RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           29 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050005810


      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. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Stanley Kelley                |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. LaVerne M. Douglas            |     |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, in effect, that he be provided copies of the
medical treatment records of his combat injury; that he be awarded the
Purple Heart (PH); that he be granted Prisoner of War (POW) status; that he
be awarded the Army Good Conduct Medal (AGCM); and that his records be
corrected to show he is “Native American”.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that the medical treatment records
documenting the treatment he received for combat related injuries are
missing from his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  He also claims
the medical treatment and surgery he received at a Mobile Army Surgical
Hospital (MASH) in Korea and in a hospital in Japan are also missing.  He
also contends that after being treated in a hospital for an eye injury, he
got lost returning to his unit and was captured by North Korean forces.  He
claims to have been held as a POW for four days, at which time the North
Koreans fled and left him behind.  He states he was then picked up by a
patrol from another unit and returned to his unit.

3.  The applicant also states that he was supposed to have his records
corrected to show he received the AGCM and Air Force Good Conduct Medal,
and he would also like his OMPF corrected to show he is Native American.
He states that when he was a member of the 72nd Tank Battalion, all combat
equipment and many files were turned over to the South Korean Army.  He
believes many of his files were lost in this turnover.  He claims that he
was recently told that part of his files appear to have been destroyed by a
fire in the Department of Defense records archives.  He concludes by
stating that he is totally disabled and requests his military record be
corrected before his death.

4.  The applicant provides the 18 documents listed on the enclosure list he
submits with his application in support of his request.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 7 January 1955, the date of his separation from the Army.
The application submitted in this case is dated 11 April 2005.

2.  Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552(b), provides that applications for
correction of military records must be filed within 3 years after discovery
of the alleged error or injustice.  This provision of law allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant’s record shows he was inducted into the Army and entered
active duty on 29 January 1953.  His Service Record (DD Form 230), which
documents his active duty service in the Army, from 29 January 1953 through

7 January 1955, shows his religious preference was “Christian” and his race
was “Caucasian”.

4.  Section 4 (Service Outside the Continental United States) of the
applicant’s DD Form 230 shows he served in Korea from 29 October 1953
through
20 December 1954.  During his tour in Korea, he was assigned to Company B,
72nd Tank Battalion, from 4 November 1953 through 11 September 1954.  He
was also assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Battery (HHB), 31st
Field Artillery Battalion, from 25 September through 16 December 1954.

5.  Section 8 (Wounds Received Through Enemy Action) of the applicant’s
DD Form 230 is blank and Section 9 (Medals, Decorations and Citations)
shows that during his active duty tenure, he earned the Korean Service
Medal (KSM), United Nations Service Medal (UNSM), and the National Defense
Service Medal (NDSM).  The PH and AGCM are not included in this list of
earned awards entered in Section 9.

6.  Section 14 (Remarks) of the applicant’s DD Form 230 contains no entry
regarding his capture by enemy forces or his POW status.  Section 17
(Indorsements) shows he received “Excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings
and favorable AGCM recommendations at each of his active duty assignments.


7.  On 24 November 1992, the Director of the National Personnel Records
Center (NPRC) in a response to a Congressional Inquiry concerning the
applicant’s military medical records, stated that the applicant’s Army and
Air Force medical records were sent to the Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) under claim number 18-746-631.  He suggested the applicant contact the
VA regional office to obtain copies of those medical records.

8.  On 7 January 1955, the applicant was honorably separated from the Army
after completing 1 year, 11 months, and 9 days of active military service.
The separation document (DD Form 214) he was issued shows he held the rank
of corporal at the time.  Item 12 (Description-Race) contains the entry
“Cau”.

9.  Item 27 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Commendations, Citations and
Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214
shows that during his active duty tenure, he earned the KSM, UNSM and NDSM.
Item 29 (Wounds Received as a Result of Action with Enemy Forces) contains
the entry “NONE”.  The applicant authenticated this document with his
signature in Item 48 (Signature of Person Being Separated).

10.  The documents provided by the applicant contain a VA Rating Decision
showing the applicant was granted service connection status for a bilateral
hearing loss, with a 0 percent disability rating.  The VA medical treatment
records indicate he was injured in Korea.  However, they fail to confirm
his hearing problems were attributable to a combat related wound or injury
that the applicant received as a direct result of, or caused by, enemy
action.

11.  The applicant also provides a letter from an Employment Assistance
Specialist, Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Fairbanks, Alaska, dated 17 March 1975.  This letter indicates the
applicant asked them to establish the fact he is of at least 1/4 Indian
blood.  The applicant claimed his mother was 1/2 Choctaw and his father was
1/2 Cherokee Indian.  This official claims he contacted the United States
Public Health Service Hospital in Behtel, Alaska on several occasions and
asked if the degree of the applicant’s Indian blood could be verified.

12.  Hospital officials informed this Bureau of Indian Affairs official
that they did not verify the content of the applicant’s Indian blood
because they had no reason to doubt the applicant was 1/4 degree Indian.
This official further indicated that since the applicant appeared to be
Caucasian, he felt sure the Public Service Hospital would not have admitted
him without verifying his Indian status as they were bound by law to
establish eligibility.  For that reason, they were confident the applicant
was Indian of at least the required 1/4 degree.

13.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) prescribes Army policy,
criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military
awards.  Paragraph 2-8 contains the regulatory guidance pertaining to
awarding the PH.  It states, in pertinent part, that the PH is awarded to
any member of an Armed Force who is wounded or killed in action.

14.  The awards regulation defines a wound as an injury to any part of the
body from an outside force or agent sustained under conditions defined by
this regulation.  In order to support awarding a member the PH, it is
necessary to establish that the wound, for which the award is being made,
required treatment
by a medical officer.  This treatment must be supported by records of
medical treatment for the wound or injury received in action and must have
been made a matter of official record.

15.  Chapter 4 of the awards regulation prescribes the policy for award of
the
AGCM.  It states, in pertinent part, that the AGCM is awarded to
individuals who distinguish themselves by their conduct, efficiency and
fidelity during a qualifying period of active duty enlisted service.  This
period is 3 years, except in those cases when the period for the first
award ends with the termination of a period of Federal military service, in
which case a period of more than 1 year is a qualifying period.  Although
there is no automatic entitlement to the AGCM, disqualification must be
justified.

16.  On 20 August 1999, the Department of Defense approved acceptance and
wear of the Korean War Service Medal (KWSM) to eligible veterans of the
Korean War, or their surviving next of kin.  Responsibility for
distribution of the KWSM was given to the Department of the Air Force.  In
order to apply, the applicant should submit a copy of his DD Form 214 to
the Awards and Decorations Section, Headquarters, Air Force Personnel
Center, 550 C Street West, Suite 12, Randolph Air Force Base, Texas 78150-
4714.  Once the KWSM has been authorized by the Department of the Air
Force, the applicant may apply to this Board to add this foreign award to
his DD Form 214.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s claim of entitlement to the AGCM was carefully
considered and found to have merit.  The evidence of record confirms the
applicant received “Excellent” conduct and efficiency ratings and favorable
consideration AGCM recommendations at each of his active duty assignments.


2.  Lacking any derogatory information or a formal disqualification from
any of the active duty unit commanders for which the applicant served, it
is concluded that he completed a period of qualifying honorable active duty
service that entitles him to receive the first award of the AGCM.
Therefore, it would be appropriate to award him the first award of the
AGCM, for his qualifying honorable active duty service from 29 January 1953
through 7 January 1955.

3.  The applicant’s request to have his military records changed to show
his race as “Native American” and the supporting letter from the Department
of the Interior was carefully considered.  However, the evidence of record
confirms he enlisted, served, and was separated with his race being
categorized as “Caucasian”.  The Army has an interest in maintaining the
accuracy of its records. The data and information contained in those
records should reflect the conditions and circumstances that existed at the
time the records were created.  While the applicant’s desire to have the
records changed to show he is a “Native American” is understood, there
appears to be no compelling reason to compromise the integrity of the
Army’s records to satisfy this request at this late date.

4.  The applicant’s request for copies of his medical records was also
carefully considered.  However, as confirmed by the Director of the NPRC in
1975, his medical records were forwarded to the VA in connection with his
claim.  The applicant has had a long standing relationship with the VA and
should be able to obtain copies of any military medical records still in
possession of the VA from that agency.

5.  The evidence of record and the VA medical records provided by the
applicant contain no indication that he was ever wounded or injured as a
result of enemy action, or that he was ever treated for a combat related
wound or injury by military medical personnel.  As a result, the regulatory
burden of proof necessary to support award of the PH has not been satisfied
in this case.

6.  The evidence of record is also void of any indication that he was ever
taken as a POW, or that he was ever placed in a POW status during his
active duty tenure.  As result, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis
to correct his record to show he was a POW at this time.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

___SK __  ___MHM_  __LMD__  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to
warrant a recommendation for partial relief and to excuse failure to timely
file.  As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army
records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Army
Good Conduct Medal, for his
qualifying period of honorable active duty service from 29 January 1953
through 7 January 1955; and by providing him a correction to his separation
document that includes this change.

2.  The Board further determined that the evidence presented is
insufficient to warrant a portion of the requested relief.  As a result,
the Board recommends denial of so much of the application that pertains to
award of the Purple Heart, granting Prisoner of War status, showing Native
American status, and providing military medical records.




            ____Stanley Kelley______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050005810                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/11/29                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1955/01/07                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 615-360-5                            |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |Grant Partial                           |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Schneider                           |
|ISSUES         1.  1021 |100.0000                                |
|2.  61                  |107.0015                                |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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