MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:     

	BOARD DATE:           24 June 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1998012673

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

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Hubert S. Shaw, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Mr. Gary C. Miller		Member	
	Mr. Curtis L. Greenway		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That award of his Parachutist Badge be restored.

APPLICANT STATES:  That, when he requested termination of his “jump status” on 3 April 1963, it was not made clear to him that his Parachutist Badge would be revoked.  He contends that his intent at the time was to be removed from parachutist status and to be reassigned to another unit.  The applicant also contends that the length of time a soldier serves in parachute status should have no bearing on whether or not the badge can be worn as part of the uniform.  He states that he agreed to serve not less than one year.  He also commented that there are many service members, who upon earning the parachutist badge have never served in an airborne unit, but have worn “the badge like a rifle badge”.  In support of his application, the applicant submitted a DA Form 1049 (Personnel Action), dated 13 February 1962, in which he volunteered for airborne status; U.S. Army Infantry Center Special Orders 58, dated 14 March 1962, assigning the applicant to the 82nd Airborne Division; 1st Airborne Battle Group Special Orders Number 70, dated 24 March 1962 assigning the applicant to perform hazardous duty as a parachutist; a 5 April 1963 request by the applicant to terminate his jump status; a DA Form 1049 removing the applicant from parachute status, removing airborne qualification from his military occupational specialty (MOS), and revoking his parachutist badge; and 82nd Airborne Division Special Orders Number 93, dated 20 April 1963, terminating hazardous duty as a parachutist and revoking the applicant’s Parachutist Badge.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

That the applicant at the time in question was assigned to Company C, of the 2d Airborne Battle Group of the 504th Infantry, a unit of the 82nd Airborne Division. 

Evidence of record shows the applicant volunteered for airborne training and completed that training at Fort Benning, Georgia, on 16 March 1962.  He was subsequently assigned as a parachutist in the 82nd Airborne Division and placed on orders to perform hazardous duty as a parachutist effective 24 March 1962.

On 5 April 1963, the applicant submitted a “Request for Termination of Jump Status” to his company commander under the provisions of Headquarters 82nd Airborne Division Memorandum 611-1.   In this personnel action, the applicant stated that he did not wish to exit an aircraft in flight anymore and requested transfer to a non-airborne unit.  He also acknowledged that, by voluntarily terminating his airborne status, he would be barred from further airborne duty.

On 5 April 1963, the company commander recommended approval of the request and stated that he had interviewed the applicant.  On 20 April 1963, the applicant was removed from airborne status, the airborne qualification digit was removed from his MOS, and award of his Parachutist Badge was revoked.

Army Regulation 672-5-1 (Military Awards), dated 3 May 1961 and in effect at the time in question, provided that any Parachutist Badge may be revoked when the awardee (a) is convicted by court-martial for refusal to participate in a parachute jump; or (b) initiates, in his initial tour of airborne duty, action which results in termination of his airborne status prior to his completion of 18 consecutive months of airborne duty.  Currently, Army Regulation 600-8-22 governs award of the Parachutist Badge and contains in Paragraph 1-30 the provision for revocation of the Parachutist Badge if termination is initiated prior to completion of 36 months of cumulative airborne duty.

82nd Airborne Division Regulation 611-7 (Airborne Status) replaced 82nd Airborne Division Memorandum 611-1.  This regulation prescribes the current policies and standard procedures for deliberate, command and medical termination of airborne status by soldiers, non commissioned officers and officers.  The regulation requires the unit commander and other members of the chain of command to counsel the terminee regarding the consequences of his actions.  The regulation also provides that the Division Commander may revoke award of a parachutist badge when a soldier, non commissioned officer or officer is punished under provisions of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) or initiates action which results on the termination of airborne status prior to the completion of the required months in a parachutist position.  The current standard is 36 cumulative months in a parachutist position.  

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  Evidence of record shows that the applicant requested termination of his airborne status prior to completion of 18 cumulative months of airborne duty and his request was approved.  As a result, competent authority then revoked the applicant’s award of the Parachutist Badge based on Army Regulation 672-5-1.

2.  There is no evidence of record, and the applicant has provided no evidence, that revocation of his Parachutist Badge was improper or was not authorized by proper authority. 

3.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that length of time on airborne status should have no bearing on wear of the badge.  However, the Board noted that the requirement to serve 18 consecutive months of airborne status was in effect at the time he volunteered for airborne training and when he requested termination of his airborne status.  There is also evidence of record that the applicant was counseled regarding the consequences of his request to terminate his airborne status which would have included revocation of the Parachutist Badge, removal the airborne designator from his MOS and ineligibility for future assignment to airborne duty.
4.  The applicant’s contention that he only volunteered to perform airborne duty for a year is without merit.  The DA Form 1049, which the applicant signed on 13 February 1962, clearly states that he “may be assigned to an airborne unit for a period not less than one year upon completion of the prescribed course.”  This cite is a commitment by the Army to assign parachutist qualified personnel for a minimum of a year if they are assigned to an airborne unit.  This statement is not related to and does not govern award or revocation of the Parachutist Badge.  

5.  The applicant’s contention that the Parachutist Badge is worn by personnel who never served in an airborne unit is noted.  However, this issue is not relevant in this case since wear of authorized badges is governed by uniform regulations which are not authorities for award or revocation of the badge in question.

6.  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 the aforementioned requirement.

7.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

RVO____  GCM____  CLG____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1998012673	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990624	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	UNKNOWN	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19740909	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	UNKNOWN	
DISCHARGE REASON	UNKNOWN	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	MR HARRELL	
ISSUES         1.	107	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.