IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 13 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110022241 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests removal of a nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) from the performance section of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 2. The applicant states the NJP has served its intended purpose. It is in the best interest of the Army to remove this document so he can continue to excel and share his experiences with his fellow Soldiers at the next level of his career. He also states his past behavior has not and will not recur. He has learned from this mistake and now uses it to be a better leader. 3. The applicant provides copies of his noncommissioned officer evaluation reports (NCOERs) for the period ending: * 31 January 2008 * 15 October 2008 * 15 October 2009 * 29 April 2010 * 12 October 2010 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant, a career NCO, then serving as a sergeant (SGT)/E-5, received NJP on 22 March 2007 for making a false official statement regarding the authenticity of a college transcript. His punishment included a reduction to specialist (SPC)/E-4, suspended until 25 June 2007; forfeiture of $1,031.00 pay per month for 2 months, suspended until 25 June 2007; and extra duty for 45 days. The imposing commander directed the DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) be filed in the performance section of his OMPF. 2. The suspension period passed without incident. The applicant was subsequently promoted to staff sergeant (SSG)/E-6 effective 1 June 2008. 3. On 27 October 2008, the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) received the applicant's request for transfer of his NJP to the restricted section of his OMPF. In his statement he admitted he had intended to deceive a field grade officer during an investigation by making a false statement. He stated the NJP had served its intended purpose and the continual presence of the NJP hinders his potential and his career, and prevents the Army from benefiting from the full potential he has to offer as a Soldier. 4. On 12 February 2009, having considered the documents submitted by the applicant, the DASEB elected to not transfer the record of NJP to the restricted section of his OMPF. 5. The NCOERs he provided with his application to this Board speak highly of his standards and performance in increasingly complicated and responsible assignments. None contain any derogatory information nor make any reference to the type of behavior that led to the NJP. 6. Army Regulation 27-10 (Military Justice) provides the guidance for transfer or removal of records of NJP. It states: a. Enlisted Soldiers (SGT and above) may request transfer of a record of NJP from the performance section to the restricted section of their OMPF under the provisions of this regulation. To support the request, the person must submit substantive evidence that the intended purpose of the NJP has been served and that transfer of the record is in the best interest of the Army. b. The officer who directed the filing of the record in the OMPF may provide a statement to the Soldier in support of a request for transfer of the record from the performance to the restricted section. Other evidence submitted in support of a request should not include copies of documents already recorded in the Soldier’s OMPF. c. There are no provisions for completely removing an Article 15 from the OMPF. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's contentions were carefully considered. His assignments and accomplishments as reflected by his record and specifically by his most recent NCOERs indicate a principled, resourceful, and dedicated leader. 2. After a careful review of the available evidence, the applicant's professional progress and his promotion to SSG/E-6 demonstrate that the intended purpose has indeed been served and that the NJP and associated documents should be transferred to the restricted section of his OMPF. 3. However, as there is no evidence to show the NJP it was not properly imposed there is insufficient evidence on which to remove it and its associated documents from his OMPF. 4. In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s record as recommended below. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ____X __ ____X___ ____X _ _ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by transferring his DA Form 2627, dated 22 March 2007, and associated documents to the restricted section of his OMPF. 2. The Board further determined that the evidence presented was insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief. As a result, the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to removing the DA Form 2627 from his OMPF. _______ _ X_______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110022241 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110022241 4 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1