IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 29 November 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20230004552 APPLICANT REQUESTS: correction to her separation date to reflect “16 March 2000.” She also requests a personal appearance via video/telephone. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) 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 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) 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, in effect, her separation date and year is incorrect. Due to harassment issues that were reported, her unit refused to correct the date and year of discharge in order to prevent benefits from being claimed, as well as reenlistment options [sic]. Her separation date was written incorrectly due to “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” (DADT) violation. Captain , First Sergeant , and Sergeant violated DADT policy by non- stop threats and harassment by threatening her if she did not admit her sexuality. 3. The applicant provides a copy of her DD Form 214. 4. A review of the applicant’s service record shows: a. She enlisted in the Regular Army on 26 January 1998 and held military occupational specialty 92Y, Unit Supply Specialist. b. On 13 January 1999, she accepted nonjudicial punishment for: (1) (1) On or about 6 November 1998, with intent to deceive, sign an official record, which record was false in that she wrongfully dated the DA Form 647-1 (Personnel Register) “9 November 1998,” when in fact she signed and dated the DA Form 647-1 on 6 November 1998, and was then known by her to be so false. This is in violation of Article 107, UCMJ. (2) On or about 7 November 1998, without authority, fail to go at the time prescribed to her appointed place of duty, to wit: 0600 hours workcall at the Supply Section. This is in violation of Article 86, UCMJ. (3) On or about 0630 hours, 30 November 1998, without authority, absent herself from her unit and did so remail absent until on or about 1930 hours, 2 December 1998. This is in violation of Article 86, UCMJ. (4) Her punishment included a reduction to the grade of E-1. c. DA Form 3822 (Report of Mental Status Evaluation), 21 December 1998, reflects a mental status evaluation was conducted on the applicant who was being considered for discharge. The applicant was hospitalized at Winn Army Community Hospital from 18 December through 21 December 1998. She was found to have the mental capacity to understand and participate in the proceedings, met the retention requirements of chapter 3, AR 40-501, and was psychiatrically cleared for chapter 5-18 discharge. d. U.S. Army Medical Department Activity memorandum, 21 December 1998, Subject: Certificate of Psychiatric Evaluation, certified the applicant was hospitalized and evaluated from 18 December 1998 to the present. The evaluation summary states, “The patient was admitted to the psychiatric ward for after a command referral for concerns of suicidal ideation. She had written a letter to a member of her chain of command expressing distress and suicidal thoughts. She responded well to the supportive milieu of the inpatient ward. She was able to discuss/get a better perspective on several stressors in her life. She had mixed feelings as to whether she wanted to remain in the military. Her chain of command reported that she has generally been an unreliable, manipulative, and untruthful soldier. Inpatient evaluation revealed no evidence of a significant mental illness.” She was diagnosed with (Axis I) Adjustment Disorder with Depressed Mood Phase of Life Problems, (Axis II) Borderline, antisocial traits. e. On 17 February 1999, the commander informed the applicant of the initiation of separation proceedings under the provisions of Army Regulation (AR) 635-200 (Personnel Separations - Enlisted Personnel), paragraph 5-18, other designated physical or mental conditions. Specifically, on 21 December 1998, she was diagnosed with having adjustment disorder with depressed mood phase of life problems and borderline antisocial traits. The commander recommended the applicant receive an honorable discharge. f. The applicant acknowledged receipt of the commander's intent to separate her on 22 February 1999. She consulted with legal counsel and representation by military counsel and/or civilian counsel. She acknowledged that she: * understood she could expect to encounter substantial prejudice in civilian life if a general discharge under honorable conditions were issued to her * understood she could be ineligible for many or all benefits as a veteran under Federal and State laws as a result of the issuance of a discharge under other than honorable conditions * understood if she received a discharge characterization of less than honorable, she could make an application to the Army Discharge Review Board (ADRB) or the ABCMR for an upgrade, but she understood that an act of consideration by either board did not imply her discharge would be upgraded g. On 5 March 1999, the separation authority approved the applicant's discharge under the provisions of AR 635-200, chapter 5-18, other designated physical or mental conditions, and directed that she be issued an honorable discharge. Paragraph 1d states, “the Soldier will be outprocessed from this installation within five (5) working days.” h. Orders Number 67-42, issued by Headquarters 3rd Infantry Division, Fort Stewart, GA ordered the applicant to report to the U.S. Army Transition Center for transition processing. Date of discharge 15 March 1999. i. The applicant was discharged from active duty on 15 March 2000. Her DD Form 214 reflects she was honorably discharged on 15 March 1999, under the provisions of AR 635-200, paragraph 5-18, physical condition (not a disability), separation code JFV, and reentry code 3. She served 1 year, 1 month, and 20 days of net active service this period. She was assigned Separation Code JFV, and Reentry Code 3. She served 1 year, 1 month, and 20 days of net active service. 5. U.S. Army Inspector General Agency memorandum, 13 September 2023, Subject: Response to Request for Army Inspector General Records for Official Use states, “The Department of the Army Inspector General (DAIG) Records Release office searched the Army IG database—the Inspector General Action Request System—and did not locate any records responsive to your request.” 6. AR 635-200, paragraph 5-18b, provides that when a commander determines that a Soldier has a physical or mental condition that potentially interferes with assignment to or performance of duty, the commander will refer the Soldier for a medical examination and/or mental status evaluation in accordance with AR 40-501. 7. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant’s petition and her service record in accordance with the published equity, injustice, or clemency determination guidance. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicant's record of service, documents submitted in support of the petition and executed a comprehensive and standard review based on law, policy and regulation. Upon review of the applicant’s petition and available military records, the Board determined there is insufficient evidence to support the applicant’s contentions for correction of her separation date to reflect “16 March 2000. The Board determined the applicant’s record is absence any DFAS documentation to support the applicant’s claims and she provided no supporting documentation regarding her request for correction. Based on insufficient documentation, the Board lacks the facts and circumstances to properly determined if the applicant’s separation date is in error. Therefore, the Board denied relief. 2. The applicant’s request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION ? BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. 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. REFERENCES: 1. 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. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-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. Paragraph 5-18a provides, in pertinent part, that Commanders specified in paragraph 1–21 may approve separation under this paragraph on the basis of other physical or mental conditions not amounting to disability (AR 635–40) and excluding conditions appropriate for separation processing under paragraph 5–11 or 5–13, that potentially interfere with assignment to or performance of duty. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20230004552 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1