BOARD DATE:	  1 December 2011

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110018805 


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 removal of the DA Form 2166-7 (Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report) (NCOER) covering the period March 1994 through November 1994 from his official military personnel file (OMPF) or, in the alternative, the NCOER be transferred to the restricted section of his OMPF. 

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  he has a 17-year old NCOER from a separate prior service period that is still in his OMPF and is prejudicial to his current enlistment.  The NCOER in question is from January 1995.  His current enlistment began in October 2007.

	b.  in 1995 he was chaptered out of the Regular Army (RA) for misconduct and he received an NCOER that reflected his misconduct.  After his discharge, he remained unaffiliated with the military for more than 11 years.  In October 2007, he received the necessary waiver for his previous misconduct discharge and enlisted in the RA.  For some reason, the NCOER he received in January 1995 is still on his OMPF and is viewable to anyone with access.  He believes this NCOER should not be in his OMPF or should be moved to the restricted file.  This old NCOER does not accurately reflect his performance for his current enlistment and therefore unjustly and negatively effects his current enlistment.   

	c.  he accepts complete responsibility for his misconduct in 1995.  He has matured as a person and learned from his previous behavior and is better for it.  He was punished for his behavior in 1995 and he feels he is being unjustly punished again by the presence of this NCOER in his OMPF.
	d.  he is submitting an application to become a career counselor in his brigade and he has received endorsement letters from his current and previous battalion commanders, his company commander, the brigade's senior career counselor, and his direct supervisor.  This 17-year old NCOER has been identified as a possible disqualifying item.  He has been a stellar NCO since his enlistment in 2007.    

3.  The applicant provides the DA Form 2166-7.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Having prior active service in the RA and inactive service in the U.S. Army Reserve, the applicant enlisted in the RA on 13 January 1988.  He served as a military police.  He was promoted to sergeant on 1 July 1989. 

2.  The contested NCOER is a 9-month change of rater NCOER covering the period March 1994 through November 1994.  The rater provided a "No" entry for maintains high standards of personal conduct on and off duty  in Part IV (Values/NCO Responsibilities) with the bullet comment:  "off duty conduct does not set a positive example for subordinates to follow."  

3.  He was rated as "Needs Improvement (Much)" for "Leadership" with bullet comments:  

* Places soldiers needs before his own
* Puts forth the effort in accomplishing mission
* Does not make good decisions in conducting personal affairs

4.  He was rated "Marginal" for overall potential for promotion and or service in positions of greater responsibility by his rater.

5.  The senior rater rated him "Fair-4" for overall performance and overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility with a bullet comment: "potential for advancement is hindered by his personal off duty performance."

6.  On 6 January 1995, he was discharged under honorable conditions (a general discharge) for misconduct.

7.  He enlisted in the Army National Guard on 27 April 2006.  On 23 October 2007, he was honorably discharged from the Army National Guard.  

8.  He enlisted in the RA on 24 October 2007 in the rank of sergeant and has remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments.  He was promoted to staff sergeant.    

9.  His NCOERs for the period December 2007 to June 2011 show:

* he was rated "Among the Best" by his raters
* he was rated "Successful" for his overall performance by his senior raters 
* he was rated "Superior" for his overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility by his senior raters

10.  A review of the applicant's performance section of his OMPF on the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) revealed a copy of the contested NCOER.

11.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel Information Management/
Records) prescribes the policies governing the OMPF, the military personnel 
records jacket, the career management individual file, and Army personnel qualification records.  Paragraph 2-4 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, Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board, Army Appeals Board, Chief of Appeals and Corrections Branch of the Total Army Personnel Command, OMPF custodian when documents have been improperly filed, Total Army Personnel Command as an exception, Chief of the Appeals Branch of the Army Reserve Personnel Center, and Chief of the Appeals Branch of the National Guard Personnel Center.

12.  Army Regulation 600-8-104, Table 2-1 states that an NCOER will be filed in the performance section of the OMPF.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although he contends the 17-year old NCOER is prejudicial to his current enlistment, the governing regulation states that NCOERs will be filed in the performance section of the OMPF.  

2.  The evidence of record supports his contention he has been a stellar NCO since his enlistment in 2007.  His NCOERs from 2007 to present are outstanding and he was promoted to staff sergeant.        



3.  Nevertheless, the NCOER covering the period March 1994 to November 1994 is properly filed in the applicant's military records in accordance with the governing regulation.  Therefore, there is an insufficient basis for granting the applicant's requests. 

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)                                         AR20110018805





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110018805



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1