MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:            27 March 2001
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000046248

	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	
	Mr. Hubert S. Shaw, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Roger W. Able		Chairperson	
	Mr. Allen L. Raub		Member	
	Ms. Gail J. Wire		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:  As the son of a World War II former service member (FSM), that award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to the FSM be upgraded to the Medal of Honor.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he believes there are a number of factors that beg for the Medal of Honor to be awarded in this case.  He contends that the FSM placed his life at great risk to ensure the safety and survival of others, and gave up his life doing so, and did this in a combat situation.  There is no doubt that the convoy and the ship were receiving enemy fire and that the FSM’s heroism was his personal reaction to a direct and devastating hit on the ship.  The applicant provided eleven citations of Medal of Honor recipients which he contends describes very similar heroic acts to those of the FSM.  He states, in all cases, the individuals placed the well being and lives of their fellow soldiers (or sea/airmen) above and beyond their own safety and survival, with many paying the ultimate price.  In support of his application, he submits a copy of the FSM’s citation for award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device; a recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor by a Member of Congress, dated 7 September 1999; a recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor by a Medal of Honor recipient dated 30 June 2000; a recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor from the President of the Rohna Survivors Memorial Association, dated 
7 July 2000; and three undated recommendations for the Medal of Honor from survivors of the His Majesty’s Troop Ship (HMT) Rohna.    

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The FSM’s military records show:

The FSM’s military records were destroyed or lost during the National Personnel Records Center fire of 1973.  Records available to the Board were obtained from alternate sources and show that the FSM enlisted in the Army Air Corps in November 1936.  While serving as a First Sergeant in the Army Air Corps aboard the ship, HMT Rohna, in convoy KMF26, the FSM was killed in action on 26 November 1943 during an attack by German air forces. 

There is no evidence that any member of the FSM’s unit or any other official recommended the FSM for an award for his actions on 26 November 1943 prior to 3 May 1951 which was the statute of limitations on approval of awards for World War II service.

On 7 September 1999, a recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor to the FSM was submitted under the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code, by a Member of Congress to the Secretary of the Army for consideration.

On 30 September 1999, the Army Decorations Board considered the evidence submitted and determined that the degree of action and service rendered by the FSM did not meet the criteria for an award of the Medal of Honor.  The Army decorations Board recommended award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device instead of the Medal of Honor.  The Commanding General, United States Total Army Personnel Command, acting on behalf of the Secretary of the Army approved the award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device.

The citation for the FSM’s Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device reads:  “For extraordinary heroism, courage, and devotion above and beyond the call of duty, and complete disregard of his own life, during a ferocious attack made by German Air Forces on November 26, 1943, against the troopship HMT Rohna and convoy KMF26.  First Sergeant [the FSM’s name omitted] displayed an extraordinary calm and cool manner during the attack, and with excellent judgment and leadership supervised the escape of his men from the hold area.  Once topside, First Sergeant [the FSM’s name omitted] again demonstrated extreme courage by re-entering the ship while it was listing and sinking (to search for more of his men), and gave up his life doing so.  Certainly, without his heroic efforts, many of his men would not have made it topside or escaped the doomed transport.  First Sergeant [the FSM’s name omitted] heroic actions brought great honor and credit to himself, the U.S. Army Air Corps, and the United States Army”.

On 9 February 2000, a recommendation to upgrade the FSM’s Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device (for extraordinary heroism on 26 November 1943) to award of the Silver Star was submitted under the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code, by a Member of Congress to the Secretary of the Army for consideration.  

On 9 March 2000, the Army Decorations Board considered the recommendation and determined that the degree of action and service rendered by the FSM did not meet the criteria for an award of the Silver Star.  As a result, the Commanding General, United States Total Army Personnel Command, affirmed that the previously awarded Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device for valor was the appropriate award for the FSM’s actions.    

In support of his request for award of the Medal of Honor, the applicant submitted 11 citations for Medals of Honor awarded during World War II as “precedents for acts very similar” to those of the FSM.

The applicant also provided six letters in support of the recommendation for award of the Medal of Honor to the FSM.  One of the letters was from a Member of Congress who forwarded the award recommendation to the Secretary of the Army for consideration under Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code.  A second letter was from a Medal of Honor winner who read the citation for the FSM’s the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device and stated that the FSM deserved a much higher award than the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device.  Four letters of support were from former unit members who were on the HMT Rohna on 26 November 1943 and described the FSM’s actions they contend saved the lives of many of his fellow soldiers.  These former unit members concluded their statements with the recommendation that the FSM receive the nation’s highest award.

Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code provides that the Service concerned will review a proposal for the award of, or upgrading of, a decoration that would 
not otherwise be authorized to be awarded based upon time limitations previously established by law.  Requests for consideration of awards should be supported by sworn affidavits, eyewitness statements, certificates and related documents.  Corroborating evidence is best provided by commanders, leaders and fellow comrades who had personal knowledge of the circumstances and events relative to the request.  A request for award not previously submitted in a timely fashion will only be considered under this provision if the request has been referred to the Service Secretary from a Member of Congress.  The burden and costs for researching and assembling documentation to support approval of requested awards and decorations rests with the requester.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) provides, in pertinent part, for award of the Medal of Honor.  The Medal of Honor is awarded by the President in the name of Congress to a person who while a member of the Army distinguishes himself or herself conspicuously by gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of his or her life above and beyond the call of duty while engaged in an action against an enemy of the United States.  The regulation provides that the deed performed must have been one of personal bravery or self sacrifice so conspicuous as to clearly distinguish the individual above his comrades and must have involved the risk of life.  Further, the regulation requires that “incontestable proof” of the performance of the service will be exacted and each recommendation for this decoration will be considered on the standard of extraordinary merit.

Army Regulation 600-8-22 provides, in pertinent part, that the Bronze Star Medal is awarded in time of war for heroism and for meritorious achievement or service. The bronze “V” device indicates acts of heroism involving conflict with an armed enemy.

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 Board reviewed the 16 June 1999 letter contained in the FSM’s records from the applicant to the Member of Congress forwarding a recommended citation for award of the Medal of Honor, a biography of the FSM, letters from survivors of the HMT Rohna sinking, the War Department letter and telegram announcing the death of the FSM, and background materials.

2.  The Board reviewed the applicant’s request for award of the Medal of Honor and supporting documents, including the letters of support and the eleven citations for awards of the Medal of Honor.

3.  The Board noted that an award recommendation for the Medal of Honor was considered by the Army Decorations Board under the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code, on 30 September 1999.  The Army Decorations Board determined the degree of action and service rendered by the FSM did not meet the criteria for an award of the Medal of Honor and instead recommended award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device.  The Commanding General of the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command, on behalf of the Secretary of the Army, approved award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to the FSM.

4.  The Board also noted that a recommendation to upgrade the FSM’s award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to the Silver Star was considered by the Army Decorations Board on 9 March 2000 under the provisions of Section 1130, Title 10, United States Code.  The Army Decorations Board determined that the degree of action and service rendered by the FSM did not meet the criteria for award of the Silver Star and that the previously awarded Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device was the appropriate award for the FSM’s actions on 26 November 1943.  Based on the recommendation of the Army Decorations Board, the Commanding General of the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command, affirmed the award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to the FSM as the appropriate award for his actions on 26 November 1943.

5.  Although the Board reviewed the 11 citations for the Medals of Honor presented by the applicant as precedents in his case, the Board considers each case on its own merit.  As a result, awards received by others or considered and awarded by other boards and commissions are not bases for the Army Board for Correction of Military Records to grant an award.

6.  This Board reviewed the Army Decoration Board’s consideration of the requests by the applicant for award of the Medal of Honor and the Silver Star to the FSM.  The Board concluded the applicant presented no evidence that the deliberations of the Army Decorations Board or the decisions by the Commanding General of the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command on behalf of the Secretary of the Army were flawed, inequitable, unjust or in contravention of Army regulations or policy.  The applicant’s disagreement with the decisions of the Army Decorations Board and officials empowered by the Secretary of the Army to act in his behalf is noted, but this difference of opinion is not a basis for recommending award of the Medal of Honor or upgrading an award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to award of the Silver Star or to the Medal of Honor.
7.  This Board considered all information submitted and all available evidence of record in this case and found the actions of the FSM were indeed heroic.  However, the Board found no compelling evidence which warranted upgrading the FSM’s award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device to the Medal of Honor or to the Silver Star.  Therefore, this Board reaffirms the decisions of the Army Decorations Board that the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device is the appropriate recognition for the FSM’s heroism on 26 November 1943.

8.  While the decision of the Board is not favorable in this case, the Board wants the applicant and all others concerned to know that this action in no way diminishes the heroism and sacrifice by the FSM in service to the United States.  His actions on 26 November 1943 were recognized with an award of the Bronze Star Medal with “V” Device for heroism in action and the applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of the FSM’s service in arms and the recognition of his heroism.

9.  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.

10.  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

__ALR__  __GJW__  ___RWA__  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000046248	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	20010327	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD, GD, UOTHC, UD, BCD, DD, UNCHAR)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	YYYYMMDD	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR .  .  .  .  .  	
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	MR. CHUN	
ISSUES         1.	107.0001.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.