IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 January 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220005054 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reversal of the Awards and Decoration Branch, U.S. Army Human Resources Command decision to deny him retroactive award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * DD Form 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record) * self-authored statement * DA Form 4980-14 (Army Commendation Medal Certificate), 29 October 2012 * DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), 29 May 2015 * letter, Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR), 12 November 2012 * letter, Army Human Resources Command (AHRC), 3 May 2022 * two supporting statements FACTS: 1. The applicant did not file within the 3-year time frame provided in Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b); however, the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) conducted a substantive review of this case and determined it is in the interest of justice to excuse the applicant's failure to timely file. 2. The applicant states, in effect: a. On 31 October 2012, 1st Platoon returned to Combat Outpost (COP) Mushan after a patrol. While awaiting a debrief in the Tactical Operations Center (TOC), explosions were heard and the building shook. A non-commissioned officer (NCO) came through the door and shouted, "We're getting hit. Get to the bunkers." The platoon ran outside the TOC into an ensuing firefight. They were ordered to return to their tent for weapons maintenance. While in the tent, the intensity of the firefight increased. They were ordered to go to the bunkers. While moving towards the bunker, he observed explosions on the helicopter landing zone (HLZ). Upon reaching the bunker, they were told to await further orders. They were then told to mount a wall as part of 360-degree security of the COP and await air support. Shortly before helicopters arrived, the enemy broke contact. b. Following the engagement, several Soldiers asked their sergeants if the engagement was "[Combat Infantryman Badge] material." Staff Sergeant (SSG) replied, "They're not getting it for that; they need to get their cherries popped outside the wire like we did." He later learned all the Soldiers present, who had yet to receive a combat award, received one for the attack on COP Mushan. The only four Soldiers out of an entire Infantry Company with support attachments who did not receive the Combat Infantryman Badge were the replacements in 1st Platoon. c. Over the years, he brought the subject up to leadership. One SSG stated, "Y'all got badge protected. It was messed up, but you guys earned that award." When asked why he wouldn't help them receive the award they earned, he stated it would be too messy and too much work. d. He was unaware there were administrative avenues to address the situation and of the regulatory requirements for the Combat Infantryman Badge. * be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties * assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat * actively participate in such ground combat e. Given those requirements, he was satisfactorily performing his infantry duties while engaged in ground combat. He followed all orders from his leadership while being engaged and having indirect rounds explode within 50mm of his position. While the firefight was still occurring, his platoon mounted a wall in an effort to provide 360-degree security for the COP, which constitutes active participation in an enemy engagement. He believes the verbiage in the regulatory guidance allows for subjectiveness in determinations. f. He struggles with severe Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) following his military service, partially caused by the engagement that occurred on 31 October 2012 and the injustice that followed. The denial of the Combat Infantryman Badge was further punishment from a toxic leadership culture, who frequently looked for ways to punish he four replacements. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 May 2015. He held military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman). 4. He served in Afghanistan, with 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, in support of Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) from 27 August 2012 to 21 November 2012. 5. His DD Form 214 shows he was honorably discharged from active duty on 29 May 2015 by reason of completion of required active service. 6. His record does not contain, nor does he provide any evidence to show he was awarded the Combat Infantryman Badge. 7. He provides DA Form 4980-14, dated 29 October 2012, which shows he was awarded an ARCOM for the period of service 5 September 2012 to 3 December 2012. 8. He provides a Memorandum from the ABCMR, dated 21 November 2021, which shows his previous request for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge, Docket Number AR20210010877, was returned without Board action as the applicant did not exhaust all administrative remedies available to correct the error or injustice. 9. He provides a Memorandum from AHRC, Awards and Decorations Branch, dated 3 May 2022, wherein AHRC denied his request for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. AHRC stated that they are unable to authorize the requested badge for issuance; Army combat badges are designed to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engage the enemy in ground combat or who satisfactorily perform their duties while being engaged in ground combat by the enemy. This particular event does not meet the regulatory guidance for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge (CIB). In accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-22, paragraph 8-6, the CIB is not intended to recognize an individual for unit battle participation or deployment to a combat zone. The CIB is designed to recognize the infantry Soldier, whose daily mission is to close with and destroy the enemy. The badge is intended to recognize an individual Soldier's satisfactory performance in ground combat with the enemy. The provided documentation does not indicate he meet the criteria. As such, HRC cannot authorize issuance of the CIB for this event. Although this response is not favorable, in no way does it detract from your faithful and dedicated service to our Nation. 10. His application includes two supporting statements which provide the following: a. SSG (retired) states, in effect, he became the applicant's Platoon Sergeant after the platoon returned from Afghanistan. The applicant was in the same place at the same time as other members of the company who received the Combat Infantryman Badge. The applicant and other new Soldiers in the platoon were not treated fairly. They were berated, harassed, cussed out and beaten in an out-of-control hazing environment. The company was investigated by the Criminal Investigation Division (CID) during and after deployment. The replacement Soldiers who arrived late in the deployment were denied the Combat Infantryman Badge. They received enemy contact shortly after arriving. The applicant earned the Combat Infantryman Badge and should have been included on the original orders that were published for the rest of his platoon. None of the replacements in 1st Platoon were included. b. An individual who served with the applicant in Alpha Company, 1st Battalion, 23rd Infantry Regiment, states, in effect, he was a member of 1st Platoon during the deployment to Afghanistan. The applicant arrived shortly after the middle of the deployment and was present at COP Mushan when they were engaged by Taliban forces on 31 October 2012. They received both direct and indirect fire. Several Soldiers asked why the replacements were not receiving combat awards. They never received an answer. He overheard a squad leader say "COP defense is a part of deployment; they're not getting a Combat Infantryman Badge for that. They need to get their cherry popped outside the wire like we did." He later learned that all the replacements from other platoons received the award. The only individuals who did not were the replacements in 1st Platoon. 11. Regulatory guidance states there are basically three requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. The Soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground combat. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was not warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. There are three requirements for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge. The Soldier must be an infantryman satisfactorily performing infantry duties, he must be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat, and he must actively participate in such ground combat. The definition of requirement to be "engaged in active ground combat" means being personally present, under fire, and engaging in action against the enemy in ground forces combat. It is not awarded for battle participation credit. The Board determined the incident described by the applicant does not meet the criteria for this badge. ? 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. 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, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction of military records must be filed within 3 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 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be in the interest of justice to do so. 2. Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), prescribes Army policy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit military awards. Paragraph 8-6 (Combat Infantryman Badge) of this regulation provides, in part, a Soldier must meet the following three requirements to be eligible for award of the Combat Infantryman Badge: * be an Army infantry officer in the grade of Colonel/O–6 or below, or an Army enlisted Soldier or warrant officer with an infantry MOS * be assigned to an infantry unit of either a brigade, regimental, or smaller size during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat * must actively participate in such ground combat; campaign or battle credit alone is not sufficient for award of the CIB //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220005054 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1