RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-00233
INDEX CODE:137.00
COUNSEL: None
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to allow him to elect spouse coverage under
the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The applicant was not married when he retired. He married in
September 2001. He requested SBP spouse coverage in September 2003
and was informed he could not elect spouse coverage due to the one-
year time limit. He was not aware of a one-year time limit and would
be willing to pay back premiums in order to provide his wife with
spouse coverage under the SBP.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant prior to enlisting in the Air Force Reserves on
5 October 1979, served honorably in the Regular Army and the Army
Reserves.
The applicant on 2 October 1994, prior to his 60th birthday declined
SBP coverage. He was not married at the time and did not have any
eligible children. The applicant and D. were married on 25 September
2001. The applicant failed to submit a valid spouse election within
the first year of marriage.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPTR states a servicemember, who is unmarried at retirement and
later marries, may elect coverage for a newly acquired
spouse, as long as the election is made before the first anniversary
of the marriage. 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. Furthermore, SBP is similar to commercial life insurance in
that individuals must elect to participate and pay the required
premiums in order to be covered. 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. AFPC/DPPTR finds no evidence of error or injustice and
therefore, recommends the requested relief 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 26 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 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. Applicant’s contentions are duly
noted; however, after thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record, we
are not persuaded to correct the service member’s record to reflect he
elected spouse coverage. In this respect, a member who is not married
at the time of retirement and marries later may elect coverage for a
newly acquired spouse within one year of the marriage. We note the
applicant married D. in September 2001, and failed to elect spouse
coverage within the first year of their marriage. He contends that he
was not aware of the one-year time period required to add spouse
coverage for a newly acquired spouse. However, we note the
Afterburner, News for USAF Retired Personnel was mailed to the
applicant at the address he provided to the finance center. The
Afterburner contained information regarding the procedures for adding
a spouse after retirement. The applicant has not provided persuasive
evidence that he did not
receive this information. The applicant had the opportunity to elect
coverage for his spouse and failed to do so. 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-
2004-00233 in Executive Session on 20 July 2004, under the provisions
of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton, Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Joseph A. Roj, Member
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 17 Jan 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 23 Mar 04.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Mar 04.
ROSCOE HINTON, JR.
Panel Chair
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-2004-02286
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his retirement, he was not married and elected child only SBP coverage. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states a servicemember, who is unmarried at retirement and later marries, may elect coverage for a newly acquired spouse, as long as the election is made before the first anniversary of the marriage. ...
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-2004-02681
He received a response in September 2003, informing him the request he submitted was not received until after the authorized open enrollment period. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. After his first marriage ended, he remarried in February 1998; however, his current spouse is not eligible to receive RSFPP because the marriage occurred after the applicant retired.
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03905
________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Retiree Services Branch, AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and recommended denial stating there is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice. The member’s claim that he was not briefed on the one-year time period to add a spouse should he marry after retirement is without merit. DPPTR states that if the Board’s decision is to grant relief, the member’s record should be corrected to show that on...
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...
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-2003-01398
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR indicates that the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) was established by Public Law (PL) 92-425 on 21 September 1972, authorizing a one-year open enrollment period for servicemembers to elect coverage. However, if the Board recommends granting the request, the servicemember’s record should be corrected to show the servicemember elected SBP spouse only coverage based on full retired pay effective 21...
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-2003-04100
_________________________________________________________________ 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. ...