Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05994-06
Original file (05994-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved
   DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
         BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
         2 NAVY ANNEX
         WASHINGTON DC 20370-51 00
WJH:djc
 Docket No. 5994-06
19 January 2007

From:    Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To:      Secretary of the Navy
Subj:    REVIEW O F RECORD ICO
Ref:     (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552
End:     (1) DD Form 149 w/attac h ments
 (2)      PERS memorandum 5420 POOJ1/120 of 26 Oct 06
1.       Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject’s former spouse, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that after his divorce from in June 2005, Subject submitted a written request changing his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) beneficiary election from “spouse” to “former spouse.”
2.       The Board, consisting of Messrs. Novello, Countryman, and Leblanc, reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 12 December 2006 and, pursuant to its regulations, determined that the corrective action indicated below should be taken on the available evidence of record. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of the enclosures, naval records, and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Board also considered an advisory opinion prepared by the Bureau of Naval Personnel Office of Legal Counsel that recommended no corrective action be taken. A copy of that recommendation is attached as enclosure (2)
3.       The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:
a.
 were married on 10 December 1955.












Docket No. 5994-06

b. transferred to the Retired Reserve, on 30 August 1967. On 30 October 1972, during the initial Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) open period, he enrolled in SBP in the “spouse” category of coverage.
                  c.       were divorced on 1 June 2005 after nearly 50 years of marriage. Under the terms of the divorce decree, was not required to maintain Survivor Benefit Plan coverage on Part IV of the divorce decree states only that Chief Petty Officer“USN Pension” is his “sole and separate property.
         d.       There is no record or    ever
 having requested a change in beneficiary category from “spouse” to “former spouse” within one year of the date of divorce (as required under the regulations governing SBP).
e.       never remarried.
f.       died on 28 February 2006, approximately eight months after his divorce. At that, time, he was still enrolled in the “spouse” category of coverage (however, due to his divorce, he no longer had a “spouse”). He had paid “spouse” category premiums from the time of his initial enrollment in 1972 until his death, even during the period after his divorce.
g.       Per enclosure (3), the Bureau of Naval Personnel, provided an opinion advising that the evidence is insufficient to support the requested record change. The advisory opinion relies on the facts stated above that (1) the decedent’s divorce decree “does not award applicant former spouse SBP,” (2) the decedent’s divorce decree states that i5fUUUUI~,E~jmuuI~s “USN Pension” is his “sole and separate property,” (3) Chief Petty Officer Waldo never requested a change in beneficiary category from “spouse” to “former spouse within one year of the date of divorce (as required under the regulations governing SBP, and (4) although still paying “spouse” premiums at his death, he was no longer married and did not have a “spouse.” The advisory opinion reasons essentially that . was not obligated by the divorce decree to change the election from “s ouse” to “former spouse,” and he did not do so. Moreover, was not eligible to make a “deemed election” because there was no mention of SBP in the divorce decree.














Docket No. 5994-06

CONCLUS ION
Upon review and consideration of all the evidence of record, and notwithstanding the opinion expressed in enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence of an injustice warranting never remarried and continued to pay (spouse) premiums from the time of his retirement until the time of his death. The Board noted that he even paid premiums during the period between 2 June 2005 and 28 February 2006 when he was not married. It accepted explanation that she and NI were under the mistaken impression that because was paying premiums, the SBP coverage remained in effect to provide benefits to her in the event of his death. Accordingly, the Board concluded that the record should be changed to show that made a timely request to change the SBP coverage from “spouse” to “former spouse “ after his divorce and before his death.
RECOMMENDATION:
That Subject’s naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to show that:
a.       On 2 June 2005, the day after his divorce,. submitted a written request to change the category of Survivor Benefit Plan coverage from “spouse” to “former spouse” naming the “former spouse” beneficiary.
b.       A copy of this Report of Proceedings will be filed in the Petitioner’s naval record.
4. It is certified that quorum was present at the Board’s review and deliberations, and that the foregoing is a true and complete record of the Board’s proceedings in the above entitled matter.
         ROBERT D. ZSALMAN        WILLIAM J
         Recorder         Acting Recorder








3
Docket No. 5994-06



5. The foregoing action of the Board is submitted for your review and action.

 ROBERT D. ZSALMAN
Acting Executive Director

Reviewed and approved:





 Robert T. Call
 Assistant General Counsel
Manpower and Reserve Affairs)























Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01351

    Original file (BC-2012-01351.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPSIDAR states that there is no evidence of Air Force error in this case; however, in the absence of a competing claimant and to prevent a possible injustice, they recommend the decedent’s record be corrected to reflect he elected former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming APPLICANT as the former spouse beneficiary, effective 11 January 2005. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04626

    Original file (BC-2012-04626.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFFF recommends approval, stating, in part, there is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, DPFFF recommends the decedent's record be corrected to reflect on 1 Feb 94, he elected to change SBP spouse to former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming the applicant as the former spouse beneficiary. Considering the applicant failed to execute a deemed...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 11995-08

    Original file (11995-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject’s former spouse, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable ‘naval record be corrected to show that after his divorce from eile December 2006, Subject submitted a written request changing his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) beneficiary election from “spouse” to “former spouse.” 2. & 1450(£) (3) to change the 1 Under the rules governing SBP, when a person with suspended...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 05199-07

    Original file (05199-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    5199-07 20 December 2007From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the NavySubj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICORef: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Subject’s former spouse, hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that after his divorce from in March 2001, Subject submitted a written request changing his Survivor Benefit Plan...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2011 | 01116-11

    Original file (01116-11.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5109 BAN Docket No. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Petitioner filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show Subject submitted a timely written request for conversion from spouse to former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) electing as the sole beneficiary. In February 2011, Petitioner applied to BCNR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03921

    Original file (BC 2013 03921.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFFF recommends granting relief. The parties divorced on 2 Dec 04, and in the Agreement, incorporated in the divorce decree, the decedent agreed to pay SBP premiums currently in place for the benefit of the applicant. SECRETARY OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON JUL 2 2 2015 MEMORANDUM FOR THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS (AFBCMR) SUBJECT: AFBCMR Docket Number: BC-2013-03921 I have carefully reviewed the AFBMCR application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 02598

    Original file (BC 2012 02598.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case; however, absent a competing claimant and to prevent a possible injustice, DPSIAR recommends the member's record be corrected to reflect he elected former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming the applicant as the former spouse beneficiary. There is no evidence of Air Force error; however, to preclude an injustice, we agree with AFPC/DPSIAR’s recommendation that the member’s records should be corrected to reflect that he made...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02598

    Original file (BC-2012-02598.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case; however, absent a competing claimant and to prevent a possible injustice, DPSIAR recommends the member's record be corrected to reflect he elected former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming the applicant as the former spouse beneficiary. There is no evidence of Air Force error; however, to preclude an injustice, we agree with AFPC/DPSIAR’s recommendation that the member’s records should be corrected to reflect that he made...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05614

    Original file (BC 2013 05614.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, DPFFF recommends the decedent’s record be corrected to reflect that on 1 Jul 87, he elected to change RCSBP spouse to former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming the applicant as the eligible beneficiary. SBP premiums were deducted from the decedent’s retired pay until his 28 Jun 11 death. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01689

    Original file (BC-2006-01689.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    No recommendation is provided. A complete copy of the Legal Advisor’s evaluation is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel argues the legal advisory’s contention is that a deemed election was not made. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the AFBCMR Legal Advisor and adopt his rationale as...