AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

 

DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01961 
 
COUNSEL: NONE 
HEARING DESIRED:  NO 

 
IN THE MATTER OF: 
   
   
   
    
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His undesirable discharge be upgraded to an honorable discharge.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
He  was  given  an  undesirable  discharge  due  to  his  sexual 
preference.    He  would  like  his  discharge  upgraded  as  this 
restriction has been lifted. 
 
The applicant submits no supporting documentation.   
 
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
The  applicant  is  a  former  member  of  the  Regular  Air  Force  who 
entered  active  duty  on  16  January  1956.    The  applicant  was 
discharged  on  17  July  1956  under  Air  Force  Regulation  35-66, 
Discharge  for  Homosexual  Acts  or  Tendencies  (Class  II)  with  an 
undesirable discharge. 
 
The  circumstances  and  facts  surrounding  his  discharge  are  not 
available due to limited records.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
AFPC/DPSOR  recommends  approval.    On  20  September  2011,  the  law 
commonly known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT), 10 USC 654 was 
repealed.  The Department of Defense subsequently issued guidance 
indicating  that  Service  Discharge  Review  Boards  (DRB)  should 
normally  grant  requests  to  change  the  narrative  reason  for  a 
discharge, requests to re-characterize the discharge to honorable, 
and/or  requests  to  change  the  reentry  code  when  both  of  the 
following  conditions  are  met:    (1)  the  original  discharge  was 
based  solely  on  DADT  or  a  similar  policy  in  place  prior  to 
enactment  of  DADT,  and  (2)  there  were  no  aggravating  factors  in 

the  record,  such  as  misconduct.    Although  the  discharge  was 
processed according to the applicable regulation, the applicant’s 
record  indicates  the  discharge  was  based  solely  on  DADT  or  a 
similar policy and did not involve aggravating factors. 
 
The  applicant’s  service  characterization  should  be  changed  to 
reflect  honorable  and  the  narrative  reason  for  separation  be 
changed to Secretarial Authority, SPD code “JFF.” 
 
The complete DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. 
 
AFPC/JA  recommends  approval.    Although  the  record  is  scant,  the 
available  evidence  indicates  the  regulations  in  effect  at  the 
time  were  appropriately  followed  and  the  actions  taken  were 
supported  by  the  evidence.    While  the  applicant’s  DD  Form  214, 
Report of Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States, 
does  not  indicate  the  homosexual  classification  of  which  he  was 
accused,  the  regulations  and  the  DD  Form  214  indicate  this  was 
most  likely  a  Class  II  homosexual  case.    If  it  were  a  Class  II 
case,  in  the  worst  case  scenario,  he  would  have  received  an 
honorable  discharge  or  a  general  discharge  classification.    His 
DD Form 214 lists AFR 35-66 as the reason for discharge with an 
undesirable discharge.  Therefore, it is logical to assume he was 
classified  as  a  Class  II  homosexual  and  that  there  were  no 
aggravating  factors  that  supported  the  case  to  be  referred  to  a 
court-martial. 
 
DoD policy guidance addresses the correction of military records 
following the repeal of 10 U.S.C. 654, setting forth supplemental 
policy guidance to services Discharge review Boards and the Board 
for Correction of Military Records.  Remedies correcting records 
to reflect continued service with no discharge, restoration to a 
previous  grade  or  an  increase  from  no  separation  pay  to  half  or 
full separation pay would not normally be appropriate.  However, 
DRBs should normally grant requests to re-characterize discharges 
when no aggravating factors are present. 
 
While the evidence and record supports that the actions taken by 
the  Air  Force  complied  with  the  law,  regulations  and  policy  in 
effect  at  the  time,  the  applicant’s  record  warrants  re-
characterization  of  service  and  a  change  to  the  narrative 
description.   
 
The complete JA evaluation is at Exhibit D. 

 AFPC/DPSOA  defers  recommendation  to  the  OPR.    On  10  September 
2011,  the  Under  Secretary  of  Defense  issued  guidance  to  repeal 
DADT.  The guidance stated requests to change the RE code to 1J 
should be granted for members separated under DADT unless there 
was  misconduct  present.    However,  the  guidance  for  RE  codes  in 
1956 shows the equivalent was “1” as there were no two digit RE 
codes at that time.   
 

 
 

2

If it is determined the RE code should have been listed on the 
applicant’s DD Form 214, the Board should direct his RE code be 
listed as 1. 
 
The complete DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit E. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant 
on  30  August  2012,  for  review  and  comment  within  30  days 
(Exhibit F).    As  of  this  date,  this  office  has  received  no 
response. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 
 
1.  The  applicant  has  exhausted  all  remedies  provided  by 
existing law or regulations. 
 
2.  The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 
 
3.  Sufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice.  In light of 
the  repeal  of  Don’t  Ask,  Don’t  Tell  (DADT)  and  in  accordance 
with  the  Under  Secretary  of  Defense  (Personnel  and  Readiness) 
guidance  memorandum,  Correction  of  Military  Records  Following 
Repeal  of  Section  654  of  Title  10,  United  States  Code,  dated 
20 September 2011, Discharge Review Boards should normally grant 
requests to re-characterize the discharge to honorable when both 
of the following conditions are met: (1) the original discharge 
was based solely on DADT or a similar policy in place prior to 
enactment  of  DADT  and  (2)  there  were  no  aggravating  factors  in 
the  record,  such  as  misconduct.    Based  on  our  review  of  the 
evidence  of  record,  the  applicant’s  discharge  meets  these 
requirements.  Therefore, we recommend the applicant’s record be 
corrected as indicated below. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: 
 
The  pertinent  military  records  of  the  Department  of  the  Air 
Force  relating  to  APPLICANT,  be  corrected  to  show  that  on 
17 July  1956,  he  was  honorably  discharged  with  a  reason  and 
authority  for  separation  of  “Secretarial  Authority”  and  was 
furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
 

 
 

3

The  following  members  of  the  Board  considered  AFBCMR  Docket 
Number  BC-2012-01961  in  Executive  Session  on  1  November  2012, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 

 
 
 

, Panel Chair 
, Member 
, Member 

 
All  members  voted  to  correct  the  records,  as  recommended.    The 
following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Apr 12. 
     Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records. 
     Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 11 Jul 12. 
     Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/JA, dated 31 Jul 12. 
     Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 29 Aug 12. 
     Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 12. 
 
 
 
 

Panel Chair 

 
 

4