MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            25 July 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001065236

	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	
	Ms. Deyon D. Battle		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		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 Proceedings of Nonjudicial Punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniformed Code of Military Justice be expunged from the restricted portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

APPLICANT STATES:  That he does not contest the findings of the Article 15 or present new evidence, rather he believes that the Article 15 has served its purpose and asks that it be expunged from his record.  He states that he is making this request as a citizen who recognizes his mistake for what it was, the mistake of a young, immature man who on one evening made some very poor decision.  He states that he will forever personally regret making the decisions that he made that night and that he sincerely desires this Board finds it in its heart to forgive the Article 15 and mercifully allow him to begin afresh.  In support of his appeal, he submits the memorandum from the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) dated 11 May 200 and four letters from friends and associates attesting to his character and performance.

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

On 9 May 1997, he accepted an appointment as a Reserve Commissioned Officer of the Army in the rank of second lieutenant (O1).  Upon of his acceptance of his appointment in the United States Army Reserve he was ordered to active duty with a 4-year commitment.

On 18 September 1998, while assigned at Fort Wainwright, Alaska, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant for being drunk at a bachelor party in his honor and in the presence of enlisted soldiers from his unit, wrongfully committing an indecent act with a woman while the woman was engaged in a nude exotic dance and conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of one half of his basic pay per month for 2 months.  His commanding officer directed that the record of proceeding of NJP (DA Form 2627) be filed in the performance fiche of his OMPF.

On 9 November 1998, he was promoted to the rank of first lieutenant (O2).

On 3 March 2000, the applicant applied to the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) to have the record of NJP dated 18 September 1998, transferred from the performance fiche of his OMPF to his restricted fiche based on intent served.  On 11 May 2000, after evaluating the applicant’s entire record, the DASEB voted to approve transfer of the record of NJP to his restricted fiche based on intent served.  

The applicant was promoted to the rank of captain (O3) on 1 December 2000.

On 9 May 2001, the applicant was released from active duty and he was transferred to the United States Army Reserve Control Group (Reinforcement).  He had completed 4 years of total active service.  He is currently a member in the Inactive Ready Reserve.

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 NJP was imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations and policies.  The punishment imposed was neither unjust nor disproportionate to the offense involved.

2.  The Board has noted the applicant’s contentions regarding the action taken by the DASEB and careful consideration has been given to his service before and after the NJP was imposed and filed.  However, the Army has a need to maintain such records and the Board finds that he has failed to show sufficient evidence to show why the NJP should not remain a matter of record in his restricted fiche.

3.  The applicant's contention that he was young and immature at the time is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant relief.  The Board notes that the applicant was almost 23 years of age at the time of the offense in question.

4.  Therefore, this Board has determined that the proceedings were conducted in accordance with applicable law and regulations; the punishment imposed was within legal limits; and the record of proceeding of NJP is properly on file.

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

___kwl __  ___rtd___  ___rvo __  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001065236	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/07/25	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  277	126.0000	
2.  281	126.0400	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.