ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 11 March 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180000132 APPLICANT REQUESTS: the Combat Action Badge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Self-Authored Statement * Officer Record Brief (ORB) * Orders No TB90281 (Deployment Orders) * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) * Two DA Forms 2823 (Sworn Statement) * Response from U.S. Army Human Resources Command FACTS: 1. The applicant states he is requesting award of the Combat Action Badge. The letter from HRC says that his statements did not say he was in danger. The statements clearly state he was in danger of being injured or killed during the mortar attack. The blast area of a 122mm mortar is 60 meters. He and other personnel within the administrative and logistics operation cell (ALOC) were well inside the blast area and could have been killed or injured during the attack. They were clearly in immediate danger during the mortar attack. He was assigned at Forward Operating Base Marez in Mosul, Iraq from 15 November 2004 to 15 December 2004. During his assignment, they were always under mortar attack and small arms fire almost every night. On the night of 9 December 2004, they were attacked by 2 122mm mortars falling within 40 meters from the ALOC. The personnel on duty immediately took up a defensive posture and later checked for any injured Soldiers. It rocked their building along with several others in the area. The individuals executing the attack knew what area to fix on for a target. Luck was on their side and they did not have any injuries. If the mortar strike would have been closer, he and other personnel on duty could have been killed or injured during the attack. They had intelligence of the person executing the attack, but by the time the security forces got there the vehicle was gone from the launch area. 2. The applicant deployed to Iraq on 15 November 2004. 1. 3. He provides a witness statement from Staff Sergeant X that states on the night of 9 December 2004, the applicant was engaged by two 122mm mortars falling within 40 meters from the ALOC during his shift. The applicant was on duty as the officer in charge during the attack by anti-Iraqi forces and could have been injured during the attack and perform his duties satisfactorily in accordance with the rules of engagement. 4. He also provides a witness statement from Sergeant First Class (Retired) X that states on the night of 9 December 2004, the applicant was engaged by 2 122mm mortars falling within 40 meters from the ALOC during his shift. It is reasonable to state that the applicant could have been injured or killed during the mortar attack and performed his duties satisfactorily in accordance with established rules of engagement. 5. He was honorably retired on 31 January 2008. His DD Form 214 is void of an award of the Combat Action Badge. 6. HRC responded to the applicant on 22 September 2017 concerning his desire to receive a retroactive award of the Combat Action Badge. The Chief, Soldier Programs and Services Division states the incident did not meet the basic requirement for award of the Combat Action Badge. The witness statements provided in support of the request describe a mortar attack occurred; however, they do not indicate that the applicant was in immediate danger. 7. By regulation, for award of the Combat Action Badge the Soldier must be personally present and actively engaged or being engaged by the enemy and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement. Narratives and sworn statements of incidents will include the proximity of the Soldier to the impacted area or small arms fire (in meters) and whether the Soldier could have reasonably been injured by the blast, detonation or explosion. BOARD DISCUSSION: After review of the application and all evidence, the Board determined there insufficient evidence to grant relief. The applicant’s contentions were carefully considered. Based upon the preponderance of evidence, the Board agreed the applicant did not meet regulatory guidance to receive the CAB. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 : : : GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING :X :X :X DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. ___________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. Army Regulation (AR) 600-8-22 (Military Awards), currently in effect, provides Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual military awards. It states the Combat Action Badge was created on 2 May 2005 to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engaged, or are engaged by, the enemy. The requirements for award of the Combat Action Badge are branch and military occupational specialty immaterial. Assignment to a combat arms unit or a unit organized to conduct close or offensive combat operations, or performing offensive 1. combat operations, is not required to qualify to the Combat Action Badge. However, it is not intended to award the Combat Action Badge to all Soldiers who serve in a combat zone or imminent danger area. The specific eligibility requirements include: * May be awarded to any Soldier * Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized * Soldier must be personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy, and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement 2. Military Personnel Message 11-268 (Approved Changes to AR 600-8-22) provides clarifying guidance for the combat badges. It states, in pertinent part, narratives and sworn statements of incidents will include the following: * Specific date of the incident * Proximity of the Soldier to the impacted area or small arms fire (in meters) * Whether the Soldier could have reasonably been injured by the blast, detonation or explosion //NOTHING FOLLOWS//