PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            18 January 2001                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000040517

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Melvin H. Meyer		Member	
	Mr. John T. Meixell		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) filed in the performance fiche of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) be removed.

3.  The applicant states that the subject form is incorrect in that it contains charges that were dismissed by the commander who imposed nonjudicial punishment (NJP) against him.  In support of his application, he submits:  an undated memorandum from the commander who imposed the NJP stating that the first two of five charges were dismissed and all punishment suspended save 45 days of extra duty; and a 19 March 1996 memorandum (with enclosures) from the Commander, US Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (USAEREC), Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, approving the applicant's appeal of a DA-imposed bar to reenlistment under the qualitative management program (QMP).

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he is a staff sergeant serving on continuous active duty since 4 August 1981.  In 1994-95, he was assigned to Headquarters, 16th Medical Logistics Battalion, Republic of Korea.  On 10 February 1995, his battalion commander offered, and he accepted, NJP for misconduct involving two specifications of Article 92, UCMJ (dereliction of duty), two specifications of Article 123, UCMJ (writing checks with insufficient funds in his account), and one specification of Article 134, UCMJ (dishonorably failing to pay a just debt).  During the NJP hearing, the applicant presented evidence in his defense which caused his commander to dismiss both specifications of the dereliction of duty charge.  He was, however, found guilty of the remaining charges and specifications and punished by reduction from staff sergeant to sergeant, forfeiture of $785 per month for 2 months, 60 days' restriction [all suspended, to be automatically remitted in 60 days unless sooner vacated], and 45 days' extra duty [to be served].

5.  The applicant's commander directed that the DA Form 2627 be filed in the performance fiche of the applicant's OMPF.  When the action was filed in the applicant's OMPF, the original DA Form 2627, not the corrected copy with the two deleted charges, was inadvertently filed.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The NJP was imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies.  The punishment imposed was neither unjust nor disproportionate to the offense, and there is no evidence of any substantive violation of any of the applicant's rights during the NJP process.

2.  The NJP was filed in the performance fiche of the applicant's OMPF.  Unfortunately, two dismissed charges of violations of Article 92, UCMJ were inadvertently included in the filed copy.

3.  Considering the nature of the offenses involved and the applicant's commendable performance during more than 19 years of service, it appears that the subject punishment has served the purpose for which it was intended.  In the interest of justice, it would now be appropriate to remove the record from the performance section of his OMPF.  To fail to do so would be inequitable and unjust.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by:

	a.  Deleting the first two charges (dereliction of duty) from the continuation sheet attached to the DA Form 2627, dated 10 February 1995, located in the performance fiche of the OMPF of the individual concerned; and

b.  Transferring from the performance fiche to the restricted fiche of the OMPF the corrected DA Form 2627 and all documents related thereto.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jns____  __mhm__  __jtm___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		     __John N. Slone___
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000040517	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20010118	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	GRANT PLUS	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DASA	
ISSUES         1.	126.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.