AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: 98-00762 Nov 1 3 m-
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her deceased husband's record be changed so that she is entitled
to Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity.
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She signed documents with the understanding that she was signing
up for the SBP, which apparently was changed without her
knowledge.
In support of her appeal, the applicant provided a personal
statement, Election Statement For Former Spouse Coverage, DD Form
1882 (Survivor Benefit Plan Election Change - Former Spouse) , DD
Form 2293 (Application For Former Spouse Payments From Retired
Pay), and other documentation.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant and the member were married on 28 September 1969.
The decedent declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 August 1994
retirement.
e election form in the
presence of the counselor a
AFB, concurring in the
decedent's election.
The applicant '
-
On 9 April 1997, the applicant and member divorced.
The member died on 26 October 1997.
.
98- 00762
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief Retiree Services Branch, Directorate of Personnel
Program Management, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and
states that the decedent's pay record contains no evidence to
support the applicant's claim that the SBP election was changed.
All records indicate the member declined SBP coverage and the
petitioner concurred in his election.
It is each person's
responsibility to ensure they understand the implication of any
document they sign.
In their view, the applicant's
unsubstantiated claims do not negate the effect her signing the
concurrence. Further, the court's action to award the SBP is
unenforceable since the member did not elect spouse coverage when
he retired. The law does not permit former spouse coverage after
divorce if the member was married at the time of retirement, but
declined spouse coverage. Therefore, they recommend denial of
applicant's request.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at
Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF A I R FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant reviewed the advisory opinion and states that she
was deceived and did not know military law. She states that she
trusted her spouse for 28 years of marriage during his 25 years
of military duty. In February 1995 the physical abuse occurred,
which was the result of an adulteress affair her husband had and
the courts agreed. The court awarded the divorce based on the
grounds of adultery, and requested that her husband make sure
that SBP was available to her. She also states she was not
advised by any counselor, nor military documents which should
have been given to all spouse's of retired military in advance,
so they will know the truth. She feels that she served her
country just as well as her husband, and is entitled to the
benefits as awarded by the courts due to the circumstances of the
divorce.
Applicant's complete response is attached at Exhibit E.
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies
law or regulations.
provided by existing
2. The application was timely filed.
2
98-00762
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 o u r 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 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 27 October 1998, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Panel Chair
Ms. Ann Heidig, Member
Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 March 1998, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 11 August 1998.
Exhibit D. Letter, MIBR, dated 24 August 1998.
P
H RY C. SAUNDERS
P ne1 Chair
3
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and states that at the time of the applicant's divorce there was no provision under the SBP law to continue coverage to a former spouse. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did noz 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...
HQ AFPC/JA informally advised the AFBCMR Staff that unless the divorced party can prove, either in a court of the country in which the divorce was obtained or in a United States court, that the foreign divorce was not in compliance with the laws of the foreign country, the divorce cannot be voided. If legally married to the decedent at the time the POA was issued, the applicant should have been entitled to a dependent ID card. The Chief advises that, should the Board grant relief, approval...
An AFAFC letter to the decedent, dated 7 October 1972, explained that SBP coverage had been established on his spouse's behalf in compliance with the provision of the law that required establishment of maximum spouse and child coverage if a member, such as the applicant, made no election before retirement. Documents provided by the applicant include a copy of a 7 Oct 72 letter to the decedent from the Air Force Accounting and Finance Center (AFAFC) which explained SBP coverage had been...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01570
He told her that her husband was making SBP payments and therefore she should have been receiving an annuity after his death. DPPTR states there is no basis in law to waive the two-year survival requirement; however, if the Board’s decision is to grant relief, the record could be corrected to show the member elected spouse only SBP coverage based on full-retired pay on 27 July 1977, prior to the first marriage anniversary. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D).
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
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...
Even though the applicant and the decedent were married at the time of his retirement (1 Apr 91), records indicate that the applicant’s valid concurrence in the decedent’s SBP election was obtained prior to his retirement. Subsequently, the decedent was eligible to provide coverage for the applicant during two SBP open enrollment periods authorized by Public Laws (PLs) 101-189 and 105-126 (1 Apr 92 – 31 Mar 93 and 1 Mar 99 – 29 Feb 00, respectively). We took notice of the applicant's...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01168
She states her divorce decree did not address the SBP annuity because her counsel advised her that once the member began receiving retired pay that neither the “…condition of the annuity nor the beneficiary could be changed.” She is writing after 30 years because she recently found out the SBP plan could apparently be changed after the receipt of benefits. DPPTR states the law in effect at the time of the applicant’s divorce did not allow retired members to provide SBP coverage to former...
Both must be exercised within the first year following divorce: the retiree may file an election change, or the former spouse may request the retiree be deemed to have made such a change on his or her behalf. If neither the member nor former spouse requests the election change within the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. There is no evidence the decedent nor the applicant took the required action to change the coverage, and SBP premiums...
When a member fails to complete an SBP election prior to retirement, coverage is established for all eligible beneficiaries by operation of law. Title 10 USC Section 1448 (a) (3) requires that the spouse of a married member must concur in any election that provides less than full spouse SBP coverage. The statement from the member's husband concurring in her election to decline coverage is inappropriate in that he does not clearly acknowledge retired pay ceases when the member dies, that he...