PROCEEDINGS


         IN THE CASE OF:
        

         BOARD DATE: 18 July 2002
         DOCKET NUMBER: AR2002073700


         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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst

The following members, a quorum, were present:

Mr. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson
Mr. John P. Infante		Member
Mr. Stanley Kelley		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 that his claim for benefits under the Ready Reserve Mobilization Income Insurance Program (RRMIIP) be reviewed and that he be paid at the rate in which he originally enrolled.

3. The applicant states, in effect, that he originally enrolled in the RRMIIP on 26 January 1997 for the amount of $5,000.00 in coverage; however, a determination was made at the Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM) that the maximum he could be enrolled for was $1,000.00. Consequently, he was denied the amount in which he originally requested. He further states that other members of his unit applied to the Board and the Board granted them an increase in RRMIIP benefits to the amount they originally requested. He goes on to state that his situation is similar to the other soldiers’ situations and he desires to have his benefits increased as well. In support of his application he submits copies of the Board’s proceedings which approved other soldiers in his unit for additional RRMIIP benefits.

4. The applicant’s military records show that on 11 January 1997, while serving in the pay grade of E-4 in a United States Army Reserve (USAR) unit in Puerto Rico, he was briefed on the RRMIIP with other members of his unit. He was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Joint Endeavor/Guard on 26 January 1997.

5. He also submitted his application for enrollment in the RRMIIP on 26 January 1997, electing the $5,000 option. It appears that he was initially denied coverage but was subsequently approved for the $1,000 option by officials at the ARPERSCOM.

6. He remained on active duty until he was released from active duty on 21 October 1997. He had served 8 months and 26 days of active service during that period.

7. In the processing of previous cases pertaining to members of the applicant’s unit, a member of the legal staff contacted several members of the applicant’s unit in Puerto Rico and determined that on 11 January 1997, when the applicant’s unit was briefed on the RRMIIP, the applicant, along with other members of his unit were informed, in effect, that they did not qualify for the RRMIIP and the briefing was given only a scant few minutes of coverage. The staff legal advisor opines, in effect, that the members of the unit were unjustly denied the opportunity to enroll in the RRMIIP because they were not properly and timely briefed on the program. He also opines that the commander’s admission that the failure to properly and timely enroll in the program was through no fault of the soldiers was indicative that there was a problem in disseminating the program information. Accordingly, he recommended that they be afforded the opportunity to be enrolled in the program in the amounts originally designated on their applications effective the date the briefing was originally conducted on 11 January 1997.

8. 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. The 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 who enlisted in a Troop Program Unit 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. Additionally, personnel who entered on active duty were not eligible to enroll regardless whether their 60-day enrollment period at elapsed. Personnel who elected an option less than the maximum could not at a later date increase their option; however, they had the option at any time to decrease the amount of the coverage.

CONCLUSIONS:

1. The issue in this case is whether or not the applicant was properly briefed on the RRMIIP and was it accomplished within the prescribed time frame and whether or not he actually submitted an RRMIIP application in a timely manner. The Board is convinced, based on the staff legal advisor’s investigation, that the applicant was not properly briefed on the RRMIIP prior to his mobilization processing and that he was denied a benefit that he otherwise would have been entitled to receive had he been properly and timely briefed.

2. In previous cases, his unit commander acknowledged that the failure to properly and timely enroll in the RRMIIP was through no fault of the soldiers at the time he requested that the soldiers of his units be enrolled in the RRMIIP at the rate they originally requested. While the Board is already convinced that the soldiers lacked the proper information to make an informed decision about participating in the enrollment process for the program, the fact that it involved so many members of the same unit is indicative that the briefing conducted on 11 January 1997 was flawed because the members were already aware that they were going to be mobilized in the near future and the Board believes that no reasonable person would choose to decline the insurance under those circumstances.

3. It was the unit commander’s responsibility to notify the soldiers regarding the RRMIIP briefing and to ensure that informed decisions could be made regarding the program. The fact that the applicant was not properly briefed or the fact that he mobilized before he obtained the proper information for him to make an informed decision is not sufficient justification to deny him the opportunity to enroll in the RRMIIP or to limit the amount of his enrollment. To do so would be denying him an opportunity to be afforded the same benefits that other soldiers were afforded.

4. Therefore, the Board accepts the applicant’s contention that he was not properly briefed on the program and was unjustly denied a benefit that he otherwise would have been able to receive had he been properly and timely briefed. Accordingly, it would be in the interest of justice to enroll him in the RRMIIP under the $5,000 option effective 11 January 1997, the date the briefing was conducted, albeit improperly.

5. 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 11 January 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 he would have been paid had he been properly enrolled on 11 January 1997 and any payments he has already received.

BOARD VOTE:

__sk____ ___rvo __ __jpi____ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION




                  __Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.__
                  CHAIRPERSON

---

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2002073700
SUFFIX
RECON	YYYYMMDD
DATE BOARDED	2002/07/18
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION	GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1. 13	101.0000/RRMIIP
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.