Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012872
Original file (20130012872.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:  8 April 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130012872 


THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:

1.  Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).

2.  Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests correction of her husband's records to show he elected to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) for spouse coverage.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  For some reason her husband did not make the change to include her in the SBP as his wife.  It seems he did not make the proper notification to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) about SBP in 2000 when they married on 26 October 2000.

	b.  Her husband retired with 20 years of active duty service.

	c.  The error was made when they married in October 2000.  They had been together since 1996.  Before they married, they discussed the issues of SBP and life insurance.  She continued to remind him to properly update the records to avoid this situation she is experiencing now, but he kept postponing it until it was too late.  She is now left with the mortgage and various other financial obligations and the only income she receives is from the Social Security Administration, which is $1,512.00 per month.  The mortgage alone is $1,052.00 per month and that amount has increased to $1,156.00 per month now that she is behind on her payments.  The error her husband made in 2000 will cause her to lose her house and become homeless.



3.  The applicant provides:

* FSM's DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* marriage certificate
* FSM's death certificate
* Certificate of Appreciation
* letter from DFAS to a Member of Congress, dated 5 June 2013
* letter from a Member of Congress, dated 20 June 2013

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The FSM enlisted in the Regular Army on 30 August 1977.

2.  A DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel), dated 8 August 1997, shows the FSM elected children-only SBP coverage based on his full retired pay.  This form shows he was not married.

3.  The FSM retired in the rank of sergeant first class on 31 August 1997.

4.  The FSM married the applicant on 26 October 2000.

5.  The FSM died on 3 December 2012.

6.  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 of SBP spouse coverage and for this reason no annuity is payable to the applicant 

7.  Public Law 92-425, enacted 21 September 1972, established the SBP.  The SBP 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.

8.  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 1 year after the date on which that person marries or acquires that dependent child.

9.  Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation 7000.14-R, volume 7B (Military Pay Policy and Procedures – Retired Pay), paragraph 430601B2, states that if the member has no eligible spouse on the date of retirement and elected coverage for children only, the member may include the spouse with coverage previously elected for the children within 1 year after marriage or remarriage.

10.  Every issue of Army Echoes, the Army bulletin published and mailed to retirees to keep them abreast of their rights and privileges and to inform them of developments in the Army, contains the information, "Remember:  You are responsible for updating your retired pay file information at DFAS-CL…within one year of the event if you marry, remarry…and need to make or update an SBP election."

11.  Public Law 108-375, enacted 28 October 2004, established an open enrollment season from 1 October 2005 through 30 September 2006.  The retiree must have paid monthly premiums starting on the date of enrollment and a buy-in premium covering all the costs that would have been paid for the election if it had been made at the first opportunity to do so.  Extensive publicity was given in Army Echoes.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows the FSM was not married when he retired and he elected SBP coverage for children only on 8 August 1997.

2.  The FSM married the applicant on 26 October 2000 and he had 1 year from his date of marriage to enroll in the SBP for spouse coverage.  There is no evidence to show he enrolled in the SBP for spouse coverage within the given time frame.

3.  The FSM also had opportunities to enroll in the SBP during the 2004-2005 open enrollment season, but there is no evidence to show he did so.  Regrettably, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.





BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____X___  ____X___  ___X__ _  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _  X ______   ___
               CHAIRPERSON
      
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130012872



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130012872



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004639

    Original file (20130004639.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests correction of her husband's record to show he elected to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) for spouse coverage. He married the applicant on 6 September 1985.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015438

    Original file (20080015438.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A letter from DFAS, dated 11 March 2008, informed the FSM that his request for spouse coverage under SBP for his newly married spouse could not be implemented because he had not elected coverage within 1 year of their marriage date. The FSM's Retiree Account Statement, with an effective date of 7 April 2008, does not show any SBP premiums being deducted from the FSM's retired pay. They would have received at least one Retiree Account Statement within one year of their marriage and the FSM...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010010

    Original file (20100010010.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FSM was born on 23 February 1968 and he enlisted in the Louisiana Army National Guard (LAARNG) on 11 August 1986. Therefore, even if he had been married to the applicant for a year, she would still not be eligible to receive an SBP annuity because the FSM named his children as the beneficiaries of his SBP annuity and never added the applicant. _______ _ X _______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002627

    Original file (20120002627.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests the records of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show he elected to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) for spouse coverage, based on the full amount. The FSM was honorably retired on 31 July 1992 and he was placed on the retired list in his retired rank of MAJ on 1 August 1992. Prior to retirement the FSM was provided an opportunity to make an SBP election.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080006415

    Original file (20080006415.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Notification of Eligibility for Retired Pay at Age 60 Memorandum, dated 17 November 1988. c. DD Form 1883, dated 7 January 1989. d. Certificate of Marriage, dated 2 August 2000. e. Miscellaneous letters and Designation of Beneficiary Forms from the New York State Police and Fire Retirement System. This letter notified the FSM that he had completed the required years of service and would be eligible for retired pay upon application at age 60. Even if the FSM had been able to enroll the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011300

    Original file (20080011300.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FSM and the applicant married on 8 May 1999. The FSM married the applicant in May 1999. However, the Army Echoes issued at the time he married the applicant reminded retirees that if they remarried and needed to make an SBP election they were responsible for contacting DFAS, clearly indicating that an SBP election could be made upon remarriage and clearly implying that the new wife could be covered.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001369

    Original file (20090001369.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests reconsideration of her previous request that the records of her husband, the 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 appealed to the ABCMR in an application dated 1 August 2007 requesting that the FSM's records be corrected to show that he elected to change his SBP coverage from "Natural...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100022811

    Original file (20100022811.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel) provided by DFAS shows the following: * retirement date – 1 October 2004 * spouse – F____ * child – S____ with a date of birth of 23 July 1991 * SBP election – 26b, coverage for spouse and child(ren) * date signed – 7 July 2004 4. DFAS stated in an email to this Board, dated 9 May 2011, the FSM's DD Form 2656 was submitted by Fort Carson on 3 November 2004 and shows he elected spouse and child(ren) coverage. The applicant and the FSM...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100016126

    Original file (20100016126.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests the records of her deceased husband, a retired former service member (FSM), be changed to show he elected spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) on the DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel), dated 28 March 2000. She requests the Board change the record to show the FSM elected spouse coverage under the SBP. On 18 March 2010, the ABCMR sent a letter to the applicant in response to her request for correction of military records, in effect,...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090013359

    Original file (20090013359.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The evidence available to the Board indicates the FSM annotated on his October 1993 DD Form 1883 that he was not married at the time he elected to provide an annuity to his dependent son. There is no evidence, and the applicant has not provided any, that the FSM...