RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           20 December 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20050016908


      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             |
|     |Ms. Wanda L. Waller               |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James Hise                    |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Ronald Blakely                |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Jeanette McCants              |     |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, that his General Officer Memorandum
of Record (GOMOR) be removed from his Official Military Personnel File
(OMPF).

2.  The applicant states he received a Letter of Reprimand for driving
under the influence when he was a specialist.  He contends the reprimand
has served its purpose and a lesson was learned.  He is now a staff
sergeant and wants to advance further in his career and serve his country
at a higher level.

3.  The applicant provides a letter, dated 14 November 2005, from the
Department of Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB); and his petition,
dated 28 October 2005, to the DASEB.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is currently serving on active duty in the rank of staff
sergeant.

2.  On 21 July 1997, the applicant was issued a GOMOR by the Commanding
General of the 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, Texas for driving under the
influence of intoxicating liquor and refusing to take a legally requested
blood test at the time of the arrest.  This GOMOR was imposed as an
administrative measure and not as punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code
of Military Justice.  The Commanding General indicated that he was
considering filing this reprimand in the applicant’s OMPF.  The memorandum
was referred to the applicant for comment.

3.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the GOMOR and elected to submit a
statement in his own behalf.  In summary, he stated that he had consumed
two cans of beer and half a bottle of wine on 11 July 1997 and then went to
bed.  Two and a half hours later his wife called him for a ride and when he
went to pick her up he hit another car after he was cut off in traffic.
When the police arrived on the scene, they smelled alcohol on his breath
and he was arrested for driving while intoxicated.  He stated that the
police did not give him a blood test, that he was falsely accused of
leaving the scene of the accident, and that he was falsely accused of
setting an appointment to give blood.  He acknowledged that he was wrong
for getting into his vehicle after he had consumed alcohol earlier that day
but he felt he had given himself enough time to drive.

4.  On 21 November 1997, the Commanding General directed that the
applicant’s GOMOR be filed on his OMPF.

5.  On 28 October 2005, the applicant petitioned the DASEB for transfer of
the GOMOR to his restricted fiche.

6.  On 14 November 2005, the DASEB voted to approve the transfer of the
GOMOR, dated 21 November 1997, from the performance portion of the
applicant's OMPF to the restricted portion of his OMPF.  The transfer was
based upon the intended purpose having been served, it was not to be
considered retroactive, and did not constitute grounds for referral to a
Special Selection Board for a previous non-selection.

7.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information
Management/Records) states, in pertinent part, that disciplinary
information filed on the restricted portion of the OMPF will be provided to
the Command Sergeant Major (CSM)/sergeant major (SGM) promotion, SGM
Academy selection, and CSM/SGM retention boards to ensure the best
qualified Soldiers are selected for these positions of highest trust.

8.  Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information) prescribes policies
and procedures regarding unfavorable information considered for inclusion
in official personnel files.  Chapter 3 covers unfavorable information in
official personnel files.  Paragraph 3-4 applies to filing of nonpunitive
administrative letters of reprimand (LOR) or censure in official personnel
files.  Paragraph 3-4(b) provides for filing in the OMPF.  It states that a
letter, regardless of the issuing authority may be filed in the OMPF
maintained by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, the U.S. Army Human
Resources, St. Louis, Missouri, or the proper State Adjutant General (for
Army National Guard Personnel) only upon the order of a general officer (to
include one frocked to the rank of brigadier general) senior to the
recipient by direction of an officer having general court-martial
jurisdiction over the individual.  Letters filed in the OMPF will be filed
on the performance portion (P-fiche).  The direction for filing in the OMPF
will be contained in an endorsement or addendum to the letter.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The GOMOR was properly imposed and was properly filed on the permanent
fiche of the applicant’s OMPF.

2.  On 14 November 2005, the DASEB voted to approve the transfer of the
GOMOR from the performance portion of the applicant's OMPF to the
restricted portion of his OMPF.

3.  It appears the applicant’s performance has been without further
incident since his GOMOR as evidenced by his promotion to staff sergeant.
However, Army Regulation 600-8-104 provides a valid reason for retention of
GOMORs on the restricted fiche.  When the time comes for the applicant to
be considered for selection to positions associated with grade E-9, his
disciplinary history must be provided to the selection board(s) to ensure a
fair comparison is made between all eligible Soldiers.  The restricted
portion of his OMPF would not normally be provided to selection boards and
so should not affect the chances for his next two promotions (E-7 or E-8).

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

JH_____  _RB_____  _JM_____  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 Hise__________
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050016908                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051220                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |126.0400                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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