RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER:BC-2003-00646
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).
_____________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He would like to discontinue SBP for his wife ----. His wife is
presently suffering from Alzheimer’s disease. Paying the SBP coverage
is a waste of money because his wife will not recover from the
disease.
In support of his application, he submits letters from the Chief,
Retiree and Family Matters Division, his senator, a personal letter,
and consent for release of personal record information.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit
A.
_____________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The member retired and elected spouse only SBP coverage based on full
retired pay prior to his 60th birthday (25 August 1976). The
applicant married on 8 October 1942.
_____________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPTR reviewed the application and states that while the
applicant’s wife illness is unfortunate, there is no basis in law that
permits disenrollment based on a beneficiary’s medical condition.
Further, the member had the opportunity to disenroll during the period
authorized by PL 105-85 and had ample resources to obtain information
on the correct disenrollment procedures. Information, points of
contact, as well as the DD Form 2656-2, were included in the May 1998
issue of the Afterburner, USAF News for Retired Personnel. That
issue, as well as others published during the period, was mailed to
the correspondence address each retiree had provided to the finance
center. Records indicate this official newsletter was mailed to the
address where he continues to reside. Permitting this applicant an
additional opportunity to terminate SBP coverage would be inequitable
to other retirees in similar situations.
There is no evidence of an Air Force error, nor basis in law to
approve the petition; therefore, they recommend the request be denied.
However, if the Board’s decision is to grant partial relief, the
member’s records should be corrected to show he terminated SBP
coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85 effective 17 May 1998.
Approval should be contingent upon the member’s providing a notarized
statement from his wife’s physician attesting to her medical
condition.
AFPC/DPPTR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 28
March 2003 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 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 an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's
complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, the
Board agrees with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force and
adopts their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. The
applicant had the opportunity to disenroll from SBP during the
authorized open enrollment period under PL 105-85, but apparently
chose not to do so. The applicant has not shown he was unaware of his
right to disenroll from the program. While it is unfortunate that the
applicant's wife is suffering from such a debilitating illness, there
are no provisions under law to allow him to terminate SBP based on his
wife's medical condition. In addition, to offer the applicant another
opportunity to terminate his coverage would be unfair to other members
participating in SBP in similar situations. 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 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-
2003-00646 in Executive Session on 25 June 2003, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
Mr. William H. Anderson, Member
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Feb 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 21 Mar 03.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Mar 03.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02917
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He and his wife were told that cancellation had to be done by his wife. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17 Oct 2003, for review and response. However, should the applicant provide the Board sufficient documentation from a medical doctor showing...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01072
Microfiche entries reflect in March 1989, the applicant’s request to change voluntary former spouse coverage to spouse coverage was processed, naming his second spouse as the eligible spouse beneficiary. Evidence provided indicates the applicant chose to elect spouse SBP coverage in March 1989, changing it from former spouse coverage. The applicant has not provided any evidence that he submitted a termination request under Public Law 105-85, allowing members a one-year opportunity to...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-00895
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. On 22 Aug 02, the AFBCMR Staff, at the request of the Board, forwarded a letter to the applicant requesting he provide information regarding if guardianship has been established for his wife and clarification if the income requirement was regulated by state law or was it a policy of an agency within the state...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01361
He was told both times that he would not be able to cancel the plan until 1 Apr 03. Disenrollments are effective upon receipt of a properly completed request by DFAS-CL, postmarked not later than the member’s third anniversary of receiving retired pay. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04088
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her father has not had contact with his spouse for over 15 years and financially he can no longer afford SBP premiums. There is no record the applicant submitted a DD Form 2656-2 required to terminate his SBP coverage during the disenrollment period provided by PL 105-85. There is no evidence of an Air Force error or injustice in this case; therefore, DPPRT recommends the request be denied.
Applicant's complete submission, which includes a notarized statement from his current spouse requesting disenrollment, is attached at Exhibit A. If the Board recommends granting the request, his record should be corrected to show he disenrolled from the SBP under the provisions of PL 105-85, effective 16 May 1999, with his wife’s concurrence. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session...
DFAS has no record of the applicant submitting a valid SBP disenrollment request during the authorized timeframe to submit a request to terminate his enrollment in SBP. In this respect, PL 105-85 provides a one-year window of opportunity to disenroll from the SBP provided the service member submits a completed DD Form 2656-2, with the notarized signature of the beneficiary concurring with the termination of the SBP. _________________________________________________________________ The...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2005-03820
On 11 March 1999, the applicant submitted a request to terminate his SBP coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85. PL 108-375 authorized an open enrollment period from 1 October 2005 through 30 September 2006 to enroll in SBP, but the law stipulates that servicemembers who terminated coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85 can not renter the program. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
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...