Army Board for Correction of Military Records Record of Proceedings BOARD DATE: 4 June 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180013818 APPLICANT REQUESTS: * removal of narrative reason for separation * upgrade of her discharge to honorable APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states: a. She believes that she was discriminated against and she would appreciate that the prejudice narrative or separation comment be removed. She was an outstanding representative for her country as her credentials on her DD Form 214 shows. Following her law enforcement training, she proudly specialized in Military Law Enforcement and became a Military Police Officer. Her personal relationship with another individual was sincere and private. She was honest when confronted and she believes that she is due an honorable discharge. b. The current record on file has disgraceful comments against her that uses deplorable verbiage that was entered onto her DD Form 214. She recently applied for a mortgage and the lender was appalled by the discriminative verbiage that was used. It was not until she recently needed to show a copy of her DD Form 214, when she was reminded just how unacceptable and offensive the reason for separation comments truly are. She would sincerely appreciate having her reason for separation updated with the offensive language eliminated. 3. On 6 October 1981, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. 4. On 20 July 1983, a Criminal Investigation Command (CID) Report of Investigation indicated there was sufficient evidence to initiate the judicial, non-judicial, or administrative action the applicant’s chain of command deemed appropriate. 5. The applicant was cleared by a medical examination and mental status evaluation for administrative separation. 6. On 25 July 1983, her commander notified her of his intent to initiate separation action under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel), chapter 15, for homosexuality. The specific reason for the discharge was the applicant's engagement in homosexual activity. He further discussed her entitlements and rights and recommended nothing less than a general discharge. 7. On 26 July 1983, the applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's notification, and consulted with legal counsel. She was advised of the basis for the contemplated separation action for homosexuality, the type of discharge she could receive and its effect on further enlistment or reenlistment, the possible effects of this discharge, and of the procedures/rights that were available to her. The applicant elected to submit statements in her own behalf and to personally appear before a board of officers. She also acknowledged that she might expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge was issued to her. a. Her chain of command recommended approval of her discharge, and indicated the applicant waived her request for a personal appearance before a discharge board to consider her case. b. The separation authority approved the applicant's separation from the Army and directed her discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 15, for homosexuality, with the issuance of a general, under honorable conditions character of service. He further directed the applicant not be transferred to the Individual Ready Reserve. 8. On 30 August 1983, the applicant was discharged accordingly. The DD Form 214 she was issued confirms the following entries: * item 24 (Character of Service): Under Honorable Conditions * item 25 (Separation Authority): AR 635-200, paragraph 15-3a * item 26 (Separation Code): JRA * item 27 (Reentry Code): 4 * item 28 (Narrative Reason for Separation): “Engaged, Attempted to Engage in/solicited Another to Engage in Homosexual Act(s)” 9. Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. At the time, chapter 15 stated that homosexuality was incompatible with military service and provided for the separation of members who engaged in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements, demonstrated a tendency to engage in homosexual conduct. 10. The Under Secretary of Defense for 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 (DRB's) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NR's) to follow when taking action on applications from former service members discharged under Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) or prior policies. This memorandum states that, effective 20 September 2011, Service DRB's should normally grant requests in these cases to change the: * narrative reason for discharge to "SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY" * separation program designator code to "JFF" * character of service to honorable, if warranted * RE code to an immediately-eligible-to-reenter category 11. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The Board carefully considered the applicant’s request, supporting documents, evidence in the record and published DOD guidance for consideration of DADT or prior policy discharges. The Board discussed the reason for her separation, found no underlying misconduct and reviewed the applicable DoD policy. The Board determined that due to a change in policy following the repeal of DADT that a correction should be made to correct an injustice. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board determined that relief was warranted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 :X :X :X GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: After a full review of the application and record the Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending her DD Form 214 for the period of service ending 30 August 1983 as follows: - item 24 (Characterization of Service): Honorable - item 25 (Separation Authority): AR 635-200 - item 26 (Separation Code): JFF - item 27 (Reentry Code): 1 - item 28 (Narrative Reason): Secretarial Authority - No additional entries will be made in Remarks to show the DD Form 214 was reissued. 6/10/2019 X CHAIRPERSON Signed by: 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): Not Applicable REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 635-200 (Personnel Separations – Enlisted Personnel) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. At the time, chapter 15 stated that homosexuality was incompatible with military service and provided for the separation of members who engaged in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements, demonstrated a tendency to engage in homosexual conduct. 3. The Under Secretary of Defense for 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 (DRB's) and Service Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NR's) to follow when taking action on applications from former service members discharged under DADT or prior policies. This memorandum states that, effective 20 September 2011, Service DRB's should normally grant requests in these cases to change the: * narrative reason for discharge to "SECRETARIAL AUTHORITY" * separation program designator code to "JFF" * character of service to honorable, if warranted * RE code to an immediately-eligible-to-reenter category 4. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court- martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. a. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. b. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization.