ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2004-01183-2
INDEX CODE: 110.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her now deceased husband’s record be changed to show he elected to
participate in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Program (RCSBP).
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On 20 July 2004, the Board considered and denied her application for
correction of military records. For an accounting of the facts and
circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request and the rationale of the
earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit D.
On 2 June 2006, she applied for reconsideration through her Representative
and provided a completed Form 123 indicating the decedent’s intent to
provide SBP coverage for her (Exhibit E).
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
We carefully considered the evidence she submitted in support of her
request including a completed Form 123. However, she has provided no
substantiation to show the form was ever submitted. Further, there is no
evidence the application was either lost or misfiled. In fact, the record
shows the decedent did not make an election when he was first eligible and
was therefore automatically entered into Option A, Deferred Election until
Age 60. He also failed to make an election during a subsequent Open Season
opportunity and unfortunately died prior to reaching the age of 60.
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 probable material error or injustice; 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 21 February 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Ms. Renee Collier, Member
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit D. Record of Proceedings, dated 6 Aug 04,
with exhibits A through C.
Exhibit E. Representative, Letter, dated 2 Jun 06.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01448
DPPRT’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. SAF/MRB (AFBCMR Legal Advisor) recommends denial. We note neither the applicant, nor the former spouse filed the necessary SBP election applications that would have provided the former spouse SBP coverage within the one-year time frame allotted them to do so. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRB, dated 27 June 2007.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00884
The law at the time of the member’s retirement did not require that the spouse concur in the election and he did not elect SBP coverage on her behalf at that time. Further, the laws controlling SBP preclude a married member who declined spouse coverage at the time of retirement from providing SBP former spouse coverage following divorce unless Congress authorized an open enrollment. DPPRT states the member had two opportunities to elect former spouse SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-01689-2
For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F. In a letter dated 12 June 2007, counsel for the applicant provided evidence of a court ruling dated 11 June 2007, wherein the court ruled that the spouse of the decedent at the time of his death waives any interest in the applicant’s SBP benefits and is no longer a party to the applicant’s claim to the Air...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01228
DPP records show that the family members are updated in their system. 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 was notified on several occasions of her eligibility to participate in RCSBP and...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01000
The parties divorced on 26 December 1985 and in the marital settlement agreement the member agreed to designate the applicant as beneficiary to the SBP. 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 AFBCMR Legal Advisor and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice requiring corrective action by this Board. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-03123
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He did not make an RCSBP election in 1994, he was not married at the time and his children were aged 25, 22, and 17, and when he applied for retired pay in 2006, he elected no RCSBP benefits. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice;...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-02639
She states she was unaware of the 1 March 1999 to 29 February 2000 ‘open season’ as no briefings were scheduled nor were any dates published nor was any information given as to what an ‘open season’ was or what it offered members in the way of changing options. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2005-02786
DPPRT states there is no evidence the member submitted a request within the required time limit to voluntarily elect former spouse coverage on the applicant’s behalf. Records show that the member did not remarry and premiums continued to be deducted from his retired pay until his 2 Jul 96 death. 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...
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-2006-03587
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,...