PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:        

	BOARD DATE:            9 December 1999
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999025314

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. JoAnn H. Langston		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas D. Howard, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

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

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests, in effect, retroactive enrollment in and compensation from the Ready Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Program (RRMIIP).

3.  The applicant states, in effect, that she was in the Primary Leadership Development Course (PLDC) when the initial RRMIIP briefings were provided.  She goes on to say that she was never briefed on the program upon her return to the unit and never afforded the opportunity to enroll.  Shortly after this she was transferred to another unit where she requested enrollment prior being mobilized in August 1997.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that on 8 October 1991, she enlisted in the USAR in the pay grade of E-4, for a period of 8 years and assignment to a Troop Program Unit (TPU).

5.  During the initial RRMIIP enrollment period the applicant was assigned to Detachment 1, 2125th USAR Garrison Support Unit at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. However, during this period she was on active duty for training at Fort Jackson, South Carolina, attending the PLDC.  She attended PLDC from 1 December 1996 to 15 December 1996 and the first drill she attended at her TPU, after her release from active duty, was on 11 January 1997.  The applicant’s TPU commander has provided a statement, in support of the applicant’s request.  In this statement the commander indicates that the applicant was at PLDC during the initial RRMIIP briefings and was never briefed at any time prior to her transfer to a new unit in May 1997.

6.  In May 1997, the applicant was assigned to the 805th Military Police (MP) Company, Raleigh, North Carolina.  On 31 July 1997, the unit commander of the 805th MP company submitted the applicant’s undated request for enrollment in the RRMIIP under the $5,000 option.  In the forwarding endorsement, the unit commander recommended approval of the enrollment and indicated that the applicant had never been afforded the opportunity to decline the RRMIIP.  On 
16 August 1998, the applicant’s request was returned without action by the RRMIIP Program Manager at the Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM) due to the applicant having missed the cut-off date for submission and advised the applicant that she had the right to submit her request as an appeal.

7.  On 19 August 1997, the applicant was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Joint Endeavor/Guard in Hungary for a period not to exceed 270 days. 
She was honorably released from active duty on 2 May 1998 due to completion of required active service and was returned to her unit in Raliegh.

8.  The applicant appealed the decision denying her enrollment in the RMIIP and provided additional statements to support her claim that she was not briefed.  Her request was again denied by the ARPERSCOM on 4 September 1998; however, this time it was denied on the basis that the commander did not provide a sufficiently detailed explanation as to why the applicant was not briefed and the fact that initial briefing procedures and initial enrollment was not addressed.  In addition, she was notified that the cut-off for the appeals program was 30 June 1998.

9.  A review of the statement from the applicant’s commander, during the initial enrollment period, indicates that the applicant was not briefed during the initial enrollment period because she was on active duty attending the PLDC.  It also confirms that the applicant was never briefed on her return to the unit or prior to her being transferred to another unit in May 1997.  The applicant’s request for enrollment, even though accomplished in conjunction with a mobilization, was done within 60 days of reporting to her new unit and prior to the actual mobilization.  In addition, it is clear from the forwarding endorsement from the new unit commander on the applicant’s RRMIIP enrollment request, dated 31 July 1997, that the applicant had not been afforded the opportunity to enroll or decline the RRMIIP in that unit prior to that time.

10.  In the processing of this application an advisory opinion was requested from the RRMIIP Program Manager at the ARPERSCOM.  It opines, in effect, that the applicant’s request was disapproved because of the lack of documentation submitted by the unit commander pertaining to the initial notification procedures.  It goes on to state that the responsible unit commander offered no documentation as to what notification procedures were used in the appeal packet received by their office.  It also states that while the packet received at this Board does include a statement from the unit commander responsible for initial notification, it still does not offer any documentation.  It further comments that RRMIIP information had been mailed to all units in late September 1996 to disburse to soldiers.  This opinion was provided to the applicant for comment.  

11.  On 5 August 1997, the applicant responded to the advisory opinion referred to in the preceding paragraph.  In her reply the applicant indicated that she had enclosed a letter from the unit commander explaining why she did not receive the initial RRMIIP briefing and verifying that she had not been briefed on her return to the unit or at any time prior to her reassignment.   She also commented that, in an attempt to resolve the situation, she had provided the necessary explanations and statements on many occasions and thinks that the unit commander's statement provided with her request should be sufficient to prove she had never been briefed on the RRMIIP. 

12.  The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, dated 
10 February 1996, authorized the RRMIIP with an initial start date of 1 October 1996.  RRMIIP was designed to provide income insurance for most Reserve Component members who were involuntarily ordered to active duty in support of military operations for over 30 days.  The initial enrollment period for active members of the Reserve Components (USAR and National Guard) was 
1 October 1996 through 31 December 1996.  Personnel who failed to enroll within 60 days after being briefed were considered to have declined.  Personnel on active duty were not eligible to apply for enrollment in the RRMIIP.  Personnel who enlisted in a TPU after the initial enrollment period were required to be briefed on the program within 60 days of arrival in the unit and had 60 days after being briefed to enroll or decline.

13.  The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1998, effective 
18 November 1997, terminated the RRMIIP coverage for those not ordered to involuntary active duty as of that date and prohibited new enrollments.  Consequently, the USAR and Army National Guard extended administrative appeals/errors processing to offer Reserve Component soldiers who believed that they were wrongfully denied enrollment an opportunity to appeal.  All appeals had to be received in complete form as of 30 June 1998.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The issues in this case are whether or not the applicant was properly briefed on the RRMIIP and was it accomplished within the prescribed timeframe.  Notwithstanding the opinion of the ARPERSCOM, the Board is convinced that the applicant was not properly briefed on the RRMIIP.

2.  After carefully reviewing the statement from the unit commander responsible for the applicant’s initial RRMIIP briefing and the forwarding endorsement from her commander at the time she applied for enrollment, the Board believes that both statements support the applicant’s contention that she was not briefed on the program.  The first commander indicates that the applicant was not present at the initial briefing and was never briefed on the RRMIIP prior to her departing the unit.  The forwarding endorsement from the unit commander on the applicant’s enrollment request states that the applicant was never afforded the opportunity to decline the program, which translates to she was never properly briefed on the program.  In addition, the applicant’s request was made within 60 days of being assigned to her new unit, well within the timeframe allotted for soldiers who had been on active duty during initial briefings.  These statements are sufficiently convincing to lead the Board to believe that the applicant had never been properly briefed or afforded the opportunity for enrollment in the RRMIIP, prior to her enrollment request in July 1997.

3.  Therefore, the Board accepts the applicant’s contention that she was not briefed on the program and was unjustly denied a benefit that she otherwise would have been able to receive had she been properly and timely briefed.  Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to enroll the applicant in the RRMIIP effective 31 July 1997, when a proper briefing should have been conducted and prior to the date she was ordered to active duty and became ineligible through no fault of her own.

4.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the individual concerned was enrolled in the RRMIIP effective 31 July 1997, under the $5,000 option.

2.  That the individual concerned be afforded the opportunity to submit a      DFAS-CL Form 1241/3 (RRMIIP Claim for Mobilization Insurance Benefits) and supporting documents for retroactive payment of RRMIIP benefits, minus any premiums she would have paid had she been properly enrolled on 31 July 1997.

BOARD VOTE:  

__jhl____  ___jps___  __tdh ___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		____JoAnn Langston______
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999025314	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	1999/12/09	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	N/A	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	N/A	
DISCHARGE REASON	N/A	
BOARD DECISION	GRANT	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  13	101.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.