| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Luther L. Santiful | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Joe R. Schroeder | Member | |
| Mr. Charles Gainor | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That the records of her deceased spouse, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show he enrolled in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) for spouse coverage.
APPLICANT STATES: That the FSM elected full RCSBP coverage to begin upon his passing. He and the applicant were to be married but put off the wedding until a later date. He and the applicant were dating at the time. He believed that since he elected coverage and they later married that she was covered. He did not believe that a new paper had to be completed upon their marriage. The FSM split his insurance between his mother and herself because she was to get his pension and his mother would have money to live on, also. She states that she provided the marriage certificate and insurance election as supporting evidence; however, only a letter from the Missouri National Guard was attached to the DD Form 149 (additional evidence later obtained from the Missouri National Guard).
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The FSM's military records from the Army National Guard are not available. The information contained herein was obtained from alternate sources.
The FSM was born on 14 January 1948. He had prior service in the Regular Army from 1967 – 1969. He enlisted in the Army National Guard on an unknown date. He received his notification of eligibility for retired pay at age 60 (his 20-year letter) on 14 April 1996.
On 19 April 1996, the FSM completed a Survivor Benefit Plan Election Certificate, DD Form 1883. He checked that he was not married and that he had no dependent children. He did not check any of the category blocks indicating what category of RCSBP coverage he wanted; however, he checked that he wanted to provide an annuity based on the full base amount, option C.
The FSM and the applicant married on 28 June 1998. The FSM died on 2 May 2001 of a brain stem stroke.
Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided that military members on active duty could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents. Elections are made by category (spouse, spouse and child, former spouse, former spouse and child, child only, or insurable interest). A person who is not married and does not have a dependent child upon becoming eligible to participate in the SBP may elect to provide an annuity to a person with an insurable interest in the member.
Public Law 95-397, the 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 annuity for their survivors should they die before reaching age 60. Three options are available: (A) elect to decline enrollment and choose at age 60 whether to start SBP participation; (B) elect that a beneficiary receive an annuity if they die before age 60 but delay payment of it until the date of the member’s 60th birthday; (C) elect that a beneficiary receive an annuity immediately upon their death if before age 60. If death does occur before age 60, the RCSBP costs for options B and C are deducted from the annuity.
Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1448(a)(5) provides that a person who is not married and has no dependent child upon becoming eligible to participate in the SBP but who later marries or acquires a dependent child may elect to participate in the SBP. Such an election must be written, signed by the person making the election, and received by the Secretary concerned within one year after the date on which that person marries or acquires that dependent child.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. There is insufficient evidence to show that the FSM intended the applicant to be his SBP beneficiary.
2. Although the DD Form 1883 indicated that the FSM may have wanted some type of coverage, he did not indicate exactly what type of coverage. Section II, item 8d indicated that if he had no spouse or child he could have elected insurable interest coverage and entered the applicant’s name and other data in section IV. He did not do so nor did he even erroneously check spouse coverage.
3. Since the FSM did not make an RCSBP election by category in 1996, he could have done so within one year of his marriage to the applicant in June 1998. He failed to do so.
4. 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:
________ ________ __jrs___ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__cg____ __lls___ ________ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001060887 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20011010 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 137.01 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130008509
Three options were available: * elect to decline enrollment and choose at age 60 whether to start SBP participation * elect that a beneficiary receive an annuity if they die before age 60, but delay payment of it until the date of the member's 60th birthday; or * elect that a beneficiary receive an annuity immediately upon their death if before age 60 Once a member elects either option B or C in any category of coverage, that election is irrevocable. The evidence of record shows the FSM...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140019212
The applicant states: * Army regulations in effect at the time the FSM submitted his retired pay application required the submission of a DD Form 2656 (Data For Payment of Retired Personnel) * After an exhaustive search with the U.S. Army Human Resources Command (HRC), the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) advised her that they could not find this document * She was never counseled or provided any documentation to sign for or notarize to relinquish of the SBP * She was married to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011157
The applicant requests, in effect, that her husband's records, a former service member (FSM) be corrected to show that he elected to change his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage from "Natural person with insurable interest-mother" to "Spouse only" coverage upon marriage. The applicant provided the following documentary evidence in support of her application: a. DD Form 1883, dated 19 July 1994; b. DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States Report of Transfer or Discharge); c....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003512
BOARD DATE: 21 August 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20120003512 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Public Law 95-397, enacted 30 September 1978, provided a way for Reserve Component members who qualified for Reserve retirement, but were not yet age 60 and eligible to participate in the SBP, to provide an annuity for their survivors should they die before reaching age 60. Three options were available: * elect to decline enrollment and choose at age 60 whether to start SBP...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062248C070421
B___ then applied to this Board for the RCSBP annuity in 1995. Since he was married on the date he was eligible to participate in the RCSBP, by law he could not have made a person with insurable interest election. However, since it was clearly the FSM’s intent to provide for his former spouse, the applicant, and not B___, and since spousal concurrence with a failure to elect spouse coverage was not required at the time, there was no legal error or injustice in not granting B___ the RCSBP annuity.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060006196C070205
The applicant states, in effect, when her husband was notified in 1991 of his eligibility for retired pay at age 60, he was single and listed his sister as the person to receive his RCSBP annuity. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1448 (Application of Plan), provides, in pertinent part, that a person who is not married and has no dependent child upon becoming eligible to participate in the SBP, but who later marries or acquires a dependent child may elect to participate in the Plan. However,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004101899C070208
Since he had elected children only coverage, he had to elect either option B or option C. If he were married, he and his spouse had to sign the reverse of the DD Form 1883. The available evidence of record shows that the FSM was not married to the applicant in May 1989; therefore, he could not have elected spouse coverage at that time. The available evidence of record shows that the FSM and the applicant married in October 1989; therefore, by the time the March 1992 letter was sent out...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090355C070212
It appears he was not married at that time and, by failing to return the DD Form 1883, did not make an RCSBP election. The FSM and the applicant married in 1998. In the absence of substantiating evidence (i.e., the DD Form 1883) it does not appear that failure to grant the applicant’s requested relief would be inequitable.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001062788C070421
On 10 March 1987, the FSM was counseled concerning the RCSBP and on that date completed a Survivor Benefit Plan Election Certificate, DD Form 1883. Records at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service – Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) indicate that the DD Form 1883 was not on file and presumably was not forwarded to DFAS by the U. S. Army Reserve Personnel Command when the FSM applied for retired pay. The DD Form 2656 provides an option not to participate; it does not provide an option to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006862
The applicant requests, in effect, that the records of her deceased spouse, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show he elected to participate in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) for spouse coverage. By law, a member who was not married upon becoming eligible to participate in the RCSBP, but who later marries may elect to participate in the RCSBP. In this case, the FSM and applicant were married on 13 June 1992.