Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR11045 14
Original file (NR11045 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
701 §. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

BAN
Docket No:NR11045-14

a1 Arteries 2014
on

Nee ee ee a ee a

‘This is in reference to your original application dated 13
December 2013 with enclosures. On 11 August 2014, you requested
reconsideration of your case, which was considered and denied on
7 October 2014.

A three member panel of the Board convened on 7 October 2014, |
and found that there is no basis for relief of your request.
You are advised that when a request for corrective action is
denied by the Board, sitting in executive session, new and

material evidence or other matter not previously considered must
be submitted in order to have the Board reconsider its decision.

Therefore, after a careful review of your evidence, the Board
determined that although you provided new information, it was
not material information. Therefore, your case was denied. The

Board noted the following facts:

        

a) a eeeice ne acts SE ee as “
was married to his first wife in —__> He was subsequently
divorced in

b) SEP vc ixed from the Navy infijpte wes single

at that time but had three dependent children. However, Siii?>

ever elected “child” only coverage under the Retired
Serviceman’s Family Protection Plan (RSFPP), (the only available
annuity program at that time). Therefore, he was not enrolled in
the program.’

 

1 The RSFPP was the Department of Defense survivor program in effect prior to
September 21, 1972 when it was replaced by the Survivor Benefit Plan {SBP). RSFPP
coverage could not be established after September 20, 1972. During the SBP initial
enrollment period (Sept. 21, 1972 to March 20, 1974), members with RSFPP coverage
could terminate that coverage and elect SBP coverage, oF keep the RSFPP coverage in
addition to electing SBP coverage. additionally, if the member retired on or after
Nov.i, 1968, unmarried children are eligible beneficiaries until age 18, or age 23 if
attending school full time.
Docket No .NRLiO45-14

i

ep AT SET

c) In 1984, i you were married. He had the

opportunity to enroll his spouse (you) in the SBP program within
one year of marriage, but he failed to do so. Furthermore,
under the law at that time, he was not required to notify you of
his decision.

d) although SEE 2c i cioned the court for a divorce

in 1993, it was never finalized; and cherefore, vacated in 2010

by the Circuit Court of the City 5

e) In 2005, EP «i 23. Before his death, he had
numerous opportunities to enroll you in the SBP program during

the open-enrollment seasons, but he failed to do 80.

Therefore, based on all the aforementioned issues, the Board
concluded that since your spouse was nov enrolled in SBP, you
are not entitled to an SBP annuity. In making their
determination, the Board also considered your response dated 11
August 2014, and your claim that your spouse's Retired Account
Sratement noted “SBP election is reflected on your account”.
However, the Board pelieved that this was an error since no SEP
premium payments have ever been made or taken out of his
retirement pay. The names and votes of the members of the panel
will be furnished upon request.

Tt is regrettable that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action camnot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
material evidence within one year from the date of the Board’ s
decision. New evicence is evidence not previously considered by
the Board prior to making its decision in your case. In this
regard, it is important té keep in mind that a presumption of
regularity attaches to all official records. consequently, when
applying for a correction of an official record, the burden is
on the applicant tc¢ f material error

or injustice.

 

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1840 14

    Original file (NR1840 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    _ BPE RS DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BEOOre™s BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 761 S COURTHOUSE RD SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON VA 22204-2490 BAN Docket No.NRO1840-14 27 October 2014 From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records To: Secretary of the Navy Subj: REVIEW_OF NAVAL RECORD ICO q Ref: {a) Title 10 U.S.C. 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 that, as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01439

    Original file (BC-2007-01439.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    Had the member elected SBP coverage based on full retired pay, the monthly cost would have been approximately $157 at the time of his death and the annuity would have been no less than $1,335. Furthermore, the Air Force may not pay an SBP annuity to the applicant because the member retired before the implementation of the SBP and he did not choose to provide SBP coverage on her behalf. It is possible that since the premiums were still being deducted from the member’s retired pay after the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090008249

    Original file (20090008249.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant, the ex-spouse of a deceased former service member (FSM), requests that the FSM's records be corrected to show he changed his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage to former spouse coverage and that she be paid the SBP benefit payments. Public Law 99-661, dated 14 November 1986, permitted divorce courts to order SBP coverage (without the member’s agreement) in those cases where the member was participating in the SBP or was still on active duty and had not yet made an SBP...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02681

    Original file (BC-2004-02681.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He received a response in September 2003, informing him the request he submitted was not received until after the authorized open enrollment period. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. After his first marriage ended, he remarried in February 1998; however, his current spouse is not eligible to receive RSFPP because the marriage occurred after the applicant retired.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03764

    Original file (BC-2002-03764.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR recommend that applicant’s request be denied and stated that there is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice, or merit in fact, nor basis in law to approve this case. Briefing material used at the time the member completed his RSFPP election clearly stated that “dependents acquired after you retire are not eligible to receive Family Protection Plan annuity payments,” payments would only...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00568

    Original file (BC-2006-00568.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior to the servicemember’s 1 October 1963 retirement, he was married and elected spouse and child RSFPP coverage, Option 4 - that allowed the member to terminate RSFPP premium payments in the event the beneficiary lost eligibility. We find no evidence he attempted to elect SBP coverage for the applicant during any of the four open enrollment periods provide by law. Regardless, it appears the servicemember made no attempt to elect SBP coverage for the applicant when he was eligible during...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6055 13

    Original file (NR6055 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    In May 2013, Petitioner a _— my applied deceased former spouse's to BCNR re ing to correct her " |g record to show that he elected former spouse coverage within one year of his divorce, pursuant to a divorce decree, enclosure (1). to DFAS requesting former spouse SBP coverage within one year of their divorce, as required by law. Although the Board recognized that Petitioner, at that time, did not submit a deemed election within one year from the date of divorce as required by law, the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 08279-07

    Original file (08279-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by NPC Memo dtd 7 Nov 07, a copy of which is attached.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. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 01807-04

    Original file (01807-04.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 MEH:ddj Docket No: 1807-04 11 May 2004 This is in reference to your application for correction of your deceased spouse’s 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 11 May 2004. In addition, the Board considered the...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006665

    Original file (20120006665.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The FSM died on 12 July 1996 and based on their review of his military retired pay account, he declined participation in both the RSFPP and SBP. Based on this, there are no annuity entitlements payable to the applicant from the FSM's military retired pay account. If the applicant had requested an annuity within 6 years of the FSM's death, her claim would have been denied due to the FSM's declination of SBP coverage.