RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00082
INDEX CODE:137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to reflect he elected child coverage under
the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He and his wife, during the retirement briefing, were led to believe
they could not elect child coverage unless they elected spouse
coverage.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
At the time of his retirement the applicant was married and had one
child, born on 10 October 2000. Prior to his 1 February 2003
retirement, he elected not to participate in the SBP. His wife
concurred with the election on 14 November 2002.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPTR states the DD Form 2656, Data Verification for Payment of
Retired Personnel, item 26c, provides an option for child coverage.
The applicant and his spouse’s signature on the DD Form 2656 indicated
they acknowledged and understood the options of the SBP and the
effects of those options. Furthermore, each servicemember is
responsible for making the SBP selection that would provide the best
level of protection for their individual circumstances. DPPTR
believes the evidence does not support that an error or injustice
occurred and recommends the applicant’s request be denied.
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 12 March 2004, for review and response. 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 timely filed.
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 the recommendation of the Air
Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Essentially, the applicant alleges that he and his spouse were
miscounseled regarding electing child only coverage. However, the DD
From 2656, item 26c, provides the option for child only coverage. The
applicant’s and his wife’s signature on the DD Form 2656 indicate
their acknowledgement that they understood the options of the SBP and
the effects of those options. The applicant has not established to
our satisfaction that he was miscounseled regarding his SBP options.
Furthermore, it is the responsibility of each servicemember to elect
the SBP coverage that best suits his family situation. 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2004-00082 in Executive Session on 7 April 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Dec 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 8 Mar 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 12 Mar 04.
ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02108
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states that Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouses of married servicemembers to concur in writing, prior to the servicemember’s retirement, in SBP elections that provide less than full spouse coverage. DPPTR further states SBP elections can not be arbitrarily terminated as long there are eligible beneficiaries; however, PL 105-85, effective 18 November 1997, authorized retired servicemembers...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03410
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his retirement he was erroneously briefed on his options for SBP. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states a servicemember who has eligible children at the time of retirement and declines to elect coverage for them under SBP, may not provide coverage for any child in the future, unless an open enrollment period has been...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02796
The applicant did not add his spouse to his existing child coverage within the first year of their marriage. Furthermore, Item H1 clearly and specifically describes the post-retirement option: servicemembers, who at the time of retirement had no spouse or child, are eligible to elect SPB for these dependents within one year of acquisition. Furthermore, it was nearly five years after he retired that he got married and at the time of his marriage, he had no recollection of the one-year time...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04100
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouses of married servicemembers to concur in writing prior to the servicemember’s retirement, in the SBP election that provides less than full spouse coverage. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states the applicant contends the finance center did not have her husband’s information to process an election. ...
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-2004-02452
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states even though the applicant claims he was informed that his child only SBP coverage would be suspended after the youngest child lost eligibility, he had the choice to and could have elected SBP coverage for his wife when he retired, or during the 92-93 or 99- 00 open enrollment periods. It would be inequitable to those members who chose to elect spouse coverage when eligible and...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01550
The letter also explained that if she agreed with her husband’s child only election, she must sign and date the DD Form 2656 in the presence of a notary or a Military Personnel Flight (MPF) representative, and the form must be returned before her husband’s retirement date or maximum spouse coverage and costs will take effect. The applicant’s wife signed the election form eighteen days after his retirement date, evidence that the letter was received, and her signature was notarized in...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04282
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-04282 INDEX CODE: 137.04 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His record be changed to reflect the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage he selected was for spouse and dependent children and not spouse only. He states the counselor recommended he select spouse and children coverage (as it...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00645
DPPTR stated that although the member claims he was unaware of the required one-year time limit, issues of The Afterburner, News for Retired Air Force Personnel, were routinely mailed to the applicant’s correspondence address on file at the finance center. Copies of The Afterburner reminded retirees of their SBP options when marrying after retirement. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00978
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The divorce decree ordered the servicemember to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but neither the servicemember nor she was aware of the one-year requirement to submit an election for former spouse coverage. Neither the servicemember nor the applicant made an election for former spouse coverage within one-year following their divorce. The applicant reviewed the Air Force...