MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            16 May 2002                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002067073

	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. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Ms. Paula Mokulis		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:  In effect, that a Service School Academic Evaluation Report (AER-DA Form 1059) and all other documents/information related to his attendance at the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC), Class Number (#) 2-94, between 20 April through 3 May 1994, be removed from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that during his period of training at BNCOC 
Class # 2-94, he was going through very stressful divorce negotiations.  As a result of the mental stress related to the divorce, he was unable to concentrate and/or focus on one of the most important stages of his military career.  After being released from this BNCOC, he immediately settled the divorce differences, and returned to BNCOC training in class # 3-94.  He completed the course as a Distinguished Honor Graduate for the military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B Track.

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

He is currently serving on active duty in the Regular Army, in the rank and pay grade of sergeant first class/E-7 (SFC/E-7), in Hawaii. 

On 3 May 1994, the Commandant of the United States Army Noncommissioned Officer Academy, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii, notified the applicant, he was being released from BNCOC Class # 2-94 for academic reasons.  The applicant was also informed that he could reenter the course when it was determined, by his unit commander and the Commandant, he was prepared to successfully complete the course.  The applicant acknowledged receipt of the release letter and indicated that he did not wish to submit an appeal.

On 3 May 1994, an AER was prepared on the applicant, which evaluated him on his attendance at 11B BNCOC Class # 2-94, for the period 20 April through 
3 May 1994.  Item 13 (Performance Summary), confirms that the applicant failed to achieve course standards.  The remarks entered in Item 16 (Comments) indicate that the applicant was released from the course for academic reasons, based on his second time failure on the E301 Common Leader Training Examination.  The AER was referred to the applicant, he acknowledged receipt and elected not to submit a statement.  

The applicant was reenrolled in Class # 3-94 on 11 June 1994 and successfully completed the course on 30 September 1994.  Item 13 of the AER issued to the applicant at the completion of this course confirms that, he “exceeded course standards.”  Item 16 contains nine extremely complimentary bullet comments, which included one that confirmed, he was the BNCOC Distinguished Honor Graduate for the 11B Track.

In connection with the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was requested of and received from the Chief, Personnel Actions Branch, United States Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC), Indianapolis, Indiana.  It indicated that, although the applicant subsequently passed the BNCOC, there is no regulatory guidance that allows removing a document from the OMPF if the document was administratively correct.  The DA Form 1059, dated 3 May 1994, which evaluated the applicant on his attendance at BNCOC Class # 2-94 was filed in accordance with the applicable regulations and in view of this fact, the applicant’s request should be denied.  On 28 February 2002, the applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion in order to have an opportunity to respond and to date, he has failed to reply. 

Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Military Personnel (MILPER) Information Management/Records) prescribes the policies for the MIPER Information Management/Records program.  Chapter 2 contains guidance on the OMPF and Table 2-1 outlines the composition of the OMPF.  It states, in pertinent part, that the DA Form 1059 will be filed in the performance portion of the OMPF. 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:

1.  The Board notes the applicant’s request to have the AER he received, dated 
3 May 1994, along with all other information and/or documents related to his release from his first BNCOC class removed from his OMPF.  However, it finds an insufficient evidentiary basis for this requested relief.  

2.  The evidence of record confirms that the AER in question, along with all other documents related to the applicant’s BNCOC attendance, which includes the AER subsequently issued to the applicant for his completion of the course as a Distinguished Honor Graduate, were properly filed in his OMPF in accordance with applicable regulations.  

3.  The Board concurs with the recommendation provided in the EREC advisory opinion, which recommended that the documents in question not be removed from the applicant’s OMPF because they were properly issued and filed in accordance with applicable regulations.

4.  In the opinion of the Board, the fact that the applicant ultimately graduated from the course as a Distinguished Honor Graduate, which is well documented in the OMPF, offsets any stigma that may be attached to the AER and documents relating to his release from the BNCOC class he attended.  Further, the Board finds no error or injustice related to the filing of the AER or any related documents in question.  Therefore, it concludes that the requested relief is not warranted in this case. 
5.  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 this requirement.

6.  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

__FNE___  __RA__  __PM____  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002067073	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2002/05/16	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  267	123.0700	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.