RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02213 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Her deceased father’s records be corrected to reflect he was a Prisoner of War (POW). 2. His records be corrected to reflect award of the Prisoner of War (POW) Medal. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The decedent was granted POW status by the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) on 15 May 93. In support of her request, the applicant provides extracts of the decedent’s personnel records, DVA decisional documents, and death certificate. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 19 Mar 43, the decedent entered the Army Air Corps and was honorably discharged on 5 Nov 45. The decedent’s master personnel records were destroyed by the 1973 fire at the National Personnel Records Center. His WD AGO Form 53-55, Enlisted Record and Report of Separation, Honorable Discharge, reflect he arrived in the European Theater on 26 Dec 44 and returned to the United States on 11 Aug 45. He is credited with serving in the Ardennes, Rhineland, and Central Europe Campaigns. In accordance with DoD 1348-33M, Manual of Military Decorations and Awards: General Information, Medal of Honor, and Defense/ Joint Decorations and Awards, C6.2.1.2.3, the POW Medal shall be issued only to those taken prisoner by foreign forces that are hostile to the United States, under circumstances which the Secretary concerned finds to have been comparable to those under which persons have generally been held captive by enemy armed forces during periods of armed conflicts. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPWC recommends denial for awarding POW status and defers to HQ AFPC/DPSIDR on award of the POW Medal. DPWC states that during World War II, the decedent’s aircraft was shot down and he was detained as an internee by Russia in Poltava, Russia (Ukraine) for a period of 50 days, from 17 Mar 45 to 6 May 45. The Department of Defense Joint Publication 1-0 defines “prisoner of war” as a detained person as defined in Articles 4 and 5 of the Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 Aug 49. In particular, one who, while engaged in combat under orders of his or her government, is captured by the armed forces of the enemy. In contrast, “interned” is defined as “the casualty is definitely known to have been taken into custody of a non belligerent foreign power as a result of and for reasons arising out of any armed conflict in which the Armed Forces of the United States are engaged.” The DVA’s decision to treat for the purposes of benefits and compensation to certain World War II veterans who were forcibly detained in allied or neutral countries (under similar conditions to those veterans who were forcibly detained by enemy governments) does not by itself qualify the member for POW status. In this context, mistreatment may qualify veterans for VA compensation, but it does not qualify them for official POW status on their military record. Additionally, despite numerous attempts, the treating DVA hospital failed to provide records. The National Archives do not have the decedent listed as a POW in their Records of World War II Prisoners of War, 1942-1947. Additionally, the Army Repatriation and Family Affairs Division do not have him listed in their POW database. Moreover, substantiating documentation was not provided with the application. The complete DPWC evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. HQ AFPC/DPSIDR recommends denial for award of the POW Medal. DPSIDR states that with HQ AFPC/DPWC unable to validate the decedent being considered to have POW status, they are unable to verify his entitlement to the POW Medal. The complete DPSIDR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 22 Oct 10 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The SAF/MRB Legal Advisor recommends denial. He states that being detained after crash landing a plane is not being taken prisoner and held captive within the meaning of the statute. Secondly, at this time in the war, Russia was an ally of the United States and Switzerland was a neutral country. The complete SAF/MRB Legal Advisor’s evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the SAF/MRB Legal Advisor’s evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 18 Feb 11 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility and the SAF/MRB Legal Advisor and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2010-02213 in Executive Session on 12 April 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 30 May and 2 Aug 10, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPWC, dated 21 Sep 10, w/atch. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIDRA, dated 7 Oct 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 Oct 10. Exhibit E. Letter, SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, dated 10 Jan 11, w/atchs. Exhibit F. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 18 Feb 11.