Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02894
Original file (BC-2003-02894.doc) Auto-classification: Denied



                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-02894
            INDEX CODE:  137.04

      COUNSEL:  NONE

  XXXXXXX   HEARING DESIRED:  YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect  he  elected  coverage  under  the
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

During his retirement processing, he was offered  the  opportunity  to
enroll under SBP.  At that same time he was going  through  a  divorce
and decided to opt-out of the  SBP.   However,  when  he  subsequently
inquired about the SBP for his current wife, he was told he could  not
elect SBP coverage because he had declined it at retirement.

He was never advised that declining SBP coverage meant for the rest of
his life or that it was a one-time deal  for  only  the  wife  he  was
married to at the time.  Had he known that it was for the rest of  his
life he would have never declined SBP coverage.  For that  reason,  he
feels that it is unfair not to allow him to exercise his right to  use
the SBP.

In support of his request, applicant submits a personal statement;   a
copy of his DD Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, dated
31 Dec 97, and a certification of SBP Briefing, signed  and  dated  31
Dec 97.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Applicant and his first wife elected child only coverage based on full
retired pay prior to  his  1 Jun 98  retirement.   Applicant’s  spouse
concurred in the  election  and  the  parties  subsequently  divorced.
Defense  Enrollment  Eligibility  Reporting  System  (DEERS)   records
reflect the applicant remarried his  second  wife  on  29 Jun 02,  but
neither  the  applicant’s  three  natural   children   nor   his   two
stepchildren  are  currently  enrolled  in  DEERS.   Child  only  cost
continues to be deducted from his retired pay and Defense Finance  and
Accounting Service-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) records reflect at least
one child is eligible to receive SBP payments  in  the  event  of  the
applicant’s death.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPTR reviewed this application and states that on  31 Dec 97,
the applicant signed the SBP Report-Individual Personnel (RIP) used by
the counselor at the base during his one-on-one briefing and  provided
to him a copy as a record of  critical  information  about  the  Plan.
Item H states that the SBP election is basically irrevocable, but some
changes are authorized; H3 further explains that members, who have  no
eligible spouse or child  at  retirement,  may  elect  SBP  for  these
dependents within one year of acquisition.

If the applicant had elected spouse coverage for his first wife,  that
portion of his SBP could have been suspended following  their  divorce
and, absent an election for former spouse coverage,  his  second  wife
would have become the  eligible  spouse  beneficiary  upon  the  first
anniversary of their marriage.  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.

They found no evidence of error or injustice in this case;  therefore,
they recommend denial of the request.

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 divorce.  He disagrees with the evaluation and believes
that because he was not fully briefed an inequity  has  been  done  to
him.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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.  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   issues   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-
2003-02894  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 23 Aug 03, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ USAF/DPPTR, dated 27 Oct 03.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Nov 03.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, undated.




                                   JOSEPH A. ROJ
                                   Panel Chair


Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01370

    Original file (BC-2003-01370.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Had the applicant elected spouse only coverage at the time of his retirement, coverage and costs would have been suspended upon the divorce. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 10 Jun 03 for review and comment within 30 days. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00339

    Original file (BC-2004-00339.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Records indicate that, prior to his 1 April 1989 retirement, the applicant (who was married at the time of his election) elected child only coverage based on full, retired pay. It would be inequitable to those members, who chose to elect spouse coverage when eligible and subsequently received reduced retired pay, to provide an additional opportunity for the applicant to change his SBP election. We took...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0201220

    Original file (0201220.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    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-2003-00708

    Original file (BC-2003-00708.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-01599

    Original file (BC-2003-01599.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00032

    Original file (BC-2003-00032.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Because she married the service member after his retirement from the Air Force, she was unaware of the rules and regulations regarding these issues. However, we find no evidence that the service member intended to provide SBP coverage for his spouse or child. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • 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-2003-02836

    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 | CY2002 | 0200517

    Original file (0200517.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-00489

    Original file (BC-2003-00489.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She and the service member were married for 36 years prior to their divorce and she did not ask for maintenance at the time of their divorce with the agreement he would provide coverage for her under the SBP program. The member could have elected former spouse coverage voluntarily within the first year following their divorce, but failed to do so. A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit...