RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        26 October 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050011715


      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. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Eric S. Moore                 |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Vick                 |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Conrad V. Meyer               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda M. Barker               |     |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, 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).

2.  The applicant states that he received a Field Grade Article 15 on
           26 November 1984 and is now requesting that it be removed due to
the negative impact it could have on his consideration for selection to
sergeant major.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the DA Form 2627.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant entered active duty on 6 August 1982 and was promoted to
master sergeant/pay grade E-8 on 22 August 2001.

2.  On 26 November 1984, the applicant, then a sergeant, accepted
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military
Justice (UCMJ) for knowingly and wrongfully using some amount of marijuana
between 2 July 1984 and 12 July 1984, and 1 October 1984 and 11 October
1984.  His punishment consisted of reduction to the grade of specialist
four/pay grade E-4 and extra duty for 45 days.

3.  Item 5 of the DA Form 2627 shows that the officer imposing the
punishment directed that the original be filed in the restricted fiche of
the applicant's OMPF.

4.  The commander's decision whether to file a record of nonjudicial
punishment on the performance section of a Soldier's Official Military
Personnel File (OMPF) is as important as the decision relating to the
imposition of nonjudicial punishment itself.  In making a filing
determination, the imposing commander must weigh carefully the interests of
the Soldier's career against those of the Army to produce and advance only
the most qualified personnel for positions of leadership, trust, and
responsibility.  In this regard, the imposing commander should consider the
Soldier's age, grade, total service (with particular attention to the
Soldier's recent performance and past misconduct), and whether the Soldier
has more than one record of nonjudicial punishment directed for filing in
the restricted section (see below).  However, the interests of the Army are
compelling when the record of nonjudicial punishment reflects unmitigated
moral turpitude or lack of integrity, patterns of misconduct, or evidence
of serious character deficiency or substantial breach of military
discipline.  In such cases, the record should be filed in the performance
section.

5.  Army Regulation 635-200 (Enlisted Personnel) sets forth the basic
authority for the separation of enlisted personnel from active duty.
Chapter 14, in effect at the time, dealt with separation for various types
of misconduct, which included drug abuse.  It provides that individuals
identified as drug abusers may be separated prior to their normal
expiration of term of service (ETS).  Individuals in pay grades E-5 and
above must be processed for separation upon discovery of a drug offense.
Those in pay grades below E-5 may also be processed after a first drug
offense and must be processed for separation after a second offense.  The
issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally
considered appropriate.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information) states that
the restricted portion of the OMPF is for historical data that may normally
be improper for viewing by selection boards or career managers.  The
release of information on this fiche is controlled.  Documents on this
fiche are those that must be permanently kept to maintain an unbroken,
historical record of a member's service, conduct, duty performance, and
evaluation periods and are intended to protect the interest of the Soldier
and the Army.  Once placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent
part of that file.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  In light of the regulatory guidance for filing determinations and
considering the applicant was a sergeant, and by regulation, he should have
been processed for elimination, the decision to file the DA Form 2627 on
his restricted fiche was quite lenient.

2.  The DA Form 2627 (Article 15) is properly filed and as such no error
exists.  The action by the Army in this case was proper, and there is no
doubt to be resolved in favor of the applicant.

3.  Although the applicant may perceive that retention of the Article 15 on
his restricted fiche might somehow be prejudicial to his career, there is
no evidence to support such a conclusion.

4.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily
appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy that requirement.  Therefore, there is
no basis for granting the applicant's request.


BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___jev __  __cvm___  __lmb___  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. Vick________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050011715                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/10/26                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |MR CHUN                                 |
|ISSUES         1.       |126.0400                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]