RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02898
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to establish Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage
for his wife.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
At the time of his retirement in February 1988, he was told his
spouse and youngest son were covered under the SBP. In May 2010,
he was notified he had no SBP.
The applicant does not provide any evidence in support of his
appeal.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who
retired effective 1 February 1988 in the grade of senior master
sergeant (E-8). Prior to his retirement, he elected child only
SBP coverage based on full retired pay and his spouse concurred
with his election. His youngest child lost eligibility due to
age, and, SBP premiums ceased effective 1 September 2003.
The remaining relevant facts, extracted from the applicants
military service records, are contained in the evaluation
provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility at
Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPSIAR recommends denial. DPSIAR states there is no error
or injustice in this case. The applicants claim that when he
retired he was told his spouse and youngest son were covered
under the SBP is without merit. He made a valid election for
child only coverage with his wifes concurrence prior to his
retirement. There is no evidence he submitted a valid election
during the 1992-1993, 1999-2000, or 2005-2006 open enrollment
periods. His youngest child lost eligibility due to age and SBP
premiums ceased effective 1 September 2003. The applicant offers
no explanation for failing to question or take corrective action
during the seven years he was not paying SBP premiums. He had
three opportunities to elect SBP coverage for his wife. It is
unreasonable for him to have assumed he had SBP coverage for his
wife, particularly during the 2005-2006 open enrollment, after
SBP premiums had ceased being deducted from his retired pay in
2003. At the time the applicants last child lost eligibility,
SBP premiums were $17; if he had spouse coverage, the monthly
costs would have been approximately $180.
It is DPSIARs opinion that 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.
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 5 November 2010 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit
D). As of this date, this office has received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 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 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-2010-02898 in Executive Session on 28 April 2011, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered in connection
with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-02898:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 9 Aug 10.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 15 Sep 10.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 Nov 10.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01895
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force (exhibit B). The applicant married his wife on 17 December 2009, but failed to notify DFAS of the change to his marital status or request SBP coverage be established on his wifes behalf within the first year of their marriage. We took notice of the applicant's complete...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02880
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-02880 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased former spouses record be changed to show he elected spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The decedent and the applicant were...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01608
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01608 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The former member’s record be corrected to authorize Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) spouse coverage. DPSIAR states there is no evidence of an Air Force error; however, to preclude an injustice, they recommend the former member’s record be corrected to...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01176
However, there is no evidence the applicant elected coverage for his spouse during these time periods. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2011-05023
However, they were married on 3 Jan 2011. In order for a spouse, who married a member after his/her retirement, to be considered eligible for the SBP annuity, the post-retirement marriage must endure for one full year from the date of marriage. Although the applicant provides evidence that recognizes their relationship as a marriage, the law requires a member to be married for one full year before the widow is eligible for SBP payments, assuming the member...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04761
However, his election should be changed because his former spouse is required to receive SBP based on the divorce decree. ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial, stating, in part, there is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice in this case, or any basis in law to grant relief. Since spouse SBP coverage was not established at the time of the member's retirement, former spouse coverage is not authorized.
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02569
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 applicants 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 applicants behalf. We took notice of the applicant's...
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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01864
He agrees that he did not elect SBP coverage during open enrollment because he thought he had full coverage. In an e-mail communication on 15 May 2013, the applicant agrees to pay past premiums in order to be eligible to elect SBP coverage for a future spouse should he remarry. __________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that that...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02194
On 2 June 2003, the applicant requested that the finance center stop the SBP. Furthermore, the applicant failed to respond to their 7 July 2003 letter requesting he obtain a notarized statement completed by his wife in which she acknowledges retired pay ceases when the applicant dies, that she is currently eligible to receive an annuity valued at approximately $774 per month (after the age of 62, no less than $492), and approval of this request would result in her receiving no...