| Mr. Loren G. Harrell | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos . | Analyst |
| Mr. Samuel A. Crumpler | Chairperson | |
| Mr. James E. Vick | Member | |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Member |
2. The applicant requests a full cost refund of Retired Serviceman’s Family Protection Plan (RSFPP) payments erroneously withheld.
3. The applicant states he made a mistake when he applied for the RSFPP. He signed a blank form and trusted his clerk to finish it. The clerk then checked the wrong option (“child” when the applicant wanted “widow”). He never realized this, since his monthly statements only showed a deduction for the RSFPP and not the category of deduction, until 1996 when he finally received a detailed Retired Pay Statement. However, his child became an ineligible beneficiary in 1985, when she reached age 22.
4. The applicant’s military records show that he initially enlisted in the Army on 16 September 1943. He was commissioned a second lieutenant on 15 May 1945 and had continuous service. On 11 March 1970, he made his first election under the RSFPP. The “child” option is checked and the applicant signed the form. He retired on 1 July 1972, in pay grade O-6, after completing over 28 years of active federal service.
5. The applicant first submitted a request to the Department of the Army Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) board to change his RSFPP election from “child only” to ”spouse only.” This was denied since there was no evidence of government error. At this time, that board realized that RSFPP deductions for his child were being erroneously withheld since the law in effect when he retired stated that “when there is no eligible beneficiary remaining to benefit from the option elected, the member’s retired pay will be restored.”
6. The SBP board helped the applicant obtain a refund of six years of erroneously withheld premiums but could not get him more than that due to the Barring Statute. They referred him to this Board since RSFPP costs should automatically have stopped when there was no longer an eligible child beneficiary.
7. The RSFPP was the forerunner of Public Law 92-425, the SBP, which was not enacted until 21 September 1972. Both programs provided that military members on active duty could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving spouse and dependent children. The election made by the soldier was irrevocable.
8. Title 32, U. S. Code, section 3702 states that a claim against the government must be received within 6 years after the claim accrues.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicant is not claiming government error on the type of option elected (“child” vice “widow”). He realizes that was his mistake.
2. The government did make an error in not stopping RSFPP deductions when his child reached age 22 in 1985. By law, this was to have been an automatic stoppage, no action required on the part of the member.
3. On 19 August 1996, the applicant received six year’s worth of overpaid child RSFPP costs and is now requesting the rest of the refund due from May 1985 until August 1990.
4. The Barring Statute does not apply in this case. The claim accrued in May 1985 and was automatically claimed by the retiree at this time because the law stated when there is no eligible beneficiary remaining to benefit from the option elected, the member’s retired pay will be restored.
5. In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.
RECOMMENDATION:
That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by refunding to the applicant the remaining amount of his overpaid child RSFPP costs.
BOARD VOTE:
SAC____ JEV_____ LLS____ GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
______________________
CHAIRPERSON
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707185C070209
The applicant first submitted a request to the Department of the Army Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) board to change his RSFPP election from child only to spouse only. This was denied since there was no evidence of government error. At this time, that board realized that RSFPP deductions for his child were being erroneously withheld since the law in effect when he retired stated that when there is no eligible beneficiary remaining to benefit from the option elected, the members retired...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03764
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR recommend that applicant’s request be denied and stated that there is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice, or merit in fact, nor basis in law to approve this case. Briefing material used at the time the member completed his RSFPP election clearly stated that “dependents acquired after you retire are not eligible to receive Family Protection Plan annuity payments,” payments would only...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00568
Prior to the servicemember’s 1 October 1963 retirement, he was married and elected spouse and child RSFPP coverage, Option 4 - that allowed the member to terminate RSFPP premium payments in the event the beneficiary lost eligibility. We find no evidence he attempted to elect SBP coverage for the applicant during any of the four open enrollment periods provide by law. Regardless, it appears the servicemember made no attempt to elect SBP coverage for the applicant when he was eligible during...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01439
Had the member elected SBP coverage based on full retired pay, the monthly cost would have been approximately $157 at the time of his death and the annuity would have been no less than $1,335. Furthermore, the Air Force may not pay an SBP annuity to the applicant because the member retired before the implementation of the SBP and he did not choose to provide SBP coverage on her behalf. It is possible that since the premiums were still being deducted from the member’s retired pay after the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060015824C071029
Edward E. Montgomery | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. The evidence of record shows that the FSM enrolled in the RSFPP in conjunction with his retirement on 30 June 1967, and that premiums continued to be collected from his retired pay through the date of his death in 1995, more than 18 years after his first spouse died in 1977. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070013961
Director Analyst The following members, a quorum, were present: M Chairperson M Member M Member The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. At this time but before 1 September 1969, a retired member who was participating in the RSFPP without inclusion of the former option 4 could have elected to have that option included in his election. The FSM retired in November 1971.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002069386C070402
Members retired for more than two years as of 17 May 1998 were authorized a one-year opportunity (17 May 1998 through 16 May 1999) to disenroll. The applicant has provided no evidence to show he attempted to disenroll from the SBP prior to the date of his current application. There is insufficient evidence to show that it would be equitable at this date to grant the relief requested.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060017320
The applicant, as the son of a service member (SM), requests that his fathers military records be corrected by canceling his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election for spouse coverage. The SM attempted to revoke his RSFPP election in 1961. The SM had a 1-year option from 17 May 1998 to 18 May 1999 to terminate his participation in the SBP.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090005935
This letter notified the applicant that he had completed the required years of service and would be eligible for retired pay upon application at age 60. Reservists who elected an option under the RCSBP will continue to have the Reserve Premium add-on deducted from their retired pay. The evidence of record shows that within 90 days of receipt of his 20-year letter, the applicant elected to participate in the RCSBP, full spouse coverage.
He could have elected former spouse SBP coverage for her during the 1992 open enrollment. However, spouse premiums could be terminated following divorce if the member additionally selected Option 4. He could have elected former spouse SBP coverage for her during the 92 open enrollment.