Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016716
Original file (20100016716.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  5 October 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100016716 


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 summary court-martial and letter of reprimand be removed or transferred to the restricted portion of his file.

2.  The applicant states it has been over five years since the incidents that led to his summary court-martial and letter of reprimand, he has not had any additional disciplinary actions, and he has been promoted since the incidents.  The applicant states that he walked away from a superior noncommissioned officer (NCO) after she repeatedly used profanity in berating him.  While stationed in Korea regulation changes prohibited Soldiers, under the rank of staff sergeant, to have privately-owned vehicles (POV).  He had purchased the vehicle prior to the change and had been unable to divest himself of it.  Also, his wife still needed to use the car.  He had applied for an exception to policy.

3.  The applicant provides the Record of Trial by Summary Court-Martial with an attached written reprimand.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 28 February 2000 with three subsequent reenlistments.

2.  On 16 March 2005, while stationed in Korea, a summary court-martial found the applicant guilty of being disrespectful toward a superior NCO and wrongfully owning and operating a POV.
3.  The adjudged sentence was forfeiture of $703.00 pay per month for one month (to be suspended for 30 days), 60 days restriction, and a letter of reprimand.

4.  The court-martial convening authority approved the sentence except he directed that the forfeiture not be suspended.

5.  The applicant was promoted to staff sergeant (E-6) effective 1 June 2007.

6.  Since the summary court-martial the applicant has successfully completed  the following courses:

	a.  on 30 September 2005, Field Sanitation Team Training;

	b.  on 22 June 2006, the Warrior Leader Course;

	c.  on 4 April 2008, the Motor Transport Operator - Basic NCO course; and

	d.  on 4 April 2008, the Modern Army Combatives Program Level 1 Instructor Certification Course.

7.  The applicant's rater evaluated the applicant on his NCO Evaluation Reports (NCOERs) for 2005 and 2006 as fully capable and block 2 with the senior rater evaluating him as superior - block 2.  His evaluations for 2007 through the most current have him marked by his rater as among the best and successful - top block, with the senior rater giving him a superior - block 1.

8.  The statutory authority under which this Board was created (Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, as amended) precludes any action by this Board that would disturb the finality of a court-martial conviction.  

9.  Army Regulation 600-37 (Unfavorable Information) states unfavorable information that should be filed in official personnel files includes indications of substandard leadership ability, promotion potential, morals, and integrity.  These must be identified early and shown in those permanent official personnel records that are available to personnel managers and selection board members for use in making such personnel decisions as result in selecting Soldiers for positions of public trust and responsibility, or vesting such persons with authority over others, should be based on a thorough review of their records.  The ABCMR has the authority to modify a court-martial record by directing the filing of all related documents in the restricted portion of a Soldier's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), or in cases of an extreme injustice to remove it from the OMPF altogether.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant states it has been over five years since the incidents that led to the summary court-martial and letter of reprimand, he has not had any additional disciplinary actions, and he has been promoted since the incidents.  

2.  To remove the summary court-martial and letter of reprimand would again place the applicant on the same footing as other Soldiers who did not commit the same or similar infractions. 

3.  Further, the Board does not have the authority to disturb the finality of a court-martial.  Purging the court-martial from his OMPF would effectively remove the record of the conviction from any further consideration by Army officials.  In the spirit of 10 USC 1552, the ABCMR only exercises the authority to remove a court-martial from the OMPF in the rarest and most extreme situations involving a significant injustice.  This is not one of those cases.  Therefore, it would not be appropriate to purge the record of these items.

4.  Since the court-martial, the applicant has progressed well in his military career and his development as a Soldier.  This is documented by his completion of several advancement courses, promotion to staff sergeant, and the high ratings on his NCOER's.  The continued retention of the documentation related to the court-martial action and letter of reprimand in his performance file will potentially negatively affect the Soldier's future promotion and assignment potential.

5.  Therefore, as a matter of equity, it is appropriate to direct that the summary court-martial and letter of reprimand be moved to the restricted portion of his official records.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ___X_____  ___X_____  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by moving the summary court-martial and letter of reprimand to the restricted portion of his official records.



      _______ _   __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)                                         AR20100016716



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100016716



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005420C070208

    Original file (20040005420C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), or in the alternative that the GOMOR be transferred from the performance portion (P-Fiche) to the restricted portion (R-Fiche) of his OMPF). The DASEB decision summary indicates all the following factors were present in the applicant’s case: the applicant acknowledges his action and believes he should be punished, the chain of command...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001058438C070421

    Original file (2001058438C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: The applicant requests that his NCO evaluation report (NCOER) for the period December 1991 through November 1992 be removed from his official military personnel file (OMPF), transferred to the restricted portion of his OMPF, or that the senior rater comments be deleted from that NCOER. APPLICANT STATES : That the Board should consider the whole soldier...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150013880

    Original file (20150013880.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Counsel states: * the applicant has future potential in the Army and would continue to be an asset if allowed to continue in the service * the applicant disputes the underlying adverse actions that initiated or led to the QMP * the denial of continued service is based on two erroneous NCOERs (from 20080219-20090130) * the applicant received a company grade Article 15 which was directed to be filed in the restricted folder of his OMPF but the applicant has improved his performance since this...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9608474C070209

    Original file (9608474C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he “had [his] day in the civilian court, and the judge found [him] not guilty of the DUI charge because there was insufficient evidence.” He states the judge “dropped the DUI charge for insufficient evidence” after he informed him that he had passed three field sobriety tests. The applicant was issued a LOR on 13 June 1995 which indicated he refused to complete a lawfully requested breathalyzer test. Letters of reprimand may be filed in a soldier's OMPF only upon the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012928

    Original file (20110012928.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests that the General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 22 September 2006, be removed from the performance portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and remain in the restricted portion of his OMPF. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090016712

    Original file (20090016712.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant contends, in effect, that all traces of his court-martial should be removed from his OMPF or, if this is not possible, the court-martial documents should be transferred to the restricted portion of his OMPF because his NCOERs since that time show his professionalism and dedication to duty, but he has twice failed to be selected for promotion to SFC (E-7). The evidence of record shows that the court-martial order, dated 16 October 2003, is properly filed in the performance...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120007602

    Original file (20120007602.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In part, the article included the following allegations: a. A review of his record shows the GOMOR is filed in the performance section of his AMHRR. c. Documents in the restricted section are those that must be permanently kept to maintain an unbroken, historical record of a Soldier's service, conduct, duty performance, and evaluation periods; show corrections to other parts of the AMHRR; record investigation reports and appellate actions; and protect the interest of the Soldier and the Army.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040008192C070208

    Original file (20040008192C070208.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    Linda M. Barker | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Incidents that result in Federal convictions are also recorded in databases over which the Board has no authority. The Board further determined that the evidence presented is insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140014642

    Original file (20140014642.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests transfer of the DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)), dated 16 April 2008, and DA Form 2166-8 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER)) for the period 30 October 2007 to 30 April 2008, (hereafter referred to as the contested NCOER) from the performance file to the restricted file of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant received a Relief for Cause NCOER that covered 6 months of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010782

    Original file (20110010782.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The appeal was denied by the commanding officer of the 10th Special Forces Group on 20 May 2008. b. Paragraph 3-3 (Relationship of NJP to nonpunitive measures) states NJP is imposed to correct misconduct in violation of the UCMJ. The evidence of record shows the Article 15 and allied documents were properly filed in the performance portion of the applicant's OMPF.