DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON BC 20370-5100
. WH -
Doc. No, 9433-08
30 June 2009
This is in reference to your application for correction of the
naval record of Petty Officer First Class Eric V. Matthews
(USN) (Retired) (Deceased) pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC
1552.
BA three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 29 June 2009. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your deceased husband’s naval record and.
applicable statutes, regulations and policies. in addition, the
Board considered the 10 April 2009 advisory opinion furnished by
the Naval Personnel Command which was previously provided to
your counsel.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. The Board found that the records showed
that, prior to his retirement from the Navy, your husband
declined participation in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
Moreover, on 13 March 2005, you signed the DD Form 2656 (a copy
of which is enclosed) wherein you certified that you concurred
in your husband's decision to decline participation and that you
had received information that explained the options available
and the effects of those options. The Board found that you also
certified on the DD 2656 that you were aware that your husband’s
retired pay would stop when he dies. Because of your husband’ s
Doc. No. 9433-08
election (to decline participation) accompanied by your
statement (concurring in his decision), your husband was not
enrolied in the SBP. He did not pay any of the “costs” or
“premiums” that would have been associated with participation in
SBP. He received his “full” retired pay without deductions for
SBP costs. The Board gave careful consideration to your claims
that you did not receive proper counseling and that the DD 2656
was not properly witnessed. The Board also noted that you did
not complain about these alleged insufficiencies until after
your husband died. The Board found that these claims were
insufficient to warrant any relief. The Board was satisfied,
based on the DD Form 2656 that you personally were adequately
aware of your options, you personally concurred in the decision
‘to decline participation and that you were aware as early as 13
March 2005 that your husband would not be participating in SBP
and his retired pay would stop upon his death. Accordingly,
your application has been denied. The names and votes of the
members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence or other matter not previously considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
La Ven Qaetf
W. DEAN PFEIF
Executive Dir Oo
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 09029-10
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. On 29 December 2003, he executed a DD Form 2656 declining participation in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120003257
The applicant requests that 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). The applicant provides a copy of a DD Form 2656 which shows this form was signed and dated by her, the FSM, and a witness on 24 March 2001 during the FSM's retirement processing. The applicant and the letters from two retired service members state that if the FSM and the applicant had been adequately...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100012764
The letter also advised her that she must notify the USAR Personnel Command, using DD Form 1883 (SBP Election Certificate), of her decision within 90 days of the date of the letter. Public Law 106-398, dated 30 October 2000, required Reserve and Guard members, who had completed their service obligation, considered entitled for retired pay, but who are not yet age 60, to obtain their spouse's concurrence in RCSBP elections that do not provide maximum spouse coverage (immediate option). As a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110017403
The case corrected the military records of an FSM to show the applicant (the FSM's spouse) was entitled to an RCSBP annuity effective the date following the FSM's death. There was no evidence the FSM completed a DD Form 1883 or that the spouse was informed the FSM could participate in the RCSBP. The evidence of record shows the FSM received his Twenty-Year Letter with the accompanying SBP forms in June 2000. a.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140020468
The applicant requests the DD Form 2656-5 (Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP)) of her deceased husband a former service member (FSM) be corrected to show he elected Option C (Immediate Annuity) instead of Option A (I decline to make an election until age 60). 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000030
He elected participation in the Reserve Component SBP (RCSBP) for spouse only coverage based on the full amount under Option C (Immediate coverage). On 15 August 2011, by letter, a DFAS official notified the applicant's Member of Congress that: * Entitlement to retired pay terminates on the date of the retiree's death * The Arrears of Pay (AOP) include unencumbered amounts due to the deceased member * An amount of $752.40 was mailed to the applicant on 1 September 2010 for his AOP from 1 to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016884
Option B and C participants do not make a new SBP election at age 60. Based on the available records it cannot be determined what, if any, counseling the applicant received at the time of her initial SBP election in 1996 or at the time of her second submission in 2014. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing the applicant requested and was granted a suspension of coverage for her mother as an...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004957
The applicant, the widow of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests correction of her husband's records to show he enrolled in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) with spouse coverage. She applied for the survivor annuity and was told that a DD Form 1883 (Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Certificate) was not on file in the FSM's military records. The applicant contends that the records of her deceased husband should be corrected to show he enrolled in the RCSBP...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03065
He was briefed that SBP costs would be 50% of his retirement pay, which they agonized over before declining SBP coverage. If they were correctly informed during their initial briefing, they would have elected to participate in the program and she would have never signed the form declining coverage. Further, there is no record the member submitted an election under PL 105-261.