IN THE CASE OF:  BOARD DATE: 25 April 2023 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20220011288 


APPLICANT REQUESTS: reversal of the decision by the Awards and Decorations Branch at the U.S. Army Human Resources Command to deny him award of the Combat Action Badge.  

APPLICANT'S SUPPORTING DOCUMENT(S) CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD: 



































•Army Review Board Agency Case Tracking System Online Application and signature page•self-authored statement•enemy report; 24 February 2008•Combat Action Badge quality checklist; date of incident 24 February 2008•Orders 145-229, Joint Force Headquarters, •National Guard, •, 25 May 2007•DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty); 14 June 2008•Enlisted Record Brief, 3 May 2015•Personnel Qualification Record; 3 May 2015•letter; Congress member, 9 June 2015•7 DA Forms 2823 (Sworn Statement) -•Master Sergeant (MSG) M., 1 May 2015•Sergeant First Class (SFC) P., 1 May 2015•Specialist (SPC) H., 2 May 2015•Staff Sergeant (SSG) C., 3 May 2015•Major (MAJ) K., 5 May 2015•MAJ A., 14 July 2015•SSG M., 26 February 2018



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.His requests for award of the Combat Action Badge were not approved forservice performed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom. His request was denied by the National Guard Bureau Soldier's Programs and Decorations Service Division, they state they found: "indirect fire was present at the base camp" however his peers have since been awarded the Combat Action Badge for the same incident. 

b.In accordance with Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), paragraph8-8c(3), he was personally present and actively being engaged by enemy forces on24 February 2008 at Camp Bucca, Iraq. In accordance with MILPER message 11-268,table 8-1, step 5, note 3, it is extremely reasonable to assume that he could have beeninjured or killed. He was located in a Combat Housing Unit that was made of non-ballistic or non-concussion proof material such as sheet metal, plywood and glass. Hewas within 50 meters of the immediate blast that killed a civilian employee. Thisemployee was inside a structure similar to his. According to Army Field Manual (FM)23-90, Chapter 7, paragraph 28, note 1, a tube fired projectile of similar size has a killradius of 60-75 meters. He could have been killed or injured in the attack with byshrapnel, debris or the collapse of his housing unit.

c.On 24 February 2008 around 11:00 p.m. while stationed at Camp Bucca, insupport of Operation Iraqi Freedom, he was engaged by anti-Iraqi forces with indirect fire (IDF). He was off duty in his Combat Housing Unit (CHU) with his fire team and roommates when they heard the initial volley of an IDF. They took cover on the floor, and the blast occurred less than 50 meters away to the west along the Hesco protective barriers in relation to his location. The concussion from the blast knocked items from the desks, wall lockers, the wall, damaged, warped, and shook the CHU. After everyone was ok, they moved outdoors to the bunkers for better cover. Once the all clear was given they proceeded to the tactical operations center where accountability was performed. It is reasonable to state he could have been injured during the attack and he performed his duties satisfactorily in accordance with the established rules of engagement. There were no Soldiers injured during the attack, however one civilian contractor was killed, and several individuals were wounded from the attack who lived no less than 20 meters from his CHU.  

3.The applicant provides several documents as evidence, containing the personallyidentifiable information (PII) of other Soldiers. This information includes correspondencefrom the Army Human Resources Command, correspondence from the ABCMR, theABCMR dockets of other Soldiers, and the permanent orders awarding other Soldiersthe Combat Action Badge. The ABCMR is not authorized to address the military recordsof other Soldiers in this Record of Proceedings or to include them as evidence without the express written permission of the Soldiers whose PII was listed on noted documents, as doing so would be a violation the Privacy Act. 
4.The applicant was serving as an enlisted Soldier in the Tennessee Army NationalGuard (TNARNG) during the period under review, from 4 June 2007 to 14 June 2008.

5.Orders 145-229, published by Joint Force Headquarters, TNARNG, show theapplicant was ordered to active duty for support of contingency Operation Iraq Freedomon 4 June 2007.

6.His DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) shows hewas honorably released from active duty on 14 June 2008, after completing 1 year and11 days of net active service, of which 8 months and 21 days were credited as foreignservice. This form also contains the following information and entries:

a.Block 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign RibbonsAwarded or Authorized) lists the Iraq Campaign Medal but does not reflect the Combat Action Badge. 

b.Block 18 (Remarks) shows the following entries: Served in a designatedimminent danger pay area, Service in Kuwait/Iraq from 20070831-20080521." 

7.DD Form 215 (Correction to DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge fromActive Duty) corrects item 12e (Total Prior Inactive Service) to reflect 2 years 8 monthsand 26 days.

8.The applicant provides seven sworn statements from witnesses of whom state, ineffect, on 24 February 2008, Camp Bucca, Iraq was hit by indirect fire. The blast wasmeters away from combat housing units (CHUs). The IDF killed one contractor andwounded several others. Two of the seven statements mention the mention theapplicant:

a.SPC H's statement notes, after the blast, when he finally made it to the bunkers,he saw other Soldiers from his company, including the applicant. 

b.SSG M's statement notes that the ABCMR awarded him the Combat ActionBadge for the same incident the applicant is now making his request. SSG M states he witnessed the applicant, who was present during the incident in question and was much closer to the blast than he was, trying to find cover in the concrete bunkers, but he cannot attest to the applicant's actions at the exact time of the contact of the "Near" blast. He further states, the applicant's CHU was closer to the blast area and location where personnel were killed/injured than his own CHU. 

9.A letter from the Chief, Awards and Decorations Branch, AHRC, dated 4 April 2022,disapproved the applicant's request for the award of the Combat Action Badge. AHRCstated based upon review of the forwarded documentation and the additional resourcesavailable to their office, their previous determination regarding award has not changed;this incident does not meet the strict criteria for award of the Combat Action Badge inaccordance with Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), paragraph 8-8c(3). Assuch, they remain unable to authorize issuance of the Combat Action Badge.

10.Regulatory guidance states the Combat Action Badge is not intended to recognizeSoldiers who simply serve in a combat zone or imminent danger area. Battleparticipation credit alone is not sufficient; the unit must have engaged or been engagedby the enemy. In order to qualify for the Combat Action Badge, a member must beperforming assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay isauthorized; he/she must be personally present and under hostile fire while performingsatisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement; and he/she mustnot be assigned or attached to a unit that would qualify the Soldier for the CombatInfantryman Badge or Combat Medical Badge.


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. The applicant contends he was present and actively being engaged by enemy forces on 24 February 2008 in Iraq. He was located in a Combat Housing Unit that was made of non-ballistic or non-concussion proof material such as sheet metal, plywood and glass. He was within 50 meters of the immediate blast that killed a civilian employee. The Board determined that based on review of the forwarded documentation, the applicant’s incident does not meet the strict criteria for award of the Combat Action Badge. 


BOARD VOTE: 

Mbr 1 Mbr 2 Mbr 3 

: : : GRANT FULL RELIEF 

: : : GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

: : : GRANT FORMAL HEARING 

XX: XX: XX: 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. 


Microsoft Office Signature Line...




REFERENCES: 

1.Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552(b), provides that applications for correction ofmilitary records must be filed within 3 years after discovery of the alleged error orinjustice. This provision of law also allows the ABCMR to excuse an applicant's failure totimely file within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines it would be inthe interest of justice to do so.

2.Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards), in effect at the time, prescribed Armypolicy, criteria, and administrative instructions concerning individual and unit militaryawards. Instructions stated the requirements for award of the Combat Action Badge arebranch and military occupational specialty immaterial. Assignment to a combat armsunit or a unit organized to conduct close or offensive combat operations, or performingoffensive 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 servein a combat zone or imminent danger area. The Combat Action Badge may be awardedto any Soldier. Paragraph 8-8 stated specific eligibility requirements include:

a.Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay orimminent danger pay is authorized. 

b.Soldier must be personally present and actively engaging or being engaged bythe enemy and performing satisfactorily in accordance with the prescribed rules of engagement. 

c.Soldier must not be assigned or attached to a unit that would qualify the Soldierfor the Combat Infantryman Badge/Combat Medical Badge. For example, an 11B (Infantryman) assigned to Corps staff is eligible for award of the Combat Action Badge. However, an 11B assigned to an infantry battalion is not eligible for award of the Combat Action Badge. 

d.In addition to Army Soldiers, the Combat Action Badge may also be awarded tomembers of other U.S. Armed Forces and foreign military personnel assigned to a U.S. Army unit, provided they meet the above criteria. 

e.Award of the Combat Action Badge is authorized from 18 September 2001 to adate to be determined. Award for qualifying service in any previous conflict is not authorized. 

3.Title 5, United States Code, Section 552a, Privacy Act of 1974, broadly stated,provides the purpose of the Privacy Act is to balance the government’s need tomaintain information about individuals with the rights of individuals to beprotected against unwarranted invasions of their privacy stemming from federal protected against unwarranted invasions of their privacy stemming from federal protected against unwarranted invasions of their privacy stemming from federal 
 
//NOTHING FOLLOWS//