RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-00708
INDEX CODE: 137.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 9 SEP 07
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her election to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) be
cancelled.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She and her husband have changed their minds about participating in the SBP
program. When she added her husband to the program she was unaware of the
costs.
In support of her request, applicant provided her retiree account
statement, her marriage license, her request to enroll in the SBP program
and her request to terminate her enrollment. Her complete submission, with
attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Data extracted from the personnel data system reflects applicant retired
from the Air Force on 31 May 00 in the grade of senior master sergeant.
At the time of her retirement, applicant was unmarried and elected child-
only SBP coverage. Applicant married her current spouse on 14 Feb 05. On
1 Mar 05 she requested her spouse be added to her SBP coverage. Spouse
coverage and premiums began on the first anniversary of their marriage.
Her youngest child lost eligibility in June 2005.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRT recommends denial. DPPRT states it is unfortunate she failed to
fully investigate the impact of adding her husband to her SBP coverage,
basic facts, such as the monthly costs and the potential amount of the
annuity, before making such a significant decision. To provide her an
additional opportunity to change her SBP election would be inequitable to
other members in similar situations and is not justified by the facts.
There is no evidence of an error or injustice in this case.
The DPPRT evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 14 Apr
06 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, this office has
received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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. After a thorough review of the evidence
of record, we find no evidence of an error in this case and after careful
consideration of her submission, we are not persuaded she has been the
victim of an injustice. Therefore, 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. 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-2006-
00708 in Executive Session on 15 Jun 06, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Ms. Marcia Jane Bachman, Member
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Mar 06.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPRT, dated 7 Apr 06.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 Apr 06.
MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
Panel Chair
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-2005-01176
However, there is no evidence the applicant elected coverage for his spouse during these time periods. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01390
There is no record he submitted an election to provide coverage for her at that time. It would be inequitable to those members, who chose to elect spouse coverage when eligible and subsequently received reduced retired pay, to provide an additional opportunity for this member to change his SBP election. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-03676
The member’s widow is eligible to receive an SBP annuity of $412, but she has not submitted an application to date. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. Applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. The widow of the service member indicated in a statement dated 25 Jan 06, that she recently completed and returned some forms sent to her by DFAS-CL.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01902
Finance records reflect the applicant concurred in the former member’s SBP election 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 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. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01227
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. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...
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-2005-02793
Furthermore, Section V of the DD Form 2656-2 clearly instructed members to have their spouses’ signature notarized if not signed in front of an SBP counselor prior to submitting the form. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: It is evident to her that the DD Form 2656-2 was not completed properly due to a discrepancy between the date of their signatures and the date it was notarized. In their previous advisory, dated...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00953
Subsequently, Public Laws (PLs) 97-35, 101-189, and 105-261 authorized additional SBP open enrollment periods (1 Oct 81 – 30 Sep 82, 1 Apr 92 – 31 Mar 93, and 1 Mar 99 – 29 Feb 00, respectively) so that retirees could elect or increase SBP coverage. Similarly, the Air Force may not pay an SBP annuity to the applicant, because the member retired before the implementation of the SBP and he did not choose to provide SBP coverage for her when he was eligible to do so. Exhibit C. Letter,...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01655
A week after the divorce from her husband, she took the divorce decree to Offutt AFB to finish the paperwork for DFAS for the annuity of her former husband’s retirement. In support of her application, applicant provided personal statements from both her and her daughter, copies of her 2 Jun 01 letter to DFAS, a 2 Jun 01 letter to her former husband, their divorce decree, a certified letter to the Director of DFAS from her attorney, her former husband’s death certificate, and his retirement...