| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Ms. Nancy L. Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr. | Chairperson | ||
| Mr. Thomas B. Redfern, III | Member | ||
| Ms. Karen A. Heinz | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage be changed to former spouse coverage.
APPLICANT STATES: That the divorce decree ordered him to keep his former spouse as the SBP beneficiary.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 15 July 1975. He married on 1 July 1977. He retired on 1 March 1996. At that time, he completed a Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, DD Form 2656, and elected to participate in the SBP for children only coverage, full base amount. His spouse did not concur in his election and instead concurred in an election of spouse and children coverage, reduced coverage ($600.00).
The applicant divorced on 29 January 1998. The divorce decree ordered that his spouse remain the beneficiary of his SBP.
The applicant remarried in September 1999. Neither he nor his current spouse responded to a letter requesting her concurrence with his request to change his SBP coverage to former spouse coverage.
Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided that military members could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents.
Public Law 97-252, the Uniformed Services Former Spouses Protection Act (USFSPA), dated 8 September 1982, established SBP coverage for former spouses of retiring members. Public Law 98-94, dated 24 September 1983, established former spouse coverage for retired members (Reservists, too).
Public Law 98-525, enacted 19 October 1984, provided that a former spouse could request a deemed election within one year of the court order requiring SBP to be established on the former spouse’s behalf provided the member agreed to provide coverage.
Public Law 99-145, enacted 8 November 1985 but effective 1 March 1986, required the spouse's written concurrence for a retiring member's election that provides less than the maximum spouse coverage. It also permitted a previously participating retiree upon remarriage to elect not to resume spouse coverage or to increase reduced coverage for the latter spouse. Changes must be made prior to the first anniversary of remarriage or else the previously suspended coverage resumes by default on the first day of the month following the first anniversary of the remarriage, with costs owed from that date.
Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the member was participating in the SBP or was still on active duty and had not yet made an SBP election.
Title 10, U. S. Code, section 1448(b)(3) incorporates the provisions of the USFSPA relating to the SBP. It permits a person who, incident to a proceeding of divorce, is required by court order to elect to provide an annuity to a former spouse to make such an election. Any such election must be written, signed by the person making the election, and received by the Secretary concerned within one year after the date of the decree of divorce. If that person fails or refuses to make such an election, section 1450(f)(3)(A) permits the former spouse concerned to make a written request that such an election be deemed to have been made. Section 1450(f)(3)(C) provides that an election may not be deemed to have been made unless the request from the former spouse of the person is received within one year of the date of the court order or filing involved.
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. The Board concludes that an injustice has occurred in this case but will not take corrective action because that action would cause another injustice.
2. Although the applicant does not explain why he did not make a former spouse election within one year of the date of his divorce and there is no evidence to show his former spouse attempted to make a deemed election within one year of the divorce, it appears to now be his intent to comply with the divorce decree.
3. However, there is no evidence to show the applicant elected through the procedure prescribed by law not to provide spouse coverage within one year of his remarriage. Therefore, his current spouse automatically acquired spouse coverage on the first anniversary of his remarriage. To grant the applicant’s request at this date would constitute an unconstitutional taking from his current spouse.
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:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__EJA__ __TBR___ ___KAH__ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2002071961 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 2002/09/17 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 137.04 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001054942C070420
Public Law 98-94, dated 24 September 1983, established former spouse coverage for retired members (Reservists, too). Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the retiree had elected spouse coverage at retirement or was still on active duty and had not yet made an SBP election. The evidence of record shows that the applicant did not request termination of his SBP spouse coverage after his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040011510C070208
The FSM divorced on 11 May 1995. Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the member was participating in the SBP or was still on active duty and had not yet made an SBP election. In accordance with Federal Law, a request to change SBP coverage from spouse to former spouse coverage must have been made within one year of the date of divorce by either the FSM or the applicant.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060004313C070205
There is no evidence of record that indicates the applicant submitted a written request for a deemed election for former spouse coverage. The FSM retired on 1 May 1986 and elected SBP spouse and dependent children coverage. It stated that “[FSM] shall not, during his lifetime, provide, modify, amend, withdraw, or in any other manner alter the election to name [applicant] beneficiary of the Armed Services Survivor Benefit Plan.” However, there is no evidence of record that shows the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065247C070421
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage in those cases where the retiree had elected spouse coverage at retirement or was still on active duty and had not yet made an SBP election. It permits a person who, incident to a proceeding of divorce, is required by court order to elect to provide an annuity to a former spouse to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110005945
The applicant requests the records of her former spouse, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show he changed his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage to former spouse coverage. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1450(f)(3)(A), permits a former spouse to make a written request that an SBP election of former spouse coverage be deemed to have been made when the former spouse is awarded the SBP annuity incident to a proceeding of divorce. The applicant would have to provide a signed and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050014731C070206
She included in the divorce decree that she would like the SBP as part of her divorce settlement for herself and her two children. The applicant submitted a written request, dated 25 May 2005, for a deemed election to DFAS to change the SBP coverage from spouse and children to former spouse and children coverage. Considering the applicant submitted a deemed election for former spouse and children coverage in a timely manner and provided documentation as evidence of her timely deemed...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110003140
His service record is void of evidence which indicates the FSM or the applicant made a deemed election to change his SBP coverage from spouse to former spouse coverage within 1 year of the divorce. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1450(f)(3)(A) permits a former spouse to make a written request that an SBP election of former spouse coverage be deemed to have been made when the former spouse is awarded the SBP annuity incident to a proceeding of divorce. However, there is no evidence which...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 2004100144C070208
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 24 August 2004 DOCKET NUMBER: AR2004100144 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the member was participating in the SBP or was still on active duty and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050004710C070206
The applicant requests that the records of her former spouse, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show he elected to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) for former spouse coverage. The FSM and the applicant divorced on 12 February 2003. When the FSM and the applicant divorced on 12 February 2003, the divorce decree stated in pertinent part that the FSM would enroll in the SBP and name the applicant as the beneficiary.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002066936C070402
There is no evidence of record that the FSM or the applicant ever requested that SBP coverage be changed to former spouse. Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the retiree had elected spouse coverage at retirement. There is no evidence of record to show that the FSM ever elected to change his SBP coverage from spouse to former spouse.