RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01729
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 NOVEMBER 2006
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to permit him to provide Survivor Benefit
Plan (SBP) coverage for his spouse.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He notified the Defense Department after he was married in August 1990
that his wife was to be listed as his beneficiary. He was not
notified of any benefits or the timing of the SBP program, subsequent
to his marriage.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a
copy of his marriage certificate, and several letters in support of
the appeal.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Records reflect the applicant, a Reservist, was unmarried and declined
SBP coverage effective 23 February 1981, his 60th birthday. He
married P--- on 25 August 1990; however, there is no record he
submitted a request to establish SBP coverage on P---‘s behalf within
the first year of their marriage.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRT states although the applicant claims he notified the
Defense Department of his marriage, the Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS) has no record showing a request was received within the
required time limit. Furthermore, issues of the Afterburner, News for
USAF Retired Personnel, were routinely mailed to the applicant’s
correspondence address he provided to the finance center, reminding
retirees of their SBP options when marrying after retirement. Had he
submitted an election within the first year of his marriage, monthly
premiums would have been approximately $76 and SBP costs of about
$12,800 would have been deducted from his pay to date. SBP is similar
to commercial life insurance in that an individual must elect to
participate during the time prescribed by law and pay the associated
premiums in order to have coverage. Approval of this request would
provide the applicant and his wife an additional opportunity to elect
SBP coverage not afforded other retirees similarly situated and is not
justified. Finally, PL 108-375, 28 October 2004, authorized an SBP
open enrollment, scheduled to begin 1 October 2005, during which the
applicant can provide spouse coverage. While details of this open
enrollment have not been completed, the law does require a “buy-in”
amount, in addition to monthly premium payment. Therefore, they
recommend denial of applicant’s request.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant provided a statement saying that he understands the
specifics and the conclusion of the reply to his application. He
desires to enroll in the SBP program and if it can be accomplished
through the Corrections Board, it would be most appreciated. He knows
there would be costs involved, and if the Board cannot approve it at
this time, he is requesting that he be listed in the new open
enrollment period scheduled to begin on 1 October 2005.
Applicant's complete response, with attachments, is attached at
Exhibit E.
_________________________________________________________________
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. In the
absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend
granting the relief sought in this application.
4. We note the applicant’s request that, by Board action, he be
enrolled in the SBP via the open enrollment authorized by PL 108-375.
But, the applicant may obtain the relief he is seeking without action
by this Board. For further information the applicant should contact
his nearest servicing Military Personnel Flight or the Air Force
office of primary responsibility at the Air Force Personnel Center
(Retiree Services) on 1-800-531-7502.
_________________________________________________________________
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 27 October 2005, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Member
Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Feb 04, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRT, dated 17 Jun 05.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 Jun 05.
Exhibit E. Applicant’s Response, dated 5 Jul 05, w/atchs.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00743
Had the applicant submitted a valid election within the time prescribed for making an SBP election after retirement, monthly premiums would be approximately $81. 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. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03820
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 | CY2007 | BC-2007-00439
There is no evidence he submitted an election during the 92-93, 99-00, or the 05-06 open enrollment periods. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D). 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 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01326
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRT states even though his retiree account statements have erroneously reflected his full retired pay as the annuity base amount for over seventeen years, the monthly cost deducted is based on the reduced annuity he elected prior to his retirement. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01423
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR notes if the member submitted an open enrollment election and survives for two years, his spouse would be entitled to an SBP annuity of approximately $685 per month upon his death. The applicant contends he was advised, in August 2004, that he had to wait for one year after his marriage to secure Survivor Benefit Plan coverage for his second spouse and subsequently, in July 2005, he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01319
On 17 October 1998, PL 105-261 established an SBP open enrollment from 1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000 for servicemembers who were not participating at the fullest extent and a non-participant could elect coverage. The applicant’s records reflect his SBP coverage was terminated under PL 99-145 within the first year of his marriage to D. PL 105-261 did not prohibit servicemembers from making an election during open enrollment if they had not resumed spouse coverage when they remarried....
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01292
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He believes that because of the erroneous information he was given about having to wait a minimum of one year for enrolling his second wife, he ended up not getting SBP before applying for a divorce from her. Therefore, he believes he should have SBP coverage for his present spouse, being effective 7 March 2006. The Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records reflect he divorced...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00568
Prior to the servicemember’s 1 October 1963 retirement, he was married and elected spouse and child RSFPP coverage, Option 4 - that allowed the member to terminate RSFPP premium payments in the event the beneficiary lost eligibility. We find no evidence he attempted to elect SBP coverage for the applicant during any of the four open enrollment periods provide by law. Regardless, it appears the servicemember made no attempt to elect SBP coverage for the applicant when he was eligible during...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02125
The member elected spouse only coverage based on full retired pay during the Plan’s initial enrollment period authorized by Public Law (PL) 92-425. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states this situation started with his 11 Feb 05 request to DFAS to obtain cost and facts as to whether he could enroll his wife in the military SBP and CSRS SBP. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02917
The Air Force developed the SBP RIP (report-individual person), a tool for counselors to use for one-on-one briefings conducted prior to a member’s retirement. 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. ...