RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


      IN THE CASE OF:


      BOARD DATE:        22 November 2005
      DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20050004708


      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             |
|     |Mrs. Nancy L. Amos                |     |Analyst              |

      The following members, a quorum, were present:

|     |Mr. Thomas A. Pagan               |     |Chairperson          |
|     |Mr. Eric N. Andersen              |     |Member               |
|     |Mr. Joe R. Schroeder              |     |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 item 18 (Record of Assignments)
on his DA Form 66 (Officer Qualification Record) be corrected to enter
three specific missions he accomplished in September 1951.

2.  The applicant states the regimental commander told him, in February
1951, to take his platoon of 20 men to the 2d Infantry Division
headquarters and report to the Division Commander.  He was told to go the
32 miles on foot, in two feet of snow, and return the same way.  Their
route took the high ground in the mountains.  They took 10 minute breaks
every hour, and they reached their objective in 8 or 9 hours.  He reported
to the commanding general, who told him he (the applicant) had penetrated
the enemy line three times during their route.  The commanding general sent
them back by truck, and in about an hour they were back in their area.  He
served two tours of duty in Korea, received one promotion, lost his right
foot in battle, and is still perturbed that the true story of Bloody Ridge
has not been accurately recorded in military history.

3.  The applicant provides the second page of a DA Form 66 with three
entries (dated 3, 7, and 8 September 1951) in item 18 highlighted and a
copy of an internet article entitled, "2nd Division on Bloody Ridge."

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant is requesting correction of an alleged error which
occurred on 29 February 1956.  The application submitted in this case is
dated 22 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.  After having had prior service, the applicant was called [to active
duty] from inactive duty on 21 August 1950.  Item 18 on the DA Form 66 on
file in his official military personnel file (OMPF) shows he was assigned
to Company C, 9th Infantry Regiment, Far East Command (i.e., Korea) on 9
December 1950 as a platoon leader.  On 2 March 1951, he was assigned duties
as a company commander.  On 5 March 1951, he was assigned duties as a
platoon leader.  On 22 April 1951, he was a patient in an unknown hospital.
 On 25 April 1951, he was a patient in Osaka Army Hospital.  On 8 (sic)
April 1951, he was a patient at the 35th Station Hospital.  On 23 July
1951, he was assigned duties as a platoon leader with Company B, 9th
Infantry Regiment, Far East Command.  On           24 September 1951, he
was a patient in Medical Hold Detachment, Tokyo Army Hospital.

4.  The applicant provided a copy of the second page of a DA Form 66 which
shows that, on 23 July 1951, he was assigned duties as a platoon leader
with Company B, 9th Infantry Regiment, Far East Command.  On 3 September
1951, he was assigned duties as "Co Comdr (Took Hill 700)."  On 7 September
1951, he was assigned duties as “Co Comdr (Took Bloody Ridge)."  On 8
September 1951, he was assigned duties as “Co Comdr (Wounded Heart Break
Ridge)."  On 24 September 1951, he was a patient in Medical Hold
Detachment, Tokyo Army Hospital.

5.  The applicant last reviewed his DA Form 66 on 21 April 1955.

6.  On 24 September 1951, the applicant sustained a perforating wound of
the right thigh with division of the femoral artery that resulted, on 14
November 1951, in the amputation of his right foot.  He desired to return
to duty and he was returned to duty on or about 14 November 1952.
Subsequently, he was found to be medically unfit for duty and was retired
by reason of physical disability on     29 February 1956.

7.  In a 19 May 1982 letter to the Office of The Adjutant General, the
applicant stated, "July 1951: …Capt. D___ joined us as the new C.O.  After
seeing what we were doing, he asked the Bn. C.O. to permit him time to
under-study me.  His request was granted.  Aug. 1951:  Capt. D___ took
command of this company…"

8.  Army Regulation 611-103 (Personnel Selection and Classification,
Officer Qualification and Classification), effective 6 December 1954,
provided guidance for recording entries on the DA Form 66.  For item 18, it
stated, in part, that the title of the principal duty performed by the
individual and the degree of responsibility being exercised would be
recorded (e.g., "Plat Ldr," CO Comdr," "Bn Ex").  Recording of actual job
descriptions was prohibited.

9.  Special Regulation 605-105-2 (Officer's, Warrant Officer's, and Flight
Officer's Qualification Record (WD AGO Form 66)), effective 29 August 1951,
provided guidance for recording entries on the predecessor to the DA Form
66, the WD AGO Form 66.  For item 28 (Chronological Record of Military
Service), it stated, in part, that the title of the principal duty
performed by the individual and the degree of responsibility being
exercised would be recorded (e.g., "Plat Ldr," CO Comdr," "Bn Ex").
Recording of actual job descriptions was prohibited.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  Judging from the partial DA Form 66 the applicant provided, it appears
his primary concern is with his duties during September 1951.

2.  It is noted the applicant provided a copy of the second page of his DA
Form 66 that is slightly different from the one contained in his OMPF.  The
DA Form 66 that is contained in his OMPF appears to be the accurate one.

3.  The regulation in effect at the time the applicant separated (and at
the time the September 1951 entries were originally recorded) meant item 18
to be a reflection, in part, only of his principal duties.  The DA Form 66
was not used as a method of recording each separate mission the applicant
may have been assigned during his time as a platoon leader or company
commander.

4.  In addition, there is no evidence the applicant was a company commander
in September 1951.  The DA Form 66 in his OMPF shows he last reviewed that
form on 21 April 1955, at which time the form in his OMPF showed he was a
platoon leader in September 1951.  In addition, in a 1982 letter to the
Office of The Adjutant General, the applicant stated that Captain D___ had
taken over command of the company in August 1951.

5.   Records show the applicant should have discovered the alleged error or
injustice now under consideration on 29 February 1956; therefore, the time
for the applicant to file a request for correction of any error or
injustice expired on   28 February 1959.  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

__tap___  __ena___  __jrs___  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.




                                  __Thomas A. Pagan_____
                                            CHAIRPERSON

                                    INDEX

|CASE ID                 |AR20050004708                           |
|SUFFIX                  |                                        |
|RECON                   |                                        |
|DATE BOARDED            |20051122                                |
|TYPE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DATE OF DISCHARGE       |                                        |
|DISCHARGE AUTHORITY     |                                        |
|DISCHARGE REASON        |                                        |
|BOARD DECISION          |DENY                                    |
|REVIEW AUTHORITY        |Mr. Chun                                |
|ISSUES         1.       |100.00                                  |
|2.                      |                                        |
|3.                      |                                        |
|4.                      |                                        |
|5.                      |                                        |
|6.                      |                                        |


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