RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        14 September 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050016928


      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             |
|     |Mr. G. E. Vandenberg              |     |Analyst              |


      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Ms. Rose M. Lys                   |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Richard O. Murphy             |     |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 that his undesirable discharge (UD) be upgraded.

2.  The applicant states that it has been 40 years and he has been a
responsible tax paying member of society and his community.  He has changed
his life and would like to have his records reflect this change.

3.  In his personal statement he requests that his discharge be upgraded
based on his successes as a father, employee, and a member of society.  He
states that despite the stigma of the UD he was able to complete college
and has had a 35 year career.  He admits to drug and alcohol problems at
the end of his military service and for a number of years thereafter.  He
entered a rehabilitation program in February 1979 and has been sober for
more than 26 years.  He is active in the community as a speaker on drugs
and alcohol.

4.  The applicant provides a personal statement and a curriculum vita.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant entered active duty on 15 December 1959 and reenlisted on
19 June 1963.  He was promoted to specialist five (E-5) on 23 December
1963.

2.  The applicant received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15 of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) as noted below:

      a.  8 May 1964, for absenting himself from his place of duty;

      b.  9 October 1964, for failure to go to his appointed place of duty;


      c.  25 November 1964, for failure to go to his appointed place of
duty; and

      d.  1 December 1964, for failure to go to his appointed place of
duty.

3.  On 16 March 1966, a special court-martial found the applicant guilty of
AWOL (absence without leave) for the periods 19 July 1965 to 30 August 1965
and 3 to 19 September 1965.  He was sentenced to confinement for three
months, forfeiture of $56.00 pay per month for six months, and reduction to
the lowest enlisted grade (E-1).  The confinement portion of the sentence
was suspended for three months and was to be remitted unless sooner
vacated.

4.  The applicant was AWOL from 14 through 18 May 1966 and from 19 May 1966
through 29 June 1966.  He escaped from confinement on 8 July 1966.

5.  On 20 September 1966 a general court-martial found the applicant guilty
of the above violations.  He was sentenced to total forfeiture of all pay
and allowances, confinement for 18 months, and a dishonorable discharge
(DD).

6.  The convening authority approved the findings and sentence on 24
October 1966 and, except for the DD, ordered the sentence executed.

7.  On 31 January 1967 the Army Board of Review, Office of the Judge
Advocate General, affirmed the findings of guilty and the sentence.

8.  On 8 March 1967 the Army Clemency and Parole Board denied the
applicant's requests for restoration to duty, parole, and clemency.  The
supporting documentation indicates that, in addition to the offenses that
led to his court-martial, the applicant had also been arrested and
convicted six times by civilian authorities.  It was recommended that the
board reconsider the application on 1 July 1967.

9.  On 11 April 1967, the United States Court of Military Appeals denied
the applicant’s request for review.

10.  The applicant was discharged on 15 May 1967 with a DD.  However, the
Department of Defense (DD) Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States
Report of Transfer or Discharge) issued at that time is now marked with a
large X and stamped VOID.

11.  During a subsequent Army Clemency and Parole Board review, the
applicant withdrew his request for restoration due to financial concerns.
The Clemency Board denied restoration to duty but did substitute an
undesirable discharge (UD) for the DD previously executed and remitted the
unexecuted portion of his confinement.

12.  On 18 August 1967, the Office of The Adjutant General directed that
the unexecuted portion of the applicant's sentence to confinement be
remitted and that an UD be substituted for the DD executed pursuant to the
original court-martial orders.

13.  On 21 December 1981 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the
applicant's request for upgrade of his UD.

14.  The record does not contain a copy of the revised DD Form 214 or the
UD certificate.  It does contain notification to both the Department of
Veterans Affairs and the Social Security Administration that the applicant
received a dishonorable discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant was court-martialed for repeated incidents of AWOL and
escaping from confinement.

2.  The available documentation does not include any indication that the
applicant's command was made aware of any drug or alcohol problems or
dependency.  The service medical records do not indicate any treatment for
either drug or alcohol related problems.

3.  Furthermore, intoxication does not excuse misconduct.  For example,
drunk drivers are held legally responsible for the results of their
behavior even though they are shown to be alcoholic.

4.  The applicant was granted significant clemency and an upgrade of his
discharge by the Clemency Board in 1967.

5.  The applicant’s post-service good citizenship, educational, and career
accomplishments, reported successful rehabilitation and 27 years of
sobriety are noted but are not so meritorious as to outweigh the
seriousness of the charges that led to his discharge.

6.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must
show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily
appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to
submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

7.  As a result of the lack of inclusion of the revised documentation,
erroneous information as to the type of discharge the applicant received
has been forwarded to the VA and SSA.  These administrative errors should
be corrected.

8.  Correction of the above noted administrative errors do not require
action by the Board.  Therefore, administrative correction of the
applicant's records will be accomplished by the Case Management Support
Division (CMSD), St. Louis, Missouri, as outlined by the Board in paragraph
2 of the BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION section below.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

_ROM___  _RML___  __ENA __  DENY APPLICATION


BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  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 for correction of the
records of the individual concerned.

2.  The Board determined that administrative errors in the records of the
individual should be corrected.  Therefore, the Board requests that the
CMSD-St. Louis administratively correct the records of the individual
concerned by reissuing and including in the official record a revised DD
Form 214 for the period of service from 19 June 1963 through 15 May 1967
reflecting an undesirable discharge.




                                  __     Eric N. Andersen_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON


                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050016928                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060914                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |UD,                                     |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |144                                     |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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