RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-02336
INDEX CODE:
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her former husband’s records be corrected to show that she is entitled
to a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
There was tampering of the divorce papers; the initials on the corners
are not hers, and page 3 of the divorce papers “USAF Retirement Rights
to Husband” was inserted after she signed.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of the Death
Certificate, a copy of the divorce papers, a copy of the marriage
certificate, a copy of a letter from the Bar Association, a copy of a
letter from the Superior Court of Guam; a copy of the final decree, a
copy of an order from Superior Court of Guam for half of the
retirement pay.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The deceased member and the applicant were married on 16 January 1965,
they divorced on 16 December 1985, and the divorce decree did not
refer to the SBP. The former member and R--- (his second wife) were
married on 16 November 1988 and he elected spouse and child SBP
coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay prior to his 1 August
1990 retirement. The youngest child lost eligibility effective June
1996. The former member died on 4 March 2004 and SBP annuity payments
of $238 monthly were established on his widow’s behalf. Subsequently,
the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded her Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation (DIC) payments. SBP payments terminated
because DIC payments are greater than $238.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPTR states the former member could have elected former spouse
coverage voluntarily upon his retirement, but failed to do so.
Instead, he elected SBP spouse coverage for his (new) wife. Even
though the applicant (former spouse) claims her divorce decree was
tampered with by removing the survivor benefits from the divorce
papers, she had the opportunity to readdress the SBP issue during the
27 July 1998 hearing held at the Superior Court of Guam. However, the
order she provided only referred to the division of the former
member’s military retirement pension. Under the Uniformed Services
Former Spouses’ Protection Action, the former spouse’s right to
payments based on a division of retired pay terminated upon the death
of the former member. Therefore, they recommend denial of the former
spouse’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 27 August 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to
the former spouse for review and response within 30 days. 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. 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.
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 this application in
Executive Session on 2 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Roscoe Hinton Jr., Panel Chair
Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, undated.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 Aug 04.
ROSCOE HINTON JR.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00293
We do not take issue with the applicant’s contention her divorce decree ordered her deceased former husband to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but he did not do so. However, since neither the applicant nor her deceased former husband took the necessary actions to ensure she was provided former spouse coverage under the SBP within the one-year period in which they could have done so, it appears that the applicant has no legal entitlement to the relief sought. It...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-01168
She states her divorce decree did not address the SBP annuity because her counsel advised her that once the member began receiving retired pay that neither the “…condition of the annuity nor the beneficiary could be changed.” She is writing after 30 years because she recently found out the SBP plan could apparently be changed after the receipt of benefits. DPPTR states the law in effect at the time of the applicant’s divorce did not allow retired members to provide SBP coverage to former...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-00935
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00935 INDEX CODE: 137.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Corrective action be taken to show that her former, now deceased spouse, filed a timely election to change his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage from spouse and child to former spouse following their divorce. In August 1993, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03271
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-03271 COUNSEL: None HEARING DESIRED: No _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her former husband's records be corrected to show he filed a timely election for former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and any SBP premium payments due be waived. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-01375
DPPTR adds that should the applicant provide the pertinent documentation, it would be appropriate to change the record to reflect on the day following the date of divorce, he elected to change his SBP coverage to former spouse coverage based on previous reduced level of retired pay and contingent on recoupment of applicable premiums. DPPTR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02024
SBP premium were deducted from the servicemember’s retired pay until February 2003 when the finance center suspended the spouse portion of his SBP. We do not take issue with the applicant’s contention her divorce decree ordered her deceased former husband to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but he did not do so. However, in the absence of a showing the applicant is legally entitled to the relief sought or a waiver of entitlement from the current spouse, we conclude she...
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...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR reviewed the application and states in reviewing the service member's records there is no evidence that he attempted to terminate the applicant's SBP following their divorce; nor is there any evidence to indicate that he requested cessation of costs when the law permitted SBP premiums to cease after a spouse beneficiary loses eligibility, therefore, they cannot speculate regarding...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03233
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Counsel states that, prior to the former member’s retirement from the Air Force, he elected SBP coverage for “spouse and child.” On 29 December 1983, the member and applicant divorced and their divorce decree incorporated a settlement agreement wherein the applicant would receive “all (100%) of the Husband’s Survivor benefits that can be paid to a former spouse.” The Defense Finance and Accounting...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00024
DFAS records indicate that the former service member declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 July 1978 retirement. The member had an opportunity to provide coverage for the applicant during the SBP open enrollment periods authorized by Public Laws (PLs) 97-35 (1 Oct 81 – 30 Sep 82) and 101-189 (1 Apr 92 – 31 Mar 93), but there is no evidence he made such an election. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...