DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490

 

DIC
Docket No. NR5444-14
13 Jan 15

From: Chairman, Board for Correction of Naval Records
To: Secretary of the Navy

Subj: REVIEW OF NAVAL RECORD ICO _
Ref: (a) Title 10 U.S.C. 1552

Encl: (1) DD Form 149 w/attachments

(2) NPC memo dtd 17 Nov 14

(3) DEERS system printout

(4) Dependency Application/Record of Rmergency Data (NAVPERS
1070/602) dtd 5 Nov 94

(S) Dependency Application/Record of Emergency Data. (NAVPERS
1070/602) dtd 9 Apr 07

(6) Notification of Eligibility (NOE) ltr dtd 16 Apr 05

(7) NPC ltr 1820 PERS-912E/drm dtd 20 Aug 12

(8) NPC ltr 1820 PERS-912E dtd 19 Jun 13

(9) NPC ltr 1820 PERS-912E/drm dtd 2 Feb 14

1. Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a) Subject, hereinafter
'referred to as Petitioner, filed enclosure (1) with this Board
requesting, in effect, that the applicable naval record be corrected
to show timely written request for conversion from child only to-
spouse and child coverage. under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit
Plan (RCSBP).

 

2.0 The Board, {ears of

12 January 2015 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.

3. The Board, having reviewed all the facts of record pertaining to
Petitioner's allegations of error and injustice, finds as follows:

a. Before applying to this Board, Petitioner exhausted all _
administrative remedies available under existing law and regulations
within the Department of the Navy.

b. Petitioner married QUI on 16 March 1973. See

enclosures (3) and (4).

c. Petitioner divorced his spouse on 7 October 2003. See
enclosures (3) and (5).
Docket No. NR5444-14

‘d. Petitioner received his Notification of Eligibility (NOE) to
receive pay at age 60 and participate in the Reserve Component
Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) letter dated 16 April 2005.

Furthermore, he was automatically enrolled in the RCSBP with immediate
maximum child only coverage because the Naval Reserve Personnel Center
(NRPC) did not receive valid election from him during the timeframe
required by law. See enclosure (6).

e. Petitioner's song turned 18 on 9 August 2004.

See enclosure (5).

f. Petitioner married qe on 11 August 2005. See

enclosures (3} and (5).

g. Petitioner's daughters turned 18 on 13 October 2006.
See enclosure (5). .

h. Petitioner's retirement request was approved by Chief of
Naval Personnel and authorized his transfer to Retired Reserve status

effective 1 October 2012. See enclosure (7).

i. Petitioner received letter from Commander, Navy Personnel
Command dated 19 June 2013 informing him the following: “The NOE -
informed you that you had 90 days from the date of receipt to respond
back to us, otherwise you would be automatically enrolled in the plan.
Therefore, as of 16 Jul 2005, you have been enrolled in an immediate
RC-SBP annuity for your child{ren)." See enclosure (8).

j. Petitioner received letter from Commander, Navy Personnel
Command dated 2 February 2014 informing him that he was authorized to
retired pay for non-regular service effective 16 January 2014 vice his
60th birthday (16 January 2015). See enclosure (9).

k. In correspondence attached as enclosure (2), the office
having cognizance over the subject matter addressed in Petitioner's
application has commented to the effect that the request has no merit

and warrants no favorable action.. Petitioner was not married when he
was notified of his eligibility to receive retired pay and participate
in the RCSBP. He was automatically enrolled in the RCSBP with
immediate maximum child only coverage because the NRPC did not receive
valid election from him during the timeframe required by law.
Purthermore, Navy Personnel Command (PERS-912) stated that they did
not receive a request from Petitioner to enroll his spouse in the
RCSBP during the one-year timeframe required by law. Additionally,
Petitioner was notified of his eligibility to receive retired pay at
age 60 and participate in the RCSBP and did not respond. He remains
eligible to elect spouse category coverage if an open season
enrollment period is established by law.
Docket No. NR5444-14

CONCLUSION

Upon review and consideration. of all the evidence of record, and
despite the contents of enclosure (2), the Board finds the existence
of an injustice warranting the following corrective action. The Board
concurs with the available evidence provided by the Petitioner,
finding the existence of an injustice warranting corrective action.
The Board relied heavily on the events that took place prior to-
Petitioner receiving his NOE letter and commencing to receiving
retired pay. The Board’s experience has shown that many Sailors and
Marines drilling reservist receive insufficient or inaccurate
RCSBP/SBP counseling prior to or after their date of retirement, and
before receiving retire pay. Most of the interaction is made via
correspondence, and depending on the member's normal life tempo, the
individual might or might not realize the importance of RCSBP/SBP
coverage or that a decision must be made within 90 days after
receiving NOE letter. At the time he received his letter, Petitioner
was single with dependent children. It is not outside the realm of
possibility that Petitioner did not grasp the urgency of making such a
life time decision nor was he likely to be cognizant of the rules that
govern the program. In this case, Petitioner did not know that he had
to make an election within the first year of his remarriage.
Furthermore, the Petitioner was under the impression that once his
spouse was in DEERS, all requirements for the program were satisfied,
and she would be automatically covered in accordance with NRPC
Handbook 1772/2.

RECOMMENDATION:

That Petitioner's naval record be corrected, where appropriate, to
show that:

a. Petitioner executed a written request for conversion from
child only to spouse and child RCSBP coverage, at the same level of

coverage as previously elected, naming (ep as the

beneficiary. The request was received by cognizant authority and
became effective 12 August 2005, the day following: the date of
Marriage, .

b. On 16 January 2014, prior to his 60th birthday (16 January
2015), Petitioner was enrolled by DFAS in SBP for spouse and child

coverage, at the full base amount, naming «a as the
beneficiary. Any other election or declination executed by Subject is

null and void.

c. Petitioner is responsible for any unpaid SBP costs that would
have been deducted if he enrolled at the time of his Iarriage. No
waiver of unpaid costs will be granted.
Docket No. NR5444-14

da. A copy of this Report of Proceedings will be filed in
Petitioner's naval record.

4. Pursuant to Section 6(c) of the revised Procedures of the Board.

for Correction of Naval Records (32 Code of Federal Regulations,
Section 723.6(c)) 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,

 

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

ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Executive Director

Reviewed and approved.

3k is

   

ROBERT L.WOODS
Assistant General Counsel
(Manpower and Reserve Affairs)

1000 Navy Pentagon, Rm 4D548
Washington, DC 20350-1000