DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
Application for Correction of
the Coast Guard Record of:
BCMR Docket No. 2003-005
XXXXX, Xxxxxx X.
xxx xx xxxx, XXXX
FINAL DECISION
GARMON, Attorney-Advisor:
This is a proceeding under the provisions of section 1552 of title 10 and section
425 of title 14 of the United States Code. The application was received on XXXX 11,
20xx, prior to the applicant’s death. It was docketed on October 25, 2002, upon the
BCMR’s receipt of the applicant’s military records.
appointed members who were designated to serve as the Board in this case.
This final decision, dated September 25, 2003 is signed by the three duly
APPLICANT’S REQUEST
The applicant asked the Board to correct his record to show that he elected
survivor benefit plan (SBP) coverage for his daughter on March 1, 1999, during open
season.
APPLICANT’S ALLEGATIONS
The applicant alleged that at the time he completed his SBP coverage election
certificate, the form contained “incomplete” or “seriously misleading” information.
Specifically, he stated that the instruction provided for declining benefits in that “option
A,”1 leads the reader to believe that the option to designate a beneficiary will remain
1 Article 18.F.12.b. of the Personnel Manual states that upon completion of twenty years of satisfactory
service, reservists are provided an SBP packet, which explains benefits and offers options for electing
coverage. Option A is chosen by a reservist who is undecided about making an SBP election upon
completing 20 years service and defers that decision until reaching age 60.
open until any time before the member’s 60th birthday. Option A states the following:
“I decline to make an election at this time. (I will remain eligible to make an election for
coverage at age 60).” He alleged that because the form is inherently defective, he
should be permitted to make an election prior to his 60th birthday.
The applicant alleged that he was unaware of legislation enacted in 19xx, which
provided a one-year period between March 1, 1999 and February 29, 2000, during which
he could have made a new election before reaching fifty-nine and one-half years of age.
He alleged that, because he was long divorced by 1999, and his only child was just
xxxxxxxx years old, he would have selected survivor benefits for his daughter at the
earliest permissible date had he known about the open enrollment period.
SUMMARY OF THE APPLICANT’S RECORD
On XXXXX 5, 19xx,
letter”
the applicant received his “20-year
in
acknowledgement of completing twenty years of satisfactory service in the Coast Guard
Reserve. On XXXXX 31, 19xx, the applicant (who at the time was not married and had
no children) completed an SBP election certificate, wherein he chose “option A,”
electing no SBP coverage but remaining eligible to elect coverage at age 60.
On August 31, 19xx, the applicant was retired without pay, at his request, from
the Coast Guard Reserve.
On XXXXX 31, 19xx, the applicant was married to his second wife. On XXXXX
23, 19xx, his second wife gave birth to the applicant’s only child, a daughter. By 19xx,
the applicant’s second marriage ended in divorce.
On October 17, 1998, Congress authorized an “open enrollment” season from
March 1, 1999 to February 29, 2000 for retired members of the Reserve to enroll eligible
dependents in the SBP. The record does not indicate that the Coast Guard notified the
applicant about the open enrollment season.
In December 19xx, the applicant was diagnosed with malignant metastatic
melanoma. On XXXXXXX 21, 20xx, he died of the cancer at the age of fifty-seven.
VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On March 20, 2003, the Chief Counsel provided the Coast Guard’s comments to
the Board. In adopting the analysis of Coast Guard Personnel Command (CGPC) as its
advisory opinion, the Chief Counsel recommended that the Board grant the applicant’s
request for relief.
that “because of
The Chief Counsel asserted
inadequate means of
communication between retired Reserve members and the Coast Guard,” the applicant
was never informed about the SBP open season between 1999 and 2000. He asserted
that Reserve members who are in a “retired without pay” status do not receive the
Coast Guard Retiree Newsletter. Therefore, he stated, it would be unjust to have the
applicant wait until the age of 60 to enroll his daughter.
APPLICANT’S RESPONSE TO THE VIEWS OF THE COAST GUARD
On March 24, 2003, the Chair sent a copy of the views of the Coast Guard to the
applicant and invited him to respond within 15 days. On March 27, 2002, the
applicant’s counsel responded, informing the Board that he had no objections to the
Coast Guard’s advisory opinion.
APPLICABLE LAW
Personnel Manual (COMDTINST M1000.6A)
Article 18.F.2. of the Personnel Manual provides that the purpose of the SBP is to
enable “all career members of the Uniformed Services who reach retirement eligibility
an opportunity to leave a portion of their retired pay to their survivors at a reasonable
cost.”
Survivor Benefit Plan (RC-SBP), as follows:
Article 18.F.12.a. sets forth the general provisions of the Reserve Component
Public Law 95-397 … extended eligibility for coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan
(SBP) to members and former members of the Reserve components who have 20 or more
years of qualifying service and have not reached age 60, the age at which they will be
eligible for retired pay. Prior to the enactment of [Public Law] 95-397, retired reservists
could elect SBP coverage but only immediately before becoming eligible for retired pay
(age 60). This does not exempt members from the statutory requirement (10 USC 1448) to
make their election within 90 days of receiving their notice of completion of 20 years
satisfactory service. Members declining to make a selection must wait until age 60 or an
announced open season.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
The Board makes the following findings and conclusions on the basis of the
applicant's military record and submissions, the Coast Guard's submission, and appli-
cable law:
§ 1552. The application was timely.
The Board has jurisdiction concerning this matter pursuant to 10 U.S.C.
1.
2.
The applicant requested that his record be corrected to show that on
March 1, 1999, he elected SBP benefits for his daughter. The record indicates that the
applicant was entitled to counseling about the March 1, 1999 to February 29, 2000 SBP
open enrollment season period and that he was eligible to elect SBP benefits for his
daughter during this open season period. The Chief Counsel admits that the Coast
Guard committed error by not informing the applicant about the March 1, 1999 to
February 29, 2000 SBP open enrollment season.
The applicant has presented persuasive evidence which shows that had he
been counseled about the SBP open season, he would have enrolled his daughter for
benefits on March 1, 1999. Moreover, in view of the fact that SBP was intended to
benefit the survivors of members, the Board finds it appropriate to correct the
applicant’s record.
Accordingly, the applicant’s request should be granted.
4.
3.
ORDER
The application of XXXX Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, xxx xx xxxx, USCGR, for the
His record shall be corrected to show that on March 1, 1999, he changed his SBP
______________________________
Julia Andrews
correction of his military record is granted as follows:
election to cover his daughter, XXXXXX XXXXXXX.
______________________________
Margot Bester
______________________________
Donald A. Pedersen
CG | BCMR | Other Cases | 2002-158
The applicant further wrote that during the March 1, 1999 to February 29, 2000 open enrollment season, he was again unable to correct his SBP election to provided coverage for his former spouse and a dependent child. On March 27, 20xx, the applicant again requested to enroll his former spouse in RC-SBP. Accordingly, the Board should deny the applicant’s request that his record 6.
CG | BCMR | Disability Cases | 2003-022
CGPC argued that the applicant did not meet the requirements of this section of the law because he was not in the SELRES at the time of the request and significant important medical evidence is dated after the applicant became a member of the IRR on June 1, 19xx. It provided the following (a) In the case of a member of the Selected Reserve of a reserve component who no longer meets the qualifications for membership in the Selected Reserve solely because the member is unfit because of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090002862
The applicant states that prior to his August 1999 discharge from the Army National Guard (ARNG) he completed a DD Form 2656 (Data For Payment of Retired Personnel) on 9 November 1998 electing SBP coverage for his spouse and was informed by his officials at his unit that his spouse would be covered. Once a member elects either Options B or C in any category of coverage, that election is irrevocable. The evidence of record shows that upon receipt of his 20-year letter, the applicant...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004335
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his military records to show he elected Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) coverage for his spouse. The applicant contends that his military records should be corrected to show he elected RCSBP coverage for his spouse within a year of their marriage. In 2007, when the applicant married, he had a 1-year period in which to submit an RCSBP election to provide coverage for his spouse.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090003898
The applicant provided a copy of a DD Form 2656-3, dated 23 November 1999, which shows an election of spouse and child beneficiary category based on the full amount of retired pay with immediate coverage. Each statement showed the current SBP coverage elected by the retiree or the fact that no SBP election is reflected. As such, the election for spouse and child only made at the time of his retired pay application would not have been valid.
CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2001-114
Prior to enrolling in DEP, during recruit processing at MEPS, the applicant indicated no problems with her neck or neck muscles on pre-enlistment physical examination reports. of the Medical Manual, the Coast Guard was required to determine the applicant’s fitness for duty when the applicant’s health problems associated with her neck interfered with her duties aboard her second cutter. Moreover, the Coast Guard has recommended that the Board grant partial relief by ordering the Coast Guard...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090000734
On 6 September 1987, a Chronological Statement of Retirement Points published by U. S. Army Reserve Personnel Center (ARPERCEN) shows the applicant had attained 20 qualifying years of service for retirement at age 60 as of 30 March 1987. The applicant's Retiree Account Statement shows that he had Child Only RCSBP coverage. The applicants election to participate in the RCSBP Child Only Coverage was an irrevocable decision which rolled over into the SBP upon his reaching age 60.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013913
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 23 September 2010 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100013913 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. In connection with his application, the FSM completed a DD Form 2656-6 and indicated he was married to the applicant and elected "spouse only" SBP coverage based on the full gross pay without supplemental SBP. The evidence of record shows that upon receipt of his 20-year letter, the FSM executed a DD Form 1883 on 20 July 1989, electing "children only" coverage under option B.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100013797
The applicant requests his military records be corrected by changing his Reserve Component (RC) Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election from "children only" to "spouse" coverage. A DD Form 1883, dated 7 March 1987, shows the applicant enrolled in the RCSBP for "spouse and children" coverage, option C, full base amount. The applicant married in October 1984 and he had 1 year from his date of marriage to enroll in the RCSBP for spouse coverage.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006453
The applicant states, in effect, that upon retirement from the Utah Army National Guard (UTARNG), he was unmarried and thus elected the children only coverage of the Reserve Component SBP. This application was dated 2 March 2007 by the applicant and received by the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) on 27 April 2007. On 20 December 2005, HRC emailed DFAS (responding to HRC's email dated 14 November 2005) and asked "If the FSM elects to cover spouse during the open...