APPLICANT REQUESTS: That her honorable discharge (HD), issued under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, chapter 15, for homosexual conduct, be voided and that she be reinstated in the Regular Army.
APPLICANT STATES: That she is not a homosexual or bisexual and has never committed any homosexual act. She contends that the witnesses against her were lying because they did not like her for various reasons.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She served on active duty between 16 February 1988 and 6 September 1989 as a patient administration specialist at a field hospital in Germany.
While in Germany, the applicant was investigated by the Army Criminal Investigation Division (CID) for alleged homosexual activities with fellow female soldiers. Various witnesses claimed to have seen the applicant in bed with another female soldier engaging in homosexual acts of kissing and fondling. Following a legal review of the investigation, sufficient probable cause existed to title the applicant for the offense of indecent acts.
On an undetermined date in or around July 1989, the applicants commander notified the applicant that he was initiating separation action under chapter 15, AR 635-200, for engaging in, attempting to engage in, or soliciting another to engage in homosexual acts. She was advised of her rights and consulted with legal counsel. She waived her right to a hearing before a board of officers and elected to submit a statement on her own behalf.
Following physical and mental evaluations which cleared her for separation, the applicants commander, on 18 July 1989, recommended her discharge with an HD. On 16 August 1989, the approving authority approved the recommendation and, on 6 September 1989, the applicant was separated with an HD under the provisions of chapter 15, AR 635-200, homosexuality.
The applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) seeking reinstatement. On 6 May 1996, the ADRB denied her request citing the CID investigation as providing sufficient justification for the discharge action. The ADRB noted that the applicants argument that she was the victim of lies by fellow soldiers who disliked her was appropriately considered by her chain of command at the time of discharge.
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 15 of that regulation states that homosexuality is incompatible with military service and provides, in pertinent part, for the separation of members who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements, demonstrate a tendency to engage in homosexual conduct.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
2. The applicants argument to the Board was previously presented to her chain of command and the ADRB without success. Her discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and regulations applicable at the time and the character of the discharge given the applicant is commensurate with her overall record of military service.
3. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510676C070209
At one point, her former roommate, who had been discharged, came to Fort Carson where she and the applicant engaged in oral sex. During the CID investigation, the applicant made a sworn statement that she was homosexual and had performed oral sex with another female soldier in her barracks room in Korea and at Fort Carson. who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex .
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003083962C070212
There is no evidence in the available records to indicate that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge within that board's 15-year statute of limitations.Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded: ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140015601
Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum, dated 20 September 2011, subject: Correction of Military Records Following Repeal of Section 654 of Title 10, U.S. Code, provides policy guidance for Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to follow when taking action on applications from former service members discharged under "Don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) or prior policies. The evidence of record confirms...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130015106
Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) memorandum, dated 20 September 2011, subject: Correction of Military Records Following Repeal of Section 654 of Title 10, United States Code, provides policy guidance for Service Discharge Review Boards (DRBs) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) to follow when taking action on applications from former service members discharged under DADT or prior policies. The evidence of record confirms the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070002840C071029
The applicant states that she has never been a homosexual. Military records available were her DD Form 214 for the period ending 23 January 1957; her Honorable Discharge Certificate, dated 23 January 1957; a recommendation for promotion, and her separation orders, dated 3 March 1959. Ms. Ga___ stated that at the time they served together the applicant was engaged.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002081670C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS : That his discharge be upgraded. These soldiers stated that they had seen and/or participated in homosexual acts with the applicant.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001064080C070421
In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether the application was filed within the time established by statute, and if not, whether it would be in the interest of justice to waive the failure to timely file. She believes that the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell“ homosexual policy enacted by President Clinton should be applied retroactively. The applicant has not presented...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055121C070420
Issue 54 was the fact that in the transcripts the board stated that she never denied being a homosexual. However, the Board also notes that according to the transcripts CSM M___ testified that PFC A___ was not the applicant’s subordinate. The Board concludes that there was no evidence at the time of the board hearing and she has provided no evidence now to overcome the conclusion that she did make and sign the 6 May 1982 Sworn Statement in which she admitted to homosexual activity.
ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130016702
IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 25 June 2014 CASE NUMBER: AR20130016702 ___________________________________________________________________________ Board Determination and Directed Action After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review and considering the Discussion and Recommendation which follows, the Board determined the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief. The separation authority directed the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013942
On 14 March 1983, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of chapter 15 of Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of homosexuality with the issuance of a general discharge under honorable conditions. There is no indication she petitioned the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of her discharge or concerning the narrative reason for her separation within that board's 15-year statute of limitation. Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and...