Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02849
Original file (BC-2005-02849.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-02849
            INDEX CODE:137.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NOT INDICATED

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  18 MAR 07

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her former late-husband’s records be corrected to reflect  he  made  a
timely election for former spouse coverage under the Survivor  Benefit
Plan (SBP).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

It was her former late-husband’s intention and desire that she be  the
beneficiary for the SBP.  The servicemember evidently  was  not  aware
that he had to change the wording when he remarried.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The servicemember and the applicant were married on 6 July  1957.   He
elected spouse only coverage based on  full  retired  pay  during  the
initial  enrollment  period  for   SBP.    The   applicant   and   the
servicemember were divorced on 18 November 1986 and the divorce decree
was silent on  the  SBP.   There  is  no  evidence  the  servicemember
submitted a valid election to voluntarily change the SBP coverage from
spouse to former spouse  within  the  required  one  year  time  limit
following their divorce.  The SBP premium  continued  to  be  deducted
from  the  servicemember’s  retired  pay   for   seven   years.    The
servicemember married M. on 23 September 1994, and  the  servicemember
did not request that SBP coverage be established on her  behalf.   The
servicemember was awarded disability compensation by the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) and made direct remittance payments for the  SBP
monthly premiums until his 2 July 2005 death.  M. is receiving the
monthly SBP annuity; however, according to AFPC/DPPTR, she has applied
for and may be entitled to VA  survivor  benefits.   The  VA  payments
would completely offset the SBP.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR indicates that since the request involves two potential SBP
beneficiaries, no recommendation is provided (Exhibit B).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 21 November 2005, the Board staff forwarded the applicant copies of
memorandums  from  HQ  USAF/JAA  and  HQ  AFPC/DPPRT  which  will   be
considered in the processing of her application (Exhibit C).

The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluations and states  in  April
2005, her former late-husband spoke with personnel at  Kingsley  Field
and was assured that she was the sole beneficiary for his SBP (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 an error or an injustice.   We  took  notice  of  the
applicant’s complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinions and the recommendations of the Air
Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our  conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an error or an injustice.  We
do not take issue with the applicant’s contention  that  it  may  have
been her deceased former husband’s intention to provide former  spouse
coverage for her under the SBP, but he did not do so, as evidenced  by
no mention of SBP coverage in the  divorce  decree.   This  is  indeed
regrettable.  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.  We are not  unsympathetic  to
her situation.   However,  in  the  absence  of  a  showing  that  the
applicant is legally entitled to the relief sought,  we  conclude  she
has failed to sustain her burden  of  establishing  that  she  is  the
victim of either an error or injustice.

_________________________________________________________________

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-
2005-02849 in  Executive  Session  on  10  February  2006,  under  the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

                       Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
                       Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Aug 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPRT, dated 20 Oct 05.
      Exhibit C. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 21 Nov 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 30 Nov 05.




                             KATHY L. BOOCKHOLDT
                             Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02913

    Original file (BC-2005-02913.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The servicemember did not elect former spouse coverage on the applicant’s behalf. Counsel further states, based on the facts and the personal statement of the applicant, the Board should consider the benefit of doubt and find in favor of the applicant (Exhibit D). We do not take issue with the applicant’s contention that her divorce decree ordered her deceased former husband to provide former spouse coverage for her under the SBP, but he did not do so.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02726

    Original file (BC-2005-02726.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: At the time of the servicemember’s retirement on 1 April 1976, he and the applicant were married and he declined to elect spouse coverage under the SBP. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR states the laws that controlled SBP precluded a married servicemember, who declined spouse coverage at the time of retirement, from providing SBP former...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02559

    Original file (BC-2006-02559.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The parties divorced on 7 July 1998, and the court ordered the former member to maintain the SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf; however, neither party submitted a valid election change during the required time. Specifically, as noted by the Chief, Administrative Law Division, Office of the Judge Advocate General, in his memorandum of 20 April 2004, on the subject, there are a number of court decisions by both state and federal judiciaries that have held that, despite the divorce decree...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00962

    Original file (BC-2006-00962.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00962 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 31 SEP 07 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Applicant is the ex-spouse of the deceased former servicemember, who requests her former late husband’s records be corrected to reflect he made a timely election for former spouse coverage under the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02657

    Original file (BC-2005-02657.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00868

    Original file (BC-2006-00868.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    If the applicant provides the necessary documents, it would be appropriate to correct the member’s record to reflect on 29 Mar 94 (or date verified by final decree), he elected to change SBP spouse to former spouse coverage based on the previous reduced level of retired pay, naming the applicant as the eligible beneficiary. A complete copy of the HQ AFPC/DPPRT evaluation, with attachment, is provided at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01003

    Original file (BC-2005-01003.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Neither the servicemember nor the former spouse submitted a valid election within the one-year period required by law to establish former spouse coverage. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00868-2

    Original file (BC-2006-00868-2.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence the veteran remarried and SBP premiums continued to be deducted from his retired pay until his death on 3 Dec 05. In their advisory (Exhibit B), HQ AFPC/DPPRT indicated the applicant’s submission was incomplete but if she provided the necessary documents, it would be appropriate to correct the veteran’s record to reflect he elected to change SBP spouse coverage to former spouse coverage based on the previous reduced level of retired pay, naming the applicant as...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02725

    Original file (BC-2006-02725.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant’s counsel requests copies of all documents by which the Air Force determined that her client gave inadequate notice of her entitlement to the SBP, of which benefits were awarded her (and paid for by her) pursuant to the divorce decree. Apparently the Air Force determined they received adequate notice to pay her client her portion of the court-ordered military retirement benefits, it appears incongruous for the Air Force now to take the position that such notice was inadequate to...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02727

    Original file (BC-2005-02727.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    DPPRT advises that there are no provisions in law to waive the one-year eligibility period for spouses acquired after retirement. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant resubmits a copy of the former member’s divorce decree and a copy of a letter from Alfred Truman Solicitors dated 24 September 2004. Applicant’s letter, with attachment is at Exhibit...