RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01902
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 24 December 2007
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her husband’s records be corrected to show that she is entitled to a
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She was not aware that spousal benefits were not being deducted from
her husband’s monthly retirement pay.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits her husband’s death
certificate and a copy of their marriage certificate.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The former member and the applicant were married. He declined SBP
coverage prior to his 1 Aug 86 retirement. Finance records reflect
the applicant concurred in the former member’s SBP election prior to
his retirement. The former member was eligible to provide coverage
for his spouse during two SBP open enrollment periods (1 Apr 92 – 31
Mar 92 and 1 Mar 99 – 29 Feb 00). Members were advised by direct mail
of their eligibility to make an election during each enrollment
period. Enrollment packets, as well as the Afterburner, News for USAF
Retired Personnel, published during open enrollment periods and
containing contact information, were mailed to the correspondence
address the former member provided the finance center. The former
member died on 13 May 06.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPPRT recommends denial. DPPRT states that they can neither
confirm nor deny the applicant’s claim that she was inadequately
counseled. Furthermore, it is the retiring member’s responsibility to
elect the coverage that suits his family and the spouse’s right to
concur or non-concur in that election. By signing the election form,
concurring in the former member’s election, the applicant certified
that she had received information explaining the options available and
the effects of those options. The applicant could have non-concurred
in the election, however, she did not.
A complete copy of the evaluation is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 1
Sep 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 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 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.
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 April 2007, 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 13 Jun 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRT, dated 21 Aug 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 1 Sep 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 | 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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00962
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-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 | 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 | 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-2006-00348
She has learned since her husband’s death that this package was mailed as registered mail with a suspense date of 90 days, requiring an election of A, B, or C to determine her annuity. There is no evidence he made an RCSBP election at that time. A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachment, is attached at Exhibit C. ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant responded by thanking the Air Force for...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-00708
At the time of her retirement, applicant was unmarried and elected child- only SBP coverage. On 1 Mar 05 she requested her spouse be added to her SBP coverage. 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00868
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...