IN THE CASE OF:	  

	BOARD DATE:	  

	DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20080006533 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, award of the Combat Action Badge (CAB).

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he applied for retroactive award of the CAB on 11 September 2007 (sic) for actions that occurred on 28 November 2005.  The applicant also states that despite substantial documentation that he submitted to Headquarters, U.S. Army (USA) Human Resources Command (HRC), his request was disapproved due to “not being in danger of injury from ground explosions.”  The applicant further states that the application was based on the fact that the aircraft he was piloting was being fired upon by insurgent ground forces, which was continually fixing on the aircraft.  The applicant concludes by stating the circumstances upon which the application for the CAB is based, which included several ground explosions, fully meets the intent of the CAB criteria, in that the aircraft was being directly engaged by the enemy.

3.  The applicant provides a copy of Headquarters, USA HRC, Alexandria, Virginia, memorandum, dated 22 March 2007, subject: Request for Award of the Combat Action Badge for CPT [Applicant’s Name and Social Security Number] and DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action), dated 11 September 2006, subject: Award of Combat Action Badge, along with 6 enclosures (as listed).

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military service records show that he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Control Group (Reserve Officers’ Training Corps) as a Cadet on 21 June 1995.  On 10 May 1998, he was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer in the USAR with concurrent call to active duty and completed the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Officer Basic Course (OBC) in 1998.  In 2001, the applicant attended and completed the Aeromedical Evacuation Officer Course, Rotary Wing Aviator and UH-60 Aviator Qualification courses.  The applicant’s records show that he served in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom from
9 January 2005 to 16 December 2005.

2.  In support of his application, the applicant provides the following documents.

     a.  Four DA Forms 2823 (Sworn Statements), all dated 30 November 2005. These statements were submitted by the applicant (pilot); Chief Warrant Officer Two Rhett G________, co-pilot; Sergeant Douglas A_______, crewmember; and Sergeant John M____, crewmember.  The 4 statements all read essentially the same and indicate, in pertinent part, that at approximately 1945 hours, on
28 November 2005, while flying in an aircraft (i.e., Brewmaster 22) from Baghdad to Diwaniyah, the crew observed multiple explosions along a road and small arms fire; the small arms fire began to fix on the aircraft; and the rounds passed the aircraft’s 3 - 4 o’clock position at about 150 - 200 meters away from the aircraft.  The documents also state that the crew felt threatened, maneuvered to avoid incoming fire, acted in accordance with the rules of engagement, and reported the incident to Coalition forces.

     b.  Headquarters, V Corps, Orders 327-001, dated 23 November 2004, subject: Group Travel and Transportation, with 1 page of the attached unit personnel listing, and DA Form 4187, dated 7 October 2007, subject: Attachment Orders, that show, in pertinent part, the applicant was assigned to CJTF-7 and under operational control of the Commander, U.S. Army Central Command (Iraq Area of Operations) in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom, effective 5 January 2005, and attached to the 54th Medical Company, effective 8 October 2005

     c.  Headquarters, USA HRC, Alexandria, Virginia, memorandum, dated
22 March 2007, subject: Request for Award of the Combat Action Badge for CPT [Applicant’s Name and Social Security Number].  This document shows that the lieutenant colonel serving as Chief, Military Awards Branch, USA HRC, Alexandria, Virginia, carefully considered the applicant’s request for award of the CAB.  The Chief, Military Awards Branch, noted that the CAB provides special recognition to Soldiers that are personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy.  She also stated that the applicant was not in close proximity to the rocket(s) or initial blasts and did not appear to be in danger of receiving injuries due to explosion.  Accordingly, the Chief, Military Awards Branch disapproved the applicant’s request for award of the CAB.

3.  A review of the Official Military Personnel Files (OMPF) of the 3 other Soldiers present in the aircraft with the applicant on 28 November 2005, and whose sworn statements were submitted in support of the applicant’s application to this Board, failed to show that any of the Soldiers were awarded the CAB for actions on
28 November 2005.

4.  Headquarters, Department of the Army, Washington, District of Columbia, Letter 600-05-01, dated 3 June 2005, subject:  Changes to the Combat Infantryman Badge and the Combat Medical Badge and the Establishment of the Combat Action Badge, states that on 2 May 2005, the Chief of Staff, Army, approved the creation of the Combat Action Badge to provide special recognition to Soldiers who personally engage, or are engaged by the enemy.  The requirements for award of the Combat Action Badge provide that it may be awarded to any Soldier (Branch and military occupational specialty immaterial); the Soldier must be performing assigned duties in an area where hostile fire pay or imminent danger pay is authorized; the 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; and the Soldier must not be assigned/ attached to a unit that would qualify the Soldier for the Combat Infantryman Badge or Combat Medical Badge.  Award of the Combat Action Badge is authorized from 18 September 2001 to a date to be determined.

5.  Headquarters, USA HRC, Military Awards Branch, Alexandria, Virginia, message, dated 3 June 2005, subject: Combat Action Badge (CAB) Processing Procedures, provided processing procedures for award of the CAB.  This message provides, in pertinent part, that subsequent to 18 September 2001, retroactive awards of the CAB may be made to fully qualified individuals.  Requests not processed in theater will be submitted through the first two-star general officer, in the chain of command to Commander, USA HRC, Attention: AHRC-PDO-PA, Alexandria, Virginia, for consideration.  This document also states that, for the purpose of awarding the CAB, attacks by mortars, rockets, rocket-propelled grenades, improvised explosive devices, and suicide bombers qualify for the badge.

6.  Headquarters, USA HRC, Military Awards Branch, Alexandria, Virginia, message, dated 28 June 2005, subject: Delegation of Combat Action Badge (CAB) Approval Authority, announced changes to the CAB approval authority and processing procedures. This message states, in pertinent part, based on the thousands of Soldiers who potentially qualify for the CAB and the mandate to ensure timely recognition, the Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army (Manpower and Reserve Affairs) further delegated to all Army major general commanders and above authority to retroactively award the CAB to U.S. Army Soldiers assigned to their command.  Approval authority was also extended to brigadier generals (promotable) serving in major general command positions and heads of principle Headquarters, Department of the Army agencies (two-star and above). This message also announced that, for Soldiers currently in the theater of operations, major general commanders and above are responsible for approving all CAB requests for Soldiers currently assigned or attached to their command, regardless if the Soldier was assigned to their command at the time of the qualifying action.  The requirements for award of the Combat Action Badge remained as previously promulgated.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends, in effect, that he should be awarded the Combat Action Badge because the aircraft he was piloting while serving in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom on 28 November 2005 was directly engaged by the enemy.  Specifically, the aircraft was fired upon by insurgent ground forces.

2.  The evidence of record shows that, at the time of the incident under review, authority to award the CAB to U.S. Army Soldiers serving in the theater of operations in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom was delegated to two-star general officers (and above) for Soldiers assigned or attached to their command. 
The evidence of record also shows, in pertinent part, for award of the CAB the Soldier must be personally present and actively engaging or being engaged by the enemy.  The evidence of record further shows, in pertinent part, for the purpose of awarding the CAB, attacks by mortars, rockets, rocket-propelled grenades, improvised explosive devices, and suicide bombers qualify for the badge.

3.  The evidence of record shows that the incident for which the applicant seeks award of the CAB was reported to Coalition forces.  Accordingly, it is reasonable to conclude that the applicant, as pilot of the aircraft at the time of the incident, submitted the report through his chain of command.  Nonetheless, the evidence of record fails to show that the applicant’s chain of command recommended him (or any of the other members of the aircraft’s crew) for award of the CAB based on the incident.

4.  As a matter of policy, it is highly desirable that a recommendation for an award or decoration be placed into military channels and acted upon as quickly as possible.  This allows commanders (who were in the chain of command at the time of the action or service) to make a timely recommendation of approval or disapproval of the award or decoration based on first-hand knowledge of the circumstances upon which the award recommendation is based.  In this regard, the decision to approve an award or decoration rests with the commander having award approval authority; in this case, the first two-star general officer in the applicant’s chain of command.

5.  The evidence of record shows that the crew of the aircraft “observed multiple ground explosions along a road (emphasis added) and “[a]fter the explosions occurred, small arms fire was seen, and then it began to fix on the aircraft (emphasis added).”  The evidence of record also shows the rounds that were fired passed the aircraft at a distance of “approximately 150 - 200 meters away (emphasis added).”  The evidence of record does not indicate an attack by mortars, rockets, rocket-propelled grenades, improvised explosive devices, or suicide bombers, rather it shows there were “ground explosions along a road” while the aircraft was in flight.  In addition, the evidence of record does not clearly establish that the crew of the aircraft was being engaged by the enemy, as the rounds from the small arms fire were approximately 150 - 200 meters away from the right side of the aircraft.

6.  The evidence of record confirms that the applicant’s chain of command in Iraq and the Chief, Military Awards Branch, USA HRC, carefully considered the circumstances and incident upon which the applicant’s request for award of the CAB was based and determined it did not meet the strict criteria for award of the badge.  Therefore, in view of all of the foregoing, there is insufficient evidence upon which to base award of the Combat Action Badge in this case.

7.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  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 that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.




       _    ___X____   ___
       CHAIRPERSON
      
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.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080006533



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20080006533



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1