Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00664
Original file (BC-2005-00664.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-00664
            INDEX CODE:  137.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Corrective action be taken to allow him to terminate spouse and  child
coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He never received an SBP briefing and there is no signed SBP  form  in
his records.

Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was married and had dependent children,  but  failed  to
complete a valid SBP election prior to his  1  July  1994  retirement.
Consequently,  the  Defense  Finance  and  Accounting  Service  (DFAS)
established automatic coverage based on full  retired  pay  to  comply
with the law.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR recommends denial.  DPPTR states although the member claims
he did not receive an SBP briefing, he had ample opportunity to obtain
information about correcting or disenrolling from SBP  yet  he  waited
ten years to submit a request.  Public Law (PL)  105-85  afforded  the
member the opportunity to disenroll from SBP but there is no  evidence
he  submitted  a   request   during   the   permitted   time   period.
Additionally, the May 1998 issue of the  Afterburner,  News  for  USAF
Retired Personnel, included information, points of contact  to  obtain
guidance on disenrollment procedures as well  as  the  required  form.
This issue of the AFTERBURNER was mailed to the  address  the  retiree
had  provided  to  DFAS.   To  provide  this  member   an   additional
opportunity to terminate SBP coverage is not  merited,  and  would  be
inequitable to  other  retirees  in  similar  situations  and  is  not
justified by the facts.

DPPTR’s complete 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
25 March 2005 for review and comment 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 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 recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the  basis
for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the  victim  of  an
error or injustice.  Notwithstanding the fact he waited ten  years  to
request termination based on not receiving an  SBP  briefing,  several
other opportunities were available during that time frame  with  which
he could have requested the  desired  change  but  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-
2005-00664 in Executive Session on 7 July 2005, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:



      Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
      Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
      Ms. Marcia Jean Bachman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Feb 05.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 22 Mar 05.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Mar 05.




                                   MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03820

    Original file (BC-2005-03820.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 11 March 1999, the applicant submitted a request to terminate his SBP coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85. PL 108-375 authorized an open enrollment period from 1 October 2005 through 30 September 2006 to enroll in SBP, but the law stipulates that servicemembers who terminated coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85 can not renter the program. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01361

    Original file (BC-2003-01361.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    He was told both times that he would not be able to cancel the plan until 1 Apr 03. Disenrollments are effective upon receipt of a properly completed request by DFAS-CL, postmarked not later than the member’s third anniversary of receiving retired pay. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2004-03076

    Original file (BC-2004-03076.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice in this case. 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Novel, Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Aug 04, w/atchs.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2000 | 9803298

    Original file (9803298.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The Retired Pay Operations, DFAS-CL/FRAB, stated that the Jul-Aug and Nov-Dec 1980 issues of the Afterburner contained information regarding disenrollment from SBP upon being rated totally disabled by the VA for a period of ten years. The applicant has presented no information that he did not receive these issues of the Afterburner. Furthermore, the 81-82 SBP open enrollment information package,...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02917

    Original file (BC-2003-02917.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-01548

    Original file (BC-2003-01548.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Since he was married and had dependent children at the time, he was automatically enrolled for full spouse and child coverage under the SBP. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded that relief should be granted. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-01548 in Executive Session on 30 September 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Mr....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-04100

    Original file (BC-2003-04100.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ 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 | CY2003 | BC-2002-03448

    Original file (BC-2002-03448.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Issues of the Afterburner are mailed to the correspondence address each retiree provides to the finance center. It is each member’s responsibility to notify DFAS-CL of their current correspondence address, regardless of their pay status. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-03448 in Executive Session on 21 January 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. David C. VanGasbeck,Panel Chair Ms....

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02485

    Original file (BC-2003-02485.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence of an Air Force error or injustice, nor is there any basis in law to grant relief. In some states you are automatically divorced after such a length of time. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are unpersuaded that he should be allowed to terminate spouse coverage under the SBP.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0102112

    Original file (0102112.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    At that time, RCSBP coverage and premiums were suspended. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states that SBP spouse coverage is suspended when the spouse loses eligibility. 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...