RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03102
INDEX CODE: 137.02
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
The applicant, legal guardian of the decedent’s son, requests that the
member’s record be corrected to show she was medically retired
effective 1 August 2006, prior to her death, rather than on 14
November 2006.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
HQ Air Force Personnel Center (AFPC) changed the deceased members’
retirement date from 3 August 2006 to 14 November 2006 without the
consent of the member or any legal guardian. As a result, her son may
not be eligible for SBP coverage under the Insurable Interest
Election.
In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided copies of the now
deceased member’s retirement paperwork, a letter from the Military
Personnel Flight (MPF) commander explaining the reason for extending
her retirement date and pertinent copies of applicable law and
casualty documents.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The member was not married but did have an SBP-eligible child. She
was diagnosed with and was suffering from metastatic breast cancer at
the time of her death on 9 August 2006 while on active duty. On 14
July 2006, she was hospitalized in critical but stable condition but
was unable to actively participate and complete her retirement out-
processing. On 1 August 2006, her Date of Separation (DOS) was
recalculated in accordance with Air Force Instructions that resulted
in her DOS being extended to 13 November 2006 in order to account for
her leave balance of 87.5 days. She never fully regained
consciousness and died on 9 August 2006. As a result of the DOS
correction her date of retirement was extended and she died while on
active duty.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPD responded to the applicant’s request to have the deceased
members’ retirement date changed to 3 August 2006. DPPD cites Air
Force Instruction (AFI) 36-3212 wherein the calculation to determine
the date of disability retirement or discharge includes consideration
of permissive Temporary Duty (PTDY) of 20 days and any unused/unsold
leave. In this case DPPD was provided documentation showing that the
member had sold 60 days of leave during her career and had a current
leave balance of 87.5 days. DPPD recalculated her date of separation
(DOS) adding her accrued leave to a 20-day processing time to arrive
at her final retirement date of 13 November 2006. DPPD recommends
denial as the preponderance of the evidence reflects that no error or
injustice occurred during her disability process.
DPPD’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
HQ AFPC/DPPRT considered the applicant’s request for the decedent’s
minor child to be eligible for SBP under Insurable Interest coverage.
DPPRT states the deceased member was initially due to be placed on the
Permanent Disability Retired List (PDRL) on 3 August 2006 and she
completed an insurable interest election for her son prior to that
date. However, those orders were replaced and a 14 November 2006 PDRL
retirement date was established. Consequently, she died prior to her
retirement while on active duty. If the decedent’s disability
retirement (either 3 August or 14 November 2006) had consummated, the
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) would determine the
validity of her Insurable Interest election. In the event DFAS
determined her son to be considered an eligible Insured Interest
beneficiary, he would receive 55% of her net retired pay for the
remainder of his life, regardless of his marital or student status.
DPPRT’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.
EXAMINER’S NOTE: On 8 March 2007, applicant asked that his application
be administratively closed pending his review of the Air Force
evaluations. In accordance with his request, his application was
administratively closed on 14 March 2007. On 21 August 2007, he
requested his case be reopened.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant notes that the Board should have received a memorandum
from Bolling AFB informing the Board that the decedent was medically
and physically incapable of signing a document requesting an extension
of her retirement date, and that the extension was done without her
knowledge and consent (Exhibit E). He requests the decedent’s record
be changed to show she retired as of 1 August 2006 and that her minor
son be granted all of the entitlements made available to him under the
changed retirement date.
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law
or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
3. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the
existence of error or injustice. This case appears to be one where
the Air Force, in a laudable attempt to provide for one of its own,
actually made matters worse. The decedent had taken steps prior to
her final hospitalization to make certain her son would benefit from
her military service by properly completing the form necessary to
ensure he would receive a Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity. In
order for her son to receive the annuity however, she would have to
have been retired prior to her untimely death and not on active duty
as the case turned out to be. As part of the preparation for
disability retirement, AFPC had to calculate a DOS that included 67.5
days of unused leave and 20 days of permissive TDY for a total
extension to her DOS of 87.5 days. Unfortunately, the added leave and
permissive TDY extended her DOS beyond her original DOS of 3 August
2006 to 13 November 2006. She died on 9 August 2006, while on active
duty. Had her original DOS not been extended, she would have been
relieved from active duty on 2 August 2006 and permanently disability
retired on 3 August 2006, six days prior to her death. AFI 36-3212
allows for the early discharge or retirement for the benefit of all
concerned at the request of the member or the member’s commander. We
believe, had she been physically able, she would have chosen the
earlier DOS for the sake of her son and his eligibility to receive an
SBP annuity. Therefore, we recommend that the records be corrected as
indicated below.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not been
shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will
materially add to our understanding of the issue involved. Therefore,
the request for a hearing is not favorably considered.
______________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that:
a. On 28 July 2006, she made a valid Survivor Benefit Plan
election, based on full retired pay, under the insurable interest
option, naming her son, Jamahl D. Brown as the insurable interest
beneficiary.
b. On 2 August 2006, she was relieved from active duty and
permanently disability retired effective 3 August 2006.
______________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered this application in
Executive Session on 20 September 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
Mr. Christopher D. Carey, Panel Chair
Mr. Gregory A. Parker, Member
Mr. James L. Sommer, Member
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 23 December 2006, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPPD, dated 28 November 2006.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPPRT, dated 22 January 2007.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 January 2007.
Exhibit E. Letter, 11 MSS/DPM, dated 27 March 2007.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 21 August 2007.
CHRISTOPHER D. CAREY
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-00678
Under this provision of law, the applicant is not eligible for additional SGLI gratuity payment since her son was not on active duty at the time of his death. DPPD’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant contends she wrote many letters to Congress advocating retroactive death benefits be extended to all those who died on active duty since 7 October 2001; not just those who...
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,...
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-2005-00415
Even though the law in effect at the time of the applicant’s divorce did not allow retired members to provide former spouse SBP coverage, the member could have voluntarily elected former spouse SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf when he applied for commencement of his retired pay, but he did not. A member, who has an eligible former spouse at the time of retirement, and does not elect SBP former spouse coverage, may not later elect that option unless Congress authorizes an open...
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-2005-02915
Public Law (PL) 92-425, which established the SBP on 21 Sep 72, authorized an enrollment period for retired members to elect SBP coverage. A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit B. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03625
However, in the event the applicant provides the required document, an amended death certificate, it would be appropriate to correct the decedent’s records to show the applicant was the eligible spouse beneficiary upon his death. A spouse’s eligibility to receive an SBP annuity terminates upon divorce. However, to date, the applicant has not provided an amended death certificate.
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02127
On 16 April 2002, DFAS received a request from the member requesting that the spouse portion of the SBP be suspended based on his 1988 divorce. AFPC/JA’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. AFPC/DPPRT, in a previous advisory, dated 21 August 2006, stated that should the Board of Corrections (BCMR) determine the applicant had sufficiently established her claim as the decedent’s common-law wife prior to 9 August 2001, according to the laws of the State of California, his record should be...
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.