RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00225
INDEX CODE: 137.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be provided an opportunity to elect Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP)
coverage.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He does not recall being briefed or offered his right to elect SBP coverage
for his spouse and is now told he is ineligible. The timeframe was a
difficult time for him personally and he may not have been aware of the SBP
program. His complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Applicant retired from the Air Force on 1 Sep 66 in the grade of staff
sergeant. Retired Serviceman's Family Protection Plan (RSFPP) elections
were required to be made before completing 18 years of service. Members
were provided an 18-month enrollment period following the 21 Sep 72,
enactment of the SBP program. Retirees were provided a one-year period
from the date of marriage for the first spouse acquired after 21 Sep 72.
Applicant's marital status on 21 Sep 72 is unknown and there is no
indication he elected RSFPP coverage for his previous wife prior to his
retirement. He and his current wife were married on 23 Apr 82. There is
no evidence he elected SBP coverage during the initial enrollment for a
previous wife, during the first year of marriage for his current wife, or
during either of the open enrollment periods.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPTR recommends denial. DPPTR states that the member offers no
compelling evidence that justifies extending him a fourth opportunity to
provide SBP coverage for his wife. It would be inequitable to other
retirees similarly situated to grant his request. There is no evidence of
Air Force error or injustice nor any merit in fact of basis in law to
approve this case. The DPPTR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28 Feb
03 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has
received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 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.
Election for coverage of a newly acquired spouse must be made before the
first anniversary of the marriage. The first anniversary of his marriage
was 23 Apr 83. We see no evidence which would lead us to believe that he
made any attempt to provide SBP coverage for his spouse within the
specified period of time nor are we persuaded by his contentions that
information pertaining to the SBP program and his election options was not
made available to him. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the
contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief
sought in this application.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been shown
that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to
our understanding of the issue involved. Therefore, the request for a
hearing is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES 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 only be
reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not
considered with this application.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-
00225 in Executive Session on 26 Jun 03, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Member
Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Jan 03.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 21 Feb 03.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Feb 03.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
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 | CY2004 | BC-2004-00998
___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The member was married at the time of his retirement on 1 Jul 71. Other than his own assertions, we find no evidence has been presented to show the applicant submitted a valid request to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service-Denver Center to establish survivor coverage for his spouse within the first year of their marriage. Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03764
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR recommend that applicant’s request be denied and stated that there is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice, or merit in fact, nor basis in law to approve this case. Briefing material used at the time the member completed his RSFPP election clearly stated that “dependents acquired after you retire are not eligible to receive Family Protection Plan annuity payments,” payments would only...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02699
DPPTR states that a member, who is unmarried at retirement, may elect coverage for a spouse acquired after retiring; however, the election must be made before the first anniversary of the marriage. On 15 October 2000, the applicant requested to provide SBP coverage for his spouse after he married; however, his request was not made before the required one-year anniversary date of that marriage. Exhibit B.
There were no provisions in the law at that time to notify spouses if the servicemember did not elect coverage. There is no evidence that the servicemember elected SBP during any of the authorized open enrollments. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Apr 02.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00708
In support of her request, applicant submitted a copy of the former service member’s Death Certificate; a copy of their divorce decree; and copies of the former service member’s DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States for Report of Transfer or Discharge), retirement order, dated 19 Feb 70, and documents associated with his retirement for disability. _________________________________________________________________ AIR STAFF EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPTR reviewed this application and...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00667
At the very least the retiree should be given the opportunity to accept or decline further SBP enrollment when the new spouse is enrolled in DEERS. In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a letter from his spouse, his retiree account statements (dated 11 and 24 January 2002), and a letter from DFAS. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: Through his member of Congress, applicant provided a personal statement,...
At the very least the retiree should be given the opportunity to accept or decline further SBP enrollment when the new spouse is enrolled in DEERS. In support of his appeal, the applicant submitted a letter from his spouse, his retiree account statements (dated 11 and 24 January 2002), and a letter from DFAS. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: Through his member of Congress, applicant provided a personal statement,...
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-01220 INDEX CODE 137.02 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No ____________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he filed a timely election for termination of spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) before the first anniversary of his remarriage and be relieved from the SBP premium debt. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03374
A member who was married during the Plan’s initial enrollment period authorized by Public Law (PL) 92-425, which established the SBP, and failed to provide SBP coverage for that eligible spouse beneficiary, may not later elect coverage for that person, or another person of the same category, unless Congress authorizes an open enrollment. The applicant has provided no compelling evidence that justifies extending a fifth opportunity for him to provide SBP coverage for his wife. We took...