In its recently published report, The Effort to Account for U.S. Servicemen Missing From the Korean
War, DPMO mentions a new database they’ve developed that contains some 64,000 sighting reports mentioned
in more than 3,210 debriefs of men who were repatriated after the Korean War. I was not familiar with this
information, so I called DPMO to find out more about it.
It seems that researchers found thousands of debriefs in the holdings at Fort Meade. The debriefs
are mostly of Army men, but there are some from the other services, as well. These debriefs, along with
others that had been found previously, have been compiled into a database of sightings. It essentially
creates a list of who saw who in POW camps. Any sightings of men who remain missing tell us that these
men were under Communist control and they should have been accounted for.
This database is, evidently, the second such compilation of sightings. An earlier one, known as the
MIA-CAP list, was released a couple of years ago. Angelo Collura, director of DPMO’s Special Projects
unit, says that the two databases are different, although they apparently deal with similar types of
sightings. This newer and larger one reportedly contains such things as descriptions of loss incidents;
POWs physical condition, movements, locations after capture; POW camp descriptions; and reports of death,
with possible burial sites.
I asked Dr. Collura if the new database is available to the families. He said that, to his knowledge,
it is not. He said the underlying debriefs are classified, and that the database has not been reviewed for
privacy issues.
This calls into question the relevant law, which is something all families should know when they are
requesting information.
Privileged Information
Title 10 of the U.S. Code, section 1506 (f), says that POW debriefings that were obtained after
July 8, 1959 are privileged. Therefore, debriefings of POWs returned after the Korean War, including
the approximately 4,000 debriefings that form the basis of the new sightings reports database, are not
privileged under the law and should be released.
Privacy Issues
The so-called ‘McCain Bill’ establishes the right to privacy for people who are mentioned in documents who
do not want that information disclosed. The same right extends to the families of missing servicemen. Title
50 of the U.S. Code, section 435 (3)(A)(ii) says that, before the government can release information about an
individual, it must request consent from that individual if he’s alive and can be found, or from the family in
the case of a missing serviceman. If the named individual, or the family of someone who is missing, denies
consent, then the information cannot be released. If the individual or the family gives consent, the
information can be released, assuming it is not legitimately classified for some other reason.
The U.S. government has only been able to find the families of about 2,000 of the more than 8,100
servicemen missing from Korea. Of those contacted, most have consented to have information released.
As to Korean War era documents, when named individuals or families of named missing servicemen cannot be
found, the law says that the limitation on disclosure does not apply if the named individual or family of the
missing individual cannot be located after a period of 90 days from the date on which the record is received
by DoD for disclosure review.
DPMO and the military services have been trying to locate families of the missing men for years, by all
sorts of methods. The 90 day locating period has certainly been satisfied. Therefore, the list of names of
missing men seen in POW camps whose families have not been located cannot be withheld under the privacy law
and should all be released.
As for the names of the returned POWs who mentioned men they saw in camps, DPMO can either black out
their names, or try to find them to get consent, according to the requirements discussed above. The
non-disclosure limitation does not apply at all to the family of a missing man insofar as they are seeking
information about that man.
In sum, there is no reason why the list of men who were seen in POW camps cannot be released. We will
be requesting the list from the National Archives. Anyone else who asks for it should not accept denial
based on grounds of privilege or privacy.