RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03385
INDEX CODE: 137.01
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be changed to add spouse coverage under the Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his discharge he was not married.
In support of his request, applicant provided a copy of his Marriage
License, a copy of Special Order Number ACD-1875, a copy of AF Form
2653, Retirement Special Order-Physically Unfit, and a copy of AF Form
1265, Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) Election.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant was unmarried and elected child only SBP coverage based
on full retired pay prior to being placed on the Temporary disability
Retired List (TDRL) effective 3 December 1991. 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. On 24 June
1993, he was transferred from the TDRL to the Permanent Disability
Retired List (PDRL). His monthly premium for child coverage is less
than $6.00; costs for spouse and child coverage would be approximately
$17.00 per month.
________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPTR recommends denial. There is no evidence of error or
injustice in this case and they recommend the request be denied.
There is no evidence the member submitted a valid election to add his
wife to his existing child only coverage. He offers no explanation
why he waited more than ten years since his marriage to request
corrective action. Had he made an election within the first year
after his marriage, he would have paid approximately $2,300 in SBP
premiums to date. Public Law 105-261 authorized a one-year open
enrollment period (1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000) for retirees
to elect or increase coverage. 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.
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.
The DPPTR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 21 November 2003, for review and response. As of this
date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. After a thorough review of
the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not
persuaded that the relief requested should be granted. Applicant's
contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions,
in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the
rationale provided by the Air Force. We therefore agree with the
recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as
the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain
his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In
view of the above and absent of persuasive 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 Docket Number BC-2003-
03385 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 24 Sep 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 13 Nov 03.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 03.
JOSEPH A. ROJ
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00319
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-03375
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 | 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...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02699
DPPTR states that a member, who is unmarried at retirement, may elect coverage for a spouse acquired after retiring; however, the election must be made before the first anniversary of the marriage. On 15 October 2000, the applicant requested to provide SBP coverage for his spouse after he married; however, his request was not made before the required one-year anniversary date of that marriage. Exhibit B.
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.
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-2003-02917
_________________________________________________________________ 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 | 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...