IN THE CASE OF: .
BOARD DATE: 11 September 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080012000
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 that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) imposed on 4 January 1988 be removed from the restricted section of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).
2. The applicant states, in effect, that the DA Form 2627 was misfiled in the restricted section of his OMPF. He contends that in accordance with Army Regulation 27-10, paragraph 3-37, the DA Form 2627 was not supposed to be filed on his OMPF.
3. The applicant provides a copy of the DA Form 2627.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 5 December 1984. He is currently serving on active duty in the rank of sergeant first class (platoon sergeant).
2. A DA Form 2627, dated 4 January 1988, shows that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant (a specialist four at the time) for signing a false official record. His punishment consisted of extra duty and restriction. The issuing commander directed that the original DA Form 2627 be filed in the restricted section of the applicants OMPF.
3. A review of the restricted section of the applicants OMPF on the Interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System revealed a copy of the DA Form 2627 in question.
4. Paragraph 3-37b (Distribution and filing of DA Form 2627 and allied documents) of Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice), currently in effect, states, in pertinent part, that for Soldiers specialist or corporal and below the original DA Form 2627 will be filed locally in unit nonjudicial punishment or unit personnel files.
5. Paragraph 3-6 (Filing Determination) of Army Regulation 27-10, in effect at the time, stated in pertinent part, that a commanders decision whether to file a record of nonjudicial punishment on the performance fiche of a Soldiers OMPF was as important as the decision relating to the imposition of nonjudicial punishment itself.
6. Table 3-1 (Composition of the Military Personnel Records Jacket (MPRJ)) of Army Regulation 640-10 (Individual Military Personnel Records), in effect at the time, provided, in pertinent part, that for Article 15s issued on or after 10 August 1987, the Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627) for Soldiers in grade E4 or below with less than 3 years of service at time of imposition would be filed only in local nonjudicial punishment files. The DA Form 2627 would not be filed in the MPRJ or the OMPF of these Soldiers.
7. Table 3-1 of this regulation also stated that for Article 15s issued on or after
1 November 1982, copy 1 would be filed on the OMPF performance fiche if the issuing commander indicated in item 5 of the DA Form 2627 that the Article 15 be filed there.
8. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records), currently in effect, prescribes the policies governing the OMPF, the Military Personnel Records Jacket, the Career Management Individual File, and Army Personnel Qualification Records. Table 2-1 of the regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a DA Form 2627 will be filed in the performance or restricted section of the OMPF as directed by the issuing commander (item 5 on DA Form 2627). Allied documents accompanying the Article 15 will be filed in the restricted section.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The evidence of record does not support the applicants contention that his 1988 DA Form 2627 was misfiled in the restricted section of his OMPF. Evidence of record shows the applicant was a specialist four with over 3 years of service at the time his Article 15 was imposed. The governing regulation in effect at the time stated that Article 15s issued after 1 November 1982 would be filed on the OMPF as directed by the issuing commander. The issuing commander directed that the original DA Form 2627 be filed in the restricted section of the applicants OMPF.
2. There is no evidence that the DA Form 2627 was improperly imposed. The DA Form 2627 imposed on 4 January 1988 was properly filed in the restricted section of the applicants OMPF in accordance with the governing regulation in effect at the time.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
___xx___ ___xx___ ___xx___ 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.
_______ _xxxx______ ___
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) AR20080012000
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080012000
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080012084
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 September 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080012084 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) imposed on 22 January 2002 be removed from the restricted section of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). A DA Form 2627, dated 22 January 2002, shows that nonjudicial punishment was imposed against the applicant for driving under the influence of alcohol on 15 October 2001.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050011739C070206
The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ), from his military service record. The evidence of record shows that the written reprimand that is filed in the performance section of the applicant's OMPF was issued as part of the Article 15 punishment. The Board notes the applicant’s successful duty performance since the incident; however, it finds this is not sufficiently mitigating evidence to warrant removal of the properly...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005758
The applicant provides: * DA Form 2627 * DA Form 2627-2 (Record of Supplementary Action Under Article 15, UCMJ) CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. b. NJP was imposed against him on 8 June 2011 for violating a lawful general regulation for using bath salts and the issuing commander directed that the original DA Form 2627 be filed in the restricted section of his OMPF. Although the DA Form 2627 imposed on 8 June 2011 was properly filed in the restricted portion of the applicants OMPF in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006450
The applicant requests that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) imposed on 4 June 1996, and a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 14 June 1996, be removed from the restricted section of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The DA Form 2627 imposed on 4 June 1996 and the 14 June 1996 GOMOR were properly filed in the performance section of the applicants OMPF and then subsequently transferred to the restricted section of his OMPF as...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062179C070421
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The record of NJP was properly filed on the Restricted Fiche of the applicant’s OMPF in accordance with the imposing commander’s instructions and the applicable regulations in effect at the time.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050013387C070206
The applicant requests, in effect, transfer of a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ), from the performance to the restricted section of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which occurred on 18 September 2000, the date of imposition of punishment directing that the DA Form 2627 be filed in the performance fiche of his OMPF. More specifically in this case, the applicant must provide sufficient...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001231C070208
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). The Military Justice regulation further stipulates that, with the exception of summarized proceedings, Article 15 proceedings are recorded on a DA Form 2627, which will be filed in either the P-Fiche or R-Fiche of the OMPF on those Soldiers in the rank of sergeant and above. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079667C070215
The applicant requests, in effect, that three Records of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Forms 2627) be removed from the restricted portion (R-Fiche) of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant was advised by his unit commander that the DA Form 2627 would be filed in the R-fiche portion of his OMPF, and that he had 5 calendar days to appeal the action. However, the evidence of record also confirms that the disposition and filing of the record of NJP accepted by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017409
The applicant requests that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ [Uniform Code of Military Justice]) imposed on 27 July 2006 be removed from his record. A review of the applicants service section of his official military personnel file (OMPF) and his military personnel records jacket (MPRJ) on the integrated Personnel Electronic Records Management System revealed a copy of the DA Form 2627 in question contained in the case files for approved separations. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005668
The imposing commander directed the record of the NJP be filed in the restricted section of his OMPF. The evidence in this case shows the imposing authority elected to have the 23 April 1999 NJP record placed in the restricted section of the applicant's OMPF. The evidence also shows that the DA Form 4187 announcing the applicant's reduction in grade as a result of the NJP should have been, and was, transferred to his OMPF on his promotion to sergeant.