MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION


         IN THE CASE OF:



         BOARD DATE: 25 JULY 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002070400

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

Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director
Ms. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor		Chairperson
Mr. Richard T. Dunbar		Member
Mr. Kenneth W. Lapin		Member

         The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date. In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

         The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

         The Board considered the following evidence:

         Exhibit A - Application for correction of military
records
         Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
         advisory opinion, if any)

---

APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his under other than honorable conditions discharge be upgraded to a general discharge.

APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that he was subjected to prejudice and discrimination while stationed in Korea. He notes that he had to work late evening hours and was supposed to rest during the daytime. However, when he attempted to explain this to the “detail sergeant” he was told he was in the Army and was continually picked up “over and over for such details.” He also notes that his father was ill, which created a lot of “anguish” for him. He notes he was unable to assist his family financially and so “decided to remain AWOL [absent without leave] until [he] voluntarily turned [himself] in.” The applicant also states that he was young, immature and inexperienced, and that his father’s situation “clouded” his decision process. He states that he served with dignity, had to take care of his father’s medical condition at the time, and is still a good citizen.

In support of his request he submits a copy of a statement indicating he has had no problems with law enforcement, five letters of support attesting to his good character, and copies of his Army separation packet and Army Discharge Review Board decision. He also submits a self authored, undated, statement describing his tour of duty in Korea, and how he came to decide to stay away from the barracks because he felt “aggravated with the situation” associated with having to work evenings and then be assigned “details” during the day. He indicated that he started “going to [the] Arts and Crafts Center to evade the sergeant and the problem.” He notes that the sergeant pursued him at the center and so he decided to “go to the village to stop the situation with the sergeant.” Ultimately the applicant met a Korean woman and after escorting her home he was assaulted by three “guys.” He states that he “escaped” and hid in the woods until daytime when he could return to the base. He states following that situation he was scared to go out. Subsequently he was notified of his father’s condition and because of the problems at work he became depressed. He was told to “go home to relax.” The applicant stated that he was authorized leave to return to Puerto Rico where he requested a compassionate reassignment. When that request was denied he elected to “stay AWOL” because of his father’s situation. He states that after the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] interviewed him, he surrendered to military authorities at Fort Buchanan. When given the choice between an administrative discharge, which, he states he was told, would result in a general discharge after 10 years or a court-martial, he elected to “go along with” his commander’s recommendation and choose the discharge.







EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:

He entered active duty on 19 November 1973, at the age of 18, with 12 years of formal education. He successfully completed basic and advanced individual training and on 31 March 1974 arrived in Korea. He was assigned as an assistant postal clerk with the 2^nd Infantry Division.

Documents in available records indicate the applicant was attached to Fort Buchanan, Puerto Rico in May 1974. He applied for a compassionate reassignment and a hardship discharge. Both requests were denied.

The reassignment was denied when it was determined that the “father’s health problems presented do not constitute a basis for favorable consideration for a compassionate reassignment.” The denial message noted that if complications developed, and the soldier’s presence was required, he could “return on emergency leave,” or if his father’s medical condition became more severe, and it could be supported by proper documentation, the applicant could reapply for reassignment. His request for discharge was denied when it was “determined that information submitted [was] not sufficient to warrant favorable consideration….” The applicant was advised that he could reapply if “he has additional evidence to submit.”

The applicant was released from attachment effective 18 July 1974 and directed to return to his unit in Korea not later than 25 July 1974. On 24 July 1974 the applicant’s unit commander authorized the applicant additional excess leave days, without pay. His new reporting date to return to Korea was established as
24 August 1974.

The applicant failed to return to Korea and he was reported as AWOL. His name was dropped from the rolls of the Army on 23 September 1974. The applicant surrendered to military authorities at Fort Buchanan on 22 May 1975.

When charges were preferred, the applicant consulted with counsel and voluntarily requested discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. His request acknowledged he understood the nature and consequences of the under other than honorable conditions discharge which he might receive. He indicated he understood he could be denied some or all veterans' benefits as a result of his discharge and that he may be deprived of rights and benefits as a veteran under both Federal and State law.






On 23 June 1975 the applicant was discharged under other than honorable conditions and issued an undesirable discharge certificate. At the time of the applicant's separation he had 10 months and 9 days of creditable active service and more than 250 days of lost time. He had served in Korea less than 60 days.

On 22 May 1979 the Army Discharge Review Board unanimously denied the applicant’s petition to upgrade his discharge.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Chapter 10 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, that a member who has committed an offense or offenses for which the authorized punishment includes a punitive discharge may at any time after the charges have been preferred, submit a request for discharge for the good of the service in lieu of trial by court-martial. A discharge under other than honorable conditions is normally considered appropriate.

DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of his request. The Board notes that the Army and the applicant's commander attempted to provide as much help as was possible to the applicant under the circumstances, including extending his leave following denial of his compassionate reassignment and hardship discharge.

2. Additionally, the Board notes the applicant has provided no evidence that he was subjected to prejudice or discrimination while in Korea which would somehow justify or excuse his period of AWOL.

3. 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.

4. While the applicant’s contention that he, in effect, became a productive member of society and that he served with dignity has been noted, it does not outweigh the seriousness of his conduct while in the military and does not provide an adequate basis upon which the Board would grant relief.






5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________ ________ ________ GRANT

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__RVO__ __RTD __ __KWL__ DENY APPLICATION

                  Carl W. S. Chun
                  Director, Army Board for Correction
of Military Records

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002070400
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	20020725
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.