IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 19 March 2015
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140010231
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that she be afforded active duty survivor benefits based on the death of her husband, a former service member (FSM) who was serving on active duty at the time of his death.
2. The applicant states, in effect, that the FSM was serving on active duty at the time of his death and she believes that the Army fraudulently created orders revoking his active duty after his death. She goes on to state that initially she was assigned a casualty assistance officer, but was later told that it was a mistake. She further states that her documents show that he was on active duty and to date she has received no active duty surviving spouse benefits and believes that she is entitled to receive them.
3. The applicant provides a list of documents enclosed with her application on page 6 of her application.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The FSM initially served on active duty as an infantryman from 3 January 1989 until he was honorably released from active duty on 16 March 1992. He had served 3 years, 2 months and 14 days of active service.
2. On 26 August 2008, he was commissioned as a United States Army Reserve (USAR) captain (CPT) in the Veterinary Corps. He was initially assigned to a USAR Troop Program Unit (TPU) in Round Rock, Texas.
3. In 2012, he was reassigned to a Civil Affairs Battalion in Upland, California and on 23 January 2012, orders number 12-02300028 ordered the applicant to active duty in support of Operation Enduring Freedom with a report date to Fort Benning, Georgia effective 30 March 2012. However, on the following day those orders were revoked and he was reassigned to the Army Medical Department (AMEDD) Professional Management Command, Forest Park, Georgia. On 9 February 2012, he was reassigned to the 426th Civil Affairs Battalion, a TPU in Upland, California.
4. On 13 April 2012, the FSM was found dead in his residence as a result of the toxic effects of Isoflurane. The FSM was discovered when his employer called because he failed to report to work and the FSM was found dead face down in his bed with a plastic bag over his head with multiple containers of Isoflurane nearby.
5. A review of the FSMs official records and the documents submitted by the applicant failed to show any evidence of the FSM serving on active duty at the time of his death. Additionally, there is no evidence to show that he was drilling with his USAR unit on Friday, 13 April 2012.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants contention that she should be afforded the survivor benefits afforded the spouses of deceased active duty members has been noted and appears to lack merit.
2. The applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted with her application and the evidence of record, any evidence that would indicate that the FSM was serving on active duty at the time of his death.
3. It is also noted that the FSMs death was discovered as a result of his employer calling regarding his failure to come to work. Therefore, unless evidence can be provided to show that his employer was an officer or commander in the Army, it is reasonable to presume that he had civilian employers at the time of his death.
4. Accordingly, there appears to be no basis to grant the applicants request.
5. However, the applicant is encouraged to contact the nearest Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in regards to any benefits she may be entitled.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
____X___ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
1. 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. The Board wishes to extend its condolences to the applicant on the passing of her late husband, and wants to thank the applicant for the sacrifices she made and for her husbands service to the United States. The applicant and all Americans should be justifiably proud of his honorable service in arms.
_______ _ X______ ___
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140010231
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140010231
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080005352
The applicant requests, in effect, that the records of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show that he was not retired but was on active duty at the time of his death, thereby entitling her to receive $150,000 in additional Servicemembers' Group Life Insurance (SGLI). The applicant also states that there was no need to medically retire her husband under the Imminent Death Policy on 7 December 2003 because the law was changed two years earlier, with an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080016083
He served continuously until his death on 7 June 2006. He and another person left their location on motorcycles and were involved in an accident at approximately 2210 hours. Based on eyewitness statements showing the applicant had been drinking prior to the accident and his high level reading on the BAC, the LOD investigation determined that the amount of alcohol in the FSM's system impaired his judgment and slowed his reflexes, resulting in the motor vehicle accident that killed him.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021386
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. Item 15 (Final Approval) of a DD Form 261 (Report of Investigation LOD and Misconduct Status), dated 28 March 2012, shows the final approval authority determined the FSM was "NOT IN THE LINE OF DUTY DUE TO OWN MISCONDUCT (DEATH CASE)." She provides a memorandum, dated 22 June 2012, from the Director, Casualty and Mortuary Affairs Operations Center, U.S. Army Human Resources Command, Fort Knox, KY that states this office made an LOD...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130007305
Despite this, there is no documentation in his record that shows he elected to participate in the RCSBP after receiving his 15-year letter. Public Law 95-397, the RCSBP, enacted 30 September 1978, provides a means for those who have qualified for Reserve retirement, but who are not yet age 60 [upon which they would be eligible to begin drawing retired pay, upon request, and to participate in the SBP], to provide an annuity to their survivors should they die before reaching age 60. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019181
The applicant, the spouse of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests the FSM's discharge from the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) be voided and that he instead be placed in the Retired Reserve to allow for continued payment of his earned Voluntary Separation Incentive (VSI) benefit. The applicant states, in effect: * the FSM was recruited into the active Reserve, from the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), around September 2002 * the FSM informed the Army of the fact he was receiving VSI,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120013255
The applicant, the spouse of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests correction of her deceased husband's record to show she made a timely application for an annuity under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP). On 13 June 2012, DFAS denied her request, stating it was not in compliance with the filing provisions stipulated in Title 31, U.S. Code, which specifically require the receipt of SBP claims by DFAS within 6 years of the date of death. As a result, the Board...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017562
The applicant states: * she and the FSM gave the best years of their lives to the Army * the only reason she divorced the FSM is because of what Operation Desert Storm did to him; he came back a different man * their divorce decree clearly stipulated that she was to be the beneficiary under the SBP at the FSM's expense * the FSM paid SBP premiums from his retired pay each and every month * in spite of their divorce, she and the FSM spoke at least once a week * when the FSM knew he was dying...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 03093287C070212
The applicant requests that the records of her late husband, a former servicemember (FSM) be corrected to show that he was retired because of physical disability prior to his death. She provides copies of her husband's medical records. Efforts to revive the FSM continued until the attending physician terminated the code at 0620 hours, indicating that there was no hope for meaningful recovery.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012089
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 30 November 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100012089 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. His next available enrollment would have been at age 60; however, he did not live to be 60 years old and now there are no RCSBP/SBP or retirement benefits for her. In a letter, dated 19 March 2010, the applicant states soon after the FSM's death she discovered she would not be entitled to survivor benefits or retirement benefits because the FSM failed to enroll in the RCSBP.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110014575
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110014575 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant provides: * The FSM's U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Notification of Eligibility for Retirement Pay at Age 60 (20-year Letter) * Orders * DFAS printout titled Summary of Retired Pay Account * A certificate of death * A letter from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), Fort Knox, KY * A letter from the National Personnel Records Center CONSIDERATION OF...