RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        7 NOVEMBER 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20060000348


      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:

|     |Mr. Patrick McGann                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Richard Sayre                 |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. David Haasenritter            |     |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, and by changing the reason for his discharge, his
Reentry (RE) Code, and his Separation Designator Number (SPN) on his DD
Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or
Discharge).

2.  The applicant states that he had a number of high stress situations in
a short period of time.  Many of his friends were killed in a plane crash
in the Bering Straights, his best friend and several members of his family
died in an automobile accident, and his company commander died in an
earthquake.  His parents were divorced leaving his mother with three small
children and no help, so he sent most of his finances home to help his
family.  He became extremely depressed and asked to talk to a counselor,
but got no help.  He became frustrated and began drinking.  He tried to
apply for a hardship discharge but was given no answer and no help.  He was
18 years of age at the time, and feels if he had gotten some help or
someone to talk to, he may have been able to deal with the situations
better.


3.  The applicant further states that he knows he made some mistakes, but
believes he has done the best he can to be a good citizen.  He highly
supports his community, our troops and the country.  He works on the
veterans committee for the Veterans Pow Wow, which honors all veterans.  He
also works with the Youth Prison, Oregon Youth Authorities, which has given
him a real opportunity to give what many of us never receive, love and
understanding.  Overall, he has done his best to be a good citizen and do
what he can for his community and his country.  It has been very difficult
to go through life paying for some rough circumstances and decisions, and
would appreciate any support in changing his discharge, and will continue
to do his best no matter what decision is made in his case.

4.  The applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 214, letters of support,
and certificates of appreciation, in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 20 April 1962, for a
period of      3 years.

2.  Between September 1964 and December 1964, the applicant received six
nonjudicial punishments under the provisions of Article 15, Uniform Code of
Military Justice, for being drunk and disorderly; being absent without
leave (AWOL) on three occasions from 25 September 1964 to 30 September
1964,
30 November 1964 to 2 December 1964 and from 25 December 1964 to
26 December 1964; for breaking restriction on two occasions; and for being
drunk in a public place.  His punishments included reduction, restrictions,
extra duty, forfeitures of pay, and correctional custody.

3.  On 3 December 1964, the applicant’s commander recommended his
elimination from the Service under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-
208 because of frequent incidents of a discreditable nature with civil and
military authorities, with an undesirable discharge.  His commander’s
actions were based on the applicant not responding to counseling or
corrective actions, his being a harmful influence on others of the
organization, his repeatedly being apprehended by civil authorizes for
being drunk in public places, vagrancy, carrying a concealed weapon, and
having a minor on the premises.  His commander stated that the applicant
had no desire to successfully complete his military service, and that
numerous counseling sessions failed to rehabilitate him. The applicant’s
conduct and efficiency from 24 August 1962 to 1 October 1963 had been rated
as excellent; however, his latest ratings were unsatisfactory.

4.  On 10 December 1964, after consulting with legal counsel, the applicant
acknowledged that he understood the effects of receiving an under other
than honorable conditions discharge.  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 Veterans
Administration, and that he may be deprived of his rights and benefits as a
Veteran under both Federal and State law.

5.  On 14 December 1964, his intermediate commander recommended approval of
the applicant’s discharge, with the issuance of an undesirable discharge.


6.  On 24 December 1964, his senior commander recommended approval of the
applicant’s discharge and the issuance of an undesirable discharge.

7.  On 5 January 1965, the appropriate separation authority approved his
discharge, and directed his separation under the provisions of Army
Regulation 635-208, with an undesirable discharge.

8.  On 5 February 1965, the applicant was discharged under Army Regulation
635-208, with an Undesirable Discharge Certificate, characterized as under
other than honorable conditions.  His DD Form 214 indicates he had 2 years,
4 months, and 1 day of creditable service and 46 days of lost time, and was
assigned RE codes of 3 and 3B, and SPN 28B.

9.  On 7 August 1968, the Army Discharge Review Board denied the
applicant's petition to upgrade his discharge.

10.  Army Regulation 635-208, in effect at the time, provided the authority
for discharging enlisted personnel for unfitness.  Separation action was to
be taken when the commander determined that the best interest of the
service would be served by eliminating the individual concerned and
reasonable attempts to rehabilitate or develop the individual to be a
satisfactory Soldier were unlikely to succeed.  Unfitness included frequent
incidents of a discreditable nature with military or civil authorities and
an established pattern of shirking.  An undesirable discharge was normally
considered appropriate.

11.  Army Regulation 635-200 also states that an honorable discharge is a
separation with honor.  The honorable characterization is appropriate when
the quality of the Soldier’s service generally has met the standards of
acceptable conduct and performance of duty for Army personnel, or is
otherwise so meritorious that any other characterization would be clearly
inappropriate.

12.  Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release
from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their
service records or the reason for discharge.  Army Regulation 601-210
covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and
processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3
of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service
applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE
codes, including RA RE codes.

13.  RE-3 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service, but
the disqualification is waivable.  Certain persons who have received
nonjudicial punishment are so disqualified, as are persons with a bar to
reenlistment.

14.  Army Regulation 601-210 advises that RE codes may be changed only if
they are determined to be administratively incorrect and that there is no
requirement to change a RE code in order to qualify for enlistment

15.  Army Regulation 635-5 states that SPN codes identify reasons for, and
types of separation from active duty.  The primary purpose of SPN codes is
to provide statistical accounting of reasons for separation.  They are
intended exclusively for the internal use of DOD and the military services
to assist in the collection and
analysis of separation data.  It notes that SPN “28B” is the appropriate
SPN code for individuals involuntarily discharged for unfitness, frequent
involvement in incidents of a discreditable nature with civil or military
authorities.

16.  The applicant submits letters of support from his mother, chaplain,
and other friends and associates attesting to his excellent character, good
work ethics and his enormous help to his community.  He also provides
certificates of appreciation from the Multicultural Overnight Camp for
2002, 2003, and 2004.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The discharge proceedings were conducted in accordance with law and
regulations applicable at the time.  The type of discharge directed and the
reasons therefore were appropriate considering the facts of the case.

2.  Evidence confirms that the applicant’s RE code was assigned based on
his involuntarily separation under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-
208, for unfitness.  He received the appropriate RE code associated with
his discharge.

3.  The applicant was assigned the appropriate SPN based on the authority
and reason for his separation, and there is no justification for granting
the relief requested.

4.  The applicant's post-service conduct is commendable; however, it does
not warrant upgrading his discharge.

5.  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

___PM __  __RS ___  ___DH __  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.




                                  _____Patrick McGann_______
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20060000348                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20061107                                |
|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]