Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01092
Original file (BC-2008-01092.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-01092
            INDEX CODE:  137.00
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her husband's records be corrected to show that he elected  spouse  coverage
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) program.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her husband elected full spouse coverage under SBP.   She  and  her  husband
divorced in Sep 70, and he suspended SBP coverage.  On 14 Feb 1975, she  and
her ex-husband remarried.  He attempted to have SBP  premiums  restarted  in
Jan 80.

In support of her request, applicant submits  copies  of  the  SBP  Election
Certificate, retirement order, certificate of marriage (24 Dec 47),  divorce
decree, marriage license (14 Feb 75), and certificate of death.

Her complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant and servicemember were married on 26 Dec 47.  Member  did  not
enroll in the Retired Serviceman's Family Protection Plan (RSFPP)  prior  to
his 3 Nov 66 disability retirement.  The parties divorced on 25 Sep  70  and
he elected child only SBP coverage based on  full  retired  pay  during  the
initial SBP open enrollment period authorized by PL 92-425 (21 Sep 72  –  20
Mar 74).  The applicant and member were married again on 14 Feb 75,  however
he did not request SBP coverage be reestablished on the  applicant's  behalf
within  the  first  year  of  their  marriage,  or  during  subsequent  open
enrollment periods.

The SBP Election Certificate, provided by the applicant reflects he  elected
spouse and child SBP coverage on  11  Jan  80;  however,  the  election  was
invalid because it was not completed during the authorized  open  enrollment
period of one year.  The youngest child lost SBP eligibility due to  age  in
Jul 83.  The servicemember died on 19 Apr 95.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial.  The RSFPP was in effect until 20 Sep  72.
 Members were briefed and required to  make  their  RSFPP  elections  before
completing 18 years of service.  Spouse notification was not required.   The
laws controlling the RSFPP did not extend  coverage  to  a  spouse  acquired
after the member's retirement.  Less than 15 percent of the members  retired
during existence of RSFPP were enrolled.

Public law, establishing SBP on 21 Sep 72, authorized an  enrollment  period
for members who were already retired to elect  SBP  coverage.   Members  who
were unmarried on the date of their retirement had one  year  to  elect  SBP
spouse coverage.  Members were advised by direct mail of  their  eligibility
to make an election.

The service member had three opportunities to elect  SBP  coverage  for  the
applicant, but  failed  to  do  so.   SBP  is  similar  to  commercial  life
insurance in that  an  individual  must  elect  to  participate  during  the
opportunities provided by law and pay the associated premiums  in  order  to
have coverage.

DPSIAR opines providing entitlement to the applicant based on  the  evidence
presented would be inequitable to members  who  participated  when  eligible
and other widows whose sponsors chose not to participate.

The complete DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 23  May
08 for review and comment within 30 days.  As of this date, this office  has
received no response (Exhibit C).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided  by  existing  law  or
regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

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 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 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 probable 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 31 July 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

            Mr. Michael K. Gallogly, Panel Chair
            Mr. Alan A. Blomgren, Member
            Ms. Yvonne T. Jackson, Member

The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR  Docket  Number  BC-2008-01092
was considered:

      Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Mar 08, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 12 May 08.
      Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR dated 23 May 08.



            MICHAEL K. GALLOGLY
            Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-02569

    Original file (BC-2008-02569.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    His record contains a copy of a 28 Apr 93 letter from DFAS-DE advising him, among other things, that the 12 Feb 93 open enrollment election he submitted was “invalid” because block 10 did not indicate the base amount upon which he wished to establish coverage. His open enrollment election form contained what appears to be the monthly SBP premium amount he thought would be collected from his retired pay if he elected coverage on a reduced level of retired pay. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR...

  • AF | BCMR | CY1998 | 9702519

    Original file (9702519.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He could have elected former spouse SBP coverage for her during the 1992 open enrollment. However, spouse premiums could be terminated following divorce if the member additionally selected Option 4. He could have elected former spouse SBP coverage for her during the 92 open enrollment.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00568

    Original file (BC-2006-00568.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 0200517

    Original file (0200517.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There were no provisions in the law at that time to notify spouses if the servicemember did not elect coverage. There is no evidence that the servicemember elected SBP during any of the authorized open enrollments. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 26 Apr 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02539

    Original file (BC-2005-02539.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    PL 92-425, which established the SBP on 21 Sep 72, authorized an 18- month enrollment period (21 Sep 72 - 20 Mar 74) for retired members to elect SBP coverage, but were not required to return an SBP election form in order to decline coverage. RSFPP participants could have terminated previous RSFPP coverage, or retained it in addition to a new SBP election. There were no provisions in the laws during these open enrollment periods requiring the Services to notify spouses of retired members...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02569

    Original file (BC-2010-02569.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The deceased member elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full-retired pay during the initial enrollment period. DPSIAR states 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’ eligibility; therefore, the fact the divorce decree mentioned the SBP does not provide standing to establish SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf. We took notice of the applicant's...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-00953

    Original file (BC-2005-00953.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-00708

    Original file (BC-2003-00708.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of her request, applicant submitted a copy of the former service member’s Death Certificate; a copy of their divorce decree; and copies of the former service member’s DD Form 214 (Armed Forces of the United States for Report of Transfer or Discharge), retirement order, dated 19 Feb 70, and documents associated with his retirement for disability. _________________________________________________________________ AIR STAFF EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPPTR reviewed this application and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-02399

    Original file (BC-2004-02399.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his retirement from the Air Force he elected child coverage under the SBP. If his daughter’s disability was diagnosed while she was otherwise eligible, the member could have elected coverage on her behalf during the initial open enrollment; however, there is no evidence such an election was submitted. We believe the applicant would have elected to provide coverage for his daughter...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-01439

    Original file (BC-2007-01439.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    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...