Applicant Name:  

Application Receipt Date: 2009/03/24	Prior Review:     Prior Review Date: 090213, Denied   

I.  Applicant Request:  Upgrade     Reason Change     RE Code Change    

Issues: Time elapsed since discharge.  The applicant states in effect her discharge characterization was wrongfully downgraded.?????

II.  Were Proper Discharge and Separation Authority procedures followed?	     
Tender Offer:   NA

See Attachments:  Legal     Medical     Minority Opinion     Exhibits 

III.  Discharge Under Review
Unit CDR Recommended Discharge: 	   Date: 030417
Discharge Received: 			   Date: 030527   Chapter: 15-3b      AR: 635-200
Reason: Homosexual Admission	   RE:     SPD: JRB   Unit/Location: I Co, 4-159th Aviation Regiment, Fort Bragg, NC 

Time Lost: AWOL x2; 16 days (020517-020602), mode of return unknown; 164 days (020917-030227), surrendered; for a total of 180 days. 

Article 15s (Charges/Dates/Punishment): 030410, on or about 17 September 2002, without authority, the applicant did absent herself from her unit, to wit: I Co, 4th Bn, 159th Aviation Regt, located at or near Fort Bragg, NC, and did remain so absent until on or about 28 February 2003; reduction to the grade of E-1, forfeiture of $575.00 per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

020717,  on or about 17 May 2002, without authority, the applicant did absent herself from her unit, to wit: I Co, 4th Bn, 159th Aviation Regt, located at or near Fort Bragg, NC, and did remain so absent until on or about 3 June 2002; reduction to the grade of E-2, suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated on or before 15 October 2002, forfeiture of $651.00 per month for two months, extra duty and restriction for 45 days (FG).

Courts-Martial (Charges/Dates/Punishment): None

Counseling Records Available: Yes    No 

IV.  Soldier’s Overall Record
Age at current enlistment:  17
Current ENL Date: 000913    Current ENL Term: 4 Years  ?????
Current ENL Service: 	02 Yrs, 02Mos, 14Days ?????
Total Service:  		02 Yrs, 02Mos, 14Days ?????
Previous Discharges: 	None
Highest Grade: E-3		Performance Ratings Available: Yes    No 
MOS: 39B10/ATE OP/MAINT   GT: 103   EDU: GED   Overseas: None   Combat: None
Decorations/Awards: NDSM, ASR

V.  Post-Discharge Activity
City, State:  Detroit, MI
Post Service Accomplishments: None Listed by the applicant.




VI.  Facts, Circumstances, and Legal Basis for Separation

       a.  Facts and Circumstances:
        The evidence of record shows that on 16 April 2003, the unit commander notified the applicant of initiation of separation action under the provisions of Chapter 15, paragraph 15-3b, AR 635-200, by reason of homosexual admission with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  The applicant admitted to her company commander on 17 July 2002 during the course of an Article 15 hearing that she was homosexual and had engaged or had the propensity to engage in homosexual/bisexual acts.  The unit commander specifically recommended a general, under honorable conditions discharge because she was absent without leave (AWOL) on two occasions and left her weapon unsecured.  She was advised of her rights.  
       
       On 21 April 2003, the applicant consulted with legal counsel, was advised of the impact of the discharge action, waived her right to an administrative separation board, and did not submit a statement in her own behalf.  The unit commander subsequently recommended separation from the Army.  The intermediate commander reviewed the proposed discharge action and recommended approval of the separation action with a general, under honorable conditions discharge.  
       
       On 28 April 2003, the separation authority waived further rehabilitative efforts and directed that the applicant be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions discharge. 

       b.  Legal Basis for Separation:  
Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 15 of that regulation states that active homosexuality is incompatible with military service and provides, in pertinent part, for the separation of members who actively engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements, demonstrate a tendency to engage in homosexual conduct.  The Army regulation states that when the sole basis for separation is homosexuality, a discharge under other than honorable conditions may be issued only if such characterization is warranted in accordance with Chapter 3, Section III, and if there is a finding that during the current term of service the Soldier attempted, solicited, or committed a homosexual act by using force, coercion or intimidation; with a person under 16 years of age; with a subordinate in circumstances that violate customary military superior subordinate relationships; openly in public view; for compensation; aboard a military vessel or aircraft; or in another location subject to military control if the conduct had, or was likely to have had, an adverse impact on discipline, good order, or morale due to the close proximity of other Soldiers of the Armed Forces.  In all other cases, the type of discharge will reflect the character of the Soldier’s overall record of service.  

       c.  Response to Issues, Recommendation and Rationale:  
        After a careful review of all the applicant’s military records, and the issue submitted with the application, the analyst found no mitigating factors that would merit an upgrade of the applicant's discharge.    
       
       The analyst determined the applicant’s discharge was appropriate because the quality of her service was not consistent with the Army's standards for acceptable personal conduct by military personnel.  The applicant’s misconduct had an adverse impact on the discipline, good order, and/or morale of her unit and diminished the quality of her service below that meriting a fully honorable discharge.  
       
       The applicant provided no independent corroborating evidence demonstrating that either the command's action was erroneous or that the applicant’s service mitigated the misconduct.  
       
       The applicant contends her discharge is inequitable because the characterization of her service was wrongfully downgraded.  However, AR 635-200, states that when the sole basis for separation is homosexuality, a discharge under other than honorable conditions may be issued if such characterization is warranted in accordance with Chapter 3, Section III, and if there is a finding that during the current term of service the Soldier attempted, solicited, or committed a homosexual act by using force, coercion or intimidation; with a person under 16 years of age; with a subordinate in circumstances that violate customary military superior subordinate relationships; openly in public view; for compensation; aboard a military vessel or aircraft; or in another location subject to military control if the conduct had, or was likely to have had, an adverse impact on discipline, good order, or morale due to the close proximity of other Soldiers of the Armed Forces.  In all other cases, the type of discharge will reflect the character of the Soldier’s overall record of service.   
       
       The command determined the applicant’s two times of AWOL did affect her overall record of service and adversely impacted discipline, good order, and/or morale of the unit and approved a general, under honorable conditions discharge as provided by the regulation.  
       
       Furthermore, the analyst noted the applicant’s issue about her request for an automatic upgrade after three years.  However, the U.S. Army does not have, nor has it ever had, a policy to automatically upgrade discharges.  Each case is decided on its own merits when an applicant submits a DD Form 293 requesting a change in discharge.  Changes may be warranted if the Board determines that the characterization of service or the reason for discharge or both were improper or inequitable. 
       
       Therefore, the analyst determined the reason for discharge and the characterization of service were both proper and equitable and recommends to the Board to deny relief.   
       
       

VII.  Summary of Army Discharge Review Board Hearing

Type of Hearing: 		Date: 21 June 2010         Location: Chicago, IL

Did the Applicant Testify?  Yes     No  

Counsel: None

Witnesses/Observers: Yes 

Exhibits Submitted: None

VIII.  Board Discussion, Determination, and Recommendation
After carefully examining the applicant's record of service during the period of enlistment under review, hearing his testimony and considering the analyst's recommendation and rationale, the Board determined that the discharge was both proper and equitable and voted to deny relief.
        
IX.  Board Decision						
	XI.  Certification Signature
Board Vote:  							          Approval Authority:	
Character - Change 0    No change 5
Reason -     Change 0    No change 5
(Board member names available upon request)
								         EDGAR J. YANGER			 
								         Colonel, U.S. Army
X.  Board Action Directed					         President, Army Discharge Review Board
Issue a new DD Form 214  					
Change Characterization to: 			         
Change Reason to: No Change
Other: NA										
RE Code: 
Grade Restoration:   No   Yes   Grade: NA








Legend:
AWOL    	Absent Without Leave		GCM   General Court Martial	NA   Not applicable			SCM	Summary Court Martial
BCD   	Bad Conduct Discharge	GD      General Discharge	NIF   Not in the file			SPCM	Special Court Martial
CG 	Company Grade Article 15	HD      Honorable Discharge	OAD   Ordered to Active Duty		UNC	Uncharacterized Discharge  
DD 	Dishonorable Discharge	HS       High School Graduate	OMPF   Official Military Personnel File	UOTH  	Under Other Than Honorable 
FG	Field Grade Article 15		IADT   Initial Active Duty Training	RE     Reentry Code				Conditions 

ARMY DISCHARGE REVIEW BOARD - CASE REPORT AND DIRECTIVE

Case Number AR20090006958
______________________________________________________________________________


Page 3 of 4 pages