RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:            7 April 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:   AR20040005257


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. James E. Anderholm            |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Linda M. Barker               |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests that all charges be removed from the Federal
Bureau of Investigation's (FBI's) records (in effect, that information
concerning the charges be removed from the records maintained by the U. S.
Army Criminal Investigation Command's (CID's) Crime Records Center.

2.  The applicant states that his discharge was upgraded and he wishes to
have the charges expunged from his records.  The FBI's Criminal Justice
Information Services Division informed him that only the issuing department
could remove the record or have it expunged.  He is currently working for
the State of Tennessee as an Animal Cruelty Investigator and has been in
that position for over one year.  He is currently selected to attend the
Police Academy and this is the only thing holding him back.  That was an
isolated incident and should not be used to judge his character.

3.  The applicant states that part 1 of the FBI Identification record is a
duplicate entry and should be removed without any justification.

4.  The applicant provides his corrected DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty); notification of the upgrade of his
discharge by the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB), and an FBI
Identification Record.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was born on 2 August 1974.  He enlisted in the Regular
Army on 14 July 1992.  He completed basic training and advanced individual
training and was awarded military occupational specialty 11B (Infantryman).

2.  On 21 March 1996, in accordance with his pleas, the applicant was
convicted by a general court-martial of forgery on or about 6 June 1995; of
theft of U. S. currency between on or about 6 June 1995 and on or about 30
September 1995; of wrongful signing of an official record on divers
occasions between on or about 8 June 1995 and on or about 12 September
1995; of being absent without leave from on or about 15 November 1995 until
on or about 11 December 1995; of disobeying a superior commissioned officer
on or about 6 January 1996; and (charge VI) of breaking restriction on or
about 6 January 1996.

3.  The applicant's approved sentence was a reduction to Private, E-1,
forfeiture of $583.00 pay per month for 6 months, confinement for 90 days,
and a bad conduct discharge.  He was to be credited with 1 day confinement
against the sentence to confinement.

4.  On 5 February 1997, the U. S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals set aside
charge VI and its specification but affirmed the remaining findings of
guilty.  The Court affirmed only so much of the sentence as provided for a
bad conduct discharge, confinement for 75 days, forfeiture of $583.00 pay
per month for 6 months, and reduction to Private, E-1.

5.  On 14 November 1997, the applicant was discharged, pursuant to his
sentence by court-martial, with a bad conduct discharge.

6.  On 15 October 2001, the ADRB, after carefully reviewing the applicant's
military record, post service accomplishments, and hearing his testimony,
found that clemency was warranted and voted, in a 4 to 1 decision, to
upgrade his discharge to general under honorable conditions.

7.  Part 1 of the applicant's FBI Identification Record indicates he was
arrested or received on 15 September 1995 at Fort Belvoir on charges of
false statement, larceny, and forgery.  Part 2 indicates he was arrested or
received on 21 March 1996 at the U. S. Army Correctional Facility, Fort
Knox on charges of forgery, larceny, false official record, AWOL,
disobeying a superior commissioned officer, and breaking restriction.

8.  Army Regulation 195-2 prescribes Department of the Army policy on
criminal investigation activities and constitutes the basic authority for
the conduct of investigations and the collection, retention and
dissemination of criminal information.  In pertinent part, it states that
requests to amend CID Reports of Investigation (ROIs) will be granted only
if the requestor submits new, relevant, and material facts which would
warrant such a revision.  The burden of proof to substantiate the request
is upon the individual.  Requests to delete a person’s name from the title
block will be granted only if it is determined that probable cause did not
exist to believe that the person so titled committed the offense.  The
regulation further states that the decision to title a person for an
offense is an investigative determination independent of any judicial,
nonjudicial or administrative action taken against the individual or the
results of such action.  Requests for deletion or amendment of CID
investigative reports should be forwarded to the Director, U. S. Army Crime
Records Center, Attention:  CICR-FP, 6010 6th Street, Building 1465, Fort
Belvoir, VA  22060-5585

9.  Army Regulation 195-2, paragraph 4-3d(1) states that the disclosure of
criminal information originated or maintained by CID may be made to any
Federal, State, local, or foreign law enforcement agency that has an
investigative or law enforcement interest in the matter disclosed, provided
the disclosure is not in contravention of any law, regulation, or directive
as applied to law enforcement activities.  Disclosures under this paragraph
to a non-Department of Defense law enforcement element is a routine use
under the Privacy Act.

10.  Army Regulation 15-185 sets forth the procedures under which the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) operates.  In pertinent
part, it states that the ABCMR will not consider any application until the
applicant has first exhausted all other administrative remedies available.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant requests that all charges be removed from the FBI's
records. The Board has no authority to remove or amend records in any FBI
files.  The Board could amend the record of the charges as maintained by
the CID's Crime Records Center.  That would presumably trigger the
expungement of the charges from the FBI's records.

2.  It appears that the information contained in part 1 of the applicant's
FBI Identification Record may be a duplicate of the entry in part 2.
However, the Board will not further consider this issue because he (or the
agency that currently employs him or wishes to hire him) needs to exhaust
his administrative remedy by applying directly to the Crime Records Center.

3.  In accordance with pertinent regulations, the decision by the CID to
title a person for an offense is an investigative determination independent
of any judicial, nonjudicial or administrative action taken against the
individual, or the results of such action.  In this particular case, the
applicant pleaded guilty to, and a military court found that the applicant
actually had committed, most of the offenses of which he was charged.

4.  Disclosure of criminal information originated or maintained by CID may
be made to any Federal law enforcement agency that has an investigative or
law enforcement interest in the matter disclosed.  It appears CID may have
disclosed applicant's misconduct to the FBI.  Disclosures under this
paragraph to a non-Department of Defense law enforcement element is a
routine use under the Privacy Act.

5.  It is regrettable that the charges are now preventing the applicant
from attending the police academy; however, he has provided no evidence to
show that the disclosure to the FBI was in contravention of any law,
regulation, or directive, as applied to law enforcement activities.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__jea___  __ena __    _lmb_______  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.




            __James E. Anderholm____
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR2040005257                            |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20050407                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |134.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]