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
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01370
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
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
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
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
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
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
_________________________________________________________________ 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
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.
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
_________________________________________________________________ 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...