RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 98-02486
INDEX NUMBER: 137.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
That he be permitted to establish Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage
for his wife after the time period to do so expired.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his retirement, he was not married so he established
SBP coverage for his son. He retired in 1995 and remarried on
4 January 1997. He does not recall anyone telling him that he had
only one year to enroll his wife if he married.
Applicant’s complete statement and a copy of his marriage certificate
are at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Prior to his retirement on 1 September 1995, applicant was unmarried
and elected child only coverage, based on maximum annuity. He married
on 4 January 1997, but failed to submit a valid election to establish
spouse coverage before the first anniversary.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and
recommended denial stating there is no evidence of Air Force error or
injustice. A member, who is unmarried at retirement, may elect
coverage for a newly acquired spouse; however, the election must be
made before the first anniversary of the marriage or during an open
enrollment period.
DPPTR stated that while it’s impossible to ascertain what information
was or was not provided to the applicant when he retired, it is each
member’s responsibility to take the steps necessary to provide SBP
coverage at the appropriate time. Although the applicant’s request to
establish spouse coverage was not submitted during the time provided
by the statute, Public Law 105-261 authorized a one-year open
enrollment period (1 Mar 99 - 29 Feb 2000). The applicant may enroll
in the Plan during this opportunity.
The complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on
29 March 1999 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date,
no response has been received by this office.
___________________________________________________________________
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 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
office of primary responsibility 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.
4. Although we found no basis to favorably consider the applicant’s
stated request, we note that he is eligible to establish survivor
coverage under the current open enrollment period authorized by Public
Law 105-261, which began on 1 March 1999 and ends on 29 February 2000.
Further information may be obtained by contacting the Retiree
Services Branch at the Air Force Personnel Center. Their telephone
number is 1-800-531-7502 or (210) 565-2273.
___________________________________________________________________
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 25 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Aug 98, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 17 Mar 99, w/atch.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 28 Mar 99.
BARBARA A. WESTGATE
Panel Chair
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and states that a member, who is married during an enrollment period, may elect coverage for an eligible spouse but if the retiree fails to provide coverage during that opportunity, they may not provide coverage in the future, unless it is during another open enrollment period. There is no evidence of Air Force error; therefore,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01123
While the applicant claims that the member was unaware of all his retirement benefits, issues of the Afterburner, News for USAF Retired Personnel, were routinely mailed to the member’s correspondence address he provided to the finance center, reminding retirees of their SBP options when marrying after retirement. He could have elected coverage for the applicant at that time, but failed to do so. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states Public Law (PL) 99-145, established on 8 Nov 85, required as of 1 Mar 86 spousal concurrence of the SBP election, if the election was providing less than maximum spouse coverage. He declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 Apr 88 retirement. There is no evidence that the servicemember made an election for spouse coverage during either open enrollment period.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00670
He did not elect coverage for his former wife during the 72-74, 81-82 or 92-93 open enrollments and she died 29 November 1997. The amount of the buy-in was based upon the earliest date the member was eligible to elect coverage, but did not. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that he did receive an Afterburner or enrollment packet with...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01319
On 17 October 1998, PL 105-261 established an SBP open enrollment from 1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000 for servicemembers who were not participating at the fullest extent and a non-participant could elect coverage. The applicant’s records reflect his SBP coverage was terminated under PL 99-145 within the first year of his marriage to D. PL 105-261 did not prohibit servicemembers from making an election during open enrollment if they had not resumed spouse coverage when they remarried....
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force stated that the applicant elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 Mar 73 retirement. They stated that a member who fails to provide SBP coverage for an eligible spouse at the time of retirement may not later elect coverage for that person, or another person of the same category, unless Congress authorizes an open enrollment. ...
Making his son his SBP beneficiary negates his state care eligibility because he would be getting a regular monthly income which exceeds their limitations. However, in view of the fact that applicant’s incapacitated son’s medical care will be stopped if his son receives SBP premiums, we believe that it would be unjust to deny the relief requested. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01282
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was unmarried and elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 October 1992 retirement date. Records reflect the applicant and N--- married on 13 April 1993, but he failed to elect SBP coverage for her within the first year following their marriage. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the...
Consequently, he was not eligible to provide coverage on the applicant’s behalf following their divorce. 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. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and states Public Law (PL) 99-145 (8 Nov 85 but effective 1 Mar 86) requires a spouse’s written concurrence be obtained whenever a married retiree elects less than full spouse SBP coverage. DPPTR further states that the applicant’s claim that her husband declined SBP coverage because he believed his retired pay would be offset by...