RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-00205
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
It appears the applicant is requesting her late husband’s records be
corrected to reflect he elected spouse only coverage under the Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her husband’s death was caused by his exposure to Agent Orange.
In support of her request, the applicant submits a copy of her husband’s
death certificate.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The former service member declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 Dec 87
retirement and the applicant concurred with his election. There is no
evidence he submitted an election during the 92-93, 99-00 or 05-06 open
enrollment periods. He died on 30 Dec 09 and no SBP premiums were ever
deducted from his retired pay.
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:
DPSIAR recommends denial. DPSIAR states the cause of a member’s death does
not determine a widow’s eligibility for the SBP annuity. DPSIDR notes the
applicant signed a concurrence statement on 4 Nov 87 acknowledging that she
understood the effects of her decision.
DPSIAR notes SBP is similar to commercial life insurance in that an
individual must elect to participate during the opportunities provided by
the law and pay the associated premiums in order to have coverage. DPSIDR
states that it is the retiring member’s responsibility to elect the
coverage that suits his/her family and the spouse’s right to concur or non-
concur in that election.
The complete DPSIAR 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 14 May
10, for review and comment within 30 days. 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 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 persuasive 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 AFBCMR BC-2010-00205 in
Executive Session on 7 Oct 10, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 13 Jan 10, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 30 Mar 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 14 May 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-04144
The Public Law (PL) which established the SBP on 21 Sep 72 authorized an enrollment period for members, who were already retired at that time, to elect SBP coverage. Members who were unmarried on the date of retirement have one year to elect SBP coverage for the first spouse acquired after that date. _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-04138
DFAS-CL received a letter from the former service member on 4 Nov 94, requesting SBP coverage be established on behalf of the applicant; however, he died on 20 Mar 95, seven months before the end of their first year of marriage. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03737
Even though the SBP was not addressed in the divorce decree, the member could have elected former spouse coverage voluntarily within the first year following the divorce, but failed to do so. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-01092
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. Members who were...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02361
With no SBP election annotated, full SBP coverage should have been established for her unless there was another AF Form 1266 completed. DFAS-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) did not properly ensure copies of critical SBP documents, such as members' election forms and spouses' concurrence statements, were safeguarded and retrievable following Oct 93 when DFAS-CL assumed Air Force retired pay responsibilities. Assuming possible facts most favorable to the applicant, at its best possible, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04512
We took notice of the applicants 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-04512 in Executive Session on 4 Aug...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03362
The member and the applicant were allegedly married in Tijuana, Mexico on 8 Jun 82, and he elected spouse only coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay during the open enrollment authorized by Public Law (PL) 97-35 (1 Oct 81 30 Sep 82). The Air Force office of primary responsibility has recommended that we consider voiding the decedent's 23 Sep 82 election for SBP coverage for the applicant, suggesting that the "erroneous deductions of SBP premiums for spouse coverage be refunded...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01351
DPSIDAR states that there is no evidence of Air Force error in this case; however, in the absence of a competing claimant and to prevent a possible injustice, they recommend the decedent’s record be corrected to reflect he elected former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming APPLICANT as the former spouse beneficiary, effective 11 January 2005. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2008-02569
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 | CY2008 | BC-2007-03097
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. The effective date of his election was 28 Sep 82; however, the election was voided by his 13 Jul 84 death. 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 failed to sustain her burden of proof of the existence of an error or injustice.