APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, cancellation of participation in the Survivor benefit Plan (SBP).
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that the premiums were excessive.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
The applicants military records show that he remarried on
7 March 1993. On 1 November 1994, the applicant elected SBP participation for spouse only. Because the applicant failed to take action required by federal law to enroll his current spouse within 1 year of marriage, he was assessed an additional monthly cost for this coverage.
On 5 September 1995, the applicant appealed to this Board for correction of his military record.
Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided those military members on active duty could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents. Military members who were retired before 21 September 1972 had until 20 September 1974 to apply for coverage under the SBP.
Public Law 99-145, dated 8 November 1985 (effective 1 March 1986), permitted that a previously participating retiree upon remarriage may elect not to resume spouse coverage. Upon being notified of the remarriage, the Retired Pay Center provides information to the retiree regarding his/her SBP options. The retiree must make written request within
1 year of the remarriage if he/she desires not to enroll his second spouse, at which time the Pay Center notifies the spouse.
Army Echoes, the quarterly Army retiree bulletin, publishes reminders in each issue that Army retirees are responsible to inform the Pay Center of changes in family/martial status. This information is also available by contacting any Army Retirement Service Officer (RSO), located at major military installations.
In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the SBP board. The board recommended that the applicant request be disapproved.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
2. The evidence of record clearly shows that the applicant remarried on 7 March 1993, however he did not elect SBP coverage for his current spouse until 1 November 1994. Because of his failure to take the action required by federal law to enroll the spouse he first acquired following retirement within one year of marriage, the applicant was correctly assessed an additional monthly cost for SBP coverage.
3. The enrollment of his current spouse, and the debt which accrued, is the result of his failure to timely notify the appropriate agency of his remarriage. Therefore, no government error exists.
4. The Army Echoes repeats in each issue that soldiers are responsible to keep the Pay Center informed of all changes in marital status.
5. The applicant has submitted neither probative evidence nor a convincing argument in support of the request.
6. Therefore, in view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
GRANT
GRANT FORMAL HEARING
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003452
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 July 2009 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090003452 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided that a military retiree can have a portion of his or her monthly retired pay withheld in order to provide, after his or her death, a monthly survivor benefit to a surviving spouse, child(ren), or other eligible recipient(s). On remarriage a retiree may elect SBP spouse coverage for the first spouse acquired...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110013841
He was informed he could elect to enroll his current spouse in the SBP by filing out the appropriate forms. Public Law 99-145, enacted 8 November 1995, permitted a previously participating retiree upon remarriage to elect not to resume spouse coverage or to increase reduced coverage for the latter spouse (requiring a payback with interest of SBP premiums prior to the first anniversary of the remarriage). This statement shows whether or not SBP premiums are being deducted from a retiree's...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040005870C070208
LaVerne M. Douglas | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. When a member elects spouse coverage, that election is normally irrevocable. His spouse SBP coverage had been suspended for 6 years when he remarried in February 2002.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004968
was deceased as of 3 June 2006 * it appears he failed to notify DFAS (however, DFAS indicated they had been notified) * he has since remarried and would like to continue his benefit plan for his current spouse * DFAS continued to collect payments all this time (however, DFAS indicated they had not been collecting spouse premiums but had been erroneously collecting child premiums) d. a DD Form 2656, undated by the applicant, which shows; * he indicated his current coverage was spouse and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005326
The applicant, as the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests, in effect, that the FSM's records be corrected to show that he completed an RCSBP (Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan) election certificate and that she be granted a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity. Public Law 95-397, the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP), enacted 30 September 1978, provided a way for those who had qualified for reserve retirement, but were not yet age 60, to provide an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090020841
The applicant states the following: * he was never informed he had to decline the SBP within 1 year of his divorce from his former spouse * he received no written communications from the military to keep him informed of these circumstances * the Tennessee Army National Guard requested that he complete a DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel) in 2008 for inclusion in his application for retired pay * he completed the DD Form 2656 and declined SBP 3. On 18 October 1991, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100007240
The applicant requests correction of his military records to show he enrolled in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and elected spouse only coverage within 1 year of their marriage. Retiree Account Statements are sent by DFAS to retirees each time there is a change in the retiree's retirement pay. The applicant would have received at least one Retiree Account Statement within the 1-year period after his new marriage.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014175
An election to terminate spouse coverage under this law, once made, is irrevocable. When he and Maureen were divorced, the coverage did not change but the spouse premiums were suspended. The applicant does not now have the option to terminate his SBP election.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070005887C071029
Chester A. Damian | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Records at DFAS show the FSM married the applicant on 28 February 1981. By letter dated 2 March 2007, DFAS informed the applicant that SBP costs were not fully paid by the FSM and as a result 100 percent of her monthly SBP annuity payments would be applied to the indebtedness (of $59,833.65).
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012872
The FSM married the applicant on 26 October 2000. The applicant provided a letter from DFAS to a Member of Congress, dated 5 June 2013, which stated: * the FSM retired on 1 September 1997 * he was not married at the time, but he had minor children and he elected children only SBP coverage * he married the applicant on 26 October 2000, but he did not notify DFAS within 1 year of that marriage that he wished to elect spouse SBP coverage * his lack of an SBP election constitutes a declination...