RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03849 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her former spouse’s records be corrected to establish former 
spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was under the impression her former spouse completed the 
required paperwork to change the SBP election from spouse to 
former spouse. 

 

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are 
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force, which is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

HQ AFPC/DPSIAR states that based on guidance by the AFBCMR on 
18 Mar 04, they are forwarding the request without a 
recommendation because it involves two potential SBP 
beneficiaries. 

 

The Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) 
records show the applicant and her former spouse were married on 

25 Apr 59, and he elected spouse only SBP coverage based on full 
retired pay prior to his 1 Oct 74 retirement. The parties 
divorced on 9 May 86. DEERS reflects the former service member 
re-married on 19 Jul 89, and divorced on 3 Oct 92, and was re-
married again on 8 Feb 03. Each of these spouses became the 
eligible beneficiary, by operation of law, on the first 
anniversary of their marriages. There is no evidence the former 
service member notified either the Air Force Accounting and 
Finance Center (AFAFC) or the Defense Finance and Accounting 
Service – Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) of the changes in his 


marital status. Records from AFAFC and DFAS-CL reflected the 
applicant’s date of birth (14 Nov 37) until the former service 
member’s 14 Mar 12 death was reported to DFAS-CL in Jun 12. 

 

DPSIAR states that when the information was provided for the 
death certificate, the son of the former service member reported 
he was divorced. However, there is no evidence in DEERS which 
reflects the former service member was divorced at the time of 
his death. 

 

DPSIAR states that there is no indication the current spouse has 
applied for the SBP annuity, approximately $800 per month. 

 

The complete DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

_________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

In response to the Air Force evaluation, the applicant provided 
incomplete copies of what appears to be divorce decrees from the 
former service member’s two previous spouses. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit D. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

 

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

 

2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

 

3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of an injustice. We took notice of 
the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the 
case. This Board has been previously advised it should not 
consider cases, such as the applicant’s involving disputed 
claims unless a court of competent jurisdiction has ruled in the 
case or pushes the AFBCMR to make a determination in the case. 
The applicant contends she was under the impression her former 
spouse completed the required paperwork to change the SBP 
election from spouse to former spouse. Neither the applicant 
nor the former spouse made a deemed election within one year as 
required by law to establish former spouse coverage. Further 
complicating this case is the fact that her former spouse’s 
second and third spouse gained entitlement to the benefit by 
operation of law. Additionally, only in the most unique of 
circumstances would the Board make a ruling on a case that 
involves other claimants to a benefit that only one of them can 
receive. However, should his two former spouses’ submit a 
notarized statement relinquishing their entitlement to the SBP; 


the Board may be willing to reconsider the applicant’s appeal in 
consideration of this evidence. In view of the above and in the 
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to 
recommend granting the relief sought in this application. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: 

 

The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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 AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2012-03849 in Executive Session on 7 May 13, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Aug 12, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 25 Sep 12. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Oct 12. 

 Exhibit D. Correspondence, Applicant, undated. 

 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair