Citation Nr: 18149027 Decision Date: 11/08/18 Archive Date: 11/08/18 DOCKET NO. 15-02 181 DATE: November 8, 2018 ORDER Entitlement to nonservice-connected pension benefits is denied. FINDING OF FACT The Veteran did not serve in the active military, naval, or air service during a period of war. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to nonservice-connected pension have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1501, 1521 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.2, 3.3, 3.314 (2018). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from June 1986 to June 1990. He testified at a September 2017 Board video conference hearing. The hearing transcript is of record. Entitlement to nonservice-connected pension benefits Nonservice-connected pension benefits are generally available for qualifying veterans who served during a period of war. See 38 U.S.C. § 1521(a); 38 C.F.R. § 3.3. A veteran meets the service requirements if he served in the active military, naval, or air service, (1) for ninety days or more during a period of war; (2) during a period of war and was discharged or released from such service for a service-connected disability; (3) for a period of ninety consecutive days or more and such period began or ended during a period of war; or (4) for an aggregate of ninety days or more in two or more separate periods of service during more than one period of war. 38 U.S.C. § 1521; 38 C.F.R. § 3.3(a)(2). “Active military, naval, and air service” includes active duty, and “any period of active duty for training” during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from a disease or injury incurred or aggravated in line of duty, and any period of inactive duty training (IADT) during which the individual concerned was disabled or died from an injury incurred or aggravated in line of duty.” 38 U.S.C. § 101(24); 38 C.F.R. § 3.6(a); see Biggins v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 474, 477-478 (1991). Thus, when a claim is based on a period of active duty for training (ADT), there must be evidence that the individual concerned died or became disabled during the period of ADT as a result of a disease or injury incurred or aggravated in the line of duty. In the absence of such evidence, the period of ADT would not qualify as “active military, naval, or air service,” and the appellant would not achieve “veteran” status for purposes of that claim. See 38 U.S.C. § 101(22), (24); Mercado-Martinez v. West, 11 Vet. App. 415, 419 (1998). The term “period of war” for pension purposes means the Mexican Border Period, World War I, World War II, the Korean conflict, the Vietnam era, the Persian Gulf War, and the period beginning on the date of any future declaration of war by the Congress and ending on the date prescribed by Presidential proclamation or concurrent resolution of the Congress. 38 U.S.C. § 1501(4); 38 C.F.R. § 3.2. The Vietnam era is the period beginning on February 28, 1961 and ending on May 7, 1975, inclusive, in the case of a veteran who actually served in the Republic of Vietnam during that period; or beginning on August 5, 1964 and ending on May 7, 1975, inclusive, in all other cases. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2(f). The Persian Gulf War is the period beginning August 2, 1990 through the present. 38 C.F.R. § 3.2(i). The Veteran served on active duty from June 1986 to June 1990, as shown on his DD Form 214. This period of service falls between the Vietnam era and Persian Gulf War, and is not considered a “period of war.” The Veteran contends in statements and hearing testimony that he had additional service aboard the USS Engage after discharge from active service in June 1990. Specifically, he contends that, after discharge from active duty, he was transferred on Reserve status on August 9, 1990 to the USS Engage, and had a drill on August 31, 1990, on the USS Engage. A DD Form 214 and personnel records show that the Veteran was released from active duty in June 1990 and transferred to the Naval Reserve. His reserve obligatory termination date was in June 1994. Personnel records show that on August 31, 1990, the Veteran was aboard the USS Engage and received drill pay. While the personnel records indicate the Veteran was aboard the USS Engage in August 1990, this does not qualify as active service. The Veteran does not contend that he became disabled during a period of ADT or IADT. Personnel records from his Naval Reserve service have been obtained and do not show that he served on active duty at any time after his June 1990 separation from service. While the Veteran and his representative contend that the Veteran was stationed aboard the USS Engage in 1991, service personnel records do not verify active duty service during this period for purposes of establishing entitlement to VA pension benefits. The Board notes that deck logs and command histories for the USS Engage would not serve to substantiate any active duty service aboard the USS Engage, as they are not a DD Form 214, a Certification of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, or an original Certificate of Discharge from the United States Armed Forces in accordance with 38 C.F.R. § 3.203(a)(1). Additionally, any unverified period of ADT or IADT aboard the USS Engage after the Veteran’s June 1990 discharge would not qualify as active service for a period of 90 days during a period of war, or active service for “90 consecutive days” beginning or ending during a period of war, for the purpose of establishing entitlement to pension since the Veteran’s is not shown to have been disabled during any such period of service. See 38 U.S.C. § 1521; 38 C.F.R. § 3.7(x)(15). VA’s determination of whether a claimant’s service meets the threshold statutory service requirement is dependent upon service department records verifying the character of a claimant’s service. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.203; Duro v. Derwinski, 2 Vet. App. 530, 532 (1992). Therefore, the Board must find that basic eligibility for nonservice-connected pension benefits has not been established. This finding is in no way intended to diminish the value or significance of the Veteran’s service, but is rather required to fulfill the Board’s duty to ensure compliance with the applicable statutes and regulations. A. P. SIMPSON Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD Christine C. Kung