|
The Army Review Boards Agency (ARBA) is
assigned to the Assistant Secretary of the
Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs (ASA
(M&RA))
The ARBA serves as the
highest administrative level for review of
personnel actions taken by lower levels of
the Army and administers a number of boards
including Army Board for Correction of
Military Records (ABCMR).
The ARBA has a chance
to correct their errors in the Izumi case. If that
is left alone or worse, then anyone can
petition the ARBA to have their records
changed even when there is no evidence or
there is false
documentation.
Three years ago Izumi’s
daughter
Rachael Izumi requested that his
records be changed. A response was
sent to the ARBA
with documentation showing that Izumi was
not in Bastogne in 1944/45. In February
2020 all of Izumi’s
Army Service Records
were sent to the ARBA Analyst Paul Petty via
email. Mr. Petty confirmed that the records
had arrived and were put into Izumi’s file.
Fast forward to October
of 2022 and the decision from the ABCMR that
Rachael Izumi posted on Social Media. The ABCMR reputation has been tarnished. HR
Specialist Yvonne J. Foskey GS12 of the
ABCMR name is on the "corrected" Form DD215
so it seems Ms. Foskey was the Analyst for
this case.
Analyst's gathers
all of the facts and
presents them to the
Board to make a decision (Here
is an example). It seems
the ABCMR
used something sent from Rachael Izumi
instead of Official Army Service Records.
What
Rachael Izumi used was Air Force (AF)
Form 7 and hearsay evidence. It looks like
the ABCMR didn’t use any of the Izumi’s Army
Service Records.
Why would the ABCMR use
an unsubstantiated AF record and not the
Army Service Records? The
ABCMR had all of
Izumi’s Army Service Records back in
February 2020 and didn’t use them. It took
over 2 years to come to the Decision
(5/5/2022) and the ABCMR could have ordered
up all of Izumi’s records but didn’t it
seems.
What's more concerning
is that
Rachael Izumi said in her letter to the
ABCMR that prior to sending in the
letter and unsubstantiated records that she
in fact had all of the Army Service Records
and Air Force Records and didn't send that to the ABCMR. Why
would Izumi not have sent the Records?
Because she knew that it would show what the
world already knew, that Izumi left April 5, 1945.
These isn't one Army Document to
support Izumi's claim. Not one.
The resulting decision
was odd to say the least (Attached is DD
Form 215, AUG 2009). The ABCMR
added on
Line 32 the following Campaigns to
Izumi’s DD 214 (Form 53-55); Normandy,
Rhineland, Ardennes and Central Germany.
The ABCMR
also changed the date that Izumi left the
USA from 4 April 1945 to December 1944.
The original Form 53-55
was perfect back in 1946 when Izumi left
the Army.
The ABCMR
has done the following mistakes; first is
that gave Izumi credit for the Normandy
Campaign. Izumi wasn’t even in the
active
Service until August 3, 1944. The second
mistake says that he was in the Central
Germany Campaign. The only problem with
that is there is no such thing as Central
Germany Campaign. Izumi had already been
credited with the Central Europe Campaign in
the original Form 53-55. How the ABCMR came up
with Central Germany I have not a clue.
AF Form 7 shouldn’t
have been used at all as the Army Records
were complete for Izumi. Even if the ABCMR
used the unsubstantiated AF Form 7 from 1963
the ABCMR made mistakes on that form as well.
Nowhere on the
unsubstantiated AF Form 7 did it say that Izumi was
in the Ardennes Campaign. The only two
Campaigns listed on his AF Form 7 Line 14 were the one
for
Central Europe (which was correct) and
the Rhineland Campaign (which he wasn’t
entitled to as that Campaign ended March 21,
1945 and the ABCMR still had Izumi arriving
in Europe April 18, 1945. To reiterate on
the unsubstantiated AF Form 7 the Ardennes
was not listed as that is a separate
Campaign.
AF Form 7 can be
disproved by Izumi’s own Army Service
Records. Izumi has the
Belgian Croix de Guerre
listed on Page 2 Line 10. You would have
had to have been in the battle to receive
that award. Izumi was still in the
USA during that time period.
Now here is a little
lesson on the French Croix de Guerre, Dutch Militaire Willems
Order and the Belgian Croix de Guerre Awards
(along with the Presidential Unit Citation
(PUC). If you come into a unit even after
the war you had to wear it if you
had to wear Dress Uniform.
Izumi was in the 508th
Parachute Infantry starting in October of
1945 so he had to wear all 4
Awards. Once he
left the Regiment he was no longer allowed
to wear any of the four listed in the
paragraph above.
The only people who can
wear those Awards even after they leave the
508th in this case were Soldiers
who were in the Battles listed on the
Awards. Izumi should not have listed that
on AF Form 7. If you reference back to his
correct 1946 Form
53-55 it wasn’t listed
there either for that reason.
On AF Form 7 Line 2 it
says Date Departed and then Dec 44 (and not
when he arrived) and under Foreign Service
Summary it says the same Dec44. If you look
at a Soldiers records they never will say
just the month and year. There will always
be a day to go along with that. Look at the
rest of the Izumi dates and they all have
the day as well. You will see just a year
because that is what is asked for.
Both Dec 44 listed on
AF From 7 are disproved by not just Izumi’s
Service Records but
also by his 1949 Iowa
Application
for WWII Compensation. It shows
that he went overseas 5 April 1945.
Please look at Foreign
Service Summary once again. It shows
Isolated Tours Rhine Main which is
Frankfort, Belgium, France and Austria.
That matches up with the
attached
Form from
his Army Service Records when he arrived
overseas April 18, 1945 and where he was day
to day in Europe.
When looking through
past decisions the first one I looked at
tells the story about the ABCMR. This from
Line 4 where it states “It is reasonable to
assume that the applicant participated in
combat parachute jumps with his unit” is a
red flag.
You can never use
“reasonable to assume” when it comes to Army
Records. You need
to have documentation. In this case from 6
May 1999 they never used the 504th
Parachute Regiment
Orders for the Combat
Infantryman Badge to prove this
Soldier was in fact in the 504th
for the Sicily Campaign.
The ARBA does list
the Soldier’s first name and that he was in
Company A. After looking at the Orders for
Company A 504th Parachute for
Sicily he is nowhere listed. This calls
into question even back in May 6, 1999 what
kind of documentation that the ARBA uses to
this day.
Brian N. Siddall
November 11, 2022
|
