Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140021729
Original file (20140021729.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:    

		BOARD DATE:  22 January 2015	  

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140021729 


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 correction of his military records by removing a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 1 May 2010, from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

2.  The applicant states a GOMOR dated 1 May 2010 needs to be removed from his OMPF, or moved to the restricted folder of the OMPF.  He argues that his wife was only accused of driving under the influence (DUI) of alcohol and was never charged.  Statements made in the investigation are false.  It has been 
4 years and he has been promoted twice.  He is going to get orders for drill sergeant duty and needs this GOMOR removed.  He was not aware of the GOMOR being in his OMPF until he was promoted to sergeant.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of the subject GOMOR.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  At the time of his application, the applicant was a staff sergeant, in pay 
grade E-6, serving in the Regular Army.

2.  A DA Form 3975 (Military Police Report) dated 20 February 2010, as filed in the applicant's OMPF reports that the applicant and his wife, a civilian dependent, were ordered by the charge of quarters to not operate their vehicle because of their alcohol involvement.  They were later observed in the vehicle and the applicant's wife was driving.  The military police were notified and responded.  The couple were apprehended and transported to the Provost Marshal's Office (PMO) where they each underwent breath alcohol tests showing readings of 0.188 and 0.194.  They were released to their unit First Sergeant.

3.  The Commanding General, 7th U.S. Army Joint Multinational Training Command, issued the applicant a GOMOR, wherein he reprimanded the applicant for allowing his wife to operate a motor vehicle on a public road while under the influence of alcohol and for disobeying the direct order of a noncommissioned officer.  He described his conduct as reprehensible because he had allowed his wife to drive in spite of her highly-intoxicated state.  This showed a tremendous lack of judgment.  He had made this decision without concern for the safety of either himself or others.  His disobedience, poor planning skills, and indifference toward the well-being of others caused the commander to question the applicant's ability to lead Soldiers in the future.  The GOMOR was imposed as an administrative measure and not as punishment.  He was informed that he had 10 calendar days in which to submit any statements or rebuttal on his own behalf before the commander would make his filing decision.

4.  In an undated memorandum, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the GOMOR on 26 May 2010 and that he had until 5 June 2010 in which to submit his rebuttal.

5.  On 12 October 2010, the Commanding General who imposed the GOMOR stated in a memorandum that the applicant had failed to submit any response to the GOMOR.  Accordingly, the imposing general directed the GOMOR to be permanently filed in the applicant's OMPF.

6.  Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Records (AHMRR) Management) provides that all personnel information recorded under the authority of this regulation is the property of the United States Government.

	a.  Once recorded, it will not be removed except as provided by law or this regulation.

	b.  Once placed in the OMPF, the document becomes a permanent part of that file.  The document will not be removed from, or moved to another part of the OMPF unless directed by one or more of the following:

* The ABCMR
* The DASEB
* Chief, Appeals and Corrections Branch, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC)
* The AMHRR custodian when documents have been improperly filed

* Commander, HRC, ATTN: HRC-PDO-PO, as an approved policy
change to this regulation
* Chief, Appeals Branch, National Guard Personnel Center

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that a GOMOR, dated 1 May 2010, should be removed from his OMPF, or in the alternative, moved to the restricted folder of his OMPF because his wife had never been charged with DUI.

2.  The available evidence clearly shows that in 2010 the applicant willfully disobeyed a lawful order to not allow his wife to operate a motor vehicle because she was highly-intoxicated.  Whether or not his wife was charged, her blood alcohol content was well over the legal limit at the time.  He clearly chose to disregard this order which resulted in their apprehension by the military police.  As a result, his commander issued him a GOMOR.  The applicant did not provide any rebuttal for the commander to consider.  The applicant now argues that he did not know this document was in his OMPF.  However, his acknowledgment, as filed in his OMPF, clearly shows he knew of the GOMOR and that he had 10 calendar days in which to provide his statement.  He chose to not reply.

3.  There is no evidence of an error or injustice in this case.

4.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's requested relief.

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)                                         AR20140021729





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140021729



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019232

    Original file (20140019232.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his records by: * Removing a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 12 September 2008, from the restricted folder of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) * Reinstating him to the Fiscal Year 2008 (FY 08) Master Sergeant/Pay Grade (MSG/E-8) E-8 Promotion List * Promoting him to MSG/E-8 with original...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140010205

    Original file (20140010205.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests: * removal of the General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 12 September 2008, from the restricted folder of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) * reinstatement to the Fiscal Year 2008 (FY 08) Master Sergeant (MSG)/E-8 Promotion Selection List * promotion to MSG/E-8 and payment of all back pay and allowances * consideration by a standby advisory board...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002078666C070215

    Original file (2002078666C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was not convicted of DUI, but the GOMOR was filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) prior to the court action. On 26 May 1996, the DASEB denied the applicant’s request to transfer the GOMOR to his R-fiche. 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 | CY2015 | 20150001188

    Original file (20150001188 .txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). Counsel requests removal of the applicant's general officer memoranda of reprimand (GOMOR), dated 23 March 2010 and 21 May 2010, or transfer of the GOMORs to the restricted folder of her official military personnel file (OMPF). The GOMORs are properly filed and counsel did not provide substantial evidence showing the GOMORs served their intended purpose and that their transfer to the restricted...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080014499

    Original file (20080014499.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR) from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and reinstatement on the sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 Promotion List. On 2 October 2007, the applicant's records were considered for promotion to SFC by the STAB portion of the FY2008 Master Sergeant Promotion Board; however, the applicant was not selected. With respect to the applicant's promotion, the evidence of record shows that the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079840C070215

    Original file (2002079840C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant’s unit, battalion, and brigade commanders, after reviewing the applicant’s rebuttal letter, all recommended that the GOMOR be filed in the P-Fiche portion of the applicant’s OMPF. On 5 December 2001, the applicant was notified that the DASEB had deliberated on his petition to remove the GOMOR, dated 10 March 2000, from the P-Fiche portion of his OMPF, and after careful consideration had denied his request. The DASEB case summary indicated, in effect, that the applicant’s...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150006661

    Original file (20150006661.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: The applicant requests removal of the General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 30 January 2014, from her official military personnel file (OMPF). The applicant states, in effect: * the GOMOR resulted from an incident in which she was charged with driving while intoxicated by civilian authority * her case was dismissed and therefore the GOMOR should be removed * she feels her commander acted too quickly, not waiting first for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110019581

    Original file (20110019581.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, removal of a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 11 March 2010, from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or in the alternative, transfer of the GOMOR to the restricted section of his OMPF. A memorandum of reprimand may be filed in a Soldier's OMPF only upon the order of a general officer-level authority and is to be filed in the performance section. The GOMOR was correctly filed.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110018357

    Original file (20110018357.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant requests reconsideration of his previous request to remove the General Officer Letter of Reprimand (GOMOR), dated 5 December 1994, from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). The applicant states: * He and his wife were at the noncommissioned officer (NCO) club with a sergeant first class (SFC) who happened to be the post commanding general's (CG's) aide * The SFC stole from the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140003463

    Original file (20140003463.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests removal of a general officer memorandum of reprimand (GOMOR), dated 1 October 2009, from the restricted section of his Army Military Human Resource Record (AMHRR) (formerly known as the Official Military Personnel File). He could now begin the process of trying to correct his military records because he now had evidence to prove that he had not been DUI or driving while intoxicated and the blood alcohol level of .133 or higher did not match with all the other facts of...