PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           11 February 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999028754

	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.  

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Chairperson	
	Mr. George D. Paxson		Member	
	Mr. Thomas B. Redfern, III		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that the records of her deceased spouse, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show that he elected to participate in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP), option C, full base amount.

3.  The applicant states that the FSM did not complete the DD Form 1883, Survivor Benefit Plan Election within 90 days because it was mailed to the wrong address.  His retirement orders were mailed to the correct address.

4.  The FSM’s military records are not available.  The information contained herein was obtained from documents provided by the applicant.

5.  The FSM was born on 6 March 1950.  The FSM’s notification of eligibility for retired pay at age 60 (his 20-year letter) is dated 14 January 1999.  His Army National Guard unit mailed the notification to him at an old Vassar, MI address.

6.  The FSM’s orders assigning him to the Retired Reserve are dated                19 February 1999.  His unit mailed those orders to his correct Saginaw, MI address.

7.  On 1 May 1999, the FSM died of a heart attack.  The death certificate does not indicate that there had been any illness contributing to the immediate cause of his death.

8.  The Michigan Army National Guard state casualty officer has stated that the retirement non-commissioned officer got the address to which the FSM’s 20-year letter was mailed from a database that is supposed to be an extract of SIDPERS (Standard Installation/Division Personnel System) data.  However, that database contained his old address.  He had moved to Saginaw, MI about 2 years earlier.  The unit had submitted his request for discharge on  8 December 1998 and the request showed his correct address.  Their discharge orders process is automated and draws the address directly from the SIDPERS database.  She checked the SIDPERS database herself recently and saw that the FSM’s Saginaw, MI address is loaded into the system.  She states that from this information it is apparent the FSM did properly inform his unit of his address change and that the change had been input into the state’s SIDPERS database. She cannot determine why the unit sent his notification of retirement eligibility and SBP election forms to the wrong address.

9.  Public Law 95-397, the Reserve Component SBP (RCSBP), enacted               30 September 1978, provided a way for those who had qualified for reserve retirement but were not yet age 60 to provide an annuity for their survivors should they die before reaching age 60.  Three options are available:  (A)  elect to decline enrollment and choose at age 60 whether to start SBP participation; (B)  elect that a beneficiary receive an annuity if they die before age 60 but delay payment of it until the date of the member’s 60th birthday; (C)  elect that a beneficiary receive an annuity immediately upon their death if before age 60.  If death does occur before age 60, the RCSBP costs for options B and C are deducted from the annuity (costs for option C being the more expensive).  A member must make the election within 90 days of receiving the notification of eligibility to receive retired pay at age 60 or else wait until he/she applies for retired pay and elect to participate in the standard SBP.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The Board concludes that an injustice and Government error occurred in this case.

2.  The FSM had moved to Saginaw, MI about 2 years prior to 14 January 1999, the date his 20-year letter is dated.  The evidence of record shows he had notified the unit of his new address.  Yet, when his 20-year letter was generated it was mailed to his old address.  His retirement orders, which were published just a month later on 19 February 1999, were sent to his correct address.

3.  The law requires a service member to make his RCSBP election within 90 days of receiving his 20-year letter.  The Board concludes that it would be an injustice to have relied on the U. S. Postal Service to forward the letter to the FSM when the Army should have mailed it to the correct address in the first place.  The Board also concludes that had the FSM received his 20-year letter he would have elected to participate in the RCSBP, option C, full base amount.  Considering the FSM’s age and lack of indication of prior ill health, the Board further concludes that the FSM would not have elected Supplemental SBP.

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would be in the interest of justice to correct the FSM’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the FSM concerned elected to participate in the RCSBP, option C, full base amount, with spouse coverage on 19 February 1999, the date of the FSM’s retirement orders and within the 90-day enrollment period had he received his 20-year letter on 14 January 1999.

2.  That the applicant be advised that the Defense Finance and Accounting Service will be instructed to collect any RCSBP costs due. 

3.  That the applicant be paid an annuity based upon the FSM’s election to participate in the RCSBP retroactive to 1 May 1999, the date of his death.

BOARD VOTE:  

__mkp___  __gdp___  __tbr___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

		Margaret K. Patterson
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999028754	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000211	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	137.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.