RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2016-03164

	COUNSEL: NONE

	HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  His narrative reason for separation (Homosexuality - Acts) be removed.

2.  His Reentry (RE) code of 2B (Involuntarily separated under AFR 39-10 with a general or under other than honorable conditions discharge) be changed.

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It is no longer against Air Force regulations to be homosexual in the military.  His narrative reason for separation is unjust.  His sexuality should not be relevant to any potential employer or anyone else needing to view his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.  The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 9 Apr 91, the applicant was notified of his commander’s intent to recommend that he be discharged from the Air Force under the provisions of AFR 39-10 for homosexual acts.  

On 8 May 91, the discharge action was found legally sufficient, and the discharge authority approved the recommendation for a general (under honorable conditions) discharge on 13 May 91.

The applicant’s DD Form 214 reflects on 16 May 91, he received an honorable discharge. 

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)”.  An excerpt from the aforementioned guidance is provided below:

“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: (1) the original discharge was based solely upon 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 discharge should normally be considered to indicate the absence of aggravating factors.”

For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibits C through E.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DP2SSM recommends granting the applicant’s request to change his RE code.  On 10 Sep 11, the Under Secretary of Defense issued guidance to repeal DADT policy.  The guidance stated requests to change the RE code to 1J--(Eligible to reenlist, but elects separation) should be granted for members separated under DADT or similar policy that did not involve aggravating factors.  The applicant’s discharge processing was based solely on the homosexual policy at that time and did not involve any aggravating factors.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

AFPC/DP2STM recommends granting the application.  Although the discharge was properly processed according to the applicable regulation at the time, it was based solely on DADT.  The applicant did receive nonjudicial punishment for reporting late to work, however, it was not used as a basis for discharge.  Furthermore, the applicant was given a general (under honorable conditions) service characterization.  Although, there is no evidence of an upgrade to this discharge in his documentation, recommend the applicant’s discharge be characterized as honorable given the reason for discharge was based solely on DADT.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit D.

AFPC/JA recommends granting the application.  The applicant did have misconduct during his service; however, it was not part of the basis for discharge.  The misconduct, however, did factor into the squadron commander recommending to the separation authority to approve a general vice an honorable service characterization.  The separation authority concurred with that recommendation and approved a general service characterization.  With no other evidence in the record to indicate applicant’s service characterization was upgraded subsequent to the separation authority’s approval, it appears to be a clerical error that the applicant’s DD Form 214 states an honorable service characterization.  AFPC/JA does not recommend correcting the service characterization error.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit E.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent copies of the Air Force evaluations to the applicant on 16 Feb 17 for comment (Exhibit F), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The application was not timely filed.

2.  The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

3.  After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is the victim of an error and injustice.  In light of the repeal of DADT and the applicant's record of performance, it would be appropriate to change the applicant’s narrative reason for separation, corresponding separation program designator (SPD) code and reentry code.  The Board notes the applicant’s DD Form 214 already reflects his service characterization as honorable.  Therefore, the Board recommends the applicant’s records be corrected to the extent indicated below.

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 16 May 1991, he was discharged with a narrative reason for separation of “Secretarial Authority,” a separation program designator code of “JFF” and a reentry code of “1J.”

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-03164 in Executive Session on 11 Apr 18:

, Panel Chair
, Panel Member
, Panel Member

All members voted to correct the record.  The panel considered the following:

Exhibit A: Applicant’s application, DD Form 149, dated 12 Jul 16, w/atch.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records.
Exhibit C: Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2STM, dated 28 Feb 18.
Exhibit D: Advisory opinion, AFPC/DP2SSM, dated 5 Mar 18.
Exhibit E: Advisory opinion, AFPC/JA, dated 7 Mar 18.
Exhibit F: Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 9 Mar 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.