RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-01323
INDEX CODE: 137.00
APPLICANT COUNSEL: None
SSN HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to terminate his spouse coverage under the Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not counseled "at all" about the ramifications and the
financial hardship he would incur since the SBP premiums would be
retroactive from the date of his marriage.
Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The member was married and elected spouse only coverage under the SBP
prior to his 1 Nov 74 retirement. The applicant and his wife were
divorced on 18 Sep 92. The finance center was notified of his change
in marital status and the SBP premiums were suspended effective 1 Oct
92. The applicant remarried on 10 Jun 93. He failed to notify the
finance center before the first anniversary of his marriage that he
did not want to extend SBP coverage to his current wife. In Dec 00,
the applicant submitted a request to the Defense and Finance
Accounting Service (DFAS) to resume his existing spouse coverage under
the SBP. DFAS reinstated the spouse premiums and initiated recovery
of cost retroactive to 10 Jun 94.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Chief, Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this
application and states that Public Law (PL) 99-145, effective 18 Sep
92, allows a retiree to elect not to resume coverage for a
subsequently acquired spouse. The new spouse will be automatically
covered at the previous level on the first anniversary of the marriage
if the member has not taken action before the anniversary date to
prevent reinstatement. The premiums for the coverage will become
effective the first day of the thirteenth month.
The applicant's current spouse became automatically eligible as a
beneficiary under the SBP program because a valid election was not
made to suspend the coverage for her before the first anniversary of
their marriage. The applicant incurred a premium debt because he
failed to notify the finance center in a timely manner to not resume
the SBP premiums.
Information is regularly published in the Afterburner, News for USAF
Retired Personnel, to remind them that it is their responsibility to
keep their beneficiary information current. To provide the applicant
additional time to terminate his SBP coverage would be unfair to other
members in similar situations, therefore they recommend denying the
applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
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. They were just trying to insure everything was in order for
them to receive health care benefits. If they had known that the cost
would be retroactive, thus causing monies to be deducted from her
husband's check, creating a financial hardship, they would not have
chosen to participate in SBP. She concurs with her husband and does
not want SBP coverage (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 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 victim of an error or injustice. The
applicant's contention that he was not properly counseled regarding
the ramifications of resuming coverage is duly noted; however, he
presents no documentation to support this contention. In fact, the
Board notes that AF Form 2035, SBP Election for Participants who
Remarry, which the applicant signed on 29 Dec 00, clearly states that
existing spouse coverage and cost automatically become effective on
the first anniversary of the remarriage unless coverage is terminated.
It was the responsibility of the applicant to ask questions if he did
not understand the terms of his resuming coverage. Had the applicant
died, his widow would have been entitled to an SBP annuity based on
his original SBP election prior to his retirement. 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 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 7 May 01, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 13 Jun 01.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 15 Jun 01.
Exhibit D. Applicant’s Response, dated 27 Jun 01.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2001-01891A
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...
_________________________________________________________________ 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. ...
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...
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). 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01653
His third marriage was on 14 Jun 95, but he failed to submit a request to not extend SBP coverage to his third wife before the first anniversary of their marriage; therefore, his third spouse became the eligible spouse beneficiary on 14 Jun 96. Public Law (PL) 99-145 provides a one-year period during which SBP participants with suspended spouse coverage who remarry may choose to not extend SBP protection to the newly acquired spouse. While the applicant acted in a timely manner to notify...
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...
___________________________________________________________________ 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. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02125
The member elected spouse only coverage based on full retired pay during the Plan’s initial enrollment period authorized by Public Law (PL) 92-425. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states this situation started with his 11 Feb 05 request to DFAS to obtain cost and facts as to whether he could enroll his wife in the military SBP and CSRS SBP. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02194
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...