 or more years of service will have the DA Form 2627 filed in the OMPF. The filing decision of the imposing commander is final and will be indicated in item 5, DA Form 2627. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The available evidence in this case shows that the NJP was properly imposed against the applicant in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations in effect at the time, with no indications of any procedural errors that may have jeopardized her rights. 2. The available evidence seems to indicate that, with the exception of one NJP, she has consistently performed well during her military career. 3. The applicant’s contention that the NJP is a constant punishment that has hindered her promotion to sergeant first class numerous times is understandable. However, the Army must consider the entire record of a Soldier when making promotion determinations. The Army has an interest in maintaining such documents as a way to ensure that all Soldiers are given equal and fair consideration for promotion. 4. The applicant indicated in her request to have the NJP moved to the restricted section of her OMPF had been granted, but it still appeared in the performance section of her iperms record. A review of her iperms record did reflect that the NJP was still located in the performance section. Further, there was no evidence her request to have it moved to the restricted section had been granted. Applicant is advised to contact her personnel manager with the relevant evidence of the approval to ensure the change in her records is completed. 5. The applicant has not shown sufficient reasons why the NJP should not remain a matter of her record. Therefore, her request should not be granted. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING __JEA___ __JLP __ __JBM __ 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. _____James E. Anderholm___ CHAIRPERSON INDEX CASE ID AR20070007180 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED 20070626 TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY . . . . . DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 126.0400 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.