RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00438 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “HRB” (homosexual conduct-statement) and Reenlistment Eligibility (RE) code of “2C” (Involuntarily separated with an honorable discharge) be changed to allow her to rejoin the Air Force. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was discharged solely on the basis of homosexual conduct and her case meets the criteria necessary to merit an upgrade under the current policy related to the repeal of the law commonly known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT). The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: 09 Sep 03, the applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force. On 24 Jun 10, the applicant was furnished an honorable_ discharge and was credited with 6 years, 9 months and 16 days of active service. On 10 Sep 11, 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). In a memorandum, dated 20 Sep 11, 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”), requests to re-characterize the discharge to honorable, and/or request a change to the RE code to an immediately-eligible-to-reenter category 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 each request must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis, the award of an honorable or general (under honorable conditions) discharge should normally be considered to indicate the absence of aggravating factors. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the memoranda prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are included at Exhibits C and D. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSOR recommends granting relief, indicating sufficient evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of injustice. The applicant’s discharge was based solely on DADT and did not involve aggravating factors. The applicant freely and voluntarily informed her commander that she was a homosexual and subsequently submitted a letter to her commander asking to be discharged from the Air Force. Due to the absence of any other aggravating factors, the applicant was furnished an honorable_ discharge. Although the discharge was properly processed according to the applicable regulation, because the discharge was based solely on DADT, the board should approve the narrative reason for separation change to reflect “Secretarial Authority” and SPD code change to reflect “JFF.” A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSOA recommends granting relief, indicating sufficient evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice. Based on 10 Sep 11 guidance repealing DADT, requests to change RE code to 1J should be granted for members separated under DADT or similar policy that did not involve aggravating factors. Therefore, the board should direct the applicant’s RE code be changed to a 1J. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSOA evaluation is at Exhibit D. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 28 Jul 14 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit E). As of this date, no response has been received by this office. ? THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice warranting relief. The applicant is requesting her separation program designator (SPD) and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes be changed based on the repeal of the law known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT). No evidence has been presented which would lead us to believe her discharge was improper or contrary to the directive under which it was effected at the time of her separation. However, in light of the repeal of DADT and the applicant’s record of performance, it would be appropriate to correct her narrative reason for separation, separation program designator (SPD) and reenlistment eligibility (RE) codes. In a memorandum, dated 20 Sep 11, the Under Secretary of Defense published guidance that Service Discharge Review Boards should normally grant requests to change the character of service, narrative reason for separation, SPD, and RE codes if 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. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 24 June 2010, the applicant was issued a narrative reason for separation of “Secretarial Authority,” Separation Program Designator (SPD) code of “JFF,” and Reentry (RE) Code of “1J” in conjunction with her Honorable discharge. The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00438 in Executive Session on 21 Nov 14 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 28 Jan 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOR, dated 18 Feb 14. Exhibit D. Memorandum, AFPC/DPSOA, dated 10 Mar 14. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14.