DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DBC 20370-5100
WJH
Docket: 8353-10
14 September 2011
Qua»
This ig in reference to your application for correction of
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 12 September 2011. 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 former
husband's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations
and policies. In addition, the Board considered the 24
June 2011 advisory opinion furnished by the Survivor
Benefit Program Manager Casuaity Assistance Section which
is attached and was previously furnished to you.
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 for the reasons set forth
below.
According to your application, you recall a discussion
about SBP at the time of retirement but
do not recall the specifics. You learned that he was not
participating in the SBP in, approximately, 1991. And, due
to his declining health, you began to manage his financial
affairs in approximately 2001.
>
Docket: 8353-10
Records show that you married your spouse
QHD 20" deceased) in 1958. In 1982,
rerired from active duty. Prior to his retirement, he
declined participation in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)
by filing a NAVCOMPT 2272. You also signed the NAVCOMPT
2272 under part IV “Survivor Benefit Plan Acknowledgement”.
As a result of his election to decline participation
QUEEN wes not enrolled in the SBP. He paid no
premiums or “costs” associated with participation. He
enjoyed the benefit of his full retired pay after his
retirement.
SBP “open seasons” were held in 1991, 1999 and 2005.
There is no evidence that Qs sought to enroll
in SBP during the open seasons. Also, there is no evidence
that you sought to enroll (on his behalf) during the open
season held after you began to manage
financial affairs.
The Board found that, under these circumstances, no change
to his naval record is warranted. The Board was satisfied
that the NAVCOMP 2272 that you signed in 1982 adequately
served to put you on notice chat Qs had
declined SBP. By your own statement, you knew that he was
not participating in the SBP as early as 1991. Neither you
nor quay -<: sought to enroli during any of the
available “open seasons.” And no SBP “premiums” were ever
paid. 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
also 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,
Docket: 8353-10
the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence
of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
Executive tor
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10865-02
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 MEH: ddj Docket No: 10865-02 22 January 2003 This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 January 2003. were reviewed in accordance with administrative...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12037-10
Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject’s widow, | hereinafter referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected to show that she submitted a timely application for annuity benefits under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) after her husband’s death in 2001. The Board, consisting of Messrs. Pfeiffer, Zsalman, and George reviewed Petitioner’s allegations of error and injustice on 4 October 2010 and,...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05886-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 September 2008. 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. Per reference (a), recommend BCNR not correct record to reflect that he enrolled his spouse in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 02070-04
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 11 May 2004. 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. Per reference (a) , recommend BCNR not correct CAPT’s record to reflect that he enrolled in the
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07810-02
SCPO Benefit Plan (SBP) using his full retired pay as his base amount prior to transferring to Fleet Reserve. The recommendation is based on the following: a. SCPO transferred to the Fleet Reserve on He enrolled in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) 31 August 1980. spouse only coverage category at the minimum base amount of $300.00. The enclosure indicates b. and he had two other opportunities ?had three subsequent opportunities to base amount for the SBP after his The first was during the 1...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008231
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show he had no eligible spouse at the time of his retirement and that he submitted a request to enroll his current spouse in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) in a timely manner. The evidence of record shows that prior to his retirement in 1991, the applicant made an SBP election to decline all coverage. When the applicant attempted to enroll his new spouse in the SBP during the FY06 Open Season, he was incorrectly informed that...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060016300
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 7 June 2007 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060016300 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 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, established the SBP. However, evidence of record shows the FSM had several opportunities to inquire about SBP costs or enroll in the SBP during Open Seasons.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 04012-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 December 2010. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004269
The applicant provides copies: * DD Form 2656-6, dated 19 February 2013 * a State of Colorado Marriage License and Marriage Certificate CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. All of these open enrollment seasons were extensively publicized in Army Echoes to ensure all retirees were informed of their existence and also in the Army Times. He was authorized up to 1 year from the date of marriage to enroll his spouse and stepchildren in the RCSBP.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100019095
He was honorably retired on 31 December 1991 and placed on the Retired List on 1 January 1992. In Part V (SBP Election) he elected coverage for dependent children only. There is no evidence of record and none provided by the applicant to show he attempted to correct his SBP coverage election shortly thereafter or prior to the date of his application to the Board.