RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01282
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Corrective action be taken that would permit him to provide Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage for his wife.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His current wife was not put on SBP.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the Request to
Modify Decree of Dissolution and a copy of his Certificate of
Marriage.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was unmarried and elected child only SBP coverage based
on full retired pay prior to his 1 October 1992 retirement date.
Records reflect the applicant and N--- married on 13 April 1993, but
he failed to elect SBP coverage for her within the first year
following their marriage. His monthly premium for child coverage is
less than $4; costs for spouse and child coverage would be
approximately $75 per month.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPTR states that there is no evidence the applicant submitted a
valid election to add his spouse to his existing child only coverage
and he offers no explanation why he waited more than nine years to
request corrective action. The Afterburner, News for USAF Retired
Personnel, published in January 2000, reminded retirees of the
requirement to enroll their newly acquired spouse in the Plan within
the first year of marriage. Furthermore, Public Law 105-261, 17
October 1998, authorized a one-year open enrollment period (1 March
1999 - 29 February 2000) for retirees to elect coverage. The
applicant could have elected coverage for his wife during this period,
but failed to do so. Had he made an election within the first year
after his marriage, he would have paid approximately $8,300 in SBP
premiums to date. However, an election under PL 105-261 would have
required the petitioner pay a lump-sum buy-in amount of over $10,600.
Approval of this request would provide the applicant an additional
opportunity to elect SBP coverage not afforded other retirees
similarly situated and is not justified. Therefore, they recommend
denial of applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 17 June 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
the applicant for review and response 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 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
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
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 this application, BC-
2003-01282, in Executive Session on 30 September 2003, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Member
Mr. Mike Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 31 Mar 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 11 Jun 03.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Jun 03.
DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02546
________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was unaware of the time constraint of one year from the date of his marriage to select an SBP for his wife. The applicant and his spouse married on 31 May 1997; however, he failed to request SBP coverage for her within the first year of their marriage. 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...
___________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-02682
During all open enrollment periods, members were advised by direct mail of their eligibility to make an election. It would be inequitable to those members who chose to participate when eligible and subsequently received reduced retired pay to permit this applicant an additional opportunity to provide SBP coverage. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003- 02682 in Executive Session on 7 October...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01685
The member’s claim that his military records should state his spouse and one child was on his SBP on September 1998 is without merit. The available evidence indicates that the applicant did not elect SBP coverage for his spouse at the time of his retirement or for his current spouse during the 1999-2000 open enrollment period. Therefore, in the absence of substantive evidence to the contrary, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01599
It would be contrary to the letter and intent of the law, as well as inequitable, to grant this applicant an additional opportunity not afforded to other members similarly situated. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...
_________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-02485
There is no evidence of an Air Force error or injustice, nor is there any basis in law to grant relief. In some states you are automatically divorced after such a length of time. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that he should be allowed to terminate spouse coverage under the 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01773
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states a servicemember, who is unmarried at retirement and later marries may elect coverage for a newly acquired spouse, as long as the election is made before the first anniversary of the marriage. Although the member contends he submitted a request to change his beneficiary, the request was submitted after the one-year period provided by law. We took notice of the applicant’s complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-01999
The member could have elected former spouse SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf when he applied for commencement of his retired pay, but failed to do so. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to applicant on 9 August 2002 for review and response within 30 days. After a thorough review of the evidence of...