| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Walter T. Morrison | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Curtis L. Greenway | Member | |
| Ms. Regan K. Smith | Member |
2. The applicant requests that the Article 15 dated 20 September 1997 be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).
3. The applicant states the Article 15 was erroneously filed in his OMPF. Line 5, which directs where on the OMPF the Article 15 is to be filed, is clearly deleted.
4. The applicant’s military records show that, after having had prior service in the Army National Guard, he enlisted in the Regular Army on 14 April 1994. He was released from active duty on 13 April 1997 and was transferred to a Troop Program Unit with the U. S. Army Reserve.
5. On 2 September 1997, the applicant, then a Specialist, E-4, was given nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice for being absent from formation. He was reduced to pay grade E-3. The Article 15 is filed in the performance portion of his OMPF.
6. The applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 11 February 1999.
7. Army Regulation 27-10 prescribes policies and procedures pertaining to the administration of military justice. The version effective 24 July 1996, paragraph 3-6 states that a commander’s decision whether to file a record of nonjudicial punishment on the performance fiche of a soldier’s OMPF is as important as the decision relating to the imposition of nonjudicial punishment itself. Paragraph 3-37 states that, for soldiers Specialist or Corporal and below (prior to punishment), the original Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627) will be filed locally in unit nonjudicial punishment files. Such locally filed originals will be destroyed at the end of 2 years from the date of imposition of punishment or on the soldier’s transfer to another general court-martial convening authority, whichever occurs first. For these soldiers, the imposing commander should annotate item 5 of the DA Form 2627 as “Not Applicable.”
CONCLUSIONS:
1. An error was made in this case. As a Specialist, the applicant’s Article 15 was authorized for filing only locally in unit nonjudicial punishment files. It was not to be filed in his OMPF.
2. In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by removing the Article 15 dated 20 September 1997 from the applicant’s OMPF. Following completion of this administrative correction, the proceedings of the Board and all documents related to this appeal will be returned to the Board for permanent filing.
BOARD VOTE:
__wtm___ __clg___ __rks___ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
Walter T. Morrison
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2001065492 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020402 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (GRANT) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 126.01 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079667C070215
The applicant requests, in effect, that three Records of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Forms 2627) be removed from the restricted portion (R-Fiche) of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant was advised by his unit commander that the DA Form 2627 would be filed in the R-fiche portion of his OMPF, and that he had 5 calendar days to appeal the action. However, the evidence of record also confirms that the disposition and filing of the record of NJP accepted by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069672C070402
The applicant requests, in effect, that two Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627) be removed from the restricted fiche (R-Fiche) of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). Therefore, the Board concludes, given the minor nature of the offense for which the applicant accepted the NJP, that these current standards should be applied and that it would be appropriate to remove the DA Form 2627, dated 10 April 1987, from his OMPF at this time. However, the evidence of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091313C070212
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. The imposing commander directed that the Article 15 be filed in the applicant's performance fiche of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and was advised of his right to appeal the punishment. Paragraph 2-4 of this regulation states that once a document is placed in the OMPF it becomes a permanent part...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074056C070403
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. The applicant requests that the 26 August 1991 memorandum showing that he was disqualified for award of the Good Conduct Medal during his first period of service be removed from his performance fiche. The performance portion of the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) contains a copy of a 26...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061379C070421
The applicant requests, in effect, that his August 1991 DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) be expunged from his OMPF (Official Military Personnel File). The 25 January 1990 edition of Army Regulation 27-10, which establishes the policies and provisions for the filing of DA Forms 2627, states that records of nonjudicial punishment for soldiers in pay grade E-4 and below will be filed locally in unit nonjudicial punishment files. b. by expunging all documents...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004106518C070208
Captain F___ imposed the punishment and directed the DA Form 2627 be filed in the applicant's restricted fiche. Army Regulation 27-10 in effect at the time, dated 10 December 1985, stated in paragraph 3-37b(1) that, for those records where punishment was imposed on or after 1 November 1982, the decision to file the original DA Form 2627 on the performance fiche or the restricted fiche in the OMPF would be determined by the imposing commander at the time punishment was imposed. He provides...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078693C070215
The applicant requests, in effect, that a Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627) be removed from the restricted portion (R-Fiche) of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). A review of the applicant’s record confirms that the NJP in question is filed on the R-Fiche of the applicant’s OMPF. Therefore, the Board finds that the NJP record in question was erroneously filed in the R-Fiche of the applicant’s OMPF, and it would be appropriate to remove it from the record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090731C070212
Army Regulation 27-10 and Army Regulation 15-185 (Policy and Procedures for Applying to the Army Board for Correction of Military Records specifically preclude the removal of a valid DA form 2627 from a soldier's record, by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records, without compelling evidence. Records show the applicant should have discovered the error or injustice now under consideration on 30 April 1997, the date of his separation; therefore, the time for the applicant to file a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002068623C070402
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. The applicant requests, in effect, that the two Article 15s, which are filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), be removed from his record. There is no evidence that the officer imposing the 18 May and the 27 June 1995 nonjudicial punishments intended that these DA Forms 2627 should be filed in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075876C070403
He notes that when he was administered the UCMJ action his commander informed him that there was "no evidence to support the adultery charge and that it was being dropped." The applicant's commander then imposed punishment (forfeiture of pay, extra duty, restriction and a written reprimand) and directed that the record of proceedings be filed in the applicant's restricted fiche. The applicant's records indicate that the entire UCMJ action (DA Form 2627 and continuation sheet) was filed in...