On October 15, members of the Michigan State chapter of Students for a Democratic Society and some supporters joined in the national day of protest by sitting-in at the Ann Arbor office of the Selective Service System. Thirty-nine people were arrested.

Last week, Raymond Luzzana, one of those arrested received a reclassification and a notice of delinquency from the Detroit draft board. The letter notified him that he had violated section 12A of the Universal Military Training and Manpower Act of 1948, which makes it a felony for anyone to hinder its operation.

Mr. Luzzana had sat-in at the state's selective service headquarters and refused to leave. Therefore, he had hindered the administration of the Selective Service Act. Therefore he was delinquent and should be placed at the top of the draft list.

Nor was he the first to receive notice of reclassification on these grounds: earlier in the month, three other protesters--another from Detroit and two from Royal Oak, Mich.--were also classified 1A. And more letters may be in the mail.

The man behind the letters is Col. Arthur A. Holmes, State Director of the Selective Service System. Immediately after the demonstration Holmes called for a "review" of the files of the 26 demonstrators resident in Michigan.

Into each file went a photocopy of the October 15 charges, along with a letter to each of their local draft boards. "We called attention to the new and added information and asked them to review each case on the basis of the information in the file," Holmes was quoted in the New York Times. Also enclosed were individual recommendations suggesting whether or not to reclassify each registrant.

What inspired Holmes to ask these cases be reviewed? "Student deferments are given in the national interest in order to maintain the educational level of this country. The Ann Arbor sit-in did not contribute to that," explains Holmes.

However, Holmes had absolutely no legal justification for his action. The actual charges on which the draft boards have based their decisions are still under appeal.

But the main objection to the conduct of Holmes and the draft boards involved is that it plainly perverts the purpose of the Draft Law. Title 12A has traditionally applied only to delinquency in failing to register and be available for the draft. In addition, as national selective service officials continue to reiterate, conscription is not a punishment and the United States Army is not a patriotism school for Vietnam protesters.

All four students have appealed their boards' ruling. The National Selective Service office should clarify the intent of the law to the individual boards and suggest the rulings be reversed.

Holmes complains that people accuse him of being a Hitler, Obviously, he is not: he is only an administrator who has overstepped his function. This case should stand to all local draft boards as an example to be avoided.