RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-03507
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
MANDATORY COMPLETION DATE: 18 MAY 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to terminate spouse and child coverage under the Survivor
Benefit Program (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He has inquired on how to terminate the SBP program since the year 2000.
He was never told there was an opportunity to withdraw from the program
during the 25th thru 36th months of retirement. He and his wife have
looked at all options and firmly believe a good term life insurance policy
is much more beneficial than the small SBP payments would ever be in the
event of his death. He also believes the SBP advisors should have given
more information concerning all options, during his retirement briefing.
The lack of knowledge on the part of the SBP advisors caused him to miss
the withdrawal deadline and make needless payments over the past four years
into a program that he does not want.
In support of the application, the applicant submits his personal
statement, a support letter from his spouse, and an electronic message from
the Retired and Annuity Pay Contact Center, Defense Finance and Accounting
Service (DFAS).
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant retired on 1 Oct 99.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from
the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ AFPC/DPPRT recommends denial of the applicant’s request. DPPRT states
the applicant was married and had dependent children prior to his 1 Oct 99
retirement; however, he failed to attend the mandatory SBP briefing and did
not complete an SBP election prior to that date. Absent a valid election,
DFAS-CL properly established spouse and child coverage based on full
retired pay to comply with the law. The applicant was eligible to
disenroll from SBP under PL 105-95 beginning 1 Oct 01 through 30 Sep 02;
however, there is no evidence he submitted a valid written disenrollment
request. On 3 Mar 04, DFAS-CL received a DD Form 2656-8, SPB Automatic
Coverage Fact Sheet, containing dependency information.
DPPRT states the applicant’s refusal to follow base out-processing
procedures resulted in his failure to exercise SBP termination procedures.
Nevertheless, the Jan 01 issue of the Afterburner, News For USAF Retired
Personnel, published prior to the applicant’s 2nd anniversary of
retirement, reminded SBP participants of the option and eligibility to
disenroll from the Plan. Issues of the Afterburner are mailed to the
correspondence address retirees provide to the finance center. Providing
this applicant additional time to terminate his SBP coverage would have
been inequitable to other retirees in similar situations and is not
justified by the facts.
DPPRT concludes if the Board’s decision is to approve the request the
applicant’s records should be corrected to reflect he terminated SBP
coverage effective 30 Sep 02 under the provisions of PL 105-85. Approval
should be contingent upon obtaining his wife’s properly notarized statement
concurring in the permanent revocation of her SBP coverage in effect now on
her behalf.
The complete DPPRT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for
review and comment within 30 days on 22 Dec 06. As of this date, this
office has received no response (Exhibit D).
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or an injustice. The applicant contends he was
miscounseled; however, we note HQ AFPC/DPPRT’s assertion that he did not
attend his mandatory SBP briefing where he would have been instructed on
how to decline SBP coverage. 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 either an error or an injustice.
_________________________________________________________________
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 BC-2006-03507 in
Executive Session on 30 January 2007, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Kathleen F. Graham, Panel Chair
Ms. Renee M. Collier, Member
Ms. Janet I. Hassan, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 Oct 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. HQ AFPC/DPPRT Letter, dated 15 Dec 06.
Exhibit C. SAF/MRBR Letter, dated 22 Dec 06.
KATHLEEN F. GRAHAM
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01798
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. However, the applicant will have an opportunity to discontinue participation in the SBP at any time during the one-year period authorized by PL 105-85, beginning on the second...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01425
DPPRT states that Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouses of married servicemembers to concur in writing, prior to the servicemember’s retirement, in SBP elections that provide less than full spouse coverage. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00657
The applicant provided a copy of the DD Form 2656-2 dated 30 Jun 98. Applicant provided a statement from his spouse, concurring with his request to terminate RCSBP. We note that the applicant’s spouse has submitted a statement concurring in the permanent revocation of her SBP coverage currently in effect; however, the eligibility period for this action was between the 25th and 36th month following the effective date of his retirement.
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01269
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005- 01269 INDEX CODE: 137.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 11 OCTOBER 2006 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to terminate his spouse only coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) retroactive to the date of his Civil Service (CS) retirement (24 May 1973). PL 92-425,...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03820
On 11 March 1999, the applicant submitted a request to terminate his SBP coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85. PL 108-375 authorized an open enrollment period from 1 October 2005 through 30 September 2006 to enroll in SBP, but the law stipulates that servicemembers who terminated coverage under the provisions of PL 105-85 can not renter the program. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01199
Examiner’s Note: The law in effect at the time of the applicant’s divorce did not allow retired members to provide SBP coverage, even if they wished to voluntarily continue their former spouse’s eligibility. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her response dated June 22, 2007, the applicant states her former spouse was very sorry and surprised when his request to name her his SBP beneficiary was denied. KATHLEEN...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00130
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Air Force OPR states a review of the applicant’s record indicates the member elected spouse only coverage based on full retired pay (immediate option) under the Reserve Component SBP (RCSBP) on 5 May 79, after becoming eligible to receive retired pay except for attaining age 60. The member had an opportunity to disenroll during the 98-99 period and ample resources to obtain information on correct...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00743
Had the applicant submitted a valid election within the time prescribed for making an SBP election after retirement, monthly premiums would be approximately $81. Approval of this request would provide the applicant an additional opportunity to elect SBP coverage not afforded other retirees similarly situated and is not justified. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-00759
_________________________________________________________________ RESUME OF CASE: In an application to the Board dated 9 Mar 06, applicant requested corrective action that would allow him to terminate the SBP coverage for his handicapped daughter claiming he was not aware of the negative impact SBP payments would have on his daughter if she was to receive Medicaid assistance. The additional DPPRT evaluation is at Exhibit...
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...