RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04612	

		COUNSEL:  NONE 

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO
		

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The character of separation on his DD Form 214, Report of 
Separation from the Armed Forces of the United States, be 
changed from undesirable to general.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

1.  He was given an undesirable discharge because he said that 
he was homosexual.  Although his discharge was within the law in 
1952, considering his current health status, and low income, 
this discharge is too harsh.  With the current new U.S. military 
laws allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the U.S. Armed 
Forces, he requests that the Board change his current character 
of service from undesirable to general.  

2.  Since his discharge, he worked for the U.S. Postal Service 
for 31 years until his retirement in January 1988.  He married 
in 1955 and has five sons and one daughter.  One of his sons 
served 24 years in the U.S. Army.  His daughter’s two sons 
served in the U.S. Army.  

3.  He is now 80 years old.  In February 2012, he started having 
health problems.  He was hospitalized for approximately three 
weeks.  Upon his release, he went to stay in a rehabilitation 
center for one month.  Due to his need to have assistance with 
day-to-day living activities, he had to move into an assisted 
living home.  His current salary does not cover the full cost of 
living there.  His net salary is approximately $1,900, per 
month.  The cost of staying at the assisted living facility is 
approximately $2,500, per month.  However, the manager has 
allowed him to stay there while he tries to obtain military 
benefits.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

________________________________________________________________


STATEMENT OF FACTS:

According to documents extracted from his military personnel 
record, the applicant is a former member of the Regular Air 
Force who enlisted on 4 June 1951.  The applicant was released 
from the Air Force on 23 February 1952 under the provisions of 
AFR 35-66 (homosexuality) and received an undesirable discharge.  
He was credited with 8 months and 7 days of active duty service.  

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

1.  AFPC/DPSOR recommends his discharge be upgraded to 
honorable.  DPSOR states the applicant’s discharge was based on 
his admitting to homosexual acts in January 1951.  The applicant 
attests that his commanding officer offered him an undesirable 
discharge in lieu of facing a General Court Martial, which he 
accepted, and was subsequently discharged by reason of 
"Admission of Homosexual Acts."  AFM 39-12, paragraph 2-108, 
provided that one who is found to be a Class II homosexual 
should generally be discharged with an undesirable discharge, 
unless particular circumstances in a given case warranted 
otherwise.  

2.  On 10 Sep 2011, the Under Secretary of  Defense issued 
guidance pertaining to correction of military records requests 
resulting from the repeal of Title 10, Section 654, commonly 
known as "Don't Ask, Don't  Tell (DADT)".  “Effective September 
20, 2011, Service DRBs should normally grant requests to change 
the narrative reason for a discharge (the change should be 
"Secretarial Authority" (Separation program Designator Code 
(SPD) code JFF)), requests to re-characterize the discharge to 
Honorable, and/or requests to change the reentry code to an 
immediately-eligible-to-renter category (the new RE code should 
be 1J) when both of the following conditions are met:

	a.  The original discharge was based solely upon DADT or a 
similar policy in place prior to enactment of DADT. 

	b.  There were no aggravating factors in the record, such 
as misconduct.  Although each request must be evaluated on a 
case-by-case basis, the award of an honorable or general 
discharge should normally be considered to indicate the absence 
of aggravating factors.”

3.  Although the discharge was properly processed according to 
the applicable regulation, the applicant's discharge record 
indicates discharge was based solely on DADT or a similar policy 
and did not involve aggravating factors.

4.  They recommend the applicant's service characterization be 
corrected to reflect “honorable” and the narrative reason for 
separation be changed to “Secretarial Authority”, SPD code to 
“JFF”.  Additionally, at the time of the applicant's separation 
his reentry code should have been indicated on his DD Form 214, 
but for whatever reason it was not listed.  As mentioned above, 
the Secretary of Defense has issued guidance pertaining to re-
entry code changes for DADT.  After corresponding  with 
AFPC/DPSOA, they recommend a “1” re-entry code be added to the 
applicant's DD Form 214.  At the time of the applicant's 
discharge there were no two digit RE codes and a “1” is the 1J 
equivalent.

The complete AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit D.  

1.  AFPC/DPSOA states although not requested, their office 
addresses Re-entry (RE) codes involving separation under DADT or 
similar policy.  DPSOA further states there was no RE code found 
on the applicant’s DD Form 214 or in his records.  

2.  DADT guidance states requests to change the RE code to 1J 
should be granted for members separated under DADT unless there 
was misconduct.  However, the earliest guidance on RE codes they 
have is dated March 1954 and the equivalent of RE code 1J was 
“1”; there were no two digit RE codes at that time.  

3.  They defer to the OPR for the DD Form 214 to determine if an 
RE code should be added to the applicant’s form.  Based on 
available guidance, they believe the applicant’s RE code on his 
DD Form 214 should be listed as “2” if it is determined an RE 
code should have been listed.  

The complete AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS:  

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 8 March 2013, for review and comment within 30 days 
(Exhibit E).  To date, a response has not been received.  

_________________________________________________________________

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 injustice.  In light of the 
repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) and the applicant's 
record of performance, it would be appropriate to change the 
narrative reason to "Secretarial Authority."  In a memorandum, 
dated 20 September 2011, the Under Secretary of Defense 
published guidance that Service Discharge Review Boards should 
normally grant requests to change the narrative reason for 
discharge (the change should be to "Secretarial Authority") 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.  With regard to the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation 
regarding the applicant’s RE code, since no RE code is reflected 
on the applicant’s DD Form 214 that was issued in conjunction 
with his 1952 discharge, no action is required. 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 
23 February 1952, he was honorably discharged with a narrative 
reason for separation of “Secretarial Authority” and was 
furnished an Honorable Discharge certificate.  

________________________________________________________________

The following members of the Board considered this application 
in Executive Session on 11 July 2013, under the provisions of 
AFI 36-2603:

		, Panel Chair
      , Member
		, Member

The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-04612 was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 24 August 2012, w/atchs.  
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Records.  
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 18 December 2012.  
    Exhibit E.  Letter, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 24 January 2013  
    Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 March 2013.