Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0003202
Original file (0003202.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  00-03202
            INDEX CODE: 137.04

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage for his spouse be terminated and
all deductions from his retired pay, retroactive to 17 February 1997,  be
refunded.  He also requests  that  he  be  refunded  $7,456.52,  and  any
additional premiums taken from his retired pay since 1 September 2000.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He retired on 1 July 1975.  On 4 June  1975,  he  signed  DD  Form  1883,
Survivor Benefit Plan Election Certificate, declining  an  annuity  under
the SBP.  The form advised that his decision not  to  participate  was  a
permanent, irrevocable decision, and that he should consider his decision
and its effects very carefully.  He considered his decision  and  decided
he did not want an annuity.  He received a letter  postmarked  25  August
2000, advising him of a debt of $7,456.52 based on an overpayment by  the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) dating back to  17 February
1997, the one-year anniversary of his marriage to his current spouse.  He
sent the payment 5 days later  because  he  was  unable  to  contact  the
military pay technician at DFAS.  He was told by  the  SBP  counselor  at
Lackland AFB that SBP deductions should not have been taken  out  of  his
retired pay, if he initially declined coverage when he retired on 1  July
1975.  On 18 September 2000,  his  spouse  met  with  the  counselor  who
witnessed her statement that she agreed with the request to terminate SBP
coverage.

The applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this  application,  extracted  from  the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the
appropriate office of the Air Force.  Accordingly,
there is no need to recite these facts in this Record of Proceedings.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Chief,  Retiree  Services  Branch,  AFPC/DPPTR,  indicated  that  the
applicant’s claim that he never elected to  participate  in  the  SBP  is
without merit.  He was married prior to his 1 July 1975  retirement,  but
declined SBP coverage.  During the open enrollment period of 1 Oct 1981 -
30 September 1982, he elected spouse only  SBP  coverage  based  on  full
retired pay for his wife at the  time.   Coverage  was  effective  August
1982, and monthly premiums were deducted from his retired  pay  for  more
than 4 years, totaling approximately $8,700.  The parties divorced  on  6
February  1987,  and  the  divorce  decree  was  silent   on   the   SBP.
Notification of the divorce was received by the finance center  in  April
1987, and spouse premiums were suspended.  The  member  and  his  current
spouse married on 17 February 1996, but he failed to advise  the  finance
center that he did not want to extend SBP coverage to his new wife before
the first anniversary of their marriage (17 February  1997).   In  August
2000, the finance center learned of  the  member’s  marriage,  reinstated
spouse premiums, and  began  to  recoup  approximately  $7,456  in  costs
retroactive  to  the  first  anniversary  of  their  marriage.    It   is
unfortunate that the applicant failed to notify the finance center of his
remarriage in a timely manner and incurred  a  debt;  however,  his  wife
became an eligible beneficiary on the first anniversary of  the  marriage
and would have received an annuity, after recovery of the  premium  debt,
had the member died.

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant  on  30
March 2001, for review and response within 30 days  (Exhibit D).   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.  After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are  not  persuaded
that relief is appropriate.  The applicant’s contentions are duly  noted;
however, we do not  find  these  assertions  sufficiently  persuasive  to
override the rationale provided by the Air Force.   Since  the  applicant
failed to notify DFAS-CL in a timely manner  that  he  did  not  want  to
extend SBP  coverage  to  his  new  wife,  coverage  was  established  in
accordance with the law, and he incurred a premium  debt.   We  therefore
agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and  adopt  the  rationale
expressed as the basis  for  our  decision  that  the  applicant  is  not
entitled to 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 16 May 2001, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

           Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chairman
           Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
           Mr. Mike Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 29 Nov 2000, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 16 Mar 2001.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 30 Mar 2001.




                                   DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                                   Panel Chairman


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101323

    Original file (0101323.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant's wife submitted a letter stating if they had been counseled adequately they would have not chosen to resume SBP coverage. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 25 September 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102112

    Original file (0102112.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time, RCSBP coverage and premiums were suspended. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states that SBP spouse coverage is suspended when the spouse loses eligibility. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0002850

    Original file (0002850.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 15 September 1999, DFAS received the applicant’s request to establish SBP coverage for his new wife. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that he should be allowed to terminate SBP coverage for his wife. Therefore, we agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an error or an...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | 0203122

    Original file (0203122.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force stated that the applicant was married and elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 12 May 83 disability retirement. If a member withdraws under this provision, there is no immediate refund of premiums; however, applicable spouse premiums paid by the member can be refunded to the spouse following the member’s death. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101737

    Original file (0101737.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The service member and G. (the applicant) were married on 14 Sep 94; however, the service member did not notify DFAS of the change in his martial status nor did he request to establish coverage for his new spouse. On 21 Feb 01, the service member's former spouse (M.) submitted a request for correction of his military records to entitle her to an SBP annuity. The beneficiary form that the applicant refers to was to entitle her to the service member's unpaid retired pay, not as a beneficiary...

  • 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-02194

    Original file (BC-2003-02194.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 2 June 2003, the applicant requested that the finance center stop the SBP. Furthermore, the applicant failed to respond to their 7 July 2003 letter requesting he obtain a notarized statement completed by his wife in which she acknowledges retired pay ceases when the applicant dies, that she is currently eligible to receive an annuity valued at approximately $774 per month (after the age of 62, no less than $492), and approval of this request would result in her receiving no...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-01891A

    Original file (BC-2001-01891A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant remarried on 9 September 1992, but failed to inform the Finance Center that he did not want to extend SBP coverage before the first anniversary of his marriage. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Pursuant to the Board’s request, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed the applicant’s most recent submission. With regard to terminating the reinstated SBP coverage, Public...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03158

    Original file (BC-2002-03158.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant and the member divorced on 3 February 1983. Effective 1 March 1986, Public Law (PL) 99-145 permitted retiring members to select SBP coverage for a former spouse with the same cost as coverage options as a spouse. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that SBP was set up to protect the spouse and this is why a spouse’s signature is...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03158

    Original file (BC-2002-03158.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant and the member divorced on 3 February 1983. Effective 1 March 1986, Public Law (PL) 99-145 permitted retiring members to select SBP coverage for a former spouse with the same cost as coverage options as a spouse. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states that SBP was set up to protect the spouse and this is why a spouse’s signature is...