MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            29 March 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000038855

	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.

	Mr. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Robert G. Hinkle		Chairperson	
	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
            records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That a record of nonjudicial punishment (NJP), DA Form 2627 dated 2 July 1982 be removed from the Restricted fiche of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 

APPLICANT STATES:  That the intended purpose of the record of NJP has been served because he has had no subsequent infractions in the 17 years since it was imposed.  He goes on to state that it was an isolated incident  that occurred early in his career, while in advanced individual training (AIT) and his records will show that his career has been exemplary since that time.  He contends that the presence of the record of NJP could be resricting his advancement to a higher grade and that to allow it to remain in his OMPF would be a disservice to him and the Army.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

The applicant enlisted in Cleveland, Ohio on 13 April 1982 for a period of 4 years, training as a telecommunications center specialist and a cash enlistment bonus.

On 2 July 1982 while attending his AIT, NJP was imposed against him for the possession of a marijuana cigarette.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay, extra duty, and restriction.

He has remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-6 on 1 May 1995.  A review of his records reveals no further disciplinary action being taken against him.

On 10 November 1998 he applied to the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board to have the record of NJP moved to the Restricted fiche of his OMPF.  The DASEB approved his request on 18 March 1999 to move the record of NJP to the Restricted fiche of his OMPF based on intent served.

Army Regulation 27-10 in effect at the time, prescribes the guidelines for the filing of NJP.  Paragraph 3-31b (2) states, in pertinent part, that the decision to file the original DA Form 2627 in the OMPF will be determined by the imposing commander at the time punishment is imposed.  The filing decision of the imposing commander is final and will be indicated in item 5, DA Form 2627.

Army Regulation 600-8-104 prescribes the composition of the OMPF.  It states, in pertinent part, that forms recording punishment imposed before 1 November 1982 that are filed on the performance or restricted fiche of the OMPF, will remain filed, subject to the provisions of Army Regulation 27-10.

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:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The record of NJP is properly filed on the restricted fiche of his OMPF in accordance with applicable regulations.

3. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board; however, the Department has a need to maintain such records and the applicant’s contentions that the presence of the record of NJP in the restricted fiche of his OMPF will serve to impede his career is speculative at best on his part.  The purpose of the restricted fiche is intended to prohibit routine review of those records and precautions are taken to restrict the release of information contained on that fiche.

4.  Additionally, selection boards are not routinely allowed to review the restricted fiche.  However, in those cases where the restricted fiche is reviewed, such as selection for command sergeant majors, the content of the documents contained on the restricted fiche must be taken into account and compared to the overall record of service before final selection decisions are made.

5.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__mdm__  ___jps___  ___rgh __  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
						Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000038855	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/03/29	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  328 	134.0000/REM NJP	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.