RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01227
INDEX CODE:
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Corrective action be taken that would allow her to receive a Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She never waived her entitlement to an Air Force pension, or was aware
until after her husband’s death, that she would not receive an Air
Force pension.
In support of her appeal, the applicant has provided a personal
statement and copies of marriage and birth certificates and a DD Form
2064, Certificate of Death (Overseas).
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The decedent and the applicant were married on 28 February 1951. The
member did not enroll in the Retired Serviceman’s Family Protection
Plan (RSFPP) prior to his 1 September 1966 retirement and there is no
evidence he returned an election form during either the initial SBP
open enrollment or the 1981-1982 open enrollment period. He died on
14 March 1983.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRT recommends denial. DPPRT stated the member had three
opportunities to elect survivor protection for the applicant but
failed to do so. SBP enrollment packets and newsletters were mailed
to the decedent during both SBP open enrollment periods to the address
the decedent had provided to the finance center. SBP is similar to
commercial life insurance in that an individual must elect to
participate and pay the associated premiums in order to have coverage.
The applicant offers no explanation for her more than 23 year delay
in seeking corrective action. It would be inequitable to those
members who chose to participate when eligible and subsequently
received reduced retired pay, and to other widows whose sponsors chose
not to participate, to provide entitlement to this widow on the basis
of the evidence presented. There is no evidence of Air Force error or
injustice in this case.
DPPRT’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant understood that participation in SBP was mandatory rather
than elective and the only choice involved was whether or not the
member should reduce his own entitlement and include her in the
scheme. This opinion implies her husband elected to participate in
the plan and then deliberately excluded her. She does not believe
this to be the case. She asks the Board to consider her husband’s
diminished capacity at the time due to alcoholism, documented in his
medical records. Further, and as a result of his alcoholism, she
believes he had little regard for his own future financial security,
let alone hers. While she understands the rules have changed since
her husband’s death regarding SBP specifically, the Air Force can no
longer exclude spouses from pension entitlements without consultation
and notes this new advantage seems to be an admission the previous
regulations were defective and have led to injustices for service
widows such as her and others. She acknowledges the mention of the 23-
year delay in applying for corrective action. When her husband died
suddenly, an airman was assigned to oversee her husband’s affairs and
it was then she found out she would not be entitled to his retirement.
She was also informed she had no recourse or any corrective action
she could consider to right the wrong. Many letters she wrote to the
Air Force were never replied to.
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely not 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
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. It appears the applicant’s spouse had three
opportunities with which to provide SBP coverage and failed to take
advantage of any of them. 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-
2006-01227 in Executive Session on 5 October 2006, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
Mr. John B. Hennessey, Member
Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Apr 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPRT, dated 26 May 06
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 Jun 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Jun 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 | CY2007 | BC-2006-03587
There is no evidence of an Air Force error or injustice or any basis in law to grant relief in this case. Applicant's complete response is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2006-03587 in Executive Session on 30 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36- 2603: Ms. Kathleen F. Graham,...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00869
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR recommends the applicant’s request be denied. DPPTR states the decedent elected spouse only coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay prior to his 1 March 1989 retirement, and the applicant concurred in his election. The available evidence indicates that the applicant’s husband elected SBP coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay prior to his 1 March 1989 retirement.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01715
Members were briefed and were required to make their RSFPP elections before completing 18 years of service. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2005- 01715 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...
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 | 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-2005-02348
Public Law (PL) 92-425, which established the SBP on 21 September 1972, authorized an enrollment period for retired servicemembers to elect SBP coverage. The applicant appears to believe she is entitled to an SBP annuity on the basis that her late spouse did not inform her about SBP before his death. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01439
Had the member elected SBP coverage based on full retired pay, the monthly cost would have been approximately $157 at the time of his death and the annuity would have been no less than $1,335. Furthermore, 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 on her behalf. It is possible that since the premiums were still being deducted from the member’s retired pay after the...
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...