RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        12 January 2006
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004402


      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. John J. Wendland, Jr.         |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Ms. Linda D. Simmons              |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Rodney E. Barber              |     |Member               |
|     |Ms. Rea M. Nuppenau               |     |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 a Standard Form (SF) 600
(Chronological Record of Medical Care), dated 17 June 1965, be declared
fictitious and removed from his military service records.

2.  The applicant states, in effect, that he was never on sick call on the
date in question, there is no documentation (i.e., an x-ray or follow-up
report) that supports the SF 600, and the entry was made to deny him
benefits.  He also states, in effect, that since the document is
fictitious, it violates Title 18, U.S. Code (USC), Chapter 47, Section
1001, and should be removed from his military service records.

3.  The applicant provides a Brief in Support of Application, dated 25 June
2004, with Exhibits A through K (as identified in the document under
Attached Exhibits) and a copy of Title 18, USC, Chapter 47, Section 1001.

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error or injustice
which occurred on 26 January 1968; the date of his release from active
duty.  The application submitted in this case is dated 25 June 2004, and
was supplemented on 19 March 2005.

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 military service record shows that he enlisted in the
U.S. Army on 27 January 1965.  Upon completion of basic combat training and
advanced individual training, the applicant was awarded military
occupational specialty (MOS) 11B (Light Weapons Infantryman).  The
applicant's military service record shows that he was assigned to
Headquarters and Headquarters Company,
4th Battalion, 9th Infantry, 25th Infantry Division in Vietnam, from 16
April 1966 through 15 April 1967.  He was honorably separated from the U.S.
Army in the rank of sergeant (temporary)/pay grade E-5, on 26 January 1968,
after serving on active duty for a total of 3 years.
4.  The applicant's military service records show that from 8 February 1965
through 1 July 1965, the applicant was a private assigned to the United
States Army School/Training Center, Fort Gordon, Georgia.  His records also
show that from 6 July 1965 through 15 April 1967, the applicant was
assigned to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 4th Battalion, 9th
Infantry, and he achieved the rank of specialist four/pay grade E-4.  They
further show that from 31 May 1967 through 25 January 1968, the applicant
was assigned to Troop G, 2nd Squadron, 6th Armored Cavalry Regiment, Fort
George G. Meade, Maryland, and that he was promoted to the rank of Sergeant
on 21 June 1967.

5.  The applicant's medical records were not available during the review of
this case.  However, the applicant's Official Military Personnel File
(OMPF) was reviewed and found to contain documentation relating to the
applicant's U.S. Army enlistment and separation medical examinations, which
are, in pertinent part, discussed below.

6.  The applicant's OMPF contains a SF 89 (Report of Medical History),
dated
27 January 1965, which shows in Item 5 (Purpose of Examination), the entry
"USA (ABN)" (i.e., U.S. Army, Airborne).  This document was completed by
the applicant and shows, in pertinent part, in Item 35 (Have You Consulted
or Been Treated By Clinics, Physicians, Healers, or Other Practitioners
Within the Past
5 Years?) the entry "X" in the "Yes" column and "35 cracked knee cap".
Item 40 (Physician's Summary and Elaboration of All Pertinent Data) shows,
in pertinent part, the entry "Fr (i.e., Fractured) L (i.e., Left) patella
1960".

7.  The applicant's OMPF contains a SF 88 (Report of Medical Examination),
dated 27 January 1965, which shows in Item 5 (Purpose of Examination) the
entry "USA (ABN)".  Item 39 (Identifying Body Marks, Scars, Tattoos)
contains the entry "Burn scar lt (i.e., left) ankle area".  Item 74
(Summary of Defects and Diagnoses) shows the entry "39.  Burn scar lt ankle
area".  Item 77 (Examinee) contains an "X" in Section a (Is Qualified For)
"Enlistment in USA - ABN".

8.  The applicant's OMPF contains a SF 89 (Report of Medical History),
dated
12 January 1968, which shows in Item 5 (Purpose of Examination) the entry
"ETS" (i.e., Expiration of Term of Service).  This document was completed
by the applicant and shows, in pertinent part, in Item 20 (Have You Ever
Had or Have You Now - History of Broken Bones) the entry "X" in the "Yes"
column.  Item 39 (Physician's Summary and Elaboration of All Pertinent
Data) shows the entry "(Item) 20 - Broke right wrist - 1965".

9.  The applicant's OMPF contains a SF 88 (Report of Medical Examination),
dated 12 January 1968, which shows in Item 5 (Purpose of Examination) the
entry "ETS".  Item 74 (Summary of Defects and Diagnoses) shows the entry
"77. LOM - Right Wrist - OK for ETS - See SF 513 enclosed".  Item 77
(Examinee) contains an "X" in Section a (Is Qualified For) "Separation".

10.  The applicant's OMPF also contains a DA Form 1811 (Physical and Mental
Status on Release from Active Service), dated 18 January 1968.  This
document shows, in pertinent part, in the Physical Status section that the
physical condition of the applicant on 26 January 1968 was such that he was
considered physically qualified for separation or for immediate
reenlistment.

11.  The applicant's OMPF also contains a DA Form 3082-R (Statement of
Medical Condition), dated 26 January 1968, which states, in pertinent part,
"I underwent a separation medical examination more than 3 working days
prior to my departure from place of separation".  In response, the
applicant made a check mark on the document  indicating "There has been no
change in my medical condition" and he also affixed his signature to the
document.

12.  The applicant provides a brief in support of his application which
contains a statement that provides a biographical summary of his military
service and, in pertinent part, highlights a skiing accident that the
applicant suffered on
20 November 1965.  The brief also outlines the applicant's attempts to
correct his military records, a discussion of the contents of the SF 600 in
question and why the document is false, a declaration by the applicant
attesting to the truth and correctness of the brief in support of his
application, additional facts about his service-connected disability, and
11 exhibits attached to the document.  The exhibits are summarized, as
follows:  Exhibits A and B are two SFs 600, dated
17 June 1965 and 24 March 1965, respectively.  These documents contain, in
pertinent part, two entries by the same doctor.  Exhibit C is a SF 502
(Clinical Record - Narrative Summary), dated 3 January 1965 (sic) and a DA
Form 8-275-3 (Clinical Record Cover Sheet), dated 3 January 1966.  These
documents show that the applicant was hospitalized as a result of an injury
to his right leg when he fell while skiing.  Exhibits D and E are copies of
the applicant's DA Form 20 (Enlisted Qualification Record) and DD Form 214
(Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge) which
document his military service.  Exhibit F is a letter from the applicant's
mother stating that the only injury the applicant had prior to his military
service, which required medical attention or treatment, was a bruised left
knee.  Exhibit G is a letter from an Army veteran who served with the
applicant in both Alaska and Vietnam which states that he remembers the
applicant being injured in September 1966 during operations in Vietnam.
Exhibit H is a copy of the applicant's estimated annual Social Security
benefits.  Exhibit I is a copy of SF 513 (Clinical Record - Consultation
Sheet), dated 16 January 1968, which shows the applicant informed the
attending physician that he injured his right wrist in Alaska in November
1965.  This document also indicates, in pertinent part, "non-union
navicular with early degenerative joint arthritis" and a recommendation of
"OK for ETS".  Exhibit J is a VA Form 10-1000 (Discharge Summary -
Inpatient Care), dated 17 August 1988, which documents treatment given the
applicant by the Veterans Administration for a non-union fractured right
scaphoid.  Exhibit K is a DA Form 8-274 (Medical Condition - Physical
Profile Record), dated 14 September 1966, which shows that on 15 December
1966, the applicant was found medically qualified for limited duty for 3
months due to non-union of fractured navicular bone.  The applicant also
provides a copy of Title 18, USC, Chapter 47, Section 1001.

13.  Army Regulation 40-66 (Medical Record Administration and Health Care
Documentation) shows in pertinent part, that the SF 600 is the
chronological record of outpatient treatment and thus is the basic form of
the Health Record (HREC).  This document also shows that the Medical
Treatment Facility (MTF) initiating a SF 600 will complete the
identification data at the bottom of the form.  Entries on the form may be
typed, but they will usually be written in ink; if written, entries must be
legible.  Each entry will show the date and time of visit and the MTF
involved; these entries will be made by rubber stamp when possible.  It
further states that each entry on the form will also be signed by the
person making it.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends, in effect, that the SF 600, dated 17 June 1965,
is fictitious because the rank and unit (i.e., SGT E-5; HHC 4/9") in the
bottom portion of the form do not correspond to the actual rank and unit of
the applicant on 17 June 1965 (i.e., PVT E-2, Co A, 7/3").  Notwithstanding
the apparent errors in the rank and unit entered on the form, the document
identifies the applicant and is filed in the applicant's military service
record.  In addition, regardless of when the SF 600 was completed during
the applicant's military service, the entry "Aches in Rt (i.e., right)
wrist on and off for 6 years" indicates that the applicant's wrist injury
existed prior to service (EPTS), as the applicant served on active duty for
a total of 3 years.

2.  The applicant also contends, in effect, that the SF 600, dated 17 June
1965, is false because it is not supported by a record of diagnosis, x-ray,
or follow-up treatment, and that the doctor who completed the SF 600, dated
24 March 1965, was meticulous in completing symptoms, diagnosis, treatment,
and identifying information, but this was not the case on 17 June 1965.
The applicant offers that this supports his contention that the form was
not completed by the same doctor and is fictitious.  In addition, he
contends that the signatures of the doctor on the two SFs 600 do not match.
 The applicant further contends that his military service records are
silent about any wrist injury throughout his basic training and advanced
individual training, which offers additional support to his contention, and
he further asserts that the wrist injury is not mentioned until after the
applicant was involved in a skiing accident on 20 November 1965.  The
applicant provides documentary evidence in support of his application;
which includes documents from his military service records, the Veterans
Administration, Social Security Administration, and statements from his
mother and a former Army veteran.  However, these documents provide
insufficient evidence in support of the applicant's claim that the SF 600,
dated 17 June 1965 is fictitious and that it should be removed because it
violates Title 18, USC, Chapter 47, Section 1001.

3.  The evidence of record shows that there is only one (dated) entry on
each
SF 600 by the doctor in question (i.e., on 24 March 1965 and 17 June 1965).
 The written entries on the SF 600, dated 24 March 1965, appear consistent
in form and format with the written entries on the SF 600, dated 17 June
1965, as do the signatures.  The Board notes that the meticulously written
and typed entries referred to by the applicant (i.e., that are written
above 24 March 1965 and dated 4 March 1965, along with the typed
information entered in the identification data at the bottom of the form)
were entered by other medical professionals, based on the 4 March 1965 date
in the upper portion of the form and the medical professional's signature
mid-way on the form.  It is also noted that the applicant's rank and unit
are absent on this particular SF 600, and that his date (i.e., year) of
birth is incorrect.  However, the accuracy of this document is not called
into question by the applicant and is being used as evidence of his actual
medical treatment and in support of the applicant's claim.

4.  The SF 502, dated 3 January 1965 (sic "3 January 1966), which the
applicant provides as Exhibit C, shows that the applicant was hospitalized
as a result of a skiing accident on 20 November 1965.  This document shows
that during his hospitalization, because of the applicant's complaint of
some pain occasionally in his right hand, he was sent for x-ray examination
of the wrist.  This document also shows that the "x-ray examination of the
right wrist showed an old united fracture of the carpal navicular".  The
document further shows that "the patient gave a history of injury prior to
his military service" and that no treatment for this united fracture was
indicated at the time.

5.  The DA Form 8-275-3, dated 3 January 1966, which the applicant provides
as part of Exhibit C, also shows, in pertinent part, in Item 23 (Diagnoses)
the following entry "Nonunion of fracture, navicular, wrist bone, right.
Not PR" (i.e., Problem-Related). "LD:" (i.e., Line of Duty) "No, EPTS"
(i.e., Existed Prior to Service).

6.  The evidence of record indicates that while being treated for an injury
incurred as a result of a skiing accident, the applicant acknowledged to
medical personnel history of a right wrist injury prior to his military
service.

7.  The SF 600, dated 17 June 1965, provides additional evidence that the
patient had previously acknowledged to medical personnel that he suffered
from aches in his right wrist on and off for 6 years, providing further
support that the applicant originally injured his right wrist prior to
entering military service.

8.  The evidence of record fails to show, and the applicant has failed to
demonstrate, that the SF 600, dated 17 June 1965, is false or fictitious
and was created to deny him benefits.  Therefore, absent evidence to the
contrary, the
SF 600, dated 17 June 1965, is determined to be a valid document that was
created to document the applicant's medical care, was signed by the
attending physician, and is authorized for filing in his military service
records.

9.  Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 26 January 1968; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on
26 January 1971.  The applicant did not 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

__LDS __  __REB __  __RMN__  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.




                                  ____LINDA D. SIMMONS___
                                            CHAIRPERSON



                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004402                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |YYYYMMDD                                |
|DATE BOARDED            |20060112                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |HD                                      |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |19680126                                |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |AR 635-200, Chapter 2                   |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |Expiration of Term of Service           |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |124.0400.0000                           |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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