(a) A court order awarding a former spouse survivor annuity is not a court order acceptable for processing unless it expressly awards a former spouse survivor annuity or expressly directs an employee or retiree to elect to provide a former spouse survivor annuity as described in paragraph (b) of this section.
(b) To expressly award a former spouse survivor annuity or expressly direct an employee or retiree to elect to provide a former spouse survivor annuity as required by paragraph (a) of this section the court order must—
(1) Identify the retirement system using terms that are sufficient to identify the retirement system as explained in § 838.911; and
(2) (i) Expressly state that the former spouse is entitled to a former spouse survivor annuity using terms that are sufficient to identify the survivor annuity as explained in § 838.912; or
(ii) Expressly direct the retiree to elect to provide a former spouse survivor annuity using terms that are sufficient to identify the survivor annuity as explained in § 838.912.
Notes of Decisions
Ruth T. Hairston v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 318 F.3d 1127 (Fed. Cir. 2003).
“Hairston to elect to do so as required *1130 by 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 . Lastly, the Board held that OPM had no duty to notify Ms.”
Anna M. Rafferty v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 407 F.3d 1317 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
“5 C.F.R. § 838.804 (a) (2004). The regulations also require that [f|or purposes of awarding, increasing, reducing, or eliminating a former spouse survivor annuity, or explaining, interpreting, or clarifying a court order that awards, increases, reduces or eliminates a former…”
Hinojosa v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 205 F. App'x 843 (Fed. Cir. 2006).
“OPM also determined that the language of the July Order did not expressly provide a former spouse survivor benefit, as required under 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 . Ms. Hinojosa timely appealed to the Board.”
Teresa Capps v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2026).
· cites it 4× “Under 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 (b)(1), to expressly award a former spouse survivor annuity, the court order must identify the retirement system using terms that are sufficient to identify the retirement system as explained in 5 C.”
Beckstead v. Opm (Fed. Cir. 2021).
· cites it 2× “§ 8341 (h)(1); see also 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 (a). While there are two court orders that could potentially have entitled Mrs.”
Rosemary Irving v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2022).
· cites it 2× “Under 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 (b), in order to expressly award a former spouse survivor annuity or expressly direct an employee or annuitant to provide a former spouse survivor annuity, the court order must expressly state that the former spouse is entitled to a survivor annuity…”
Miller v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt., 332 F. App'x 618 (Fed. Cir. 2009).
“§ 8341 (h)(1); see also 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 (a) (allowing processing only if court order expressly grants annuity or expressly directs the employee to elect such an annuity).”
Kurt J Hein v. Terri Jo Hein (Mich. Ct. App. 2021).
“Pursuant to 5 CFR § 838.804 , the former spouse survivor annuity must be explicitly directed in a court order acceptable for processing.”
Judi Ready v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2024).
“5 C.F.R. §§ 838.804 (b), 838.912(a)-(b). The administrative judge found, and the parties do not dispute on review, that the divorce agreement did not provide for a survivor annuity.”
Matilda Miles v. Off. of Pers. Mgmt. (MSPB 2024).
“Second, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 838.804 (a), a court order awarding a former spouse survivor annuity is not a court order acceptable for processing unless it expressly awards a former spouse survivor annuity or expressly directs an employee or retiree to elect to provide a former…”
Williams v. Opm (Fed. Cir. 2025).
“” 5 C.F.R. 838.804(a). In order to “expressly award” a survivor annu- ity, the court order must first “[i]dentify the retirement sys- tem using terms that are sufficient to identify the retirement system as explained in [5 C.”
— 5 C.F.R. § 838.804(a) — 1 case
Williams v. Opm (Fed. Cir. 2025).
“” 5 C.F.R. 838.804(a). In order to “expressly award” a survivor annu- ity, the court order must first “[i]dentify the retirement sys- tem using terms that are sufficient to identify the retirement system as explained in [5 C.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.