Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100009398
Original file (20100009398.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  23 September 2010

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20100009398 


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 correction of his military records by expunging from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center all documents concerning his use of cocaine.

2.  The applicant states he participated in a drug screen urinalysis conducted by his unit in 1991.  Eight persons were determined to have been positive for use of drugs.  He was told that he was not one of those eight persons.  This occurred at the same time as his expiration term of service (ETS); therefore, he never followed up on it.  He wants this record invalidated and removed from his records.  The applicant further states that this record was discovered on a criminal background search.  As a result, he lost his job.  Now he is unemployed and trying to live on less than a $1,000.00 per month unemployment.  He fears he will lose his house and become a homeless veteran if his records are not purged.

3.  The applicant provides copies of his resume; employment termination notice, dated 15 October 2009; unemployment benefits payment form, dated
25 February 2010; funeral notices for his brother and wife; a letter of support from a retired 1st sergeant, dated 1 November 1999; three letters from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center, Fort Belvoir, VA, dated 6 October, 16 November, and 10 December 2009; DA Form 5180-R (Urinalysis Custody and Report Record), dated 15 April 1991; and a DA Form 3881 (Rights Warning Procedure/Waiver Certificate), dated 6 May 1991.


CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so.  While it appears the applicant did not file within the time frame provided in the statute of limitations, the ABCMR has elected to conduct a substantive review of this case and, only to the extent relief, if any, is granted, has determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.  In all other respects, there are insufficient bases to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing.

2.  In 1987, the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR).  In September 1987, he was ordered to active duty for training (ADT).  He successfully completed his initial training and he was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 75C (Personnel Management Specialist).  He was released from ADT on 29 January 1988.

3.  On 5 February 1989, the applicant was advanced to the rank/grade of specialist (SPC)/E-4.

4.  On 25 January 1991, the applicant was ordered to active duty as a member of the USAR in support of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm.  His Reserve unit was the 1018th U.S. Army Reception Battalion located at Fort Dix, NJ.

5.  A DA Form 5180-R, dated 15 April 1991, indicates the applicant underwent a unit urinalysis screening on 21 March 1991, resulting in a positive test for cocaine.

6.  On 25 April 1991, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for wrongful use of cocaine, the use of which was detected by biochemical testing of his urine sample submitted on 21 March 1991.  The punishment included a reduction to private first class (PFC)/E-3, and a forfeiture of $481.00 pay per month for 1 month (suspended).

7.  Item 18 (Appointments and Reductions) of the applicant's DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record - Part II) shows he was reduced to PFC/E-3, effective 25 April 1991.

8.  On 25 April 1991, the applicant was released from active duty.  He had completed 3 months and 1 day of creditable active duty service and he had completed the period for which he was ordered to active duty.

9.  A DA Form 3881, dated 6 May 1991, indicates he was suspected of the wrongful use of cocaine and he was informed of his legal rights.  The applicant chose not to be questioned or to say anything.

10.  Orders D-06-548377, issued by the U.S. Army Reserve Personnel Center, St. Louis, MO, dated 13 June 1995, honorably discharged the applicant from the USAR, effective on that same date.  The orders indicate his rank at the time of his discharge was PFC.

11.  The evidence provided by the applicant includes:

	a.  a letter, RE:  Termination of Employment - Criminal History, dated
15 October 2009, that states his employment was terminated because of a disqualifying criminal conviction.  The letter does not provide specifics regarding the conviction.

	b.  a letter of support from a retired 1st sergeant, dated 1 November 2009.  The author purports to be a retired U.S. Army 1st sergeant, who recalls the events surrounding a drug test administered by the 1018th Reception Battalion in 1991/1992.  The author states he was a member of this unit for more than
10 years and had served as the 1st sergeant of Company B from 1991 to 1996.  He recalls that there was some controversy concerning the drug test but he did not know the particulars.  The only personnel who would know all of the facts relating to the test would be those in the direct chain of command for the Soldiers who were tested.  He provided the names of the Headquarters and Headquarters Company commander and 1st sergeant, but did not know how to find them since both had long since left the service.

	c.  a letter from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center, dated 6 October 2009,  sent to the applicant in response to his request for release of information from the files of the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC).  The applicant was informed that his request for information was denied; however, his record was updated to add a disposition pertaining to his 6 May 1991 arrest.  That disposition reads: "Non-Judicial Punishment Field Grade Article 15 dated  25 Apr 91, Forfeiture $481.00 per month for 1 month (suspended if not vacated before 25 Oct 91), Reduced from E-4 to E-3."  The letter also advised the applicant that records are maintained for a period of 40 years and then destroyed.  He was also advised that he could appeal to the Secretary of the Army for release of additional information but that any such appeal had to be submitted through the U.S. Army Crime Records Center no later than
6 December 2009.

	d.  a letter from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center, dated 16 November 2009, sent to the applicant in response to his request for amendment of information in the files of the USACIDC, as provided for in the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).  He was informed that his being reported as a subject, was based upon probable cause that indicated he had committed an offense.  Requests to amend USACIDC reports of investigation (ROI) are granted only if the individual submits new, relevant, and material facts that are determined to warrant revision of the report.  The burden of proof is on the individual.  No action was taken to review his ROI.  He was advised to submit a request to the U.S. Army Crime Records Center, along with new and relevant information.

	e.  a letter from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center, dated 10 December 2009, sent to the applicant in response to his FOIA request for amendment of information in the files of the USACIDC.  The applicant was provided copies of DA Forms 3881 and 5180-R with the names of law enforcement, as well as names, social security numbers and other personal information pertaining to third parties redacted.  He was informed that these documents were a part of records that are exempt from the disclosure provisions of the FOIA.  Again, he was provided guidance about how to submit an appeal, and that he had a 60 day period from the date of the letter if he wished to do so.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected to expunge from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center all documents concerning his use of cocaine.  He further states that he was not one of the Soldiers who tested positive.

2.  The available records clearly show that the applicant was identified as having tested positive for cocaine.  Furthermore, he accepted NJP for this very same misconduct.

3.  The DA Form 3881, dated 6 May 1991, refers to an investigation of the applicant's possible use of cocaine, but does not specify if this action was based on the previous urinalysis results.  Furthermore, there is no available evidence showing that he was arrested or charged for using cocaine.

4.  As a result of the applicant's inquiry, his record was updated to show that he had received NJP for using cocaine.
5.  A letter provided by the applicant indicates that he was terminated from employment because of a criminal conviction.  However, this letter does not state that his use of cocaine in 1991 was that criminal act.

6.  The available evidence fails to show any error or injustice.

7.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X____  ____X____  ____X____  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.



      ____________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)                                         AR20100009398



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20100009398



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100027911

    Original file (20100027911.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, reconsideration of his earlier request for correction of his records by expunging from the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC) U.S. Army Crime Records Center all documents concerning his use of cocaine. A letter from the U.S. Army Crime Records Center, dated 6 October 2009, was sent to the applicant in response to his request for release of information from the files of the USACIDC. The U.S. Army Crime Records Center has no document that...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029361

    Original file (20100029361.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    It further indicates that regardless of the characterization of the offense as founded, unfounded, or insufficient evidence, the only way to administratively remove a titling action from the Defense Central Investigations Index (DCII) is to show either mistaken identity or a complete lack of credible evidence to dispute the initial titling determination. The case number provided by the applicant is not a record of arrest. The evidence of record confirms that the results of a CID...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013273

    Original file (20100013273.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 16 January 1992, the unit commander notified the applicant he was initiating action to separate her under the provisions of paragraph 14-12c, Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations), for misconduct. Although a discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate for a Soldier discharged under this chapter, the separation authority may issue an HD or GD if warranted by the member's overall record of service. The applicant contends that her military...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091182C070212

    Original file (2003091182C070212.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. ROI 01-CID045-84386---, dated 23 February 2001, created by the US Army Criminal Investigation (Division) Command (USACIDC), Fort Leonard Wood established probable cause to believe the applicant committed the offense of wrongful use of a controlled substance (cocaine). The available records show that the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant’s request for an upgrade of his...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060002532C070205

    Original file (20060002532C070205.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted a U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (CIC) letter, dated 5 August 2005, responding to her request for release of information. The CID Report of Investigation indicated that the applicant was being investigated for wrongful use of hallucinogens. The applicant submitted a CID Report of Investigation 0065-01-CID137- XXXX0, dated 11 July 2001.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001697

    Original file (20130001697.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    He humbly requests that the Army Board of Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) request that the CRC remove the record of NJP from the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) data base. In his most humble opinion, he believes that the great burden on his own future legal career would be greatly reduced if he did not have to explain to civilian employers how he was never arrested or criminally charged with any crime; but yet, how a criminal record for possession of marijuana shows up on...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120004588

    Original file (20120004588.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests removal of his name from the titling block of U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC) Report of Investigation (ROI) 03-CID112-XXXXX-XXX. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. The evidence of record confirms that the results of a USACIDC investigation provided a sufficient legal basis for the applicant to be titled...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008614

    Original file (20090008614.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, removal of information from U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Command (USACIDC, also known as CID) records. He claims that he was in a lot of pain with his back even with the medications provided by the Army doctors, that he could not get relief, and that he used cocaine to self medicate. The applicant has provided no evidence to show that the CID’s decision to conduct the report of investigation and title him was in error.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019273

    Original file (20080019273.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant states, in effect, that although there is no error or injustice on his military records, he has a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) identification record related to an incident that occurred while he was in the Army in 1997. The National Defense Service Medal was the only additional award the applicant earned during this period of active duty service.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015289

    Original file (20080015289.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests, in effect, that a DA Form 2627 (Record of Proceedings Under Article 15, UCMJ) imposed on 15 December 1988 be corrected to show she used marijuana instead of cocaine. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant’s failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. The applicant provided a CID Report of...