ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 12 November 2019 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20190010931 APPLICANT REQUESTS: award of the Combat Action Badge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * Orders 16-302-00029, dated 28 October 2016 * Orders HQ-338-0043, dated 3 December 2016 * North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Order Number HQ-338-0043, dated 3 December 2016 * Orders HQ-338-0043 (A1), dated 10 September 2017 * Orders 17-227-0013, dated 4 October 2017 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) for the period ending 15 November 2017 * DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 2 May 2018 * Narrative for Combat Action Badge for the Applicant * Memorandum, subject: Letter of Lateness for Combat Action Badge, dated 7 September 2018 * DA Form 2823 (Sworn Statement) from Staff Sergeant (SSG) RCC, dated 7 May 2018 * DA Form 2823 from SSG APW, dated 7 May 2018 * Memorandum from U.S. Army Human Resources Command (AHRC) pertaining to the Applicant, dated 28 May 2019 * Reserve Component Automated Record Brief FACTS: 1. The applicant states, in effect, he was unjustly denied the Combat Action Badge by the AHRC on 28 May 2019. He was in the lead aircraft for a mission when they encountered active and accurate enemy fire at their time of arrival at the landing zone and at their time of departure. He provided two sworn statements by Special Forces personnel who can account for his combat engagement. He was performing his duties assisting with the medical evacuation of injured personnel when the landing zone came under enemy fire. The two witnesses were injured and were relocated to the continental United States for medical treatment transitioning into the Wounded Warrior Program. The badge request form was signed by the Task Force Commander with the intent of supporting the veracity of his claim. He also provided a letter of lateness to AHRC with his award recommendation because it was submitted after he left the theater. 2. The applicant is currently a specialist serving in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) in a troop program unit. He is a qualified utility helicopter repairman serving in military occupational specialty 15T. 3. The applicant provided his mobilization and temporary change of station orders showing he was called to active duty on 25 November 2016 as a member of a Reserve Component for a period of 400 days. He was assigned to Detachment 3, 7th Battalion, 158th Aviation Regiment, Fort Hood, Texas in support of Operation Freedom Sentinel. On or about 7 January 2017 he proceeded on temporary change of station orders to Bagram, Afghanistan. He redeployed to the continental United States in October 2017. 4. On 15 November 2017, he was honorably released from active duty upon the completion of his required active service. He was issued a DD Form 214 showing he served on active duty for 11 months and 21 days. His DD Form 214 contains the following pertinent information: * Block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons Awarded or Authorized) shows among his awards the – * Army Commendation Medal with "C" (Combat) Device * Air Medal with "C" Device * Afghanistan Campaign Medal with one bronze service star * Basic Aviation Badge * Block 18 (Remarks) shows the following details – * Service in Kuwait from 18 January to 20 January 2017 * Service in Afghanistan from 20 January to 9 October 2017 * Service in Kuwait from 9 October to 11 October 2017 * Ordered to active duty in support of Operation Freedom Sentinel 5. The applicant provided the following evidence in support of his application. a. A DA Form 4187 showing a commissioned officer in the rank of lieutenant colonel (LTC) in the Aviation Branch recommended the applicant for the Combat Action Badge for engaging with enemy forces on 16 August 2017 in Nangarhar, Afghanistan at approximately 1900 hours Lima time zone. There was a mass casualty evacuation mission with the landing zone taking incoming enemy mortar and small arms fire. The recommending officer stated, "My signature below verifies that the Soldier named above was personally present and engaged or being engaged by the enemy and performing satisfactorily [in accordance with] prescribed rules of engagement." The award recommendation was favorably endorsed by his USAR battalion and brigade commanders. A brigadier general serving as a commanding general recommended approval and forwarded the award recommendation packet on 30 April 2019 to AHRC for their action. b. A narrative accompanied the award recommendation. In effect it states on 16 August 2017 a helicopter medical evacuation was ordered for members of the United States Special Forces who were injured during an explosion. They had been in a building at the time of the explosion. After the explosion the element was attacked by enemy forces on three sides leading to a mass casualty incident wherein more assets were required to withdrawal the seriously wounded personnel. (1) The wounded in action were taken to a casualty collection point for assessment and extraction. The ground force commander and Special Forces medics requested U.S. Air Force (USAF) pararescue forces from Bagram Air Field. This request was made to medically evacuate the wounded by USAF helicopter because of its capacity and its ability to return fire based on its machine guns as it entered a hot landing zone. (2) From the initial medical evacuation call of seven wounded in action, it grew to 13 personnel requiring urgent evacuation. With this information it was determined that two unarmed U.S. Army helicopters would enter a hot landing zone taking direct enemy fire. As ground forces responded to the situation and moved the wounded to the intended landing zone, the count of wounded personnel increased to 20 individuals with 13 requiring urgent medical evacuation. During the firefight and after the explosion, two personnel were reported killed in action. (3) The USAF helicopters were not able to respond to the emergency so the U.S. Army unarmed helicopters responded entering the hot landing zone under constant and overwhelming enemy fire. The applicant was a crew member of a U.S. Army helicopter who noticed United States ground forces were in the prone position near the landing zone returning effective fire to the west with small explosions approximately 50 meters from the landing zone. (4) As patients were loaded into the helicopter, the applicant noticed small puffs of dust popping up to the east at 50 to 100 meters from the landing zone. When the helicopter was loaded, it immediately took off to avoid more incoming enemy fire. c. On 7 May 2018, SSG RCC provided a sworn statement. He states he was the senior Special Forces medical sergeant located at the incident site for the duration of the mass casualty event occurring on 16 August 2017. His element was conducting a deliberate clearance of a valley. They were in constant contact with enemy forces. At 1730 hours the ground force commander ordered the element to clear a compound so they could remain overnight. (1) At the time the compound held enemy forces and contained improvised explosive devices (IED). A large explosion occurred 250 to 300 meters north of the compound. The compound and its only building were cleared and the Special Forces element began to secure the building when a second explosion occurred south of the compound. The element was in the building when a third explosion occurred at the front of the building. (2) Soon thereafter a complex enemy attack commenced from three sides (north, west and south). Within minutes he was aware it was a mass casualty incident requiring more assets and medical evacuation of the wounded and injured personnel. He started to move the wounded to the casualty collection point and he requested a USAF pararescue response from the United States military airfield, a 35 to 45 minute flight from his location. The USAF helicopters were better equipped to enter a hot landing zone under direct and indirect fire. At some point the USAF helicopters reported they could not respond to the mass casualty. The number of wounded personnel in an urgent status increased so U.S. Army helicopter support was requested. (3) Two medical evacuation helicopters landed on the hot landing zone that had been cleared by Special Forces personnel. At this time the wounded totaled 20, with 13 requiring urgent medical care. Two personnel were killed in action. He prioritized who would be loaded into the helicopters for immediate evacuation. (4) He identifies the crew in the lead helicopter including the applicant. Their aircraft approached from the east to the west and as it approached the landing zone it took incoming machine gun fire and rocket propelled grenades. The lead aircraft landed within 50 meters of his location and he was able to load four wounded in action personnel. Two of them were unconscious. The third became combative during the loading process requiring immediate attention of the crew and the fourth was also conscious, but not combative. There were eight wounded in action personnel remaining requiring evacuation with three personnel who were killed in action also requiring evacuation. (5) He was told he could load as many patients as he could on the second helicopter. A third helicopter would take 40 minutes to arrive. After he loaded the second helicopter with more of the seriously wounded Soldiers and the killed in action personnel, a volley of four to six mortars impacted on the landing zone blocking the southern security perimeter. There were two remaining wounded in action personnel who were loaded onto gun trucks and evacuated by ground. He knows the actions of the helicopter crews saved the lives of 11 personnel that day. d. On 7 May 2018, a second Special Forces medical sergeant, SSG APW, prepared a sworn statement attesting to the facts of 16 August 2017 when a mass casualty incident occurred after an enemy explosion. He states he was at the incident site for the duration of the action and participated in the medical treatment of the casualties and their evacuation from the incident site. He describes their location and the compound where the explosion occurred in detail. The explosion occurred at approximately 1815 hours at a building designated as their location to remain overnight. He was knocked off his feet from the blast. At the time he was outside of the building establishing security. He heard the screams of the wounded coming from the building. He immediately began trauma survey attending to the needs of the critically wounded personnel while the senior medical sergeant managed the larger casualty incident. The two medical sergeants could not effectively treat the wounded without immediate assistance. A mass casualty incident was declared with the end result being four personnel killed in action and 30 personnel wounded in action. Two medical helicopters were called into a hot landing zone that was taking incoming enemy fire. The first helicopter crewman was the applicant. His aircraft took the four most urgent patients encountering enemy fire while landing, loading, and leaving the landing zone. The second aircraft took more of the wounded in action personnel and it too arrived, loaded, and departed with incoming enemy fire. The remaining wounded were evacuated by ground and the Special Forces element withdrew from the compound and egressed out of the valley to a safer location. He was deeply impressed by the courageous performance under highly dangerous and adverse conditions of the helicopter crews. He is grateful for the helicopter crews. e. On 7 September 2018 the applicant’s platoon leader penned a letter of lateness to accompany Combat Action Badge recommendation. He states on 16 August 2017 the applicant and other members of the unit medically evacuated by helicopter personnel who were seriously wounded. It was a mass casualty incident. After the mission ended, two Special Forces medical sergeants stopped by the medical evacuation operations cell and said they would provide sworn statements. However, due to their own injuries they left Afghanistan and transitioned to a Warrior Transition Unit for recovery. His platoon was relieved in place by another unit coming into the theater and he and his Soldiers returned to the continental United States to demobilize and stabilize. It took multiple attempts to contact the two Special Forces medical sergeants to obtain their sworn statements. He believes the two statements from Soldiers external to his unit are more beneficial than if his own unit members internal to the organization had provided sworn statements. Thus, he patiently waited for the Special Forces personnel sworn statements before submitting the award recommendation. f. On 28 May 2019, the AHCR Chief, Awards and Decorations Branch informed the applicant’s USAR chain of command that it had denied their request for the Combat Action Badge based on lack of sufficient justification to warrant retroactive approval for the events of 16 August 2017. Specifically, the memorandum states, "Requests for retroactive awards must also include justification – reviewed by the wartime chain of command – that explains why the [Combat Action Badge] was not awarded in theater." BOARD DISCUSSION: 1. After reviewing the application and all supporting documents, the Board found the requested relief is warranted. 2. The Board agreed that the witness statements provided in this case clearly describe the applicant's participation in combat action that met the criteria for award of the Combat Action Badge. 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 the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by awarding him the Combat Action Badge effective 16 August 2017 and by adding the badge to his DD Form 214 for the period ending 15 November 2017. 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. Title 10, USC, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within three years after discovery of the alleged error or injustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure to timely file within the three-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) states the ABCMR operates pursuant to law within the Office of the Secretary of the Army. The ABCMR consists of civilians regularly employed in the executive of the Department of the Army who are appointed and serve as an additional duty. Three civilians constitute a quorum. The ABCMR will decide cases on the evidence of record. It is not an investigative body. The ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or an injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. 3. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), effective 25 July 2015, states 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 combat operations is not required to qualify for 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 Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized. Paragraph 8-8c(3) states "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." On 5 March 2019 this regulation was updated to include the requirement the Soldier must also be performing in an offensive or defensive act while participating in combat operations, engaging, or being engaged by the enemy. Additionally, it states requests for retroactive award of the Combat Action Badge will not be made except where evidence of an injustice is presented. Evidence of an injustice must be included when submitting a retroactive award request including why the badge was not awarded in theater by the appropriate approval authority. When awarded, the Combat Action Badge will be announced by permanent orders. 4. MILPER Message 11-268, issued 2 September 2011, Table 8-1 (Steps for Processing Award of Combat Badges), Note 3 states narratives and sworn statements of incidents will include the specific date of the incident, 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. This message expired on 30 September 2013. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20190010931 7 1