IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	       19 August 2008

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080007567 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), with an effective date of 15 August 1991; and his DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge), with an effective date of 19 July 1993, be transferred to the restricted portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the Board corrected his DD Form 214 in a prior decision because it contained an error in the narrative reason and authority for discharge.  Since his discharge, he served in the Army National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve and, after being given a waiver, came back on active duty on 25 November 1996.  He is being considered for promotion to sergeant first class/E-7 and believes his initial DD Form 214 is hurting his career progression. 

3.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214 and a copy of his DD Form 215.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  The applicant is a staff sergeant/E-6 in the Regular Army.

3.  The applicant served in the Regular Army from 1 September 1987 through
15 August 1991.  A copy of his official record for this period of service is not available for review.  He provided a copy of his DD Form 214 covering this period of active duty; however, portions of it are illegible.  An attempt was made to secure a better copy from the applicant's file maintained on the Integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS).  Unfortunately, an improved copy was not available.  He was apparently administratively discharged for a driving under the influence of alcohol conviction under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12, by reason of misconduct.

4.  The applicant's original DD Form 214 indicated that he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 14-12, by reason of misconduct – abuse of illegal drugs.  He petitioned the Board in 1993 to change the authority and narrative reason.  On 19 July 1993, he was issued a DD Form 215 correcting the authority and narrative reason for discharge to Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 14-12b, misconduct – pattern of misconduct.

5.  After being granted a waiver of his reentry (RE) code, the applicant enlisted in the Army National Guard for a short period of time.  On 3 May 1996, the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve as a specialist four/E-4 for a period of 3 years.

6.  On 25 November 1997, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army for a period of 4 years.  He has served through a series of reenlistments and currently remains on active duty.  He was promoted to SSG/E-6 on 1 November 2004.  He reenlisted on 8 May 2005, while in Iraq, for an indefinite period.

7.  A review of the applicant's OMPF reveals no misconduct, lost time, reduction in grade since he was granted a waiver and allowed to enlist in the Army.  A review of his Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Reports (NCOERS) show that he is considered a stellar performer who completes all tasks with great success; that he has unlimited leadership potential and is clearly capable of serving with distinction in the most demanding and critical assignments.  He is rated among the best NCOs and has been recommended for immediate promotion and school attendance.  
8.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/ Records) prescribes the policies and mandated operating tasks for the Military Personnel (MILPER) Information Management/Records Program of the Military Personnel System.  It establishes principles of support, standards of service, policies, tasks, rules, and steps governing all work required in the field to support MILPER Information Management/Records.  It states, in pertinent part, that once placed in the OMPF, a document becomes a permanent part of that file.  The document will not be removed from a record or moved to another section of the record unless directed by competent authority.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests that his DD Form 214, with an effective date of 15 August 1991, and the accompanying DD Form 215, be moved to the restricted portion of his OMPF.

2.  The applicant makes his request because he fears the subject documents will hinder his chances for promotion to Sergeant First Class (SFC/E-7).  Generally, documents are moved to the restricted portion of the OMPF when they have served their intended purpose and are of no decision-making value.  The applicant's DD Form 214 and DD Form 215 are indicators of his total active Federal service and are of decision-making value in a number of personnel-related areas.  Therefore they should not be moved.

3.  The applicant is requesting the movement of the subject documents because they might, at some future time, hinder his promotion potential.  This is not a valid basis for moving a document.

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 this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___X____  ____X___  ____X___  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.



      _________X_____________
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080007567



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080007567



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1