RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        15 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004281


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. John T. Meixell               |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Robert L. Duecaster           |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests reconsideration of his earlier request that his
discharge be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states the decision of the Board to deny his request to
upgrade his discharge is unacceptable.  The Board failed to recognize [or
address] the draft board's denial of his appeal not to be inducted.  The
incidents that occurred over the two years after the draft board's denial
were irrelevant to the Board's decision.  Also, the Board made a grossly
inaccurate statement in paragraph 7 of CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE.  He had
informed the Board in his application that his father left their family
when he was 9 years old.  His father never supplied any income to their
family from that time onwards.

3.  The applicant states he had noted his hands require surgery.  His
upgrade is needed to obtain Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) benefits.

4.  The applicant provides a Rhode Island Department of Human Services
Physical Examination Report dated 3 May 2005.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were
summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the
Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number
AR2004104604 on    9 December 2004.

2.  The applicant provided new evidence which will be considered by the
Board.

3.  The applicant was inducted into the Army, apparently after an
unsuccessful appeal of his induction, on 2 October 1967.

4.  On 24 April 1968, the applicant submitted a hardship discharge packet.
He noted in his packet he would be the sole support of his mother once his
sister married.  He had listed two other sisters, with 3 and 4 children,
respectively, who could not afford assistance.  He noted his father was
hospitalized.  Later documentation showed his father had been hospitalized
for 6 years for alcoholism.  On 27 May 1968, his request was not favorably
considered.  The disapproval noted that every reasonable effort had not
been made to alleviate the dependency condition and other members in the
family had a moral obligation to assist during the period of his military
service.

5.  On 2 July 1968, the applicant departed absent without leave (AWOL) and
returned to military control on 29 September 1968.

6.  In November 1968, the applicant again applied for a hardship discharge.
 His request was again disapproved on 30 December 1968.  The disapproval
stated in part:

      "Examination of application with supporting documentation does not
indicate that an undue and genuine dependency/hardship exists as a result
of a disability of applicant's father occurring after his entry into active
military service.  The condition of applicant's father existed prior to his
entry into active military service and the condition has not been
aggravated to such an extent as to necessitate care and support by the
applicant."


7.  The pertinent portion of paragraph 7 of CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE
in ABCMR Docket Number ARa2004104604 stated:

      "The denial indicated an examination of the application and the
supporting documentation did not indicate that an undue and genuine
dependency/hardship existed as a result of the disability of the
applicant's father, which occurred after the applicant's entry on active
duty, had not been aggravated to such an extent as to necessitate care and
support by the applicant."  (The underlined words/phrases are changes from
the wording in the disapproval document.)

8.  The applicant departed AWOL on 16 December 1968 and returned to
military control on 14 January 1969.  He departed AWOL again on 15 January
1969 and returned to military control on 9 March 1969.

9.  Action was taken to separate the applicant under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-212 by reason of frequent incidents of a discreditable
nature with military authorities.  On 10 June 1969, he was discharged
accordingly with an undesirable characterization of service.

10.  On 14 June 1974, after finding his discharge was proper and equitable,
the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's request for an
upgrade of his discharge.

11.  The applicant provided a document dated 3 May 2005 that showed he had
been diagnosed with severe Dupuytren Contracture (an abnormal thickening of
the tough tissue in the palm and fingers that can cause the fingers to
curl) of both hands and would require surgery.

12.  Army Regulation 635-212, in effect at the time, set forth the basic
authority for the separation of enlisted personnel for unfitness or
unsuitability.  The regulation provided, in pertinent part, that members
involved in frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or
military authorities were subject to separation for unfitness.  An
undesirable discharge was normally considered appropriate for members
separating under this provision.

13.  Army Regulation 635-200 provided the authority and general provisions
governing the separation of enlisted personnel prior to expiration term of
service. Chapter 6 provided that separation because of hardship would be
granted when all of the following circumstances existed:  (1) conditions
had arisen or had been aggravated to an excessive degree since entry on
active duty; (2) conditions were not of a temporary nature; (3) every
reasonable effort had been made by the enlisted person to alleviate the
hardship conditions without success; and (4) discharge or release from
active duty was the only readily available means of eliminating or
materially alleviating the hardship condition.

14.  The Selective Service System is an independent federal agency
operating with permanent authorization under the Military Selective Service
Act.  It is not part of the Department of Defense; however, it exists to
serve the emergency manpower needs of the military by conscripting
untrained manpower if directed by Congress and the President in a national
crisis.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contention the Board made a grossly inaccurate
statement     in paragraph 7 of CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE is noted.  The
Board did  not make that statement; the Record of Proceedings only recorded
what the      30 December 1968 disapproval of his request for hardship
discharge had stated. It is noted, however, that the Record of Proceedings
was not a completely accurate extract from the disapproval.  Though the
changes were few, they did change the meaning of the extract.

2.  The 30 December 1968 disapproval indicated the applicant had not met
the requirement that the hardship condition (i.e., his father's inability
to support the applicant's mother) had arisen or been excessively
aggravated after the applicant entered active duty.  The Record of
Proceedings implied the hardship condition (i.e., the inability of the
applicant's father to support the applicant's mother) arose after the
applicant entered active duty.

3.  The Army and the Department of Defense have no jurisdiction over the
operation of the Selective Service System.  That independent agency found
the applicant qualified for induction and the Army so inducted him.  The
[AWOL] incidents that occurred during the applicant's time in the Army were
the only issues relevant to the ABCMR's consideration of his request for an
upgraded discharge as the Board had no authority to determine he was not
qualified for induction.  Incidentally, if the applicant had never been
inducted he would not have been eligible for any veterans benefits.

4.  The Board does not grant relief solely for the purpose of enabling a
person to take advantage of DVA benefits.  Considering the applicant's
record of service, the reason for discharge and the characterization of his
service appear to have been warranted.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__sk____  __jtm___  __rld___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable
error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall
merits of this case are insufficient as a basis to amend the decision of
the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR2004104604 dated 9 December 2004




                                  __Stanley Kelley______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004281                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051115                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19690610                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-212                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |A51.00                                  |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]