RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-03506
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 20 MARCH 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show that he declined Survivor Benefit Plan
(SBP) coverage for his current spouse.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
SBP payments are being taken from his retirement pay without his permission
and will cause undue hardship.
In support of his request, the applicant submits his personal statement
(unsigned), a newspaper clipping, and a copy of his marriage license
(current spouse). The applicant's complete submission, with attachments,
is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant elected spouse and child coverage based on full retired pay
prior to his 1 September 1991 retirement. The Defense Enrollment
Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records reflect the parties divorced
on 1 June 1992 and the applicant did not submit an election for former
spouse coverage. The spouse’s portion of the SBP was suspended and
overpaid premiums refunded to the applicant. The youngest child lost
eligibility October 1995.
The applicant and current spouse were married on 2 July 1995 and he took no
action to prevent SBP coverage from being established on her behalf.
Therefore, she became the eligible spouse beneficiary on 2 July 1996. In
August 2005, the applicant faxed a cryptic note to Defense Finance and
Accounting Service – Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL), giving his and his current
spouse’s social security numbers and the words “to SBP.” DFAS-CL
established current spouse coverage per his request and notified him of the
retroactive premium debt (approximately $5,600).
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The Retiree Services Branch, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, reviewed this application and
recommended denial stating there is no evidence of Air Force error or
injustice. DPPTR states Public Law (PL) 99-145, 8 Nov 85 (effective 1
March 1986) provides a one-year period during which SBP participants with
suspended spouse coverage who subsequently remarry, may choose to not
extend SBP protection to a newly-acquired spouse. Retirees must send a
written request to deny SBP for the new spouse to DFAS-CL within the first
year following remarriage. Failure to request termination during the
period authorized by PL 99-145 results in the previous level of SBP
coverage being automatically reinstated on the spouse’s behalf on the date
of the first anniversary, or upon the birth of a child born of the
marriage, if earlier.
DPPTR states that if the Board’s decision is to grant relief, the member’s
record should be corrected to reflect he submitted a valid request not to
extend SBP coverage to his current spouse before the first anniversary of
their marriage, and correction should be contingent upon obtaining a
properly notarized statement concurring in the permanent revocation of SBP
coverage which has been in effect on her behalf since 2 July 1996.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force Evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for
review and comment on 28 December 2005. As of this date, this office has
received no response (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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 the recommendation of HQ AFPC/DPPRT and adopt their
rationale as the basis for our 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 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 10 February 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Panel Chair
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Panel Member
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Panel Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR
Docket Number BC-2005-03506.
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 14 Nov 05.
Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRT, dated 27 Dec 05.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Dec 05.
KATHY L. BOOCKHOLDT
Panel Chair
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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-00401
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states that a participant’s spouse automatically becomes an eligible beneficiary on the first anniversary of the marriage unless, before that date, a valid election to not resume the coverage under the provisions of PL 99-145 is sent to the finance center. The applicant submitted a valid request to reinstate SBP coverage on R--- ’s behalf within the time permitted, changed his mind about...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-00415
Even though the law in effect at the time of the applicant’s divorce did not allow retired members to provide former spouse SBP coverage, the member could have voluntarily elected former spouse SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf when he applied for commencement of his retired pay, but he did not. A member, who has an eligible former spouse at the time of retirement, and does not elect SBP former spouse coverage, may not later elect that option unless Congress authorizes an open...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-04088
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her father has not had contact with his spouse for over 15 years and financially he can no longer afford SBP premiums. There is no record the applicant submitted a DD Form 2656-2 required to terminate his SBP coverage during the disenrollment period provided by PL 105-85. There is no evidence of an Air Force error or injustice in this case; therefore, DPPRT recommends the request be denied.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01570
He told her that her husband was making SBP payments and therefore she should have been receiving an annuity after his death. DPPTR states there is no basis in law to waive the two-year survival requirement; however, if the Board’s decision is to grant relief, the record could be corrected to show the member elected spouse only SBP coverage based on full-retired pay on 27 July 1977, prior to the first marriage anniversary. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit D).
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02657
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 02657 INDEX CODE: 137.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 27 FEBRUARY 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased former spouse’s records be corrected to show that he elected coverage for her under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). Neither she nor her ex- husband was ever informed...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00671
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-00671 INDEX CODE: 137.3 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 MAY 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to withdraw from Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) program, effective 1 February 1977, based on the fact he was 100% VA disabled within the first five years of retirement. They also do...
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. ...