Camp Casey Boards of Inquiry & Administrative Separation Lawyers
Table Contents
A Board of Inquiry (for officers) and an administrative separation board (for enlisted personnel) are formal administrative proceedings used to determine whether a servicemember should be retained in the military. Officers appear before a Board of Inquiry, while enlisted members appear before an administrative separation board, but both forums serve the same institutional purpose: examining alleged misconduct, poor performance, or other grounds for separation.
The burden of proof in these boards is typically a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the evidence must show it is more likely than not that the basis for separation occurred. The evidentiary rules are less restrictive than those used in judicial forums, allowing the board to consider a wide range of documents, testimony, and other materials so long as they are deemed relevant and reliable.
Unlike a court-martial, these boards are administrative rather than criminal. They do not determine guilt or innocence under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, do not impose criminal penalties, and do not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Instead, their function is to assess suitability for continued service, using procedures that are formal but not equivalent to a trial.
At installations such as Camp Casey, these boards often represent the final career decision point for a servicemember because they result in an official recommendation regarding retention or separation, along with the characterization of service. The board’s findings typically conclude the administrative process and form the basis for the command’s ultimate personnel action.
A Board of Inquiry or administrative separation is a command process that reviews alleged misconduct and can end a service member’s career without a court-martial. At Camp Casey, it may impact rank, retirement, and discharge characterization. Gonzalez & Waddington provide guidance at 1-800-921-8607.
Watch the criminal defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington break down how they defend criminal cases and service members worldwide against Federal Charges, Florida State Charges, UCMJ allegations, CID/NCIS/OSI investigations, court-martials, Article 120 cases, administrative separations, and GOMORs. If you’re under investigation or facing charges, this video explains what your rights are and how experienced criminal defense lawyers can make the difference.
Camp Casey’s operational environment places units under consistent command oversight, and the close‑knit nature of the installation increases day‑to‑day visibility of service members’ performance and conduct. This heightened awareness means that any issues affecting readiness or unit cohesion are quickly identified and formally addressed.
When concerns do surface, they often begin with preliminary actions such as command inquiries, written reprimands, or nonjudicial punishment. These measures can serve as the factual basis for determining whether a pattern of behavior or a significant lapse in judgment warrants review through a Board of Inquiry or an administrative separation process.
Command teams also balance organizational risk tolerance and long‑term career management considerations. Leaders assess whether retaining a service member aligns with mission requirements, projected assignments, and overall force readiness. When risks or performance concerns cannot be effectively mitigated, administrative separation becomes a tool used to maintain standards and ensure the effectiveness of the force at Camp Casey.
If you or a loved one is facing criminal charges or a criminal investigation by federal authorities, the military, or the State of Florida, early defense matters. Gonzalez & Waddington provide disciplined, trial-focused criminal defense for high-stakes cases involving serious allegations and complex evidence. To speak with experienced criminal defense lawyers and get confidential guidance, call 1-800-921-8607 or text 954-909-7407 to request a no-cost, confidential consultation.
The Board of Inquiry or administrative separation process at Camp Casey follows a structured sequence that outlines how a service member’s case moves from initial notification to final determination by the separation authority. Each phase focuses on reviewing the grounds for separation and evaluating the evidence presented.
The steps below summarize the procedural flow, including required notices, board composition, opportunities for evidence and witnesses, and the decision-making stages that lead to a final outcome.
Boards at Camp Casey commonly review a range of documentary evidence developed during prior investigations, including command-directed inquiries, military police reports, and any letters of reprimand or nonjudicial punishment (NJP) records that describe alleged misconduct or performance issues. These materials provide the board with an official record of events and the administrative actions taken beforehand.
Witness testimony is frequently presented to clarify disputed facts or provide context to the documentary evidence. The board evaluates each witness’s credibility by considering factors such as consistency, firsthand knowledge, demeanor, and whether the testimony aligns or conflicts with established records.
Administrative records, including evaluation reports, counseling statements, and duty performance documents, are weighed to assess a service member’s overall history. Boards consider how these records support or contradict the allegations under review and how they fit within the broader pattern of the service member’s conduct and career trajectory.
Service members facing administrative separation at Camp Casey may receive one of several discharge characterizations, including Honorable, General (Under Honorable Conditions), or Other Than Honorable (OTH). Each characterization reflects the quality of military service and the circumstances surrounding the separation, and it becomes a permanent part of the service record.
An Honorable discharge typically reflects consistent adherence to standards, while a General discharge indicates satisfactory service with some documented issues. An OTH characterization is more serious and may be issued when the command determines that significant misconduct or performance deficiencies occurred, even if the service member is not processed through a court-martial.
The characterization of service can influence retirement eligibility, as administrative separation—especially when initiated close to a service member’s retirement threshold—may interrupt the completion of required years of service. Commands evaluate factors such as years of service, duty performance, and the alleged basis for separation, and the process may result in a loss of the opportunity to reach retirement status.
Long-term consequences may include effects on access to certain benefits, employment opportunities, and how future agencies or employers view a service member’s record. Because discharge characterization becomes a lasting part of the military file, its impact can extend well beyond the separation itself.
At Camp Casey, Boards of Inquiry and administrative separation proceedings often originate from findings developed during command-directed investigations. These investigations serve as the initial fact‑gathering mechanism and may reveal misconduct or performance issues significant enough to trigger formal separation actions. While a command-directed investigation itself does not impose punishment, its conclusions frequently form the evidentiary basis for determining whether a service member should face a Board of Inquiry.
Before a case escalates to separation, commanders may use intermediate administrative tools such as Letters of Reprimand. A Letter of Reprimand can stand alone as adverse documentation or contribute to a pattern of behavior that supports administrative separation. When combined with prior counseling or performance issues, such letters often play a central role in the decision to begin separation processing.
Boards of Inquiry also intersect with disciplinary mechanisms such as non-judicial punishment and, in more severe cases, court-martial proceedings. Non-judicial punishment may precede separation actions when misconduct does not rise to the level of a court-martial but still warrants consideration for removal from service. Conversely, if allegations are serious enough for court-martial proceedings, the outcome of that trial—including acquittals, convictions, or sentencing—can directly influence whether administrative separation is pursued afterward at Camp Casey.
With decades of military justice experience, Gonzalez & Waddington bring a deep understanding of how Boards of Inquiry and administrative separation actions function at Camp Casey and across the Army. Their background in board-level litigation allows them to navigate the procedural requirements, evidentiary standards, and command-driven dynamics that shape these cases.
The firm is frequently retained for its ability to conduct precise witness examinations and develop a complete, defensible record. This methodical approach helps ensure that the board receives a clear, thoroughly documented presentation of the service member’s actions, history, and mitigating circumstances.
They also integrate board representation with broader administrative and disciplinary defense, including issues involving reprimands, nonjudicial punishment, and prior investigations. This experience enables them to address how each action interacts with a separation case and to prepare clients for the interconnected nature of administrative proceedings at Camp Casey.
Answer: Administrative separation can occur without a court-martial because it is a non-judicial process used to review a service member’s suitability for continued service. It follows regulatory procedures rather than criminal prosecution. The command initiates the process based on documented grounds.
Answer: A BOI is an administrative hearing focused on determining retention or separation, while NJP is a disciplinary tool addressing alleged misconduct without a formal board. NJP can be imposed quickly, whereas a BOI involves a panel, evidence review, and a formal record. The two processes serve different regulatory purposes.
Answer: The burden of proof at a BOI is typically a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the evidence must show it is more likely than not that the alleged basis exists. This is a lower standard than required in criminal courts. The board uses this standard to make its findings.
Answer: A BOI generally consists of three commissioned officers senior in grade to the respondent. At least one member is often from the same branch or career field when possible. Their role is to review evidence and make findings.
Answer: The board may consider documents, witness statements, and testimony presented during the hearing. It can also review service records and any materials submitted by the respondent. All evidence must follow regulatory rules for admissibility in administrative proceedings.
Answer: A BOI may review a service member’s overall record when considering issues connected to retirement eligibility. The board’s findings can influence whether a member is processed for retention or separation. Any impact depends on the governing regulations.
Answer: Discharge characterization is based on the service member’s overall military record and the circumstances leading to the BOI. The board evaluates performance, conduct, and documented matters in determining a recommended characterization. Regulations outline the available categories.
Answer: A service member may have a civilian lawyer participate in a BOI at their own expense. Civilian counsel can appear with the respondent alongside any appointed military counsel. Their participation must follow the board’s procedural rules.
Camp Casey sits just south of the Korean Demilitarized Zone in the city of Dongducheon, positioning it closer to the border than most U.S. installations overseas. The base’s placement in the Gyeonggi Province corridor gives it rapid access to key transportation routes and nearby civilian communities. This proximity shapes daily military operations and local engagement.
The surrounding hills and narrow valleys create a natural environment suited for maneuver training and readiness drills. Seasonal weather shifts, including cold winters and humid summers, add complexity to field operations. These conditions contribute to mission profiles that reflect the peninsula’s operational demands.
Camp Casey hosts U.S. Army units aligned with forward-deployed missions on the Korean Peninsula. Its tenant organizations support deterrence, rapid response, and combined operations with local allies. The installation’s posture underscores its importance within the regional defense structure.
The base maintains a consistent training rhythm focused on mobility, live-fire preparation, and mission command tasks. Rotational forces often cycle through to maintain established readiness levels. This pace reflects the installation’s strategic placement and ongoing responsibilities.
The installation supports a substantial active duty presence, including deployable units and command elements. Personnel engaged in logistics, medical support, and intelligence functions contribute to the base’s daily operations. Activity levels remain high due to ongoing coordination with nearby facilities.
Military personnel regularly engage with Dongducheon and neighboring towns through commerce and community relations. Local infrastructure supports the installation’s transportation and supply needs. These connections reinforce the base’s integration into the region.
Service members stationed at or rotating through Camp Casey may encounter investigations, administrative actions, or non-judicial punishment tied to the demands of a forward-deployed environment. Courts-martial and separation proceedings can occur due to the installation’s operational tempo. The nature of combined training and overseas duty often shapes these legal situations.
The military defense lawyers at Gonzalez & Waddington represent servicemembers stationed at Camp Casey. Their work includes cases connected to the unique conditions of serving near the DMZ. This support extends to personnel assigned long-term or temporarily.
The separation authority, usually a senior commander, decides whether a case is referred to a Board of Inquiry. This decision is often based on recommendations from the chain of command and legal advisors.
Administrative separation can be based on misconduct, substandard performance, moral or professional dereliction, domestic violence, drug offenses, sexual misconduct, or a pattern of adverse administrative actions.
Yes, a service member can be administratively separated without any criminal conviction or court-martial. Separation decisions are based on administrative standards rather than criminal guilt.
A Board of Inquiry is administrative in nature, while a court-martial is a criminal trial under the UCMJ. The rules of evidence and burden of proof are significantly lower at a Board of Inquiry.
A Board of Inquiry is an administrative hearing used to determine whether a service member should be retained or separated from service and, if separated, what characterization of discharge should apply. It is not a criminal proceeding.
