ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS BOARD DATE: 9 April 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20180012729 APPLICANT REQUESTS: the Combat Action Badge (CAB). APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Photos * DA Form 67-9 (Officer Evaluation Report) * Permanent Orders 019-30 * Witness Statement, dated 4 January 2018 * Self-Authored Personnel Narrative, dated 4 January 2018 * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 18 January 2018 * Memorandum, Joint Base Myer-Henderson Hall, request for CAB, dated 8 February 2018 * Memorandum, Human Resources Command (HRC), dated 15 February 2018 * Self-authored memorandum, dated 11 September 2018 * Officer Record Brief * Basic Information Required for Retroactive Award of the CAB FACTS: 1. The applicant states: * his request for the CAB was submitted to HRC * he met the requirements for the CAB in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8- 22 (Military Awards) * HRC did not properly interpret the qualifiers for the CAB * thousands of Soldiers earned the CAB for varying exposure to indirect fires * his indirect fire from a forward operating base is equally qualifying * HRC applied the standards for the Combat Infantry Badge * the CAB does not require being engaged by the enemy * he engaged with the enemy and met the requirement * HRC accepted the combat action evidence but made an incorrect conclusion * an HRC fact sheet shows an error in presenting exposure to the enemy as a qualification criteria * the CAB qualifying incident occurred on 3 October 2004 * his retroactive CAB was denied on 15 February 2018 * the Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider the application * it is never too late to do the right thing 2. In a self-authored statement, he further states: a. He served with the 4th Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division, as the Brigade Battle Captain. He frequently tasked close combat attack aircrews via verbal fragmentary orders to requesting friendly forces under attack. He serviced such a request on 3 October 2004 for a unit that was ambushed on patrol and that suffered two Soldiers killed in action. A noncommissioned officer of the ambushed unit (1st Battalion, 206th Field Artillery) invited Soldiers of the applicant's battle staff to fire artillery on the responsible enemy. He requested to join the fire mission, which his supervisor (then Major TC) approved. After enduring enemy indirect fire attacks over the preceding months, he was eager to return fire on the enemy. He and another Soldier took turns pulling the lanyard and firing 105 millimeter high explosive rounds at the enemy with the gun team, whose teammate and friend was one of the Soldiers killed that day. He provides pictures of the fire mission and a statement from his former supervisor (now Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) (Retired) TC). The ambush noncommissioned officer in charge of the 1st Battalion, 206th Field Artillery invited Soldiers of the Battle Staff to fire artillery on the responsible enemy. He joined the Fire Support Team and was escorted to a firing position on the camp perimeter firing 105mm rounds at the enemy. b. He recently attended a ceremony at the Pentagon, where he ran into LTC TC and asked if he was ever awarded the CAB. He told him he had been on the same orders that awarded the CAB to the brigade commander. LTC TC was surprised to hear that he had not been awarded one since they had served at the same location and time and were exposed to the same enemy indirect fire attaches. He assumes that he was overlooked when the CAB orders were produced a year following the deployment because he left the unit shortly after redeployment and was new to the unit when deployed. LTC TC provided him a copy of the CAB orders, which he has enclosed. 3. His Officer Evaluation Report confirms he was assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Calvary Division, Camp Taji, Iraq, as an assistant S3/battle captain during the period 1 April 2004 – 31 December 2004. 4. In a memorandum for record, dated 4 January 2018, LTC TC confirmed the events the applicant describes, and states the applicant should be awarded the CAB for his service in Iraq with the 1st Cavalry Division for the incident on 3 October 2004 and his service during combat operations. 5. On 18 January 2018, he requested award of the CAB for the incident on 3 October 2004 through his chain of command. 6. On 15 February 2018, HRC notified him his request was disapproved. HRC stated: a. The CAB was developed to be a sister badge to the Combat Infantryman Badge. Its creation was intended to balance the inequity of non-infantry Soldiers engaging and being engaged on the non-linear, non-contiguous, contemporary battlefield. The assessment has long been that firing indirect fire (pulling the lanyard) does not constitute "personally engaging" or "being engaged" as described in Army Regulation 600-8-22. Moreover, the applicant was "invited" to participate and was in a relatively safe position. The photograph he provided does not indicate he was being engaged by the enemy. As such, the incident in question did not meet the strict criteria for award of the CAB. b. It was recommended he seek award of the CAB for an incident the applicant mentioned involving a vehicle-borne improvised explosive device while in Afghanistan. [The available records contain no detailed information on that incident.] 7. The applicant provides orders announcing award of the CAB to then Major TC and other members of the 1st Cavalry Division for action that occurred on 1 April 2004. 8. Army Regulation 600-8-22 states: a. On 2 May 2005, the Chief of Staff of the Army approved the creation of the CAB to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engaged, or are engaged by, the enemy. Eligible operations include Operation Iraqi Freedom during the period 19 March 2003 to 31 August 2010. b. The requirements for award of the CAB 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 combat operations, is not required to qualify for the CAB. However, it is not intended to award the CAB to all Soldiers who serve in a combat zone or imminent danger area. c. Specific eligibility requirements include: (1) May be awarded to any Soldier. (2) Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized. (3) 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. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the Record of Proceedings and all supporting documents, the Board determined that evidence supports awarding of the CAB to the applicant based upon witness statements attesting to the fact that the applicant conducted the same actions during the same incident as fellow members of the applicant’s unit who received the CAB and was not included in the recommendation for CAB because he was reassigned from the unit before the request for the CAB was submitted. BOARD VOTE: Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 X :X :X: GRANT FULL RELIEF : : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF : : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING : : : DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The Board determined the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending his DD Form 214 by awarding him the Combat Action Badge for actions on 3 October 2004. 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. ADMINISTRATIVE NOTE(S): not applicable. REFERENCES: Army Regulation 600-8-22 states: a. On 2 May 2005, the Chief of Staff of the Army approved the creation of the CAB to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engaged, or are engaged by, the enemy. Eligible operations include Operation Iraqi Freedom during the period 19 March 2003 to 31 August 2010. b. The requirements for award of the CAB 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 combat operations, is not required to qualify for the CAB. However, it is not intended to award the CAB to all Soldiers who serve in a combat zone or imminent danger area. c. Specific eligibility requirements include: (1) May be awarded to any Soldier. (2) Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized. (3) 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. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20180012729 2 1