MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            19 June 2003
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2002083390

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn		Member	
	Mr. William D. Powers		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:  The removal of a record of nonjudicial punishment (DA Form 2627) from the restricted fiche of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the DA Form 2627 dated 16 January 1984 should be removed from the restricted fiche of his OMPF because the intended purpose has been served.  He further states that the absence of any further disciplinary/derogatory information in his OMPF should be indicative that it was one isolated incident over 20 years.  He also states that removal of the document would be in the best interest of the Army because he is well qualified to serve in a higher capacity.

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

He enlisted on 27 October 1982 for a period of 3 years and training as an armor crewman.  He successfully completed his training and has remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments.

On 16 January 1984, while serving in the pay grade of E-4 at Fort Stewart, Georgia, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against him for failure to perform guard duty.  His punishment consisted of a forfeiture of pay and extra duty.  The imposing commander directed that the DA Form 2627 be filed on the restricted fiche of his OMPF. 

The applicant was promoted to the pay grade of E-7 on 1 February 1999 and a review of his OMPF shows no additional derogatory information contained therein.

Army Regulation 27-10, in effect at the time, prescribes the guidelines for the filing of NJP.  It states, in pertinent part, that the decision to file the original DA Form 2627 on the performance or restricted fiche of the OMPF will be determined by the imposing commander at the time punishment is imposed.  Imposing commanders should consider the member's age, grade, total service (with particular attention to his or her recent performance), and the fact that the filing decision is not subject to direct appeal.  Records of NJP for first offenses ordinarily should not be filed on the performance fiche of the OMPF if they do not indicate either a pattern of misconduct or a serious character deficiency or substantial breach of military discipline.   The filing decision of the imposing commander is final and will be indicated in item 5 of the DA Form 2627.

Paragraph 3-37 of AR 27-10 provides the filing determination for the DA Form 2627 and associated documents.  It provides, in pertinent part, that the Restricted Fiche of the OMPF is that portion of the OMPF that contains information not normally viewed by career managers or selection boards.  

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 this requirement.

2.  It appears that the NJP was imposed in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies by a commander empowered to do so.  The NJP was properly filed on the Restricted Fiche of his OMPF, as directed by the imposing commander at the time punishment was imposed. 

3.  While the Board understands the applicant’s concerns, the Army has an interest in maintaining such documents, and the applicant has not shown sufficient reasons why it should not remain a matter of record, even after considering his entire record.

4.  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

__js ____  ___wdp__  __lem___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002083390	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2003/06/19	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  281	126.0400/REM NJP	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.