Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002075890C070403
Original file (2002075890C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:
        


         BOARD DATE: 24 October 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002075890

         I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun Director
Mr. Jessie B. Strickland Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr. Chairperson
Ms. Karen A. Heinz Member
Ms. Barbara J. Ellis Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. 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 to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)


APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his general discharge be upgraded to honorable.

APPLICANT STATES: That his discharge should be changed to honorable because people who are like he thought he was are in the service now and his life-style has changed since his discharge. He goes on to state that he has been married, had two kids, was divorced and is now remarried. He further states that his sexual status has changed and since bi-sexual people are now allowed in the service, he should receive an honorable discharge.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

He enlisted on 23 January 1979, for a period of 3 years, training as an infantryman and assignment to Fort Hood, Texas. At the time of his enlistment he indicated that he had never had homosexual acts with a person of the same sex.

He completed his training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and was transferred to Fort Hood on 8 May 1979.

On 9 July 1979, nonjudicial punishment was imposed against him by his battalion commander for being absent without leave from 22 June to 1 July 1979 and for disobeying two lawful orders from his company commander. His punishment consisted of correctional custody for 30 days and a forfeiture of pay (suspended for 2 months). He appealed his punishment and his appeal was denied by the brigade commander on 25 July 1979.

On 10 July 1979, the applicant made a sworn statement to his battalion commander stating that he had been a homosexual for about 2 ½ years and he had no desire to change or start a new way of life. He also stated that he saw no mental or physical harm in his choice of life and that his choice was better suited to him than the way chosen by others.

On 16 July 1979, the assistant brigade chaplain authored a letter to the applicant’s commander indicating that he had been counseling the applicant since 2 July 1979, and that the applicant had gone AWOL because he was experiencing difficulty adjusting to military life. He went on to state that the applicant was struggling with his homosexual tendencies and was afraid that it would become known that he was a homosexual. He went on to state that the applicant was struggling with his desire to perform homosexual acts while in the Army and was trying to control his urges. The applicant was afraid bodily harm would come to him if it were known and the chaplain asserted that he believed it to be a valid fear. The applicant also admitted that he had been a homosexual for over 2 years and the chaplain opined that he should be discharged immediately.

On 16 August 1979, the applicant’s commander submitted a recommendation to separate the applicant from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, for unsuitability because of homosexuality. He cited as the basis for his recommendation, the applicant’s admission of homosexuality to himself, the battalion commander and the chaplain. He further stated that the applicant’s statement that barracks living will eventually cause him to commit overt acts and he desired to leave the Army to pursue a homosexual lifestyle appeared to be genuine. He opined that the applicant’s conduct was disruptive to discipline and could be hazardous to all concerned.

After consulting with counsel, the applicant waived all of his rights and elected not to submit a statement in his own behalf.

On 27 and 30 July 1979, the applicant underwent a psychiatric evaluation based on a request from his commander. The examining psychiatrist opined that there was no evidence of any mental disease or defect and that there was no psychiatric diagnoses appropriate at the time. He indicated that the applicant had admitted to homosexual acts prior to military service and denied any acts during military service. However, he admits to homosexual tendencies.

On 24 August 1979, after interviewing the applicant, the brigade commander approved the recommendation for discharge based on his interview and the chaplain’s statement and directed that he be furnished a general discharge.

Accordingly, he was discharged under honorable conditions on 17 September 1979, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 13-4d, for unsuitability due to homosexual tendencies. He had served 7 months and 16 days of total active service and had 9 days of lost time due to AWOL. At the time of his discharge he was advised of the procedures for applying for an upgrade of his discharge to the Army Discharge Review Board and was provided the necessary form to do so.

There is no indication in the available records to show that he ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board for an upgrade of his discharge within that board’s 15-year statute of limitations.

Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13, in effect at the time, provided, in pertinent part, that when the sole basis for separation is homosexuality, the type of discharge will reflect the character of the soldier’s service. A discharge under other than honorable conditions may be issued only if there is a finding that during the current term of service the soldier attempted, solicited or committed a homosexual act in a location subject to military control. The regulation currently in effect (Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 15), has the same provisions.

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 applicant’s administrative separation was administratively correct and in conformance with applicable regulations, with no indication of any violations of the applicant’s rights.

2. Accordingly, the type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were appropriate under the circumstances.

3. The applicant’s contentions have been noted by the Board and appear to be without merit. Under today’s standards, individuals in the same situation would be treated much the same as the applicant, depending on the individual circumstances. Likewise, the character of their discharge would reflect their overall record of service. In the applicant’s case, he went AWOL for 9 days and only served 7 months. Accordingly, his discharge was not then and is not now deemed fully honorable.

4. Although the applicant may have changed his lifestyle since his discharge, this in itself is not sufficiently mitigating to warrant an upgrade of a duly constituted discharge that properly reflects the characterization of his service during the period in question.

5. 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 this requirement.

6. 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
__be____ ___kh___ __rvo ___ DENY APPLICATION


                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records



INDEX

CASE ID AR2002075890
SUFFIX
RECON YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED 2002/10/22
TYPE OF DISCHARGE GD
DATE OF DISCHARGE 1979/09/17
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY AR635-200/CH13
DISCHARGE REASON HOMOSEXUALITY
BOARD DECISION DENY
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 563 144.4600/A46.00
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.


Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2011 | AR20110025022

    Original file (AR20110025022.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant Name: ????? The Board will consider any aggravating factors and in their absence, will change the narrative reason for the discharge to Secretarial Authority. Board Action Directed Issue a new DD Form 214 Change Characterization to: Change Reason to: Secretarial Authority under Provision of Chapter 5, AR 635-200, with a corresponding SPD Code of “JFF” and a reentry code (RE) of “1."

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080001441

    Original file (20080001441.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was advised that his commanding officer was recommending that he be discharged from the service under the provisions of chapter 15 of AR 635-200 (Personnel Separations) and that the discharge could be under other than honorable conditions. The applicant's record shows that the applicant was counseled regarding separation for homosexuality and the possible negative effects of this discharge. The applicant states in his application that his military service record is not in error.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110020585

    Original file (20110020585.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests upgrade of his general discharge to an honorable discharge and change of the reason and authority for his discharge. 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...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002071682C070403

    Original file (2002071682C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 September 1964, the applicant’s commander initiated action to separate him from the service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-89 for homosexuality. Inasmuch as the applicant was discharged based on his admission of homosexuality and admitted to performing such acts with military personnel, the Board finds that he was properly discharged in accordance with the applicable regulations in effect at the time and that he was issued the proper discharge. Accordingly, the Board...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022716

    Original file (20100022716.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his general discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge. The applicant never completed training for MOS 71C and he intentionally failed MOS 91B training. 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.

  • ARMY | DRB | CY2013 | AR20130001027

    Original file (AR20130001027.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: Mr. BOARD DATE: 10 May 2013 CASE NUMBER: AR20130001027 ___________________________________________________________________________ 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 narrative reason for the applicant’s discharge is now inequitable based on the current standard. The evidence of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001250

    Original file (20090001250.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant provides in support of his application, an undated statement in which he requests an RE code waiver, age waiver, and a medical waiver to enlist in the U.S. Army; a copy of his DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); a letter from his psychiatrist, dated 5 November 2008; and an information sheet used to fax his application and supporting documents to this Board. He also stated that the applicant got along with other Soldiers; however, he was stating...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003091390C070212

    Original file (2003091390C070212.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He had engaged in homosexual relationships during the time he was enlisted and up until the present, but not with anyone in military service. There is no evidence that the applicant ever applied to the Army Discharge Review Board within that board's 15-year statute of limitations. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant admitted to being a homosexual no less than three times and signed sworn statements to that effect at least twice.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002079298C070215

    Original file (2002079298C070215.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. The facts and circumstances pertaining to the applicant’s discharge are not present in the available records nor provided by the applicant. The applicant has failed to show, through the evidence submitted with his application or the evidence of record, that his separation which resulted in his receiving an RE Code of RE "4" was in error or unjust.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002074586C070403

    Original file (2002074586C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his undesirable discharge be upgraded to honorable. The applicant’s commander submitted a request to discharge the applicant under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-89 on 23 October 1961.