.
.
-
1
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 97-02171
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: NO .a 3 1 1998
APPLICANT REOUESTS THAT:
His coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) be changed from
spouse and child coverage to child only.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He elected child only coverage prior to 1 November 1996. He was
not told the paperwork had to physically be in prior to retirement
on 1 November 1996.
In support of his request, he submitted two copies of DD Form
2656, a letter from the Survivor Benefits Plan Manager with a SBP
Report on Individual Person (RIP) attached.
The applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The facts are adequately stated in the Air Force evaluation.
Accordingly, there is no need to recite them here.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant attended an SBP pre-retirement briefing on 28 August
1996 and signed an SBP Report on Individual Person (RIP)
acknowledging his responsibility to complete an SBP election, with
his wife's concurrence prior to his 1 November 1996 retirement.
He was notified that failure to do so could result in unwanted
premium deductions. However, he did not make an SBP election
prior to retirement and is contending that he wasn't told his
election had to be turned in prior to retiring. Absent a valid
election, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS)
established spouse and child coverage based on full retired pay to
comply with the law. The petitioner had over two months before he
retiredlduring which he could have made an election and obtained
his spousels concurrence. There is no evidence of error or
injustice on the part of the Air Force in this case. Approval of
this request would provide the applicant an opportunity not
afforded other retirees and is not justified by fact or merit.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 30 March 1998 for review and comment within 30 days. As of
this date, no response has been received in this office.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
1.
law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3 . Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice. After
thoroughly reviewing the applicant's submission and the evidence
of record, we are not persuaded that the requested relief is
There is no evidence to support the applicant's
warranted.
contention that he was not made aware that an his election had to
be completed prior to his November 1, 1996 retirement. The SBP
RIP he attached to his request clearly states that automatic
maximum coverage provisions for the spouse will be .implemented if
there is no election submitted. We therefore agree with the
recommendations of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed
as the basis f o r our decision that the applicant has not been the
victim of an error or an injustice.
Therefore, we find no
compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not
demonstrate the existence of probable material error o r 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 this application in
Executive Session on 16 July 1998, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603 :
2
AFBCMR 97-02 17 1
,
-
’I
Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Panel Chair
Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Member
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Member
Ms Kay Byrne, Examiner (without vote)
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 97, with atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 9 Mar 98.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 30 ar 98. /-
/I
p”
P el Chair
3
AFBCMR 97-02 17 1
STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force indicated the applicant elected reduced spouse and child coverage The SBP counselor at d o ; F B , Nevada, provided verification that the applicant‘s wife did not attend the 4 Sep 96 SBP pre-retirement briefing. There is no evidence of error or injustice in this case and DPPTR recommends the requested relief be denied. The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 21 May 98, under the provisions of Air...
In fact, the item was the spouse notification letter sent by the SBP counselor to inform his wife of the options and effects of the SBP and to advise her that her concurrence was required in any election other than full spouse coverage. Basis for Request: The applicant claims he received an incorrect SBP briefing and the child SBP premiums are four times more than he was briefed. v 8 b. Unmarried children normally remain eligible beneficiaries until they reach age 18, or age 22 if...
On 26 September 1997, the applicant divorced and he submitted a copy of the divorce decree to DFAS-CL, and spouse premiums and coverage have been suspended. 97- 03000 AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief , Retiree Services Branch, Directorate of Pers Program Management, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and states that when a member fails to make an SBP election prior to retirement or fails to obtain a valid spouse concurrence in an election that does not provide maximum spouse coverage,...
He has insurance coverage. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. - APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 July 1997 for review and comment within 30 days. In fact, the available evidence clearly indicates that the applicant was counseled regarding the costs of participating in the SBP and he did elect to participate.
The appropriate Air Force office evaluated applicant's request and provided an advisory opinion to the Board recommending the application be denied (Exhibit C). The member‘s wife elected spouse and child coverage based on full retired pay effective I Feb 98. However, if the Boards decision is to grant relief, the member's record should be corrected to show on 31 Jan 94 he elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay.
Applicant alleges that her signature on AF Form 694, “Data for Payment of Retired Air Force Personnel,” the concurrence portion for an SBP election concurring with less than full spouse SBP coverage, is forged. Although it is unfortunate there is no original document for comparison with regard to the applicant’s signature, we found no persuasive evidence that she did not sign the document at the time of her late husband’s retirement which appears to be properly witnessed. ...
They stated they have no way of knowing what information he did or did not receive during his preretirement briefing because his master personnel record does not contain a copy of the SBP counseling RIP. However, those briefings routinely provide information about SBP changes that are permitted after retirement. HENAY c. SAUNDERS 3 AFBCMR97-00 107 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE WASHINGTON, DC Office of the Assistant Secretary AFBCMR 97-00 107 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02894
The laws controlling the SBP do not permit the applicant to provide coverage for his second wife now, or at any other time, unless Congress mandates an open enrollment period. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: He argues that he was not briefed on the policy concerning election of SBP spousal coverage and the suspension of that portion of the coverage after...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02926
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) reflect the applicant married on 24 June 1994 and he made a valid SBP election for spouse and child coverage based on full retired pay, prior to being placed on the Permanent Disability Retirement List (PDRL) effective 18 April 2006. The applicant was provided a retirement pay estimate of $1,894 with a monthly cost estimate of $126 for full spouse...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02108
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states that Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouses of married servicemembers to concur in writing, prior to the servicemember’s retirement, in SBP elections that provide less than full spouse coverage. DPPTR further states SBP elections can not be arbitrarily terminated as long there are eligible beneficiaries; however, PL 105-85, effective 18 November 1997, authorized retired servicemembers...