MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:

	BOARD DATE:  28 November 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR2000042502

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mr. Vic Whitney		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. Wilford A. Hale		Member	
	Mr. John H. Kern		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 two records of proceedings under Article 15, UCMJ (DA Form 2627) be removed from the restricted portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

APPLICANT STATES:  That the non-judicial punishment (Article 15) he received as a private first class in 1986 has served its intended purpose.  The second Article 15 he accepted was based on racial differences and bad advice from the legal office.  He was punished for illegal use of his government travel card while in an authorized delay status.  Other members of the unit had done the same but were not punished.  The finding of an investigation under Army Regulation 15-6 was that he was a victim of discrimination.  He learned about the filing of the non-judicial punishment at the time of the sergeant first class (SFC) selection board.  He submits copies of the DA Forms 2627 and his travel voucher with supporting documents.

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

At the time of the first punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, he was assigned to Korea in the pay grade of E-3.  The punishment was imposed for making a false official statement to an investigator and the wrongful transfer of duty free goods to an unauthorized individual.  This document is filed in the restricted portion of his OMPF.

At the time of the second punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, he was serving in the pay grade of E-5.  The punishment was imposed for illegal use of his government credit card for personal use.  This document is also filed in the restricted portion of his OMPF.

On 3 February 1998 while serving in Germany in the pay grade of E-6, he was punished under Article 15, UCMJ for operating a passenger vehicle while impaired by .112 grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood.  The imposing commander directed filing in the restricted portion of his OMPF but this document is filed in the performance portion of his OMPF in accordance with Army Regulation (AR) 27-10, paragraph 3-6b.

On 30 August 1999 a Department of the Army (DA) bar to reenlistment was imposed under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP).  The bar was imposed as a result of his records being reviewed by the 1999 SFC selection board.  The board identified the 3 February 1998 Article 15 as the basis for the QMP action.  The board did not have access to his restricted OMPF documents.

The applicant appealed the QMP action and his request was approved.  The QMP action and the approved appeal are filed on the restricted portion of his OMPF.

Although the applicant provides a copy of his travel voucher with supporting receipts, there appears to be no relevance to the issue now before the Board.  Additionally, the AR 15-6 is not in the available record or provided by the applicant.
AR 27-10 (Military Justice), paragraph 3-6b, provides that a DA Form 2627 will be filed on the soldier’s performance fiche in those cases where a previous DA Form 2627, issued in the pay grade of E-5 or higher, already exists on the restricted fiche.

The Memorandum of Instruction (MOI) prepared for each pay grade E-7 through E-9 promotion selection board contains a list of the authorized files to be viewed by the board members.  It specifies that only disciplinary data from the restricted fiche will be provided to the board for selection to pay grade E-9.  The board does not view the restricted fiche for promotion consideration to pay grade E-7 or E-8.

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.  The applicant has not shown error or injustice in the filing of two DA Forms 2627 on his restricted fiche.  They did not serve as a basis for the 1999 QMP action.

2.  The regulatory authority to maintain his most recent DA Form 2627 on his performance fiche is weighed against the fact that he has two prior DA Forms 2627 on his restricted fiche, which appear to be legal and just.

3.  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

__mp___  ___wh__  __jk____  DENY APPLICATION

		    Carl W. S. Chun
		    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000042502	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20001128	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	126.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.