PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:            15 June 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028850

	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. Deborah L. Brantley		Senior Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Orville W. Troesch, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Kathleen a. Newman		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, that item 28 (most significant duty assignment) be corrected to reflect Company D, 5th Regimental Combat Team and that his records be corrected to reflect award of a Presidential Unit Citation, two Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citations, and the United Nations Service Medal.  He states he was not asked what his “most significant duty assignment” was at the time of his release from active duty and just recently found out that he was entitled to the additional awards.  In particular he states that he “took two squads of [his] MG section to reinforce the 1st  section [of the Machine Gun (MG) Platoon] on O/P [out-post] Harry….”  He notes that he was assigned as a section leader for the 2nd section, Machine Gun Platoon and provides a copy of his Machine Gun Platoon personnel roster. 

3.  While it appears that the applicant’s military records may have been lost or destroyed during the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center in St. Louis, information reconstructed from documents provided by the applicant, indicates he entered active duty on 30 November 1951 and served for nearly 12 months in Korea.  He was wounded as a result of hostile action on 12 June 1953 and awarded the Purple Heart.  Documents provided by the applicant indicate he was assigned to the 2nd Section of the Machine Gun Platoon, Company D, 5th Regimental Combat Team at the time he was wounded in action on 12 June 1953.

4.  The Armistice agreement ending the Korean War was signed on 27 July 1953.

5.  The applicant’s DD Form 214, issued at the time of his release from active duty on 29 November 1953 indicates he had been awarded the Korean Service Medal with 3 bronze service stars denoting participation in three designated campaign periods.  Item 28 (most significant duty assignment) indicates he was assigned to Company M, 123rd Infantry Regiment, Fort Lewis, Washington at the time he was released from active duty.  The single remaining document from his original military personnel file confirms the applicant was assigned to the 123rd Infantry Regiment at the time he was released from active duty.

6.  Special Regulation 615-360-1, which established the policies and provisions for the preparation of separation documents during the period in question states that item 28 (most significant duty assignment) will reflect “the last unit, or similar element, to which assigned for duty rather than the element of which individual was a part while moving to a separation point.  Assignments to units for the purpose of transfer from an oversea command to the United States are considered part of the movement to a separation point.”

7.  A review of Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 (Unit Citation and Campaign Participation Credit Register) notes the applicant’s unit (5th Regimental Combat Team) was credited with participating in three designated campaigns during the applicant’s period of assignment (Korean Summer-Fall/520301-521130, Third Korean Winter/521201-530430 and Korean Summer/530501-530727).  The unit was also awarded two Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citations during his tenure with the organization.

8.  Department of the Army Pamphlet 672-1 also notes that the 1st Section, MG Platoon, Company D, 5th Regimental Combat Team was awarded a Distinguished Unit Citation for action on 12 June 1953.  In 1966 the Distinguished Unit Citation was redesignated the Presidential Unit Citation.

9.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 states that the United Nations Service Medal was established in 1950 and awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States dispatched to Korea or adjacent areas for service on behalf of the United Nations in the action in Korea.  Personnel awarded the Korean Service Medal automatically establish eligibility for the United Nations Service Medal.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence confirms the applicant is entitled to the United Nations Service Medal and two awards of the Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation based on his service in Korea and assignment to the 5th Regimental Combat Team.  His records should be corrected accordingly.

2.  While the evidence confirms that the 1st Section of the MG Platoon of the applicant’s unit was awarded a Presidential Unit Citation, formerly known as the Distinguished Unit Citation, the evidence indicates the applicant was assigned the 2nd Section and as such is not entitled to the award.  The fact that the applicant’s section may have been dispatched to assist the 1st Section, as the applicant contends, does not establish entitlement to that unit award.

3.  The title of Item 28 (most significant duty assignment) on the 1953 version of the DD Form 214 is misleading and was, as established in the governing regulation, only intended to record the last unit, or similar element, to which an individual was assigned for duty prior to separation.  The applicant’s recollection that he was not asked about the entry at the time of his release from active duty in 1953 is accurate as his desire to have a “favorite” unit or one he considered as his “most significant duty assignment” would not have been the basis for the entry in item 28.  In view of the fact that several months elapsed between the date the armistice was signed and the date the applicant was released from active duty it is reasonable to conclude that he was assigned to the 123rd Infantry Regiment for duty and not merely for the purpose of moving to a separation point.  The applicant has not provided any evidence that would dispute this conclusion.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned is entitled to the United Nations Service Medal and two Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citations based on his service in Korea during the Korean War.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

___owt__  ___kan__  ___mvt__  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028850	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20000615	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR . . . . .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	Grant	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	110.00	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.