| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Deborah L. Brantley | Senior Analyst |
| Ms. Karol A. Kennedy | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Member | |
| Mr. Allen L. Raub | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the authority and reason for her 1992 separation from active duty be changed to permit her to return to military service.
APPLICANT STATES: “At no time did I admit to engaging in homosexual acts as is stated on my separation papers nor was there a credible witness to say that I engaged in homosexual acts.” She states that her first “personnel action flag” ended with a favorable outcome and that when the new commander arrived she was “flagged once again” based on the same information. She indicated that counsel advised her that it would not be in her best interest “to challenge the separation.” The applicant maintains that she was not aware until recently that she “was not eligible for reenlistment” and that this was “not something which was explained” to her at the time of her separation. She states that given the “circumstances” surrounding her separation, and the “lack of a credible witness or evidence,” her separation should be changed so that she can “return to the Army Nurse Corps in whatever capacity is needed to serve….” She submits no evidence in support of her request.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
She served an initial period of active duty between November 1983 and August 1986 and was discharged for the purpose of enrolling in a Reserve Officer Training Corps (ROTC) program.
She was commissioned as a second lieutenant on 31 July 1989 and returned to active duty as a nurse on 15 July 1990. Following completion of her officer basic course, she was assigned to William Beaumont Army Medical Center at Fort Bliss, Texas, in October 1990, as a clinical staff nurse.
On 31 August 1992, while still assigned at Fort Bliss, the applicant submitted a request for voluntary resignation. She noted in her request that she had been informed that she was “being considered for elimination” and that she was volunteering to “tender [her] resignation from the Army…in lieu of further elimination proceedings.” She stated in her request that she had “been fully advised and counseled in this matter by…a member of the Judge Advocate General’s Corps” and that she “fully” understood the “implications of this voluntary action.” She elected to waive her right to appear before a board of officers and “to submit matters in explanation, rebuttal, or defense concerning the allegations in my case.” She also acknowledged in her request that she had been “notified, in writing” to “show cause for retention.” Documents associated with the elimination proceedings, or the basis for her notification to show cause for retention, were not in records available to the Board.
Her voluntary request to tender her resignation was approved in a Department of the Army message dated 9 November 1992. The message directed that the applicant would be issued an Honorable Discharge Certificate and that the message and Chapter 4, Army Regulation 635-120, would be cited as the authority for separation. The message also directed that her DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) would reflect an SPD (separation program designator) code of “BRA.”
The applicant was discharged on 1 December 1992. Item 25 (separation authority) reflects the message and regulation noted above and item 28 (narrative reason for separation) reflects “engaged in homosexual acts.”
Army Regulation 635-120, Chapter 4, then in effect, stated that an officer who had been recommended for elimination from the service by a general court-martial convening authority, or who had been selected by a Department of the Army Selection Board for elimination, or to show cause why he or she should not be eliminated, could tender a resignation in lieu of elimination action.
Army Regulation 635-5 establishes the standardized policy for preparing and distributing the DD Form 214. In pertinent part, it directs that the regulatory authority authorizing the separation will be entered in item number 25 of the
DD Form 214. Item number 28 will contain the narrative reason for separation, as shown in Army Regulation 635-5-1 based on the regulatory authority.
Army Regulation 635-5-1, then in effect, prescribed the specific authorities (regulatory, statutory, or other directives), the reasons for the separation of members from active military service, and the separation program designators to be used for these stated reasons. It indicated that "homosexual acts” is the appropriate narrative reason for discharge when the authority is "AR 635-120, Chap 4,” and the SPD code was “BRA” when the separation was based on a resignation or voluntary discharge in lieu of elimination proceedings.
The applicant's petition to the Army Discharge Review Board to change the reason and authority for her discharge was denied in May 2002.
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. The Board notes that the evidence confirms that the applicant voluntarily tendered her resignation in lieu of an elimination action. While records available to the Board do not contain any documents associated with that elimination action, it appears, based on information, which is available, that the elimination action involved homosexual acts by the applicant. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Board presumes that the basis for the separation action was sufficient for the applicant to choose to voluntarily resign rather than appeal the elimination action or to present her case before a board of officers. The applicant has presented no evidence to dispute this presumption.
2. Her contention that she was unaware that her 1992 separation action would prevent her from returning to a military status is not evidence that the reason and authority for her separation was in error, nor is it a basis for the Board to now grant relief.
3. 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 that requirement.
4. 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
__KAK__ __MHM __ _ALR___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001063635 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020618 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | (HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR) |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | YYYYMMDD |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | AR . . . . . |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 110.00 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090012112
The applicant was a U.S. Army Reserve captain (CPT) with about 7 years of continuous active duty when favorable actions were suspended on 27 August 1982 due to a CID investigation into possible violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. There is no copy of the applicant's resignation in the available records. Army Regulation 635-100 (Officer Personnel) provides that an officer is normally issued an honorable discharge except in certain situations, including those instances...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000894
The applicant states that the narrative reason for her separation was determined solely by the only adverse information in her records the unfavorable Officer Evaluation Report (OER) for the period 6 October 1992 through 9 April 1993 that was subsequently appealed, deleted, and the rating period declared non-rated. The applicant provides a memorandum, dated 15 June 1995, from the Appeals and Corrections Branch, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) with a memorandum for record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100024196
Item 3 (Summary of offenses, pleas, and findings) of a DA Form 4430-R, dated 3 April 1991, shows the applicant was charged with the offense of conduct unbecoming an officer by engaging in conversations and discussions to commit murder, in violation of Article 133 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). The letter noted a DA Form 4833 (Commanders Report of Disciplinary or Administrative Act ) reflected that he underwent a general court-martial and was found guilty of conduct...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090021929
His DD Form 214 shows he was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-120, chapter 4, by reason of substandard performance of duty with an honorable character of service. The "BHK" SPD code is the correct code for officers separating under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-120, chapter 4, by reason of resignation - in lieu of elimination proceedings due to substandard performance. The evidence of record confirms the applicants SPD code was assigned based on his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110010678
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. There is no evidence that the applicant applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for upgrade of his discharge within its 15-year statute of limitations. General Discharge Certificate (under honorable conditions) may be issued when: * unqualified resignation in circumstances involving serious misconduct * discharge because of serious misconduct, including misconduct for which punishment has been imposed, which renders the officer...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029948
She also stated that this condition was not diagnosed at the time of the applicant's military service and may not have affected her service performance had the applicant not suffered a retraumatizing sexual assault by a fellow officer. The evidence of record shows on 20 July 1989, while serving on active duty, the applicant's company commander initiated action for the applicant to show cause for retention on active duty for her elimination for substandard performance and acts of personal...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013186
The applicant states she was honorably discharged under the Dont Ask Dont Tell policy in 2005 and that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) notified her of a debt in the amount of $131,582.20. 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 applicant enjoyed the benefits of the education and in making her admission statement she was in...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080000755
Specifically, he presents the following arguments: a. he was notified in the elimination memorandum that if he elected to submit his resignation or request discharge in lieu of elimination, he could be eligible for separation pay and could consult with his legal advisor and his finance and accounting office concerning entitlement to separation pay; b. he acknowledged notification of initiation of elimination action against him and requested resignation from the Army as well as a hearing by a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130001639
The applicant requests an upgrade of his discharge under other than honorable conditions to general under honorable conditions. On 5 October 1987, the applicant's immediate commander initiated a recommendation to eliminate him from the Army by reason of misconduct. _______ _ 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000808
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 August 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130000808 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence of record shows he voluntarily, willingly, and in writing, requested resignation from the Army for the good of the service in lieu of trial by a general court-martial. _______ _ __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.