RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03821
		INDEX CODE:  137.01
	 	COUNSEL:  XXXXXXX
		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her late husband’s records be corrected to show he elected 
spouse-only coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She did not consent to or elect to name their children as 
beneficiary recipients and if such an election was made it is 
unjust and must have been made in error.

In support of her request, the applicant provided a copy of her 
marriage license, her late husband’s death certificate, Defense, 
Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) documentation, a sworn 
affidavit, a copy of the decedent’s last will and testament, 
documentation from the Lincoln Financial Group, a copy of the 
decedent’s SGLV-8721, Beneficiary Designation, dated 16 Feb 90, 
and a pay statement.
 
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A.

________________________________________________________________
_

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The decedent was retired on 1 Sep 89 and credited with 25 years, 
11 months, and 26 days of active service.  He and the applicant 
were married on 9 Jul 63.  

Other relevant facts are outlined in the AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation 
at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________
_

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial.  DFAS records reflect the 
decedent elected maximum child only SBP coverage prior to his 1 
Sep 89 retirement. Records further contain an annotation that 
the applicant concurred with the member’s SBP election prior to 
his retirement.  Absent a valid election, DFAS would have 
established full spouse and child coverage to comply with the 
law.  

Media storage and retrieval incompatibilities between DFAS and 
the Air Force Accounting and Finance Center (AFAFC) preclude 
acquiring a copy of the applicant’s concurrence statement; 
nevertheless, the record reflects she concurred in her late 
husband’s decision.  While it is unfortunate, DFAS – Cleveland 
Center (DFAS-CL) did not properly ensure copies of the critical 
SBP documentation such as the members’ election forms and 
spouses concurrence statements were safeguarded and retrievable 
following Oct 93, when DFAS-CL assumed Air Force retired pay 
responsibilities. Nevertheless, there is a strong basis to 
presume both SBP counselors and AFAFC pay technicians 
administratively discharged their duties correctly and in 
compliance with the laws controlling proper documentation and 
establishment of SBP elections.  Furthermore, there is no record 
the member submitted an election on the applicant’s behalf under 
Public Law (PL) 1010189 or 105-261.  Had he made an election on 
the applicant’s behalf during the open enrollment authorized by 
PL 108-375, he would have been required  to live at least until 
1 Oct 08 for the coverage to become valid.      

The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit C.

________________________________________________________________
_

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the 
applicant’s counsel on 1 Feb 08 for review and comment within 30 
days (Exhibit D).  As of this date, this office has not received 
a response.

________________________________________________________________
_

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice.  We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of 
the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation 
of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has 
not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis 
to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

________________________________________________________________
_
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that 
the application was denied without a personal appearance; and 
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the 
submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered 
with this application.

________________________________________________________________
_

The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-
2007-03821 in Executive Session on 26 June 2008, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	XXXXXXXXXXX, Panel Chair
	XXXXXXXXXXX, Member
	XXXXXXXXXXXX, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 13 Nov 07.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 22 Jan 08.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Feb 08.


                                   XXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                   Panel Chair