Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02806
Original file (BC-2003-02806.doc) Auto-classification: Denied


                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02806
            INDEX CODE:  137.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record be changed to show he  elected  to  participate  in  the  Reserve
Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was not made aware of a change he had to make  within  one  year  of  his
marriage date.  When  he  received  his  spouse’s  identification  card,  he
expected that to be all he needed  to  do.   The  servicemember  died  after
submitting his application.

The servicemember’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The servicemember elected RCSBP - child  only  coverage,  immediate  option,
annuity based on full-retired pay on 8  November  1985.   The  servicemember
married on 29 June 1987 and divorced 10  January  1991.   He  remarried  his
former spouse on 10 February 2003.

The servicemember died on 21 August 2003.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR recommended denial.  They indicated that there is no evidence  of
Air Force error  or  injustice  in  this  case.   However,  if  the  Board’s
decision is to grant relief, the servicemember’s record should be  corrected
to show that within the first year of his first marriage,  he  added  spouse
coverage to his RCSBP  child  coverage,  immediate  option,  based  on  full
retired pay, spouse coverage was suspended on a 1991 date to be  determined,
and reinstated effective 10 February 2003.

The evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The servicemember’s widow has provided additional documentation that  is  at
Exhibit D.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.    The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law  or
regulations.

2.    The application was timely filed.

3.    Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to  demonstrate  the
existence of an error or injustice.  It appears the  servicemember  was  not
married  at  the  time  he  elected  child-only  RCSBP  coverage  in   1985.
Additionally, we find no evidence he attempted to  change  his  coverage  to
add the applicant within the first  year  of  their  marriage  in  1987,  as
required by law.  While the applicant claims that her spouse was  not  aware
that he had to make an election to his RCSBP coverage  within  one  year  of
their marriage, the  Board  finds  insufficient  evidence  to  support  this
assertion.  In accordance with the governing law,  since  the  servicemember
did not add the applicant to his existing child-only coverage  at  the  time
he was first eligible, he was not eligible  to  add  the  applicant  to  his
coverage when they remarried in 2003.  In view of the foregoing and  in  the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis upon  which
to grant the relief requested.

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented  did  not  demonstrate
the existence of an error or an 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-
02806 in Executive Session on 27 January 2004, under the provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

                 Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Panel Chair
                 Ms. Leslie E. Abbott, Member
                 Mr. Mike Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 13 August 2003, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 12 September 2003.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 September 2003.
   Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 October 2003, w/atchs.




                       JOSEPH A. ROJ
                       Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03375

    Original file (BC-2003-03375.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Prior to his 1 December 1979 retirement, the applicant elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay. DPPTR further states to approve this request would provide the applicant an additional opportunity to elect SBP coverage not afforded to other retired servicemembers 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 the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt their rationale as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00769

    Original file (BC-2004-00769.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He remarried on 14 September 1985 and, in October 1985 he submitted a valid request to DFAS to establish former spouse coverage under the insurable interest option. His former spouse remarried in 2003 and applicant, in his appeal to this Board, requests that the beneficiary eligibility of his former spouse to his SBP be deleted and his current spouse be named beneficiary. Although the separation agreement and divorce decree stated that he only had to retain coverage until his former spouse...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02836

    Original file (BC-2003-02836.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    The decedent and his second spouse divorced on 22 January 1993 and he again requested his SBP coverage to be stopped. If neither the member nor the former spouse requests the election change during the one- year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. DPPTR states that there is no evidence the decedent intended to provide SBP coverage for the applicant following their divorce.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00858

    Original file (BC-2003-00858.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time he completed the form he had been divorced since 1984. Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A. In 1990, the applicant remarried; however, the applicant did not request any changes to the RCSBP coverage within a year of the marriage, as required by law.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01225

    Original file (BC-2004-01225.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not informed that he had to add his present wife to the SBP within one year of marriage. DPPTR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant’s spouse responds to the advisory opinion and states that they were married in 1998 and made a trip to Keesler AFB to get ID cards, enroll in...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03385

    Original file (BC-2003-03385.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The member and Constance married on 12 June 1992, but he failed to elect SBP coverage for her within the first year following their marriage. Absent a valid election within the first year of his marriage, the applicant could have elected coverage for his wife during this period, but he failed to do so. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 21...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01072

    Original file (BC-2003-01072.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-02894

    Original file (BC-2003-02894.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The laws controlling the SBP do not permit the applicant to provide coverage for his second wife now, or at any other time, unless Congress mandates an open enrollment period. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION: He argues that he was not briefed on the policy concerning election of SBP spousal coverage and the suspension of that portion of the coverage after...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00233

    Original file (BC-2004-00233.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He requested SBP spouse coverage in September 2003 and was informed he could not elect spouse coverage due to the one- year time limit. Although the applicant contends he was not aware of the one-year time limit, the Afterburner, News For USAF Retired Personnel, informed retired servicemembers of the requirement to elect coverage within the first year of marriage for a newly acquired spouse. In this respect, a member who is not married at the time of retirement and marries later may elect...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00319

    Original file (BC-2003-00319.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states the applicant submitted a notarized letter alleging the signature on the copy of an AF Form 1267, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Notification and Concurrence, is not her signature and that she did sign an SBP election form for annuity for 55 percent of the servicemember’s retired pay. If the servicemember had elected full spouse coverage, the applicant’s signature would not have been...