RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        27 February 2007
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060009013


      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. Gerard W. Schwartz            |     |Director             |
|     |Ms. Loretta D. Gulley             |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Ted S. Kanamine               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Larry C. Bergguist            |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |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 a 10 December 1999 record of
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) be removed from his Official Military
Personnel File (OMPF).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the Article 15 has served the
intended purpose and he has not had subsequent infractions.  The applicant
feels removal of the NJP would be in the best interest of both the Army and
himself.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the Department of the Army Suitability
Evaluation (DASEB) decision, a copy of a copy of his request for removal of
the Article 15 from his OMPF, a copy of the Article 15 proceedings and a
self-authored statement in support of this application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is a SFC (E-7) on active duty currently assigned to the
U.S. Army Element, Vaihingen, German, performing duties in Military
Occupational Specialty (MOS) 42L (Senior Administrative Sergeant).  The
applicant’s military personnel records show he entered active duty on 17
July 1994 and trained in MOS 13B10 (Cannoneer).  On 9 April 1987 the
applicant reenlisted and trained in MOS 75B (Personnel Administrative
Specialist).

2.  On 3 December 1990, the applicant accepted NJP under Article 15,
Uniform Code of Military Justice for falsely utilizing a TDY order to
obtain a Military Airlift Command (MAC) flight ticket.  His punishment was
forfeiture of $270.00 pay for one month.  The commander imposing the NJP
directed that it be filed in the performance fiche of the OMPF.

3.  The applicant appealed to the DASEB on 5 August 1997.  The DASEB
decision summary shows that the applicant provided a self-authored
statement with no enclosures for consideration with his application.

4.  The DASEB decision summary shows that the applicant's request for
transfer of the Article 15 to his restricted section of his OMPF was
approved because the document had served its intended purpose and it would
be in the best interest of the Army to transfer the document to the
restricted section of his OMPF.

5.  On 24 September 1997, the applicant was notified by the DASEB of their
decision.

6.  Since the NJP was imposed, the applicant was awarded one Meritorious
Service Medal, five Army Commendation Medals, one Joint Service Achievement
Medal, one Army Achievement Medal, five Good Conduct Medals.  He was
promoted to pay grade E-6 on 1 February 1992, and to pay grade E-7 on
1 September 1998.

7.  Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice) provides policy for the
administration of military justice.  Chapter 3 provides that NJP is
appropriate in all cases involving minor offenses in which non-punitive
measures are considered inadequate or inappropriate.  It is a tool
available to commanders to correct, educate and reform offenders whom the
commander determines cannot benefit from less stringent measures; to
preserve a member's record of service from unnecessary stigma by record of
court-martial conviction; and to further military efficiency by disposing
of minor offenses in a manner requiring fewer resources than trial by court-
martial.  It also provides that the officer imposing NJP determines whether
the report of NJP (DA Form 2627) is to be filed in the Soldier’s restricted
or performance fiche.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information
Management/Records) establishes the responsibilities, policies, and
procedures for maintaining and controlling the OMPF.  This regulation
states, in pertinent part, that the restricted fiche is the OMPF section
for historical data that may normally be improper for viewing by selection
boards or career managers.  The restricted fiche ensures that an unbroken,
historical record of a member's service, conduct, duty performance,
evaluation periods, and corrections to other parts of the OMPF is
maintained.  It is intended to protect the interests of the member and the
Army.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The NJP was imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and
policies.  The punishment imposed was neither unjust nor disproportionate
to the offense, and there is no evidence of any substantive violation of
any of the applicant's rights.

2.  The record of NJP is filed in accordance with the applicable Army
regulation.  It is noted that the applicant’s commander ordered the record
of NJP filed in the performance fiche of the applicant’s OMPF.

3.  While it is unfortunate the applicant was not selected for promotion to
pay grade E-8, the Board does not correct a record without evidence of an
error or injustice.  However, the applicant’s record of two promotions
since imposition of the NJP would indicate that the NJP has not hindered
his career.  As mentioned above, promotion boards are not normally
furnished the restricted fiche of Soldiers’ OMPFs.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the
applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___TSK__  ___LCB _  ___LMD_  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.




            ____Ted S. Kanamine____
                    CHAIRPERSON







                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060009013                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |2007/02/27                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |MR. Schwartz                            |
|ISSUES         1.       |                                        |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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