BOARD DATE: 17 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170004205 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ___x_____ ___x_____ __x___ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 17 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170004205 BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 2. To ensure this decision results in no unintended harm to the individual concerned, this Record of Proceedings and all documents related to this appeal will be returned to this Board for permanent filing. The Record of Proceedings and associated documents will not be filed in the individual's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) or any other folder/section of the 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. BOARD DATE: 17 August 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20170004205 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, in effect, that information related to two investigations be expunged from all Army records and databases. 2. The applicant states he has served in the U.S. Army with distinction (as an enlisted Soldier and currently as a commissioned officer) for more than 21 years in positions of increasing importance and responsibility. a. He offers information pertaining to two Military Police Reports (MPR) he identifies as 1999-MPC117-4463E-5L (which cites marijuana usage) and 06137-2010-MP1024 (which cites domestic violence). He adds that he has remained without incident since the first incident (more than 18 years) and he was acquitted of all charges pertaining to the second incident. b. He states the MPRs document incidents that disqualify him from military assignments and community services that fall under the category of "position of trust." 3. The applicant provides a self-authored statement (summarized above). CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant had enlisted service in the Army National Guard of the United States from 22 October 1996 through 8 September 1997. He enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 9 September 1997 and served honorably through 18 November 2009, attaining the rank of sergeant first class/pay grade E-7. 2. On 19 November 2009, he was appointed as a commissioned officer in the RA, in the rank of second lieutenant (field artillery). He is currently serving on active duty in the rank of captain/pay grade O-3. 3. A review of the applicant's Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), maintained in the interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System, failed to reveal the records/documents or any information the applicant refers to in his application. REFERENCES: 1. Army Regulation 600-8-104 (Army Military Human Resource Record) serves as the authority for filing documents in the OMPF. Only those documents listed in Table B-1 (Authorized Documents) are to be filed in the OMPF. 2. Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 5505.7 (Titling and Indexing of Subjects of Criminal Investigations in the Department of Defense (DOD)) serves as the authority and criteria for U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command titling decisions. It states that titling ensures investigators can retrieve information in a report of investigation of suspected criminal activity at some future time for law enforcement and security purposes. Whether to title an individual is an operational decision made by investigative officials, rather than a legal determination made by lawyers. Titling or indexing alone does not denote any degree of guilt or innocence. The criteria for titling are a determination that credible information exists that a person may have committed a criminal offense or is otherwise made the object of a criminal investigation. In other words, if there is a reason to investigate, the subject of the investigation should be titled. 3. DODI 5505.7 also directs that judicial or adverse actions shall not be taken solely on the basis of the fact that a person has been titled in an investigation. By implication the DODI does not prohibit consideration of titling in making judicial or administrative decisions, but does prohibit using titling as the sole basis for those decisions. Once an individual has been titled, the only basis to remove a name from the title block of a report is if it involves a case of mistaken identity. 4. DODI 5505.11 (Fingerprint Card and Final Disposition Report Submission Requirements) implements policy, assigns responsibilities, and prescribes procedures for reporting offender criminal history data to the Criminal Justice Information Services Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), by DOD law enforcement organizations for inclusion in the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) criminal history databases. Paragraph 6 (Procedures) shows that dispositions that are exculpatory in nature (e.g., dismissal of charges, acquittal) shall also be filed. DISCUSSION: 1. The records in question are not filed in the applicant's OMPF. 2. Based on the information provided by the applicant, it appears he was properly titled at the time he was cited for the offenses in question and (based on his statement) that he was acquitted of the charges related to the second incident. Thus, there appears to be no mistaken identity in the two incidents cited. Therefore, there is no basis to remove the applicant's name from the title block of U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command records that serve to update FBI records. 3. The government has an interest in maintaining the records in question. The applicant has not shown through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record why the information in question should not remain a matter of record. 4. Dispositions that are exculpatory in nature (e.g., dismissal of charges, acquittal, etc.) are also filed. The applicant may contact appropriate law enforcement agencies to ensure any available official records of exculpatory information are also filed in the NCIC database. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170004205 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20170004205 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2