RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


	IN THE CASE OF:	  


	BOARD DATE:	  10 April 2007
	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060011408 


	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. Gerard W. Schwartz

Acting Director

Ms. Wanda L. Waller

Analyst


The following members, a quorum, were present:


Mr. Kenneth Wright

Chairperson

Ms. LaVerne Douglas

Member

Ms. Ernestine Fields

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, in effect, that information pertaining to his arrest in 1998 for a car accident in Germany be removed from the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) Military Police Report maintained by the CID Crime Records Center.  

2.  The applicant states that he served over ten years in the Army and received three honorable discharges.  He contends that he got out of the Army in May 2005 and moved to California and applied with the California Department of Corrections for employment.  After submitting his background check, he was told that something was found in his military records which showed he was arrested for a car accident in Germany in 1998.  He admits to having a car accident in 1998, but said that he was never arrested for the accident or ever detained or cited for the accident and also said that he does not think he would have gotten an honorable discharge if he had been.  He further states that he has never been arrested in his life, that this is a mistake, and that he lost out on a really good job.    
3.  The applicant provides no additional evidence in support of his application. 

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted on 15 October 1992 for a period of 3 years.  He trained as a cannon crewmember.  On 20 September 1994, he extended his enlistment for a period of 5 months.  On 14 March 1996, he was released from active duty.  The applicant enlisted on 20 May 1998, served as a cannon crewmember in Germany from June 1998 to 2000 and from 2002 to 2005, and was honorably discharged on 31 May 2005.   

2.  A Military Police Report, dated 2 November 1998, exists for a traffic accident on 24 September 1998 in Germany.  This report states that the applicant was the subject of a traffic accident and titled for damage to private property and for fleeing the scene of a traffic accident.  This report shows the applicant was apprehended on 28 October 1998, transported to the station where he was advised of his legal rights (which he waived), and made a sworn statement.  In the sworn statement, the applicant stated that on 24 September 1998 he backed his car up and thought he might have hit the car behind him and that he did not know why he did not get out to look at the car.  The applicant was released on his own recognizance.  This report further states, in pertinent part, “Subject was advised that although no action was taken, the report will be retained in Army records.”  

3.  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) for titling purposes 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.  Request for deletion or amendment of CID investigative reports should be forwarded to the Director, U.S. Army Crime Records Center, ATTN:  CICR-FP, 6010 6th Street, Building 1465, Fort Belvoir, VA 22060-5585.

4.  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 or 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.  

5.  Department of Defense Instruction (DODI) 5505.7, 14 May 1992, Titling and Indexing of Subjects of Criminal Investigations in the Department of Defense, states that titling ensures investigators can retrieve information in an ROI of suspected criminal activity at some future time for law enforcement and security purposes.  Titling or indexing alone does not denote any degree of guilt or innocence.  The criteria for titling, simply stated, is if there is reason to investigate, the subject of the investigation should be titled.  This is a very low standard of proof (mere scintilla of evidence), far below the burdens of proof normally borne by the Government in criminal cases (beyond a reasonable doubt), in adverse administrative decisions (preponderance of the evidence), and in searches (probable cause).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Although the applicant contends that he was never detained for the accident, evidence of record shows he was apprehended on 28 October 1998 for the traffic accident and he made a sworn statement.   

2.  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.  If at the time of the investigation of an alleged offense probable cause existed to believe that a particular person committed the alleged offense, the CID is justified in titling that individual.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that the CID’s initial decision to conduct the ROI and title him was in error and, in fact, he admits to the traffic accident and leaving the scene.  

3.  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 the applicant’s traffic accident to the California Department of Corrections.  Disclosures under this paragraph to a non-Department of Defense law enforcement element is a routine use under the Privacy Act.  The applicant has provided no evidence to show that the disclosure was in contravention of any law, regulation, or directive, as applied to law enforcement activities.   

4.  Based on the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant’s request. 

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

KW_____  ___LD___  __EF___  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.




__Kenneth Wright______
          CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID
AR20060011408
SUFFIX

RECON

DATE BOARDED
20070410
TYPE OF DISCHARGE

DATE OF DISCHARGE

DISCHARGE AUTHORITY

DISCHARGE REASON

BOARD DECISION
DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY

ISSUES         1.
134.0000
2.

3.

4.

5.

6.