Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702021
Original file (9702021.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
. 

b 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

IN THE MATTER OF: 

DOCKET NUMBER:  97-02021 
COUNSEL : 
HEARING DESIRED:  No 

APPLICANT REQUESTS: 

Corrective action that would entitle her to an annuity under her 
late former husband's  Survivor Benefit Plan  (SBP) . 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

Applicant states that in accordance with her divorce settlement, 
her  late  former husband  agreed to  take  all necessary  action to 
provide  her  with  guaranteed  survivorship  benefits  to  his 
government pension payable to her on a monthly basis in the event 
of his death.  However, he never made this correction. 

In  support  of  her  request,  applicant  submits  a  copy  of  her 
divorce  settlement  and  decree,  a  copy  of  the  member's  death 
certificate, and other documentation relating to her appeal. 

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

Applicant and the service member were married on 1 Dec 72. 
On 2 Mar  90, the member elected child only SBP coverage based on 
full retired pay prior to his 1 Jul 90 retirement in the grade of 
master  sergeant.  Defense Finance and Accounting  Service  (DFAS) 
records show that the applicant concurred in the election.  The 
applicant and member  divorced on  16 Oct  90 and  the  court order 
required the member to take all necessary action to provide SBP 
coverage f o r   his former spouse.  The member died on 22 Apr  96 at 
which time his youngest son began to receive the full annuity. 

AFBCMR 97-02021 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

The  Chief,  Retiree  Services  Branch,  AFPC/DPPTR,  reviewed  this 
application  and  states  that  the  member  did  not  elect  spouse 
coverage  at  retirement.  Consequently, he  was  not  eligible  to 
obtain  coverage  on  the  applicant's  behalf.  Although  he  could 
have elected former spouse coverage for the applicant during the 
open  enrollment  period  authorized  by  Public  Law  (PL)  101-189 
(1 Apr  92  -  31 Mar  93),  there  is  no  record  that  the  member 
returned  an  election  form.  There  is no  evidence of Air  Force 
error  in  this  case  and  no  basis  in  law  to  grant  relief. 
Therefore, they recommend denial of the request. 
A  complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  is  attached  at 
Exhibit B . 

0 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

A  complete  copy  of  the  Air  Force  evaluation  was  forwarded  to 
applicant and counsel on 29 Dec 97 for review and response within 
30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this 
off ice . 

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 

1.  The applicant has exhausted all 
law or regulations. 
2.  The application was not timely 
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 

filed; however, it is in the 

remedies provided by existing 

3.  Insufficient  relevant  evidence  has  been  presented  to 
demonstrate  the  existence  of  probable  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 and adopt their 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  probable  material  error  or 
injustice;  that  the  application  was  denied  without  a  personal 
appearance;  and  that  the  application wlll  only be  reconsidered 

2 

c 

upon  the  submission  of  newly  discovered  relevant  evidence  not 
considered with this application. 

AFBCMR 97-0202 1 

The following members of the Board considered this application in 
Executive  Session  on  21 May  1998,  under  the  provisions  of  Air 
Force Instruction 36-2603: 

Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Panel Chair 
Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Member 
Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member 
Mrs. Joyce Earley, Examiner  (without vote) 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 Jun 97, w/atchs. 
Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 11 Dec 97. 

3 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702519

    Original file (9702519.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He could have elected former spouse SBP coverage for her during the 1992 open enrollment. However, spouse premiums could be terminated following divorce if the member additionally selected Option 4. He could have elected former spouse SBP coverage for her during the 92 open enrollment.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03521

    Original file (BC-2002-03521.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03521 INDEX CODE: 137.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her late husband's records be corrected so that she may be eligible for a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity. They state that Public Law (PL) 98-525 permitted former spouses to submit a request to deem an SBP election change...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03271

    Original file (BC-2002-03271.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03271 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her former husband's records be corrected to show he filed a timely election for former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and any SBP premium payments due be waived. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00024

    Original file (BC-2004-00024.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    DFAS records indicate that the former service member declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 July 1978 retirement. The member had an opportunity to provide coverage for the applicant during the SBP open enrollment periods authorized by Public Laws (PLs) 97-35 (1 Oct 81 – 30 Sep 82) and 101-189 (1 Apr 92 – 31 Mar 93), but there is no evidence he made such an election. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201019

    Original file (0201019.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant submitted a copy of a 11 Jun 92 letter from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) reflecting the service member elected her as his beneficiary and that she would be entitled to a survivor's annuity. The service member and the applicant's 20 Jun 00 divorce decree incorporated the previous property settlement, but specified that the benefit was incorrectly identified as "military retirement" and should reflect the service member's "Civil Service Retirement benefits." If the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00978

    Original file (BC-2004-00978.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The divorce decree ordered the servicemember to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but neither the servicemember nor she was aware of the one-year requirement to submit an election for former spouse coverage. Neither the servicemember nor the applicant made an election for former spouse coverage within one-year following their divorce. The applicant reviewed the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00408

    Original file (BC-2003-00408.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her ex-husband told her he elected SBP at the time of his 1972 retirement and he agreed to continue coverage on her behalf in their divorce. If he had elected SBP coverage for her, he would have been eligible to change to former spouse coverage within the first year following their divorce. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03233

    Original file (BC-2003-03233.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Counsel states that, prior to the former member’s retirement from the Air Force, he elected SBP coverage for “spouse and child.” On 29 December 1983, the member and applicant divorced and their divorce decree incorporated a settlement agreement wherein the applicant would receive “all (100%) of the Husband’s Survivor benefits that can be paid to a former spouse.” The Defense Finance and Accounting...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02024

    Original file (BC-2004-02024.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    SBP premium were deducted from the servicemember’s retired pay until February 2003 when the finance center suspended the spouse portion of his SBP. We do not take issue with the applicant’s contention her divorce decree ordered her deceased former husband to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but he did not do so. However, in the absence of a showing the applicant is legally entitled to the relief sought or a waiver of entitlement from the current spouse, we conclude she...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00319

    Original file (BC-2003-00319.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states the applicant submitted a notarized letter alleging the signature on the copy of an AF Form 1267, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Notification and Concurrence, is not her signature and that she did sign an SBP election form for annuity for 55 percent of the servicemember’s retired pay. If the servicemember had elected full spouse coverage, the applicant’s signature would not have been...