Posted on Apr 16, 2019
(READ UPDATE!!!) How do you handle a situation where a Soldier is wearing a deployment patch they did not earn? What are the repercussions?
67K
517
126
186
186
0
Backstory: Soldier went in country (Iraq) for 6 days and went back to Kuwait. He now feels entitled to be able to wear a "combat patch" (his words not mine). Regulation states must be 30 days in country (combat zone; not Kuwait anymore) to qualify for a deployment patch.
((UPDATE)): I just learned from several people AR 670-1 has been updated to reflect that the amount of days boots on ground no longer matters. Most up-to-date AR 670-1 states:
"The military operation must have lasted for a period of 30 days or longer" (i.e. OIF, OIR, etc...)
"Soldiers of all Army components (Active, ARNG, and USAR) who deploy during periods of service designated for wear of the SSI–FWTS are authorized to wear a SSI–FWTS. There are no time-in-theater requirements for authoriza-tion to wear the SSI–FWTS. Soldiers may not earn more than one SSI–FWTS during the same deployment."
The Soldier can wear his deployment patch and I already let him know I made a mistake. Leaders make mistakes but it's how we fix or respond to those mistakes that matter. Good learning experience. Thank you to everyone who provided constructive feedback.
((UPDATE)): I just learned from several people AR 670-1 has been updated to reflect that the amount of days boots on ground no longer matters. Most up-to-date AR 670-1 states:
"The military operation must have lasted for a period of 30 days or longer" (i.e. OIF, OIR, etc...)
"Soldiers of all Army components (Active, ARNG, and USAR) who deploy during periods of service designated for wear of the SSI–FWTS are authorized to wear a SSI–FWTS. There are no time-in-theater requirements for authoriza-tion to wear the SSI–FWTS. Soldiers may not earn more than one SSI–FWTS during the same deployment."
The Soldier can wear his deployment patch and I already let him know I made a mistake. Leaders make mistakes but it's how we fix or respond to those mistakes that matter. Good learning experience. Thank you to everyone who provided constructive feedback.
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 65
"On the spot correction," remove it. Doesn't remove it, recommend action to the chain of command as refusal of a lawful order. Back in my day, I'd rip it off & tell him to see the First Sergeant to complain.
(43)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
CSM,
While his reg does indeed to be out of date, the same text has been moved to para 19-17(4). By the looks in the picture he's still using the 2014 version.
While his reg does indeed to be out of date, the same text has been moved to para 19-17(4). By the looks in the picture he's still using the 2014 version.
(4)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
to clarify:
"(16) Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR): between 15 June 2014 and a date to be determined, for Soldiers deployed to Iraq, Jordan, or Syria in support of OIR, who received combat zone tax exclusion and hostile fire/IDP as identified by CENTCOM Command Center-Joint Staff for Personnel and Administration. Soldiers who were deployed in the area of operations on training exercises or in support of operations other than OIR are not authorized the SSI–FWTS, unless those exercises or operations became combat or support missions to OIR."
To get an SSI for Iraq as outlined in this excerpt of AR 670-1, the Soldier must have a TCS order or amendment to Iraq.
One day in country with that order would qualify, a six day trip in and out without that order would not qualify.
"(16) Operation Inherent Resolve (OIR): between 15 June 2014 and a date to be determined, for Soldiers deployed to Iraq, Jordan, or Syria in support of OIR, who received combat zone tax exclusion and hostile fire/IDP as identified by CENTCOM Command Center-Joint Staff for Personnel and Administration. Soldiers who were deployed in the area of operations on training exercises or in support of operations other than OIR are not authorized the SSI–FWTS, unless those exercises or operations became combat or support missions to OIR."
To get an SSI for Iraq as outlined in this excerpt of AR 670-1, the Soldier must have a TCS order or amendment to Iraq.
One day in country with that order would qualify, a six day trip in and out without that order would not qualify.
(6)
(0)
SSG Trevor S.
SSG (Join to see) thank you! I didn’t check for newer versions after retiring. Good to know where it moved to.
(3)
(0)
There was a policy memo from one of the commands granting wear of the SSI-FWTS for I thought was 1 day in Iraq. This was 2017. I think it came from TF Spartan or one of the other Commands they likely fell under in Kuwait. I might just double check that. Not sure about the "being entitled" part however - he should have received some sort of memo authorizing the wear. Hope this helps.
(19)
(0)
1LT Rich Voss
PO2 Lewis Brockman - Good Lord man ! Nine ??? One of my close buddies here (also a multi-tour Viet Nam vet) is on #8, and swears she the last. As does she !!! I happen to be on 4 slash 5. Too long and personal a story for here. She does call herself "the LAST Mrs. Voss"...that's all one needs to know !
(2)
(0)
CPT William Jones
I would think one would have to be on some sort of official business with some sort of orders. One day in and out sounds like aircrew or couriering mission. Then you would be on a manifest of some sort.
(0)
(0)
Have some insight on this. In 2014, my unit deployed to Spartan Shield, and just before we went ISIL took Mosul and I served on the BCT staff. Because there was a really strict BOG restriction, we sent two of our combat battalions forward to Iraq, but had to kind of "rotate" individuals in and out. There was a lot of discussion on this topic because many people did not stay in Iraq for 30 days at a time, just long enough to do what they do and leave. Bottom line, after IG complaints, JAG involved, etc., this is what we were told. AR 670-1 21-17, (e) 3) does say "The military operation must have lasted for a period of 30 days or longer." This is what they call the "named operation" requirement. This does not mean a Soldier needs to be there for 30 days, just that the Soldier there is a part of an operation (Operation Inherent Resolve, New Dawn, etc) that has existed for longer than 30 days. The kicker here is AR 670-1 21-17, (e) 7) "Soldiers of all Army components who deploy during periods of service designated for wear of the SSI-FWTS are authorized to wear the SSI-FWTS. THERE ARE NO TIME IN THEATER REQUIREMENTS." (I put that in all caps because that is the relevant part of this portion.) Now this is all from notes I took from those discussions back then. This is how interesting it got. I don't know if your JAGs or IGs all concur on this (the ARCENT group definitely did). So if you decide to call out this Soldier for this, all that was really required was a memo stating the Soldier traveled to the zone for x amount of time. I have that memo in my file, but I don't wear that particular patch because I have one from a previous deployment to Afghanistan and I had some "questions" myself about all of this. The brigade commander actually went so far as to fly individuals into Iraq for a day and then fly them out just so they could get a patch. When the Army scaled down what could go in your file a few years back, the memo disappeared. So like I said, for me personally I'm not so worried. But if you do decide to correct this Soldier, just be aware of all of this and that if he has such a memo, he may be authorized wear of that insignia and he may be able to have JAG back him up.
(14)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
I have seen it before. When I was in Afghanistan, a nearby commander got ordered to make room to house a random LTC in one of his CHUs. The LTC was deploying there as “special advisor to the mayor cell.” We rarely saw him leave or go anywhere except chow. 60 days later he was gone. I find out from my commander that he was a LTC coming up on his look for Colonel, but he had never deployed. His boss was trying to take care of him by sending him to Afghanistan for a few months.SFC(P) (Join to see)
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
This is correct the Soldier does not need to be in the country, its "boots on ground" as long as the mission is 30 days or more.
(0)
(0)
1LT (Join to see)
SFC(P) (Join to see) - I don't see how his first line confirmed his unit wasn't authorized. I think it is ridiculous too but unfortunately the floodgates were blown off of this thing years ago. There are tons of people walking around with patches that you give them a benefit of a doubt until you ask questions. The combat patch has morphed into a sign of validity. The very proof is the shenanigans that are pulled for people to get them.
(0)
(0)
SGT Jim Wiseman
I was in a similar position with my CIB. Like a lot of guys, I got sent out from my job in the TOC to "earn" mine. The patrol took fire while we were in the vehicle. Nothing serious, but I was being taken care of by BN leadership so I wouldn't be the only Infantry guy without once deployment was over just because I had been assigned to be a TOC monkey in Afghanistan. This was fairly early in the deployment, within six months. I later got placed in PSD to replace the SAW gunner who wasn't carrying his weight. A turkey trot that ended with us being hit with an RPG on our way back to the FOB. While the incident for which I was awarded my CIB was appreciated, the incident where I was wounded and also awarded a Purple Heart for... well, I damn sure earned it there, as well as my combat patch, for sure.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next