IN THE CASE OF BOARD DATE: 2 May 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220009281 APPLICANT REQUESTS: reversal of the decision by the Awards and Decorations Branch at the U.S. Army Humam Resources Command to deny him award of the Combat Infantry Badge (CIB). APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: * Online Application and signature page, 14 July 2022 * 2 DD Forms 149 (Application for Correction of Military Record), 14 July 2022 * 2nd Infantry Division Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) Battalion Standing Operating Procedures (SOP), 22 January 1989 * 1990 Annual Historical Review, 2nd Infantry Division * Imjin Scout Certificate, 22 February 1990 * Orders 248-256, 509th Personnel Service Company, 10 September 1990 * DA Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty), 7 November 1990 * Extract, 2nd Infantry Division Regulation Number 672-3, Decorations, Awards, and Honors, Imjin Scout Certificate, 15 January 1991 * 2 DA Forms 214, 4 January 1998 and 23 September 2003 * Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions, 19 May 2004 * 3-page story of unknown origin * Letter, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (AHRC), Awards and Decorations Branch (ADB), 6 July 2022 * DA Form 1559 (Inspector General Action Request), 13 July 2022 * Memorandum, Headquarters U.S. Army Infantry School, 28 July 2022 * Letter, AHRC, ADB, 28 July 2022 * ABCMR Docket Number AR20170009862, 12 November 2020 * 4 previous ABCMR cases pertaining to other service members: * ABCMR Docket Number AC98-10667, 4 November 1998 * ABCMR Docket Number AR2001062852, 8 November 2001 * ABCMR Docket Number AR2002075474, 31 October 2002 * ABCMR Docket Number AR2017011045, 18 April 2019 * General Orders Number 25, Headquarters, 155th Infantry, 22 August 1944 * General Orders Number 31, Headquarters, 155th Infantry, 26 August 1944 * General Orders Number 37, Headquarters, 155th Infantry, 29 August 1944 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. During the time he served in Korea there were discriminatory special provisions in place to be awarded the CIB for combat operations on the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). Those provisions have since been rescinded and he feels he has earned the right to wear the badge. He served in military occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Infantryman), in an infantry unit, satisfactorily performing his duties in combat within the DMZ during May 1991, when he was personally present and under fire at Guard Post Ouellette. b. He recently applied to AHRC and was denied. AHRC stated "We acknowledge you were personally present during the event and shots were fired; however, it appears the North Korean Forces were not attempting to engage the United States Soldiers, nor was the unit you were assigned to engaged in active ground combat with an opposing hostile armed force of the U.S. In this regard, we remain unable to authorize issuance of the requested badge." This statement is nonsensical and demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what the 2nd Infantry Division did during its DMZ rotations from 1965 - 1991. c. How can AHRC know what the North Korean Army were shooting at 32 years after the fact? They were not there, and he was. They fired at them, 100%. Luckily, they were poor shots and missed. They would have returned fire, but the 2nd Infantry Division imposed strict rules of engagement on them, so without authorization from the battalion commander, a Soldier risked a court martial if he fired his weapon at the enemy. In addition, he was a private/E-2 at the time and was not authorized to fire without a direct order from his platoon leader. Other Soldiers have presented less evidence and been awarded the CIB for their service on the DMZ. One Soldier admitted he was 2400 meters away from the contact answering phones during a November 1984 firefight. 3. The applicant enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 2 August 1989. He completed training and he was awarded MOS 11B. His record does not contain an Enlisted Record Brief or a DA Form 2-1 (Personnel Qualification Record) showing the dates of his service in Korea. On 7 November 1990, he was honorably discharged. His service characterization was upgraded per ABCMR Proceedings AR20170009862 on 25 November 2020. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he completed 11 months and 16 days of foreign service and he was awarded or authorized the: * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon * Expert Marksmanship Qualification Badge with Hand Grenade and Rifle Bar (M16) 4. The applicant's DA Form 2-1 shows he served in the Army National Guard from March 1991 until 4 January 1995. 5. He reenlisted in the RA on 5 January 1995. On 4 January 1998, he was honorably discharged upon the completion of his required active service. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was awarded or authorized the: * Army Achievement Medal * National Defense Service Medal * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon * Army Reserve Components Overseas Training Ribbon (2nd Award) * Parachutist Badge * Air Assault Badge 6. He reenlisted in the RA on 21 December 2000. On 23 September 2003, he retired honorably due to permanent disability. The DD Form 214 he was issued shows he was awarded or authorized the: * North Atlantic Treaty Organization Medal * Army Achievement Medal (2nd Award) * National Defense Service Medal (2nd Award) * Kosovo Campaign Medal * Noncommissioned Officer's Professional Development Ribbon * Army Service Ribbon * Overseas Service Ribbon * Army Reserve Components Overseas Training Ribbon * Army Good Conduct Medal * Korea Defense Service Medal * Global War on Terrorism Service Medal 7. On 6 July 2022, the Chief, ADB, AHRC stated that they remained unable to render favorable action concerning award of the CIB. The AHRC official stated, "the CIB is authorized for service on the DMZ from 28 July 1953 to 31 March 1994. We must reiterate, the definition of the requirement to be "engaged in active ground combat" has been clarified over time as being personally present, under fire, and engaging against the enemy in ground forces combat. The badge is intended to recognize the Infantry Soldier whose daily mission is to close with and destroy the enemy." They acknowledged he was personally present during the event and shots were fired; however, it appeared the North Korean Forces were not attempting to engage the U.S. Soldiers, nor was the unit he was assigned to engaged in active ground combat with an opposing hostile armed force of the U.S. 8. In a proponent review for award of the CIB, on 28 July 2022, the Office Chief of Infantry, Headquarters, U.S. Army Infantry School, did not concur with the applicant's request for award of the CIB. He further stated the applicant did not meet the eligibility requirements for the award in accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards). The applicant had not provided evidence he met the following three requirements: * 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. Campaign or battle credit alone is not sufficient for award of the CIB 9. The applicant provides a/an: a. DA Form 1559 dated 13 July 2022, wherein he requests award of the CIB and an investigation into the discriminatory, inconsistent, and arbitrary manner in which AHRC awards retroactive combat badges. b. Partial 2nd Infantry Division DMZ Battalion Standard Operating Procedures with partial Annex F (Rules of Engagement for DMZ Battalion Operations) and Annex G (Tactical Operations Center Operations) to DMZ Standard Operating Procedures. c. Partial 1990 Annual Historical Review of the 2nd Infantry Division from the 2nd Infantry Division Museum and Historical Center. d. 2nd Division Regulation Number 672-3, 15 January 1991, Imjin Scout Certificate and the applicant's Imjin Scout Certificate for commendable service in the defense of freedom along the DMZ, Korea from 13 December 1989 to 22 February 1990. e. Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions – S.2450, 19 May 2004, referencing introduction of a bill to amend Title 10, United States Code, to revise the requirements for award of the CIB and Combat Medical Badge with respect to service in Korea after 28 July 1953, to the Committee on Armed Services. f. 3-page writing of unknown origin referencing Master Sergeant duty on 23 December 1984, when a Russian tourist bolted across the demarcation line from North Korea, bringing a hail of deadly gunfire and sparking a 24-minute battle between the U.S. and South Korean forces and the North Korean guards. g. ABCMR Proceedings AC98-10667, 4 November 1998, in which the evidence of record showed the applicant of this case served in Vietnam in an infantry MOS in an infantry unit in combat. Therefore, he was entitled to award of the CIB. h. ABCMR Proceedings AR2001062852, 8 November 2001, in which the evidence of record showed the applicant in this case was entitled to combat infantry pay. Evidence showed that he performed as an infantry squad leader in an infantry unit during World War II (WWII). These facts were sufficient for award of the CIB; therefore, he was entitled to award of the CIB and correction of his records to show this badge. i. ABCMR Proceedings AR2002075474, 31 October 2002, in which the evidence of record showed the applicant in this case served in Grenada from 28 October to 4 November 1983. Evidence showed the applicant in this case was awarded an infantry MOS and served in an infantry duty position with 2nd Battalion, 508th Infantry during combat in Grenada. Therefore, he was awarded the CIB. j. ABCMR Proceedings AR20170011045, 18 April 2019, after reviewing the application and all supporting documents, to include the regulatory guidance relating to the CIB relating to service in Korea, the Board found the applicant of this case met all the eligibility requirements to be awarded the CIB. k. 4 Partial declassified General Orders from WWII in which the applicant highlights the Soldiers who were awarded the CIB had no contact with the enemy yet were still awarded the badge. BOARD DISCUSSION: After reviewing the application, all supporting documents, and the evidence found within the military record, the Board found that relief was partially warranted. The applicant’s contentions, the military record, and regulatory guidance were carefully considered. To be awarded the CIB, the member must be an Infantryman satisfactorily performing Infantry duties; assigned to an Infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat; and actively participate in such ground combat. The evidence of record shows the applicant held an infantry MOS and served in Korea. However, the Board found no evidence of applicant being engaged in active ground combat and/or being personally present, under fire, and engaging against the enemy in ground forces combat. The incident he describes does not show North Korean Forces were attempting to engage US Soldiers, and the applicant’s unit of assignment did not engage in active ground combat with an opposing hostile armed force. The Board determined he does not meet the criteria for award of the CIB. 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) states, the CIB was established by the War Department on 27 October 1943. The definition of requirement to be "engaged in active ground combat" has generated much dialogue over the years as to the original intent of the CIB. The intent has been clarified over time as being personally present, under fire, and engaging in action against the enemy in ground forces combat. It is not awarded for battle participation credit. For award of the CIB a Soldier must meet the following three requirements: a. Be an infantry Soldier satisfactorily performing infantry duties. (1) A Soldier must be an Army infantry or Special Forces officer (CMF or AOC 11 or 18) in the grade of Colonel/O-6 or below, or an Army enlisted Soldier or warrant officer with an infantry or Special Forces MOS who, subsequent to 6 December 1941, has satisfactorily performed duty while assigned or attached as a member of an infantry, ranger, or Special Forces unit of either a brigade, regimental, or smaller size during any period such unit was engaged in active ground combat. (2) Eligibility for Special Forces personnel in MOSs 18B, 18C, 18E, 18F, and 18Z (less 18D–Special Forces medical sergeant) accrues from 20 December 1989. Retroactive awards of the CIB to Special Forces personnel are not authorized prior to 20 December 1989. b. Be assigned to an infantry unit during such time as the unit is engaged in active ground combat. (1) A recipient must be personally present and under hostile fire while serving in an assigned infantry or Special Forces primary duty, in a unit actively engaged in ground combat with the enemy. The unit in question must be a brigade, regiment, or smaller size. For example, personnel possessing an infantry MOS in a rifle squad of a cavalry platoon in a cavalry troop would be eligible for award of the CIB. Battle or Campaign Participation Credit alone is not sufficient; the unit must have been in active ground combat with the enemy during the period. (2) Personnel with other than an infantry or Special Forces MOS are not eligible, regardless of the circumstances. The infantry or Special Forces Career Management Field, Area of Concentration or MOS does not necessarily have to be the Soldier’s primary specialty, as long as the Soldier has been properly trained in infantry or Special Forces tactics, possesses the appropriate skill code, and is serving in that specialty when engaged in active ground combat as described above. Commanders are not authorized to make any exceptions to this policy. (3) Awards will not be made to general officers or to members of headquarters companies of units larger in size than brigade. c. Actively participate in such ground combat. Campaign or battle credit alone is not sufficient for award of the CIB. (1) The CIB is authorized for award for the following qualifying wars, conflicts, and operations. Second and third awards of the CIB are indicated by superimposing one and two stars respectively, centered at the top of the badge between the points of the oak wreath. To date, a separate award of the CIB has been authorized for qualified Soldiers in the following qualifying periods: Korea on the DMZ (4 January 1969 to 31 March 1994). (2) In Korea on the DMZ. The special requirements for award of the CIB for service in the Republic of Korea are rescinded. Army veterans and Servicemembers who served in Korea on or after 28 July 1953 and meet the criteria for award of the CIB outlined in paragraph 8–6c may submit an application (to include supporting documentation) for award of the CIB to Commander, U.S. Army Human Resources Command (AHRC–PDP–A), 1600 Spearhead Division Avenue, Fort Knox, KY 40122– 5408. Retroactive awards under these criteria are not authorized for service prior to 29 July 1953. 3. Army Regulation 15-185 (ABCMR) prescribes the policies and procedures for correction of military records by the Secretary of the Army, acting through the ABCMR. Paragraph 2-9 contains guidance on the burden of proof. It states that the ABCMR begins its consideration of each case with the presumption of administrative regularity, which is that what the Army did was correct. The ABCMR is not an investigative body and decides cases based on the evidence that is presented in the military records provided and the independent evidence submitted with the application. The applicant has the burden of proving an error or injustice by a preponderance of the evidence. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20220009281 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1