IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 30 September 2008
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20080013394
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 his DA Form 2627, Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 17 May 1996, be removed from his records.
2. The applicant states that his nonjudicial punishment (NJP) has served as a reminder of past inappropriate actions. However, he did not allow this incident to hinder his performance and progression in the Army. At this point he is trying to maintain his professional growth with his peers and believes his NJP is a hindrance to that progress. He adds he is capable of excelling in positions of greater responsibility.
3. The applicant adds that the reason for his request to remove his NJP is so he can have another document from his performance file moved to his restricted file.
4. The applicant provides in support of his application, a memorandum he wrote to the Department of Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) dated 19 March 2008, and the DASEBs 21 May 2008 response to that memorandum.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicants military records show that he enlisted in the Army National Guard on 12 April 1990. On 29 January 1992, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army.
2. On 17 May 1996, the applicant, then a sergeant, accepted NJP for stealing a wallet and four pair of mens underwear from the Army and Air Force Exchange Service (AAFES).
3. On 12 January 2001, the applicant, then a staff sergeant, again accepted NJP for wrongfully viewing pornographic materials on a Government computer.
4. The applicant is currently serving on active duty as a staff sergeant.
5. In the memorandum the applicant sent to the DASEB, he requested that his 12 January 2001 NJP be moved to the restricted portion or removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant stated that he had matured after he received the NJP and has served in many demanding positions. The applicant concluded that he is capable of excelling in positions of increased responsibility and feels that he would remain at a competitive disadvantage if his NJP remains in performance portion of his OMPF.
6. In the DASEBs response it was stated that Army regulations only allows one NJP to be filed in the restricted portion of a Soldiers OMPF. Since the applicant already has one NJP filed in the restricted portion of his OMPF, the DASEB could not consider moving a second NJP into the same location.
7. Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice) requires that when a Soldier requests a record of NJP be transferred to the restricted fiche the request is to be accompanied by substantive evidence that the intended purpose has been served and the transfer of the record is in the best interest of the Army.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant was provided leniency when his first NJP, received when he was a sergeant, was placed in the restricted portion of his OMPF.
2. The applicant was later promoted to staff sergeant.
3. The intended purpose of the applicants first NJP had apparently not been served based on the fact that he committed another offense for which he was given a second NJP.
4. The applicant now asks the Board to remove his first NJP so he can request to have his second NJP moved to his restricted section.
5. Based on the applicants history, there is no substantive evidence that the intended purpose of the applicants NJP has been served.
6. In addition, promotion boards should be given as clear of a picture as possible of Soldiers they consider in order for the promotion boards to make selections which would be in the best interest of the Army. While the transfer of one NJP to the restricted section is understandable (youthful indiscretion, isolated lapse of judgment, etc.), the transfer of a second NJP is not normally understandable. At that point a pattern has emerged. It would appear that is why the regulation governing the filing of NJPs limits the restricted section to one NJP.
7. To grant the applicants request would be giving him a benefit not provided to other Soldiers in similar situations, and would distort the picture of the applicant considered by the promotion boards.
8. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicants request.
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) AR20080013394
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20080013394
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006593
The applicant requests, in effect, the nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) that he received on 15 June 2006 be moved from the performance file to the restricted file of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). His senior rater made the comments that the applicant "can work in positions of greater responsibility; unlimited potential" and "performed his duties as a team leader in a professional and disciplined manner." Army Regulation...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004579C070206
Carol Kornhoff | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The applicant requests that a 1994 record of non-judicial punishment under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) be expunged from the restricted portion of his OMPF (Official Military Personnel File). It also provides that the officer imposing NJP determines whether the report of NJP is to be filed on the individual’s restricted...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084460C070212
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The applicant also enlisted the services of an attorney who submitted a letter to his CG dated 29 April 1999, requesting that the GOMOR be filed locally. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000051
The applicant requests that general officer memoranda of reprimand (GOMORs), dated 9 April 1997 and 15 March 2005, be removed from the restricted section of his official military personnel file (OMPF). Reaching his 18th year of service and fourth selection passover, he suspects that the reprimands are keeping him from being selected. Given the above and the fact the GOMORs were properly filed on his OMPF, and subsequently transferred to the restricted section of his OMPF as directed by the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004214
The applicant requests transfer of the letter removing him from the Drill Sergeant program from the performance portion to the restricted portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). He petitioned the DASEB in March 2007 for transfer of the following documents to the restricted section of his OMPF: * A General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 4 April 1994 * A Record of Proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ, dated 27 April 2004 * Letter removing him from the Drill...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070014521
x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Paragraph 2-4 of this regulation states that once a document is placed in the OMPF it becomes a permanent part of that file and will not be removed from that file or moved to another part of the file unless directed by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR); the DASEB; the Army Appeals Board; Chief of Appeals and Corrections Branch of the U.S. Army Human Resources...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070010041C071108
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a memorandum dated 9 October 2003 and a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) dated 2 October 2003, from the performance (P-fiche) portion of his official military personnel file (OMPF) and place in the restricted (R-fiche) portion of his OMPF. The applicant has not provided any new evidence or compelling argument to show that it is in the best interest of the United States Army to move this...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100015219
The applicant requests removal of the DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceeding under Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)), dated 27 August 1990, from his official military personnel file (OMPF). Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/ Records) establishes the responsibilities, policies, and procedures for maintaining and controlling the OMPF states that the restricted portion of the OMPF is for historical data that may normally be improper for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006492
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 June 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120006492 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests that the memorandum of disqualification for the Good Conduct Medal be moved to the restricted portion of his file. On 24 March 2011, the applicant requested transfer of the NJP and the Disqualification Statement for Award of the Good Conduct Medal to the restricted portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025674
The applicant requests the general officer memorandum of reprimand (GOMOR) he received for sexual harassment in 2007 while acting as battery commander be moved to the restricted portion of his official military personnel file (OMPF) and he be allowed to remain on active duty in order to reach retirement eligibility in the event he is passed over for promotion this year. On 2 May 2007, the I Corps Commander reviewed the applicant's response and the recommendations of the applicant's chain of...