Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03286
Original file (BC-2008-03286.DOC) Auto-classification: Denied

                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2008-03286
            INDEX CODE:  137.01
            COUNSEL:  NONE
            HEARING DESIRED:  NO


_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

1.  Her former husband's records be corrected to  reflect  that  he  elected
former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefits Program (SBP).

2.  Her two children be added as beneficiaries to the SBP.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Her spouse was supposed to file the appropriate  paperwork  as  directed  by
the divorce decree.

In support of her request, the applicant provided  a  copy  of  her  divorce
decree and a copy of a stipulation agreement.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is the former spouse of a retired colonel (0-6).

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIAR forwarded the request without recommendation due to there  being
two potential SBP beneficiaries.  DPSIAR  states  that  the  member’s  widow
became the eligible spouse beneficiary on the  first  anniversary  of  their
marriage (15 March 2007), and  the  applicant's  youngest  child  became  an
ineligible beneficiary in September 1999.

The complete DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B.

The BCMR Legal Advisor recommends denial.  The  Legal  Advisor  states  that
although the applicant was directed by the 1998 divorce decree  to  continue
coverage on the former spouse; federal law does not provide  provisions  for
elections that are not made in a timely manner.  A  USAF/JAA  legal  opinion
provided an analysis which advises the Board not  to  consider  such  cases;
the applicant should be directed  to  the  civil  court  system.   SAF/GCM’s
opinion explains that in  extraordinary  circumstances,  it  is  within  the
Board’s authority to correct the record if it finds it necessary to  prevent
and error or injustice.

The Legal Advisor states  that  if  there  were  not  a  competing  eligible
beneficiary, he would recommend correcting the record; however, the  current
spouse is the eligible beneficiary.

The BCMR Legal Advisory, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

She responded to correct an error in the Legal Advisory  which  states  that
the spouse is deceased; however, the spouse is not deceased and never  filed
the divorce decree with the Air Force as directed by the Court.

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

_________________________________________________________________

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.  The applicant's  complete  submission  was
thoroughly reviewed and her contentions were duly  noted.   However,  we  do
not find the applicant's  assertions  and  the  documentation  presented  in
support of her appeal sufficiently  persuasive  to  override  the  rationale
provided by the BCMR Legal Advisor.  In this respect, we took  note  of  the
divorce decree that  ordered  the  former  service  member  to  provide  SBP
coverage for the applicant.  However, we also note that  federal  law  makes
the election unavailable when the deemed election is  not  timely  effected,
and no evidence has been presented which shows a deemed  election  was  made
within the one-year time period mandated by  law.   We  are  aware  that  in
extraordinary circumstances, it is within the  authority  of  the  Board  to
correct a record if it finds it necessary to prevent an error or  injustice.
 However, in this case, we agree with the Legal Advisor that  there  are  no
extraordinary circumstances here  that  support  not  enforcing  the  deemed
election requirements given the fact that a correction of the record in  the
manner requested would deprive the former member’s  current  spouse  of  the
benefits she is currently entitled to.  In view of  the  foregoing,  and  in
the absence of sufficient evidence  to  the  contrary,  we  agree  with  the
recommendation of the Legal Advisor and adopt his  rationale  as  the  basis
for our  decision  the  applicant  has  failed  to  sustain  her  burden  of
establishing that  she  has  suffered  either  an  error  or  an  injustice.
Accordingly, 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 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 Docket Number  BC-2008-
03286 in Executive Session on 6 January 2009, under the  provisions  of  AFI
36-2603:

      Mr. Thomas S. Markiewicz, Chair
      Ms. Audrey Y. Davis, Member
      Mr. Grover L. Dunn, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 September 2008, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 6 October 2008.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, BCMR Legal Advisor, dated 22 October 2008,

                w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 23 October 2008.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 1 November 2008, w/atchs.
      Exhibit F.  Letter, BCMR Legal Advisor, dated 24 Novemeber
2008.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 2 December 2008, w/atch.




                                   THOMAS S. MARKIEWICZ
                                   Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2010-03013

    Original file (BC-2010-03013.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence the service member or the applicant submitted a request for former spouse coverage within one year following their divorce. The complete SAF/MRB Legal Advisor evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant requests the Board honor the divorce decree that deemed her the beneficiary under the SBP. While we do not take issue with the applicant’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00093

    Original file (BC-2010-00093.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of his retirement from the Air Force, her former husband designated her as the beneficiary to receive all final payments and monies owned him upon his death. The complete BCMR Legal Advisor’s evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the BCMR Legal Advisor’s...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02192

    Original file (BC-2011-02192.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-02192 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ___________________________________________________________ __ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her former spouse’s records be corrected to reflect he made a timely election for former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). The service member elected spouse only coverage under the SBP at full retirement pay. Since the applicant...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02857

    Original file (BC-2010-02857.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Neither party submitted a valid election change during the required time limit following their divorce. The complete SAF/MRB Legal Advisor’s evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant’s counsel states that paragraph 13; page 20 of the divorce decree shows the deceased member acknowledged his obligation by submitting this as an election for SBP for his spouse. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00062

    Original file (BC-2011-00062.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    She indicates there is no evidence the deceased former member elected former spouse coverage for any of his former spouses. In Dec 92, DFAS received an SBP Open Enrollment Election form from the member requesting to change the applicant’s coverage from spouse to former spouse. A complete copy of the AFRBA Legal Advisor evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant contends...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02108

    Original file (BC-2011-02108.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant and service member divorced on 17 Nov 89, and the divorce order directed the service member pay the monthly SBP premiums for the applicant. The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B. SAF/MRB Legal Advisor indicates there are no extraordinary facts or equities which merit granting the relief sought, unless the widow relinquishes her right to the annuity. Further complicating this case is the fact that after he remarried, the deceased former member failed to elect...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2009-02010

    Original file (BC-2009-02010.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no evidence the member submitted a valid former spouse election within one year following their divorce. The Legal Advisor states the widow became the SBP beneficiary by operation of law when the member died in Jun 05 and is currently receiving SBP payments. We note the opinion and recommendation of the SAF/MRB Legal Advisor that as an operation of law the member’s spouse is the legal beneficiary unless a legally effective election or deemed election (pursuant to a court order)...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04680

    Original file (BC-2010-04680.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Her divorce decree lists her as the SBP beneficiary to receive the former member’s SBP benefits. While we do not take issue with the applicant’s assertion that her divorce decree ordered her former husband to continue coverage for her under SBP, he failed to convert the coverage to former spouse coverage within one year of their divorce as required by law. Since the applicant has failed to demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances existed that would override the failure of she and her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00688

    Original file (BC-2011-00688.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    A Stipulation Order dated 4 Jun 91 reflects the servicemember elected to provide former spouse SBP coverage for the applicant. The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit C. SAF/MRB Legal Advisor recommends denial of the applicant’s request. While we are sympathetic to the applicant’s situation, the now deceased service member failed to elect former spouse coverage within one year of their divorce as required by law.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-03308

    Original file (BC-2010-03308.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete AFRBA Legal Advisor evaluation is at Exhibit C. __________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 30 Nov 10 for review and comment within 30 days. We note neither the applicant, nor the former member filed the necessary SBP election applications that would have provided the former spouse SBP coverage within the one-year time frame allotted them to...