ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDING IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 1 April 2022 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20210017697 APPLICANT AND COUNSEL REQUESTS: In effect, the ABCMR creates a DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) with the following information: * block 12(f): 0 years, 7 months, 22 days * block 13: Purple Heart; Combat Infantryman Badge; Parachutist Badge; and any additional unit or individual awards to which he is entitled based on his period of service in the Republic of Korea and the units to which he was assigned, these awards include but are not limited to Korean War Service Medal; Korean Service Medal, and National Defense Service Medal * block 14: update to include Infantry Basic School, Fort Knox, KY, 1950; Airborne School, Fort Benning, GA, 1951 * block 18: update to include deployed to Korea from 24 March 1952 to 14 November 1952 * block 24: change to under honorable conditions (general) * block 25: change to Army Regulation (AR) 635-200, paragraph 5-3 (the separation authority for Secretarial Plenary Authority) or in the alternative, AR 635-200, paragraph 14-12c (the separation authority for commission of a serious offense * block 26: JFF or another code commensurate with a Secretarial Plenary Authority separation * block 27: Change to RE-1, or in the alternative RE-2 * remove “Neg” or “Negroid” throughout his official military personnel file (OMPF) and service treatment records (STR) * remove any reference to a “cowardly conduct” conviction from his OMPF * personal appearance before the Board APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Counsel’s Letter, petition, and Brief * Table of Contents * Exhibit 1: Affidavit of the applicant * Exhibit 2: WD AGO Form R-5297 * Exhibit 3: General Court-Martial Record of Trial * Exhibit 4: ABCMR Pro Se Petition and Decision, dated 22 July 2020 * Exhibit 5: National Personnel Records Response Letter Re: 1972 Fire * Exhibit 6: Photographs of the applicant’s combat injuries Ex * Exhibit 7: Korean War Casualty File, 13 February 1950 – 31 December 1953, U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) * Exhibit 8: Employment Record * Exhibit 9: Letters of Recommendation * Exhibit 10: Memorandum from Robert L. Wilkie, Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Office of Under Secretary of Defense, to Secretaries of the Military Departments (25 July 2018) * Exhibit 11: U.S. Government Accountability Office, Comptroller's General's Report to the Congress, Military and Discharge Policies and Practices Result in Wide Disparities: Congressional Review is Needed (1980) * Exhibit 12: Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) No Records Response Re: 1955 Pro Se ABCMR Application * Exhibit 13: Army Regulation 600-45, "Personnel Decorations," 9 February 1954 * Exhibit 14: Army Regulation 600-8-22, “Military Awards," 5 March 2019 * Exhibit 15: United States Manual for Courts-Martial, Effective 31 May 1951 (excerpts) * Exhibit 16: Michael Killan, "Army Removes Cloud Over Black Korean War Unit," Chicago Tribune, 30 April 1996 * Exhibit 17: Department of Defense (DoD) Task Force on the Administration of Military Justice in the Armed Forces (1972) * Exhibit 18: U.S. Army Surgeon General Hospitalization File Listing 1950-1953 (Korea) & Hospital Admissions Card, Office of the Surgeon General, Department of the Army * Exhibit 19: The National Archives Records Relating to the Korean War, Compiled by Rebecca L. Collier, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC (2003) FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the three-year time frame provided in Title 10, United States Code (USC), section 1552 (b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant and counsel state, in pertinent part: a. When the applicant walked eighteen steps, he received the most severe discharge characterization permitted under military law, transforming the trajectory of his entire life. In 1952, the applicant voluntarily enlisted as an infantryman at the age of 17, with permission of his mother, to serve during a time of war. He was a black Soldier in the newly desegregated 45th Infantry Division during the Korean War. While deployed to Korea, he was wounded by enemy shrapnel during a contact patrol, earning him the Purple Heart. The record of his Purple Heart has been lost and was likely destroyed in the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). b. After 57 days of hospitalization recovering from his enemy-inflicted wounds, the applicant returned to the battlefield as the Korean War raged on. When the applicant raised a tactical safety concern to his chain of command multiple times, his grave concerns fell on deaf ears. Ultimately, his platoon leader refused to give him permission to speak with company-level leadership to report the dangerous situation. The applicant, only nineteen (19) years old, made the fateful decision to risk his own liberty and walk eighteen (18) steps in the direction of his company commander located a mere 200 yards away. c. These 18 steps resulted in a general court-martial, dishonorable discharge, and five years in prison, with the entire trial lasting less than 30 minutes. The applicant was one of the first Soldiers ever prosecuted under the military justice system (referred to as Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)), which is still in existence today. He is still paying for those 18 steps he took nearly 70 years ago. The applicant, now 89 years old, is at the end of his life. He has been punished long enough and has more than paid for those 18 steps. d. As such, the applicant respectfully requests that the ABCMR remedy the injustice in his military record. When considering the overall nature of his military service as an infantryman during the Korean War, the circumstances surrounding his discharge when he was only 19 years old, and his 70 years of unblemished post-service conduct, clemency is warranted as a dishonorable discharge characterization of service is fundamentally unfair. Additionally, the applicant was awarded a Purple Heart for combat injuries he sustained during his service in the Korean War. However, the record of his Purple Heart was likely destroyed during the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center (NPRC). e. A punitive discharge is unjust in light of the applicant’s service before and during combat and should be corrected on the grounds of clemency. The applicant earned a Purple Heart and the Board previously denied his request for the Purple Heart because he did not provide a DD Form 214; he does not have a DD Form 214; he was issued a War Department Adjutant General’s Office (WD AGO) Form R-5297 [Reference Card]. The applicant was separated from the Army before the DD Form 214 became the standard form issued at discharge. A punitive discharge is unjust in light of the changes in statutes and regulations where a service member under the same circumstances today would have received a more favorable outcome than the applicant endured. A punitive discharge is fundamentally unfair in light of the applicant’s 70 years of flawless post-service conduct; following his superior’s flawed advice, the applicant said he would not jump that day; as a result, the applicant was convicted by a court-martial and reprimanded; the applicant admits it was a “stupid mistake.” f. The applicant alerted his chain of command that he was gravely concerned about the teenage Korean Soldier’s behavior endangering the entire unit. He informed his chain of command that the Korean Soldier was falling asleep at his position/post. The applicant was called racial slurs by the same officer that preferred court-martial charges against; he was not offered procedural protections and received minimum due process during his pre-trial confinement and court-martial proceedings. He was not informed of his rights upon pre-trial confinement, and military counsel was not afforded to the applicant within 72 hours of entering pre-trial confinement. g. A DoD Task Force study in 1973 determined that a disparity in punishment existed based on service member’s race; the study found black service members disproportionately received punishment for major military or civilian offenses and confrontation or status-type offenses. The DoD ultimately concluded that "the military system does discriminate against its members on the basis of race and ethnic background." The applicant’s WD AGO documentation and Korean Casualty Report are prime examples of the racial insensitivity present in the 1950s; the applicant’s race was listed as “Negro”, a term that would never be used today. U.S Court of Military Appeals overturned the applicant’s cowardly conduct conviction because the law officer failed to instruct the panel member as to a key element of the charge that they must find that the acts of cowardice were the product of fear. h. The 24th Infantry Regiment, an all-black regiment serving in Korea, was treated differently and eventually was forcibly disbanded when similarly-performing white units were given assistance. The applicant paid dearly for his misdeeds by spending two (2) years imprisoned and by living with a dishonorable discharge for almost 70 years; he is asking for a second chance and to clear his name. He sacrificed his body and shed blood for his country. He should not have disobeyed a direct order; nonetheless, this was purely a nonviolent military offense, and his cowardly conduct conviction was rightfully revered; his punishment was too harsh; if veterans can receive honorable discharges with relatively minor or infrequent misconduct, surely the applicant deserves a General Discharge characterization for making a mistake in 1952 at age 19. i. The applicant’s service before and during combat are "mitigating facts" relating to the record from which relief should be granted. These facts alone warrant granting the applicant a second chance pursuant to the “Wilkie” Memo and thus, granting the requested relief is justified as a matter of clemency j. In conclusion, over the course of nearly 70 years, the applicant has atoned for the 18 steps he took back in 1952. These 18 steps led to a lifetime of consequences. It is time for the ABCMR to memorialize the Purple Heart he shed his blood for and grant him clemency by upgrading his discharge to Under Honorable Conditions (General). The applicant is not asking for his conviction to be overturned, or for an Honorable Discharge, but merely for this Board to right the egregious errors of the past and to show him clemency. Now 89 years old, the applicant humbly requests a correction of his records so that he can be buried with the American flag that he fought and nearly died for. 3. The applicant's military and medical records are not available to the Board for review. A fire destroyed approximately 18 million service members' records at the NPRC in 1973. It is believed the applicant's records were lost or destroyed in that fire. The case is being considered using the WD AGO Form R-5297 in lieu of DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) and documents provided by the applicant and counsel. 4. His records contained a Verbatim Record of Trial by General-Court Martial and multiple official documents that show: a. On 12 July 1950, at the age of 17, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army. His record indicates he completed training requirements and was awarded his Infantryman military occupational specialty (MOS). He attended and completed the Basic Airborne Course at Fort Benning, GA. b. On 11 August 1951, the applicant was convicted by a summary court-martial for wrongfully refusing to jump from an airplane in flight. He was sentenced to be reprimanded. c. The applicant was assigned to Korea on or about 24 March 1952. He was assigned to Company E, 279th Infantry Regiment. The applicant was wounded in the arm and leg by shrapnel in June 1952 and evacuated to Japan. He was eventually returned to duty. d. On 13 October 1952, the applicant provided a sworn statement. In pertinent part, he stated, he was assigned to a line position with a Korean Soldier. The Korean Soldier kept falling asleep and he could not get him on guard. He did not want to stay with the Korean Soldier and asked to see the commanding officer (CO). Lieutenant told him he did not have anyone to replace him. He later went down to see sergeant and asked him if he could go to the rear command post. Sergeant told the applicant he could not go without lieutenant B’s permission. The applicant told sergeant F he did not want to stay with the Korean Soldier any longer, and he still wanted to go to the rear. The applicant asked what would happen if he went anyway. He was told he might get hurt if he tried to leave and he might be shot. The applicant was told to get back to his position, so he went back to his position. Lieutenant told the applicant, he could not see the CO and if he crossed the designated path he would be disobeying his direct order. The applicant stated he still wanted to go see the CO. Lieutenant told the applicant if he wanted to go see the CO, he had to leave his weapon and bolt. The applicant left his weapon and turned around and walked off down the path and started to leave. Lieutenant yelled at the applicant and told him to put his hands up on his head because he was a prisoner and to move out. The applicant was placed under arrest. The applicant stated that he understood he was violating a direct order by leaving. He had seen the company commander prior to the incident about getting off the hill a couple days before. He was told he could get off the hill but he was sent back. He did not tell lieutenant B why he wanted to see the CO. The applicant wanted to transfer out of the 3rd platoon. e. On 15 October 1952, the Article 32 Investigation Report was completed and the Investigating Officer recommended trial by General Court-Martial. On the same date, court-martial charges were preferred against the applicant. On 23 October 1952, the charges were received by the convening authority. f. On 24 October 1952, the Acting Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) examined the charges and allied papers in the applicant’s case. The SJA recommended trial by General Court-Martial, and the charges were referred for trial on 27 October 1952. g. On 14 November 1952, the applicant was arraigned, tried and convicted by a General Court-Martial. He was found guilty of: * violation of Article 90 of the UCMJ – “willful violation of a lawful command of a superior officer” * violation of Article 99 of the UCMJ – “cowardly conduct” h. He was sentenced to be dishonorably discharged; to forfeit all pay and allowances; and to be confined for a period of five (5) years. (One previous conviction considered) i. On 1 December 1952, the General Court-Martial Convening Authority approved the applicant’s sentence. The Record of Trial was forwarded to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for review by a board of review. Pending completion of appellate review and upon release from the 8228th Mobile Army Surgical Hospital (MASH), the applicant would be confined in the Korean Base Section Stockade. j. On 16 January 1953, the applicant’s findings of guilty and sentence were affirmed by a board of review; however, the applicant and his legal counsel petitioned the U.S. Court of Military Appeals for a grant of review of the decision of the board of review. k. On 17 July 1953, the U.S. Court of Military Appeals reversed the applicant’s conviction of cowardly conduct. Nevertheless, the Court of Military Appeals noted that there was ample evidence to support the willful disobedience conviction and there was no other error tainting it. The record was returned to the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Army, for rehearing or other action not inconsistent with the opinion. 5. The applicant’s WD AGO Form R-5297 shows, in pertinent part: * his race was listed as “Negro” * his birthdate was listed as 9 December 1932 * he was single * his Army Service Number was “RA 13 123 227” * he enlisted in the Army on 12 July 1950 * he was convicted by a General Court-Martial for cowardly conduct and disobeying a superior officer on 14 November 1952 * the applicant was sentenced to a dishonorable discharge and 5-years confinement; the sentence expired on 21 July 1956 * the applicant was transferred to the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks, New Cumberland, PA, on 25 June 1953 6. A Korean War Casualty File from NARA covering the period of 13 February 1950 to 31 December 1953 shows, the applicant was: * an Infantryman, “wounded in action by missile” and hospitalized * in the North Korean Sector when he was wounded in action * wounded in action on 22 June 1952 * returned to duty on 19 August 1952 * listed in the racial group of “Negro (Negroid)” 7. An Office of the Surgeon General Hospitalization Admissions Card and Listing confirms the applicant was wounded in action in Korea. He suffered wounds and injuries in the arm and thigh. He wounds and injuries were the direct result of action against or by an organized enemy. The causative agent was “fragment or explosion of other explosive munitions: Grenade”. 8. The applicant’s DD Form 149 (Application for Corrections of Military Record) indicates his date of separation was 14 April 1954. 9. On 7 January 1955, the Secretary of the Army disapproved restoration to duty and clemency for the applicant. 10. On 10 August 1955, the applicant petitioned the ABCMR for a correction of his military records. The ABCMR denied his request. The application to the Board showing the requested correction was not available. 11. On 10 October 2019, the applicant petitioned the ABCMR for correction of his records to show that he was awarded and entitled to the Purple Heart. The ABCMR closed his case and returned it without action because he did not provide a copy of his DD Form 214 [separation document]. 12. In support of his case, the applicant and counsel provided more than 760 documents listed under the supporting documents considered by the Board. The documents will be provided to the Board for review and consideration. 13. The applicant and counsel’s contentions were reviewed and considered; nevertheless, the evidence shows the applicant was convicted by a summary court- martial for refusing to complete an airborne jump, and convicted by a general court- martial for disobeying a direct order from a superior commissioned officer and cowardly conduct. The cowardly conduct conviction was reversed. The applicant admits he was wrong for committing the offenses. However, the applicant and counsel state he has suffered long enough and has atoned for his actions. His conduct before combat and his unblemished post-service conduct, accomplishments, and achievements should be considered mitigating factors in accordance with the “Wilkie” memorandum published guidance on equity, injustice, or clemency. Counsel states the punishment was too harsh and the applicant should be granted clemency based on, among other things, the DoD Task Force findings of racial discrimination and bias related to military justice, disciplinary action, and punishment. Counsel also requests that the ABCMR memorialize the applicant’s Purple Heart he shed blood for and grant him clemency by upgrading his discharge to Under Honorable Conditions (General). Counsel further requests the applicant be issued a DD Form 214 with the additional requested corrections listed above. 14. Army Regulation (AR) 15–185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). In pertinent part, it states that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. The ABCMR will decide cases based on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative agency. The regulation also states an applicant is not entitled to a hearing before the Board; however, the Board or the Director of ABCMR may authorize a personal appearance. 15. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Board is not empowered to set aside a conviction, but is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process. 16. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. The regulation provides, in pertinent part: a. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization. b. A Soldier will be given a bad conduct/dishonorable discharge only pursuant to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. 17. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part: a. The Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action. Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. b. U.S. Army combat and special skill badges may be earned by U.S. military personnel who qualify while performing honorable active duty or Reserve service in an active status or while formally assigned or attached to the U.S. Army. 18. 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. 19. In reaching its determination, the Board can consider the applicant's petition, service record, and statements in light of the published guidance on equity, injustice, or clemency. BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant's request for a personal appearance hearing was carefully considered. In this case, the evidence of record was sufficient to render a fair and equitable decision. As a result, a personal appearance hearing is not necessary to serve the interest of equity and justice in this case. 2. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found that some relief was warranted. The Board carefully considered the applicants request, supporting documents, evidence in the records and published DoD guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade requests. The Board considered the applicant's statement, his record of service, the frequency and nature of his misconduct, the reason for his separation and whether to apply clemency. Based upon a preponderance of evidence, consideration of cultural differences during the era in which he served, the time passed since his discharge, and guidance for consideration of discharge upgrade requests, the Board determined that the character of service the applicant received upon separation should be corrected as a matter of clemency to show Under Honorable Conditions General. His record is absent a DD Form 214, therefore the Board agreed he should be issued an AHRC Form 1596 (Transcript of Military Record) in the absence of a copy of the actual separation document as creating and issuing a DD Form 214 is not warranted by regulatory guidance. 3. Evidence of record shows the applicant was wounded by enemy forces while in combat. Therefore, the Board agreed he is entitled to the Purple Heart; along with the Combat Infantryman Badge since he was an infantryman. His record also shows he refused to jump, which justly warrants the revocation of his Parachutist Badge. His record is absent a DD Form 214 to amend, so orders should be issued to authorize the approved awards, and he should seek a letter from the NPRC, which will reflect all his authorized decorations to include any earned for foreign-service. 4. Finally, the Board agreed the listing of his race/ethnicity at the time was not in error as those were the classifications used at the time, and noted any verbiage used during the court-martial proceedings remains the official court-martial record. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF :X :X :X GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for partial relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. awarding him the Purple Heart for being wounded by enemy forces on 22 June 1952; b. awarding him the Combat Infantryman Badge for engaging enemy forces on 22 June 1952; and c. issuing him a AHRC Form 1596 (Transcript of Military Record) in the absence of a copy of the actual separation document showing his character of service as Under Honorable Conditions (General). 2. The Board further determined 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 any further relief. 4/28/2022 X CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, USC, 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 also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. With respect to court-martials, and related administrative records pertaining to court-martial cases tried or reviewed under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), action to correct any military record of the Secretary's Department may extend only to actions taken by reviewing authorities under the UCMJ or action on the sentence of a court-martial for purposes of clemency. The Secretary of the Army shall make such corrections by acting through boards of civilians within the executive part of the Army. 2. Army Regulation 15–185 (Army Board for Correction of Military Records) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR). In pertinent part, it states that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. The ABCMR will decide cases based on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative agency. 3. Court-martial convictions stand as adjudged or modified by appeal through the judicial process. The Board is not empowered to set aside a conviction, but is only empowered to change the severity of the sentence imposed in the court-martial process. 4. Army Regulation 635-200 (Active Duty Enlisted Administrative Separations) sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. It provides: a. A general discharge is a separation from the Army under honorable conditions. When authorized, it is issued to a Soldier whose military record is satisfactory but not sufficiently meritorious to warrant an honorable discharge. A characterization of under honorable conditions may be issued only when the reason for the Soldier’s separation specifically allows such characterization. b. A Soldier will be given a bad conduct/dishonorable discharge only pursuant to an approved sentence of a general or special court-martial. The appellate review must be completed and the affirmed sentence ordered duly executed. 5. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) currently in effect, prescribes Department of the Army (DA) policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. In pertinent, it provides: a. U.S. Army combat and special skill badges may be earned by U.S. military personnel who qualify while performing honorable active duty or Reserve service in an active status or while formally assigned or attached to the U.S. Army. b. The revocation of decorations under the “honorable” service requirement should be used sparingly and should be limited to those cases where the Servicemember’s actions are not compatible with continued military service, result in criminal convictions, or result in determinations that the Servicemember did not serve satisfactorily in a specific grade or position. c. The decision to revoke an award may not be delegated by the awarding authority. If the award has not been presented, the awarding authority may revoke the award without informing the affected Soldier. However, if the award has been made a matter of permanent record, the command must inform the Soldier and correct the permanent record. d. Award of badges may be revoked under any of the following conditions, however, once the parachute badge is revoked, all badges contingent upon airborne are also revoked: (1) Combat or special skill badge. An award of any combat or special skill badge will be automatically revoked on dismissal, dishonorable discharge, or conviction by courts-martial for desertion in wartime (wartime is defined in the glossary). (2) Parachutist Badge. Requests for revocation of the Parachutist Badge will be forwarded from HRC, Enlisted Personnel Management Directorate, Readiness, ABN TM (usarmy.knox.hrc.mbx.epmd-airborne-team@mail.mil) to Commandant, U.S. Army Infantry School (ATSH–IP), 1 Karker Street, Fort Benning, GA 31905–4500. A badge may be revoked based on the recommendation of the field commander (colonel (COL/O–6) or above) when the awardee: (a) Is punished under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) for refusal to participate in a parachute jump. (b) Refusal to accept assignment to a parachutists coded position. (c) Refuses an order to make a parachute jump and receives UCMJ regardless of how long a Soldier has served on airborne status. 6. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) currently in effect, provides in pertinent part: a. While clearly an individual decoration, the Purple Heart differs from all other decorations in that an individual is not "recommended" for the decoration; rather, he or she is entitled to it upon meeting specific criteria. The Purple Heart is awarded for a wound sustained as a result of hostile action. Substantiating evidence must be provided to verify that the wound was the result of hostile action, the wound must have required treatment by a medical officer, and the medical treatment must have been made a matter of official record. b. For award of the Combat Infantry Badge (CIB) a Soldier must meet the following three requirements: (1) be an infantry Soldier satisfactorily performing infantry duties (2) be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat (3) actively participate in such ground combat. The CIB is authorized for award for the Korean War (27 June 1950 to 27 July 1953). c. To be eligible for award of the Basic Parachutist Badge, an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an airborne unit or the Airborne Department of the Infantry School. d. The Korean War Service Medal is awarded to Servicemembers of the U.S. Armed Forces who served in Korea and adjacent waters between 25 June 1950 and 27 July 1953. e. The Korean Service Medal is awarded for qualifying service in the theater of operations between 27 June 1950 and 27 July 1954. f. The United Nations Service Medal is awarded to members of the Armed Forces of the United States dispatched to Korea or adjacent areas on behalf of the United Nations during the period between 27 June 1950 and 27 July 1954. Personnel awarded the Korean Service Medal automatically establish eligibility for the United Nations Service Medal. g. The National Defense Service Medal is awarded for honorable active service for any period between 27 July 1950 and 27 July 1954, 1 January 1961 and 14 August 1974, 2 August 1990 and 30 November 1995, and 11 September 2001 and a date to be determined. Second and subsequent awards of the National Defense Service Medal are denoted by a bronze service star affixed to the National Defense Service Medal. h. The Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation is awarded by the Korean government. No more than one Republic of Korea Presidential Unit Citation will be worn by any individual and no oak leaf cluster or other appurtenance is authorized. i. Service stars (campaign and/or battle stars) are worn on campaign and service medals to denote participation in a named campaign and on the service ribbons to denote an additional award. A service star is a bronze or silver five-pointed star 3/16- inch in diameter. In pertinent part, service stars are authorized for wear on the NDSM and KSM. If authorized or eligible, the applicant qualified for the following campaigns: * Second Korean Winter - 28 November 1951 to 30 April 1952 - SECOND KOREAN WINTER 1951–1952 * Korea, Summer-Fall 1952 - 1 May to 30 November 1952 - KOREA SUMMER– FALL 1952 7. Army Regulation 601-210 (Regular Army and Army Reserve Enlistment Program), covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve. Table 3-1 included a list of the RA RE codes: a. RE-1 applies to Soldiers completing their term of active service who are considered qualified to reenter the U.S. Army. They are qualified for enlistment if alI other criteria are met. b. RE-2 applies to Soldiers separated for the convenience of the government (no longer used by the Army) c. RE-3 applies to Soldiers who are not considered fully qualified for reentry or continuous service at time of separation, but disqualification is waivable. They are ineligible unless a waiver is granted. d. RE-4 applies to Soldiers separated from last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification. 8. Army Regulation 635-8 (Separation Processing and Documents) prescribes the transition processing function of the military personnel system. It provides principles of support, standards of service, policies, tasks, rules, and steps governing required actions in the field to support processing personnel for separation and preparation of separation documents. The DD Form 214 is a summary of the Soldier’s most recent period of continuous active duty. It provides a brief, clear-cut record of all current active, prior active, and prior inactive duty service at the time of release from active duty (REFRAD), retirement, or discharge. The DD Form 214 is not intended to have any legal effect on termination of a Soldier’s service. A DD Form 214 will be prepared for Soldiers on termination of active duty because of administrative separation (including separation because of retirement or ETS), physical disability separation, or punitive discharge resulting from a court-martial. The regulation states, in pertinent part, once a DD Form 214 has been issued, transition centers do not reissue except for the following reasons: (1) When directed by appellate authority, executive order, or by the Secretary of the Army. (2) When it is determined that the original DD Form 214 cannot be properly corrected by issuance of a DD Form 215. (3) Activities listed in paragraph 8–1b and 8–1c may reissue DD Form 214 when circumstances listed in paragraph 8–4 apply. (4) When a DD Form 214 is administratively reissued, enter that fact and the date of such action on the DD Form 214, block 18, unless the authority directing reissuance specifies otherwise. (5) Do not issue DD Form 214 to replace copies or DD Forms 214 lost by the Soldier. If no DD Form 214 is available, issue DA Form 1569 (Transcript of Military Record). 9. Army Regulation 635-8 (Separation Processing and Documents) provides, in pertinent part: a. Block 12f (Foreign Service): Enter the total amount of service performed outside the continental United States (OCONUS) during the period covered in block 12c to include deployments. Additionally, list periods of deployed service in block 18. b. Block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations, and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized): List all federally recognized awards and decorations for all periods of service. Do not use abbreviations. Do not enter foreign or State level awards on DD Form 214. c. Block 14 (Military Education): List all formal, in-service (full-time attendance) training courses successfully completed during the period of service covered by the DD Form 214 of at least 1 week or 40 hours’ duration. This information is to assist the Soldier in job placement and counseling; therefore, do not list training courses for combat skills. d. Block 18 (Remarks): Use this block for HQDA mandatory requirements when a separate block is not available; as a continuation for entries in blocks 9, 11, 13, and 14; or for conditional and mandatory entries such as, “SOLDIER (HAS) OR (HAS NOT) COMPLETED FIRST FULL TERM OF SERVICE.” e. Block 24 (Characterization of Service): Correct entry is vital since it affects a Soldier’s eligibility for post-service benefits. Characterization or description of service is determined by directive authorizing separation. The character of service must be one of the seven designations (1) through (7) below. (1) HONORABLE. (2) UNDER HONORABLE CONDITIONS (GENERAL). (3) UNDER OTHER THAN HONORABLE CONDITIONS. (4) BAD CONDUCT. (5) DISHONORABLE. (6) DISMISSED. (7) UNCHARACTERIZED. f. Block 25 (Separation Authority): To be completed for copies 2, 4, 7, and 8 only. Obtain correct entry from regulatory directives authorizing the separation. g. Block 26 (Separation Code): To be completed for copies 2, 4, 7, and 8 only. Obtain the correct entry from AR 635–5–1 (Separation Program Designator Codes), which provides the corresponding SPD code for the regulatory authority and reason for separation. h. Block 27 (Reentry Code): AR 601–210 determines reentry eligibility and provides regulatory guidance on reentry codes. 10. On 25 July 2018, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness issued guidance to Military Discharge Review Boards and Boards for Correction of Military/Naval Records (BCM/NRs) regarding equity, injustice, or clemency determinations. a. Clemency generally refers to relief specifically granted from a criminal sentence. BCM/NRs may grant clemency regardless of the type of court-martial. However, the guidance applies to more than clemency from a sentencing in a court-martial; it also applies to other corrections, including changes in a discharge, which may be warranted based on equity or relief from injustice. b. This guidance does not mandate relief, but rather provides standards and principles to guide Boards in application of their equitable relief authority. In determining whether to grant relief on the basis of equity, injustice, or clemency grounds, BCM/NRs shall consider the prospect for rehabilitation, external evidence, sworn testimony, policy changes, relative severity of misconduct, mental and behavioral health conditions, official governmental acknowledgement that a relevant error or injustice was committed, and uniformity of punishment. Changes to the narrative reason for discharge and/or an upgraded character of service granted solely on equity, injustice, or clemency grounds normally should not result in separation pay, retroactive promotions, and payment of past medical expenses or similar benefits that might have been received if the original discharge had been for the revised reason or had the upgraded service characterization. //NOTHING FOLLOWS//