Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04512
Original file (BC-2010-04512.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04512 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her deceased husband’s records be corrected to reflect that he 
elected former-spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan 
(SBP), naming her- as the beneficiary. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

She was married to the deceased former member for 35 years and 
during the entire time that he served in the Air Force. Their 
divorce decree awarded her $500.00 per month from her husband’s 
pension, and he was ordered to make arrangements to allow her to 
continue this entitlement until her death. The error was unjust 
since the Air Force did not inform her of his decision not to 
elect coverage under the SBP. 

 

In support of the appeal, the applicant provides copies of a 
letter from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS), 
herDivorce Decree, and the former member’s death certificate. 

 

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 
Exhibit A. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The deceased former member and the applicant were married on 
1 Nov 52; however, the deceased former member declined SBP 
coverage prior to his 1 Jan 74 retirement. The parties divorced 
on 6 May 88, and the court order did not refer to the SBP. 
Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records 
show the deceased former member married Rose on 29 Jan 90 and 
they divorced on 6 Jan 98. DEERS also reflects the member 
married Mary on 9 May 98. There is no evidence he made an 
election during any of the three SBP open enrollment periods 
conducted prior to his 5 Nov 10 death, and SBP premiums were 
never deducted from his retired pay. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 


 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial. DPSIAR states there is no 
evidence of an Air Force error or injustice in this case. The 
law at the time of the deceased former member’s retirement did 
not require the spouse to concur in the election. Financial 
support or division of retired pay is not considered and should 
not be interpreted as pertaining to the SBP. SBP is similar to 
commercial life insurance in that an individual must elect to 
participate and pay the associated premiums in order to have 
coverage. After the divorce, the deceased former member could 
have elected former spouse SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf 
during the 92-93, 99-00, and 05-06 open enrollment periods, but 
he failed to do so. 

 

The complete AFPC/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 4 Feb 11, for review and comment within 30 days. As of this 
date, no response has been received by this office. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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 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 
(OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the 
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. In 
view of the above and 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 the evidence presented did not 
demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; the 
application was denied without a personal appearance; and 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-2010-04512 in Executive Session on 4 Aug 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 29 Nov 10, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 14 Jan 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRB, dated 4 Feb 11. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 



Similar Decisions

  • 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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-01307

    Original file (BC-2012-01307.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    If neither the member nor the spouse requests the election change during the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. Even though a member fails to notify DFAS—Cleveland (DFAS-CL) of the divorce and continues to pay SBP premiums afterword, the former spouse is not eligible for annuity payments upon the member’s death. However, should the applicant provide a notarized statement from the deceased former member’s widow relinquishing her...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01351

    Original file (BC-2012-01351.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    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-2007-02361

    Original file (BC-2007-02361.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2009 | BC-2009-01754

    Original file (BC-2009-01754.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    In support of the application, the applicant submits a copy of her final divorce decree and her former spouse's death certificate. Moreover, there is no divorce decree requiring SBP (perhaps because it was not within court authority to order it at that time). The complete SAF/MRB Legal Advisor's evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Counsel for the applicant states a former military spouse...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-03347

    Original file (BC-2009-03347.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The parties divorced on 13 Nov 84, and the divorce decree ordered the member to continue the SBP on the applicant’s behalf. The deceased member’s decision not to voluntarily elect former spouse SBP coverage on the applicant’s behalf shows his intent not to provide SBP for her. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case, to include her response to the Air Force evaluation; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01544

    Original file (BC-2012-01544.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Based on the available evidence of record and the applicant’s submission, it appears the decedent and the applicant were married in Feb 09. Subsequent to the divorce of his first spouse, a deemed election for former spouse coverage was submitted to DFAS and accepted in accordance with the divorce decree and the governing law. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 4 Jun 12.

  • 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 | CY2007 | BC 2007 03737

    Original file (BC 2007 03737.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2007 | BC 2007 03362

    Original file (BC 2007 03362.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...