IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 June 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140018624 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show his rank/pay grade was restored to specialist four (SP4)/E-4. 2. The applicant states, in effect, he objected to his executive officer using a racial slur. He was accused of letting a fire go out in the wood stove and the objections he made were ignored. This resulted in him being reduced in rank from SP4 to private first class (PFC). He was reduced in rank again when he could not afford to replace his SP4 patch with a PFC patch. This occurred during a time of social unrest. This was the third occurrence of the same conduct at Fort McNair, VA and at Arlington Hall, VA. He was a good Soldier and relief should be given. 3. The applicant provides documents from his official military personnel file. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing. 2. The applicant was inducted into the Army of the United States on 24 May 1966. He completed the training requirements and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 05C (Radio Operator). 3. He accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) on: a. 20 March 1968, for leaving his post as charge of quarters. His punishment consisted of reduction in rank to PFC. b. 6 May 1968, for failing to report in the proper uniform. His punishment consisted of reduction to the rank of private (PV2). He did not appeal either NJP. 4. On 23 May 1968, he was honorably transferred to the U.S. Army Reserve. He completed 2 years of total active service. 5. Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice) states NJP is imposed to correct misconduct in violation of the UCMJ. Such conduct may result from intentional disregard of or failure to comply with prescribed standards of military conduct. Non-punitive measures usually deal with misconduct resulting from simple neglect, forgetfulness, laziness, inattention to instructions, sloppy habits, immaturity, difficulty in adjusting to disciplined military life, and similar deficiencies. These measures are primarily tools for teaching proper standards of conduct and performance and do not constitute punishment. Included among non-punitive measures are denial of pass or other privileges, counseling, administrative reduction in grade, administrative reprimands and admonitions, extra training, bar to reenlistment, and MOS reclassification. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. As a result of his minor infractions, his commander imposed NJP under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ on two occasions. He did not appeal this punishment. 2. Commanders use NJP under the provisions of Article 15 of the UCMJ as a tool to correct misconduct that results from intentional disregard of or failure to comply with prescribed standards of military conduct. Additionally, commanders may administratively reduce enlisted personnel as part of the NJP. 3. There is no evidence and he has not provided evidence to show his reductions in rank occurred as a result of an administrative error or that he was improperly or unfairly reduced in rank. As such there is no basis for restoring his rank/pay grade to SP4/E-4. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ 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. _______ _ _X_____ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140018624 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140018624 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1