RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:           9 June 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20040006764


      I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record
of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in
the case of the above-named individual.

|     |Mr. Carl W. S. Chun               |     |Director             |
|     |Mr. Joseph A. Adriance            |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Melvin H. Meyer               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Lester Echols                 |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Carol A. Kornhoff             |     |Member               |

      The Board considered the following evidence:

      Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.

      Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion,
if any).

THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests, in effect, that her record be corrected to show
her entitlement to the Parachutist Badge.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was issued the Parachutist
Badge at Fort Benning, Georgia in 1990.  She requests this badge be
reinstated and included in her separation document (DD Form 214).

3.  The applicant provides a copy of a Airborne Course Certificate in
support of her application.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
that occurred on 16 November 1994.  The application submitted in this case
is dated 23 August 2004.

2.  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 allows the Army
Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) to excuse failure to file
within the 3-year statute of limitations if the ABCMR determines that it
would be in the interest of justice to do so.  In this case, the ABCMR will
conduct a review of the merits of the case to determine if it would be in
the interest of justice to excuse the applicant’s failure to timely file.

3.  The applicant’s record shows that she enlisted in the Army and entered
active duty on 27 February 1990.  She completed basic combat training at
Fort Jackson, South Carolina on 26 April 1990.  She completed advanced
individual training (AIT) at Fort Lee, Virginia on 18 June 1990.  Upon
completion of AIT, she was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS)
76V (Material Storage & Handling Specialist) and assigned to Fort Bragg,
North Carolina.

4.  The applicant’s Personnel Qualification Record (DA Form 2-1) contains
no indication that the applicant was awarded the Parachutist Badge.  Item 9
(Awards, Decorations & Campaigns) does not include the Parachutist Badge in
the list of earned awards entered.  Item 17 (Civilian Education and
Military Schools) does not include an entry indicating that she ever
completed the basic airborne course.

5.  Item 35 (Record of Assignments) of the applicant’s DA Form 2-1 is void
of any entries indicating the applicant ever attended the basic airborne
course at
Fort Benning, or that she served in a duty MOS that required the skill
qualification identifier (SQI) P (Parachutist).  Item 33 (Date Reviewed)
shows the applicant last reviewed the DA Form 2-1 on 5 May 1994.

6.  The applicant’s Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) is void of any
orders awarding the applicant the Parachutist Badge or the SQI P.  Further,
there are no documents on file that indicate she ever attended or completed
the basic airborne course, or was awarded the badge or SQI by proper
authority.

7.  On 16 November 1994, the applicant was separated under the provisions
of paragraph 5-8, Army Regulation 635-200, by reason of Parenthood.  The
separation document (DD Form 214) she was issued at the time confirms she
held the MOS of 92A10 (Automated Logistics Specialist) and the rank of
specialist (SPC).

8.  Item 13 (Decorations, Medals, Badges, Citations and Campaign Ribbons
Awarded or Authorized) of the applicant’s DD Form 214 shows she earned the
following awards during her active duty tenure:  Army Service Ribbon, Army
Lapel Button, National Defense Service Medal, Southwest Asia Service Medal
with 3 bronze service stars, Kuwait Liberation Medal-Saudi Arabia, Marksman
Qualification Badge with Rifle Bar, Overseas Service Ribbon, and Army
Achievement Medal.  The Parachutist Badge is not included in the list of
authorized awards.  The applicant authenticated this document with her
signature in Item 21 (Signature of Member Being Separated).

9.  The applicant provides an Airborne Course certificate, dated 5
September 1990, which indicates she completed the airborne course.

10.  Army Regulation 600-8-22 prescribes the Army’s awards policy.  Chapter
8 contains the policy on awarding badges and tabs of United States origin.
Paragraph 8-11 contains the criteria for award of the basic Parachutist
Badge.  It states that to be eligible for award of the basic Parachutist
Badge, an individual must have satisfactorily completed the prescribed
proficiency tests while assigned or attached to an airborne unit or the
Airborne Department of the Infantry School, or have participated in at
least one combat parachute jump.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant’s contention that she is entitled to the Parachutist
Badge and the supporting certificate she provided were carefully
considered.  However, there is insufficient evidence to support this claim.


2.  Although the applicant provides an airborne course certificate, her
record is void of any evidence to corroborate her attendance at, or
completion of the basic airborne course.  Further, her record is void of
any indication that she was ever awarded the Parachutist Badge or the SQI P
by proper authority.  Absent any evidence of record to corroborate the
course certificate provided by the applicant, there is an insufficient
evidentiary basis to support granting the requested relief.

3.  The applicant’s DA Form 2-1 does not include the Parachutist Badge in
Item 9, and the applicant last reviewed this form on 5 May 1994.  Her
review constitutes her verification that the information contained in the
record, to include the list of awards in Item 9, was correct at that time.


4.  The applicant also authenticated the DD Form 214 she was issued upon
her separation with her signature.  In effect, this was her verification
that the information contained on the separation document, to include the
list of awards in Item 13, was correct at the time of her separation.
Further, there is no indication the applicant ever raised this issue while
she was still on active duty.

5.  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.

6.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 16 November 1994.  Therefore, the time
for her to file a request for correction of any error or injustice expired
on
15 November 1997.  However, she failed to file within the 3-year statute of
limitations and has not provided a compelling explanation or evidence to
show that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse failure to
timely file in this case.
BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

___MHM_  ___LE __  ___CAK _  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

1.  The Board determined that 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.

2.  As a result, the Board further determined that there is no evidence
provided which shows that it would be in the interest of justice to excuse
the applicant's failure to timely file this application within the 3-year
statute of limitations prescribed by law.  Therefore, there is insufficient
basis to waive the statute of limitations for timely filing or for
correction of the records of the individual concerned.




            ____Melvin H. Meyer______
                    CHAIRPERSON




                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20040006764                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |2005/06/09                              |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |1994/11/16                              |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200                              |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Parenthood                              |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |                                        |
|ISSUES         1.  46   |107.0000                                |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


-----------------------
[pic]