DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD. SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No. 10147-17 MAR 23 2018 Dear , This is in reference to your application for correction ofyour naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC 1552. Your case was reconsidered in accordance with procedures that conform to Lipsman v. Secretary ofthe Army, 335 F. Supp. 2d 48 (D.D.C. 2004). You were previously denied reliefby this Board on 13 January 2017. A three-member panel ofthe Board for Correction ofNaval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 February 2018. The names and votes ofthe members ofthe panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations oferror and injustice were reviewed in accordance with adlninistrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ofthis Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted ofyour original application, your reconsideration request, which included additional medical and legal documents, your former husband's naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The advisory opinion provided in NPC memo dated 8 July 2015 was sent to you on 22 February 2016 for an opportunity to comment. Your reply, received on 1 April 2016, raised additional issues not addressed in the initial advisory opinion. A second advisory opinion provided in NPC menio dated 11 July 2016 was sent to you on 10 August 2016 for an opportunity to comment prior to being considered by the Board. Your reply was received and your case was reopened on 24 October 2016, and the entire case file was presented to the Board. Copies ofthe advisory opinions are again enclosed. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, including all additional material submitted as part ofyour reconsideration request, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. In this connection, the Board again substantially concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinions. The Board considered your argument that because you and reconciled shortly after your divorce and remained in a committed relationship until his death, you should automatically be entitled to coverage under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP). Unfortunately the Board did not agree with your rationale for relief. Specifically, the Board highlighted that SBP coverage is not automatic anf must be specifically elected by the serVice member. The Board felt that the evidence supported your assertion that you reconciled with and were cohabitating with him since 2004. However, there was a lack ofevidence to demonstrate intent to elect any type ofcoverage under the RCSBP. He was notified ofhis opportunity to participate in the RCSBP on 4 November 2005. Even though you were not remarried, he could have chosen to provide coverage for you as a natural person with an insurable interest. could also have elected coverage for youany time during the widely publicized open enrollment period that ran from 1 October 2005 through 30 September 2006. However, there is no evidence that he made such an election or desired RCSBP coverage ofany kind. Further, there was evidence that he did take such proactive steps to provide you with other non-military survivor coverage. Accordingly, your application has been denied. In regard to your request for a personal appearance, be advised that the Board regulations state personal appearances before the Board are not granted as a right, but only when the Board determines that such an appearance will serve some useful purpose. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence ofthe record. It is regretted that the circumstances ofyour reconsideration petition are such that favorable action cannot be taken again. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission ofnew and material evidence. New evidence is evidence not previously considered. by the Board. In the absence of sufficient new and material evidence for reconsideration, the decision of the Board is final, and your only recourse would be to seek relief, at no cost to the Board, from a court ofappropriate jurisdiction. It is important to keep in mind that a presuinption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction ofan official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence ofprobable material error or injustice. Sincerely, Executive Director