RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  26 February 2008
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20070018938


	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.


Ms. Catherine C. Mitrano

Director

Mr. Michael L. Engle

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Ms. Linda D. Simmons

Chairperson

Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas

Member

Mr. John G. Heck

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 removal of a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) from the restricted section of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF); and removal of the memorandum, Resolution of Unfavorable Information, dated 24 October 2007, from the performance section of his OMPF. 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that his request for removal of the GOMOR was denied; however, the denial was filed in the performance section of his OMPF, making it accessible for review and placing him at an unfair disadvantage.

3.  The applicant provides copies of the GOMOR; Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) Memorandum for Record, dated 
13 December 2002; Resolution of Unfavorable Information, dated 22 January 2003; Resolution of Unfavorable Information, dated 24 October 2007; and his Enlisted Record Brief, dated 22 November 2007.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  At the time of his application, the applicant was serving on active duty as a sergeant first class, in Iraq.

2.  On 16 June 1990, the applicant was promoted to specialist, pay grade E-4.

3.  On 5 March 1992, the applicant received a GOMOR for driving under the influence on 16 February 1992.  The imposing general directed permanent filing of the GOMOR in the applicant’s OMPF.  

4.  On 1 September 1992, the applicant was promoted to sergeant, pay grade 
E-5.

5.  On 1 May 1994, the applicant was promoted to staff sergeant, pay grade E-6.

6.  On 1 February 1999, the applicant was promoted to sergeant first class, pay grade E-7.

7.  On 13 December 2002, the applicant petitioned the DASEB, requesting that the GOMOR be transferred from the performance section of his OMPF to the restricted section.  On 22 January 2003, the DASEB determined that the GOMOR had served its intent and authorized its transfer from the performance 
section to the restricted section of his OMPF.  It further authorized the removal of the GOMOR from the applicant’s Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ), maintained locally (if so filed).

8.  On 24 October 2007, the DASEB considered the applicant’s request for removal of the GOMOR from his OMPF.  It denied his petition.  The DASEB memorandum was filed in the applicant’s performance section of his OMPF.

9.  AR 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/Records) provides, in pertinent part, that all personnel information recorded under the authority of this regulation is the property of the United States Government.  Once recorded, it will not be removed except as provided by law or this regulation. Types of authorized military personnel files are the Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ), Career Management Individual File (CMIF), and the Classified Personnel Record (CPR). Once placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent part of that file. The document will not be removed from a section or moved to another part of the file unless directed by one or more of the following: (1) The Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR); (2) The Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB); (3) Army appeal boards; (4) Chief, Appeals and Corrections Branch, Human Resources Command (5) The OMPF custodian when documents have been improperly filed; (6) Commander, Human Resources Command, ATTN: HRC-PDO-PO, as an approved policy change to this regulation; (7) Chief, Appeals Branch, Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri ; (8) Chief, Appeals Branch, National Guard Personnel Center.   Documents designated for transfer from the performance or service portion will be put on the restricted portion, if authorized.  When discovered by the custodian or requested by the Soldier concerned, transfer restricted portion documents mistakenly filed on the performance or service portion to the restricted portion. 

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence clearly shows that the DASEB considered and denied the applicant’s request to remove the subject GOMOR from his OMPF.  He has not provided any additional evidence or sufficiently mitigating argument to warrant removal of the subject GOMOR.  Therefore, the applicant’s request to remove the subject GOMOR should be denied.

2.  The available evidence clearly shows that the DASEB authorized the transfer of the subject GOMOR to the applicant’s restricted section of his OMPF.  When the DASEB denied his latest request to remove the GOMOR from his OMPF, its 
memorandum informing the applicant of their decision was filed in the performance section of his OMPF.  As a result of this filing, anyone who reviews the applicant’s performance section will know about the subject GOMOR.  This appears to be contrary to the intention of the DASEB.  Therefore, the memorandum should be transferred to the restricted section of the applicant’s OMPF. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

 __LDS __  _LMD___  __JGH __ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by transferring the DASEB Memorandum, Resolution of Unfavorable Information, dated 24 October 2007, from the performance section to the restricted section of his OMPF.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to removal of the subject GOMOR from his OMPF.




_    _Linda D. Simmons __
          CHAIRPERSON




INDEX

CASE ID
AR
SUFFIX

RECON
YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED
YYYYMMDD
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)
DATE OF DISCHARGE
YYYYMMDD
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
AR . . . . .  
DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
(NC, GRANT , DENY, GRANT PLUS)
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.