RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01092
INDEX CODE:137.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
SSN HEARING DESIRED:
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be changed to show he elected in a timely fashion to
change his coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) from
"spouse" to "former spouse."
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The applicant has not provided an explanation for failing to submit a
valid election to change his SBP coverage from "spouse" to "former
spouse."
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was married and elected spouse SBP coverage based on a
reduced level of retired pay prior to his 1 Dec 82 retirement. The
Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records show
the applicant was divorced on 29 Apr 91. There is no evidence to show
that the member reported the change in his marital status or that he
submitted a valid election to change his SBP coverage from spouse to
former spouse.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed the
application and states that a spouse's eligibility as an SBP
beneficiary terminates upon divorce. There are two mechanisms
provided by law for changing SBP coverage from spouse to former
spouse; and both must be exercised within the first year following the
divorce. The service member can file an election change or the former
spouse can request that the change be made
on their behalf. The former spouse upon requesting the change must
submit legal documentation that the service member agreed to or that
the court ordered the service member to establish former spouse
coverage. If an election is not made during the one-year eligibility
period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter.
DPPTR on 19 Apr 01, requested that the service member provide
documents that are required to establish former spouse coverage--copy
of his final divorce decree and a properly completed DD Form 2656-1,
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Statement for Former Spouse
Coverage. The service member, as of the date of the advisory opinion,
has not responded to their request.
DPPTR recommends returning the application without action and if the
service member submits the required documentation, then it would be
appropriate to correct his records to reflect he elected to change his
SBP coverage from spouse to former spouse.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant's counsel stated in a letter dated 24 Aug 01, that the
required form had been forwarded to the applicant's former spouse's
attorney in Apr 01 and no response has been received. A copy of the
divorce decree was attached to the letter received (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing
law or regulations.
2. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the
interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file.
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 are not persuaded to change his SBP election to former
spouse coverage at this time. We note the letter from a law office
indicating that the proper forms to establish former spouse coverage
were forwarded to the former spouse's counsel; however, to date, these
documents have not been completed and returned. Should these
completed documents be submitted, the Board would be willing to
reconsider this case.
Therefore, in the absence of substantial 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 25 September 2001 under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Apr 01, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 11 Jun 01.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 22 Jun 01.
Exhibit D. Counsel's Response
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
The service member can file an election change or the former spouse can request that the change be made on their behalf. DPPTR on 19 Apr 01, requested that the service member provide documents that are required to establish former spouse coverage--copy of his final divorce decree and a properly completed DD Form 2656-1, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Statement for Former Spouse Coverage. Should these completed documents be submitted, the Board would be willing to reconsider this case.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02424
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He incorrectly completed the DD Form 2656-1, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Statement for Former Spouse Coverage, and should have completed it to reflect former spouse coverage. On 1 Aug 02, they requested that the applicant provide a completed DD Form 2656-1, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Statement for Former Spouse Coverage, and his former spouse’s marriage certificate. The complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2002-02424
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He incorrectly completed the DD Form 2656-1, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Statement for Former Spouse Coverage, and should have completed it to reflect former spouse coverage. On 1 Aug 02, they requested that the applicant provide a completed DD Form 2656-1, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election Statement for Former Spouse Coverage, and his former spouse’s marriage certificate. The complete...
In this regard, we are constrained to note that the applicable statute (10 USC Section 1450(f)(3)(C)), time limit for request by former spouse, provides that “An election may not be deemed to have been made under subparagraph (A) in the case of any person unless the Secretary concerned receives a request from the former spouse of the person within one year of the date of the court order or filing involved.” Such a requirement permits a former spouse to circumvent the stipulations of a...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed the application and states the law in effect at the time the service member divorced the applicant did not have a provision to elect SBP coverage for a former spouse even if the divorce decree made a reference to the SBP. The service member did not elect coverage for his minor children at the time of his retirement. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MIBR,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01833
On 7 Jun 02, it was requested that the member provide a completed DD Form 2656-1, SBP Election Statement for Former Spouse Coverage. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B. ___________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03271
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. ...
They stated the laws controlling the SBP preclude a married member, who declined spouse coverage at the time of retirement, from providing SBP former spouse coverage following divorce unless Congress authorizes an open enrollment. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit B. 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...
However, the law provides two mechanisms for changing spouse coverage to former spouse coverage, which must be exercised within the first year following divorce. If neither the member nor the former spouse requests the election change within the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. The decedent and the applicant were married on 28 Dec 83; in Sep 85, the decedent notified the finance center of the change in his marital status and spouse...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02145
The applicant now contends the Air Force erred in determining his effective date of coverage believing it should be established on the date his divorce decree was modified; however, the applicant’s effective date for coverage was determined in accordance with the applicable law in effect at the time he applied for correction of records. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...