| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Luis Almodova | Analyst |
| Ms. Jennifer L. Prater | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Barbara J. Ellis | Member | |
| Mr. Thomas Lanyi | Member |
2. 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.
3. The applicant states in effect, that it is his belief that the two company grade Article 15s should be removed from his records since more than one year has passed since their imposition. Applicant provided a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, in support of his application.
4. The applicant's records show he entered active duty on 19 July 1990. He completed Basic Combat Training at Fort Sill, Oklahoma, and was sent to Fort Eustis, Virginia, to undergo Advanced Individual Training as a Traffic Management Coordinator, military occupational specialty, 88N. In October 1990, he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, Army National Training Center, Fort Irwin, California, as his first duty station. He served at that station without incident and achieved the rank and pay grade of Specialist, E-4. In June 1994, he was reassigned to the US Army Armor Center, Fort Knox, Kentucky.
5. On 18 May 1995, the applicant received non-judicial punishment (Article 15) for stealing baseball cards of a value of about $19.80, the property of the Army and Air Force Exchange System (AAFES). His punishment consisted of, "Forfeiture of $296.00 with forfeiture of $169.00 suspended, to be remitted if not vacated before 18 November 1995, and to perform extra duty for 14 days."
6. The applicant received a second Article 15 on 27 June 1995 for wrongfully appropriating a breakfast meal of a value of about $.95, the property of the U.S. Army. Although he was found guilty, the commander did not impose any punishment. Instead, he vacated the suspension that had been imposed on him in the Article 15 that had been administered on 18 May 1995.
7. Item 5, of both DA Forms 2627, which states, "I direct the original DA Form 2627 be filed in the ð performance fiche ð restricted fiche of the OMPF (Official Military Personnel File)" had been deleted and the entry, "NA" indicating, "not applicable," had been entered at the end of the line. Both Article 15s are contained in applicant's OMPF.
8. Army Regulation 27-10 provides policy for the administration of military justice and specifies filing instructions for DA Form 2627. For soldiers in the rank of Specialist or Corporal or below (prior to punishment), the original of the 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 Courts Martial Convening Authority, whichever occurs first.
9. The applicant was released from active duty with an honorable characterization of service on 18 September 1995 in the rank and pay grade of Private First Class, E-3. The record is silent as to the reduction in pay grade from E-4 to E-3. He had 5 years and 2 months net active service with no lost time on his separation date.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The contention made by the applicant, that the two company grades Articles 15, which are filed in his OMPF, should be removed from his record, has merit.
2. 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 the applicant's OMPF. To the contrary, it is evident from modifications made to the forms that the intention was not to have the Article 15s filed in other than unit files; therefore, the DA Forms 2627, should be expunged.
3. These Articles 15, it appears, were imposed in substantial compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies. Only the administrative filing appears to have been flawed.
4. In view of the foregoing findings and conclusions, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant's records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That all Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by removing the DA Forms 2627 and any associated documents from the records of the individual concerned.
2. That, following completion of the administrative action directed herein, the proceedings of the Board and all documents related to this appeal be returned to this Board for permanent filing.
BOARD VOTE:
__JLP___ __BJE___ __TL____ GRANT AS STATED IN
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
Jennifer L. Prater
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
| CASE ID | AR2002068623 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020521 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (GRANT) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 100.0000 |
| 2. | 126.0400 |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071759C070403
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. It states, in pertinent part, that the decision whether to file a record of NJP on the P-Fiche of a soldier's OMPF rests with the imposing commander at the time punishment was imposed and will be recorded in item 5 of the DA Form 2627. The Board concurs with the DASEB determination that the applicant failed to provide a sufficient basis for the transfer of the record of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067603C070402
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001231C070208
The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) from the restricted portion (R-Fiche) of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The Military Justice regulation further stipulates that, with the exception of summarized proceedings, Article 15 proceedings are recorded on a DA Form 2627, which will be filed in either the P-Fiche or R-Fiche of the OMPF on those Soldiers in the rank of sergeant and above. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002076558C070215
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. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. New evidence unquestionably exculpating the individual is a cited example whereas the fact that a soldier's subsequent performance has been exemplary or that the punishment adversely effects the career potential...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011739C070206
The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ), from his military service record. The evidence of record shows that the written reprimand that is filed in the performance section of the applicant's OMPF was issued as part of the Article 15 punishment. The Board notes the applicant’s successful duty performance since the incident; however, it finds this is not sufficiently mitigating evidence to warrant removal of the properly...
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 | 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 | CY2001 | 2001063430C070421
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That a Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER) and a Record of Nonjudicial Punishment (DA Form 2627) dated 6 June 1996, be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant appealed the bar to reenlistment and his appeal was granted on 3 December 1998. Neither the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record shows that the NCOER or the Record of NJP were in error or unjust.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003086772C070212
The applicant requests that his records of punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), dated 10 December 1986 and 1 April 1987 be removed from the Restricted (R) fiche of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The Article 15s were placed on his R fiche as indicated in item 5 of his DA Form 2627 (Record of proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ). The applicant’s record of punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 10 December 1986 and 1 April 1987, were properly...