IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  18 June 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140007354 


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 reconsideration of his previous request for award of the Combat Medical Badge (CMB).

2.  The applicant states:

   a.  He was denied the CMB even though he believes he meets the intent of the award for treating the combat wounded while he was actively engaged by enemy fire on two different occasions in Kirkuk, Iraq, in 2011.  The CMB was endorsed by those immediately present, but disapproved by the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC) and the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR).  He is requesting reconsideration because the original review characterized his participation as being safely distant and did not consider the sworn statements of witnesses who stated he and others were exposed to danger, i.e., from enemy fire.

   b.  The sworn statements document that the action had not ceased, yet these statements were not addressed by either HRC or in the ABCMR discussion.  Inclusion of the sworn statements as evidence regarding the continuing danger during the attacks of both 29 September and 7 October 2001 are the basis for requesting reconsideration.

   c.  The issue in question is reduced to whether or not they were still under attack while he was treating the wounded.  He understands a reluctance to change decisions; nonetheless, all evidence was not considered resulting in denied recognition.
3.  The provides copies of his previous ABCMR Record of Proceedings with enclosures, a letter from HRC, and his letter to a Member of Congress.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in the previous consideration of the applicant's case by the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20130012519 on 15 August 2013.

2.  The applicant resubmitted copies of all documentation previously provided to the Board, his letter to a Member of Congress, and a new argument.  The new argument will be considered by the Board.  

3.  He was commissioned in the Regular Army, as a captain, Medical Corps, on 8 June 2009.  He served in Iraq from August to November 2011 as a field surgeon with the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 1st Armored Division.

4.  He previously provided copies of four sworn statements wherein he and two other individuals stated:

   a.  On 29 September 2011, Contingency Operating Site (COS) Warrior received an incoming warning.  He [applicant] heard an explosion that seemed approximately 500 plus meters away.  A few seconds later he then heard a louder explosion that was clearly closer and possibly in living areas.  He grabbed his trauma bag and moved to the direction of the blast and rising cloud of dust.  From the time of the sound of the second blast to his arrival on the scene was less than two minutes.  He opened his trauma bag and began administering treatment.

   b.  In the mid-afternoon on 7 October 2011, the indirect fire (IDF) alarm sounded and shortly afterward he [applicant] heard an explosion several hundred yards from his office.  He grabbed several trauma bags and ran to assess for injuries.  They ran toward the direction of the blast locating a group of Torres guards and Soldiers yelling for medical care.  As he and several others approached they located one wounded Torres guard face down bleeding from the upper right leg.  He gave the medics his tourniquet and they began to apply it to the guard's leg to stop the bleeding.  He assessed for other injuries and noticed one small wound on the neck and he treated the patient.  They loaded the guard on a truck bed and he directed the other medics and guards to complete a cordon search of all structures.  Upon arrival at the Expeditionary Medical Services (EMEDS) Emergency Room (ER) he reevaluated the small neck wound and started the secondary survey.  He gave his report to Dr. (Colonel) Hxxxx, who eventually took patients into surgery.  He then took up station at the front of the ER for any need for further triage of patients and control of access of the ER.
   
   c.  He witnessed the applicant respond to IDF alarms at COS Warrior on several occasions.  The first was after a rocket landed in the sleeping area.  The applicant was one of the first on the scene and did all he could to treat a Soldier before this Soldier died.  When a rocket landed near his legal office and injured three contractors, the applicant arrived within a minute or two to treat them.  On two other occasions, he saw the applicant respond to the IDF alarms by trying to find out the location of the blast and then running with his aid bag to the scene if the location was likely to be near people.  In each case, the applicant exposed himself to danger in order to promptly care for the wounded.

   d.  On 7 October 2011, COS Warrior came under attack by an IDF.  He observed the applicant arrive on the scene and immediately began rendering medical aid to the injured.  The blast warning sirens were still sounding while the applicant was exposed and every expectation from recent experiences was that other rounds were imminent.  The applicant exposed himself to imminent danger in order to promptly care for the wounded.

   e.  On 7 October 2011, after the Radar Warning System sounded incoming he took cover on the side of the gym.  Within seconds of reaching cover he heard an explosion coming from the north side of the gym and he ran toward the sound of the explosion.  After reaching the bunker he immediately started rendering care and within a few seconds the applicant was next to him and took charge of the treatment.  The alarms continued to sound while combat casualty care was being given.  He believes danger was imminent, as almost every IDF attack on COS Warrior included several rounds.

5.  On 20 June 2012, the applicant's commander submitted a DA Form 4187 (Personnel Action) to HRC recommending the applicant for award of the CMB.  The Commander stated that during two 57 millimeter rocket attacks on COS Warrior the applicant immediately moved to the sound of the blasts and treated those wounded by the shrapnel within 1-2 minutes, unknown if still under rocket fire or not, and long before an all clear sounded.

6.  In a letter, dated 6 December 2012, HRC, Awards and Decorations Branch, denied the request for award of the CMB to the applicant.  The HRC official stated that the documentation provided indicated that the applicant was not performing medical duties while being actively engaged by the enemy; therefore, he did not meet the criteria for award of the CMB.

7.  In an undated letter, the applicant requested from a Member of Congress a cover letter from their office for his request for reconsideration for award of the CMB.

8.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 (Military Awards) states the CMB is awarded to medical personnel assigned or attached to or under operational control of any ground Combat Arms units of brigade or smaller size, who satisfactorily perform medical duties while the unit is engaged in actual ground combat, provided they are personally present and under fire.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s request for reconsideration was carefully considered and found not to have merit.  The sworn statements previously submitted were also carefully considered.  However, the Army has never approved of deviations from the purpose of the CMB and its intent to be awarded to those medical personnel who accompany the combat arms into combat.  

2.  The statements indicate he arrived on the scene after the explosions and performed treatment on the injured.  The statements do not indicate his unit of assignment was engaged in active ground combat at the time and he was personally present.  There is insufficient evidence showing he was performing treatment while the attacks were occurring.  There is also no evidence he was erroneously or unjustly denied award of CMB.

3.  His willingness and dedication to duty during his period of service in Iraq under hazardous conditions is acknowledged and applauded.  However, there is an insufficient evidentiary basis to support awarding him the CMB.

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 to amend the decision of the ABCMR set forth in Docket Number AR20130012519, dated 15 August 2013.



      _______ _   _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)                                         AR20140007354



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140007354


2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1