RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        7 SEPTEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050017222


      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             |
|     |Ms. Gale J. Thomas                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Susan Powers                  |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. David Haasenritter            |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Jonathan Rost                 |     |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 records be corrected by upgrading his
discharge to honorable.

2.  The applicant states that after encountering domestic problems he began
to live with a friend who asked him to sell drugs for him.  He ended up
selling drugs to DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) and CID (Criminal
Investigation Division) agents.  His arrest led to his being discharged
from the Army.  He worked with the DEA and CID to turn State's evidence and
helped convict numerous others.  At his trial the judge deemed that the
work he had performed was productive enough to suspend his prison term and
immediately released him under probation.

3.  The applicant further states that he has been a trustworthy and
upstanding citizen since his encounter with drugs in 1979, and has
submitted documents which reflect that he had no history of criminal
activity since 1979.  He is a devout Christian, has served as a member of
the PTA for his children, and has raised five children, none of which have
been involved with drugs.  He has been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress
disorder (PTSD) and depressions, both of which have been treated by the
Department of Veterans Affairs.

4.  The applicant provides copies of DD Form 214 (Report of Separation from
Active Duty); documents from the United States District Court; a letter of
reference from a U.S Probation Officer; and a criminal records check by the
Corpus Christi, Texas Office of the Sheriff, in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant reenlisted in the Regular Army on 24 October 1975, for a
period of 6 years.  He served in Germany from October 1975 to December
1975.

2.  On 28 September 1978, the applicant was convicted by the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Texas, of possessing, with
intent to distribute, approximately 229.2 grams of heroin.  He was
sentenced to imprisonment of twelve years and 5 years special parole.  The
sentence was suspended and the defendant was placed on probation with
supervision for a period of 3 years, to work undercover for the DEA.

3.  On 7 November 1978, the applicant's unit commander recommended his
elimination from the Army, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
Chapter 14, due to misconduct (civil conviction).
4.  The applicant's intermediate and senior commanders recommended approval
of his discharge.

5.  On 8 February 1979, the applicant, after consulting with legal counsel,
acknowledged that he understood the basis for his commander's actions, and
waived consideration of his case by a board of officers, waived
representation by legal counsel and elected not to submit a statement in
his own behalf.  He acknowledged that he understood the effects of
receiving an under other than honorable conditions characterization.  He
also acknowledged that he understood that he may be deprived of many or all
Army benefits and that he may be ineligible for many or all benefits
administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs, and that he may be
deprived of his rights and benefits as a Veteran under both Federal and
State law.

6.  On 2 March 1979, the appropriate separation authority approved the
applicant's discharge, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,
Chapter 14, for civil court conviction, and directed his reduction to the
lowest enlisted grade and the issuance of an under other than honorable
conditions discharge.

7.  On 24 April 1979, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of
Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 14, under other than honorable conditions.

8.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the
separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 14, in effect at the time,
established policy and prescribed procedures for separating members for
misconduct.  Specific categories included minor disciplinary infractions, a
pattern of misconduct, commission of a serious offense, conviction by civil
authorities, and desertion or absence without leave.  Action was taken to
separate a member for misconduct when it was clearly established that
rehabilitation was impractical or was unlikely to succeed.  A discharge
under other than honorable conditions was normally appropriate for a
Soldier discharged under this chapter.

9.  On 8 May 1992 the Army Discharge Review Board denied the applicant's
petition to upgrade his discharge.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in
compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural
errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2.  The type of discharge directed and the reasons therefore were
appropriate considering all the facts of the case.  There is no basis for
upgrading the applicant's characterization of service.

3.  The applicant's contention that he has been an upstanding and law
abiding citizen is insufficient to grant the relief requested.

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

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___SP __  ___DH  __  ___JR __  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that 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.




                                  ______Susan Powers________
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050017222                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060907                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)    |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR . . . . .                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.       |110.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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