ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00044
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her deceased spouses record be changed to show he elected spouse
only coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 30 August 2011, the Board considered and denied the
applicants appeal. For an accounting of the facts and
circumstances surrounding the applicants appeal and the
rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of
Proceedings, with attachments, at Exhibit E.
In a letter dated 21 November 2011, the applicant submitted a
request for reconsideration stating that her deceased spouses
declination was not valid based on the fact that he was not of
sound mind. Nothing was explained to her by military personnel
or her former husband. Her signature was not witnessed and she
never received counseling. Her deceased spouses decision
regarding her and their daughter was erratic, abusive and
impulsive and abnormal for years which forced her from a marriage
of chaos, fear and unpredictable behaviors on his part. He was
seen by a psychiatrist and hospitalized for a second suicide
attempt. Due to his mental condition and prescription drug
abuse, he was unable to make good choices. She was kept in the
dark regarding financial matters, including possible benefits.
In support of the applicants appeal, she provides a personal
statement, letters of support, police report, and page 2 of DD
Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, and other
documentation.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit F.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/JA recommends denial. JA states that unfortunately, the
evidence the applicant presents indicates the former service
member understood his actions well enough at the time he declined
coverage to manipulate others and lie convincingly to get what he
wanted. It appears he thoroughly understood the likely
consequences of his actions and took reasonable steps to obtain
what he wanted. It is a perfectly rational (although selfish)
choice to deprive ones wife of SBP coverage if one would rather
have the entirety of ones retirement available to oneself during
ones lifetime. Rather than an incompetent person at the time he
made his elections, the documents indicate he had become an
immoral person. Immorality does not make someone incompetent to
sign a contract. Because the documents presented fail to show
that at the time the service member made the decision he did not
understand the nature and consequences of his actions, or was
unable to act in a reasonable manner in regard to the
transaction, relief is not warranted.
The JA complete evaluation is at Exhibit G.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 30 April 2012, copies of the evaluations were forwarded to the
applicant for review and response within thirty (30) days
(Exhibit H). 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 again to
demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice. After
thoroughly reviewing the additional documentation submitted in
support of this appeal and the evidence of record, we agree with
the opinion and the recommendation of the staff judge advocate
and adopt his rationale as the basis for our conclusion the
applicant has failed to sustain her burden of proof of the
existence of an error. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to
the contrary, we again 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 an 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-2011-00044 in Executive Session on 15 August 2012,
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2011-00044 was considered:
Exhibit E. Record of Proceedings, dated 14 September 2011,
w/atchs.
Exhibit F. Letter, Applicant, dated 21 November 2011, w/atchs.
Exhibit G. Letter, ARPC/JA, dated 25 April 2012.
Exhibit H. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 April 2012.
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 | CY2007 | BC-2007-00012
He applied for Reserve retired pay at age 60 and was given an opportunity to make an election under the RCSBP. He was sent the appropriate forms to apply for retired pay and SBP. _________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05676
The complete DPTT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ 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. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05091
________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the deceased service member be corrected to show that on 31 Dec 02, he elected spouse only Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage based on full retired pay. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-05091 in Executive Session on...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01796
Neither the decedent’s election form nor evidence that the required notice was or was not sent to the applicant could be located. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 June 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00925
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. However, PL 99-145 required service members retiring on or after 1 Mar 86 to obtain spouse concurrence in the SBP election. The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states she was not...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02001
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. Further, although the law currently provides automatic coverage for a spouse if the member fails to provide coverage or the spouse does not agree with the decision, no such provisions existed at the time of the member’s eligibility to enroll in the program. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-02877
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 17 Sep 10 for review and comment within 30 days. Therefore, because the former member did not take action to ensure the Air Force personnel system was updated, the Legal Advisor does not find it appropriate to charge the former members negligence against the applicant by denying coverage which Congress intended....
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2007-00214
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-00214 INDEX CODE: 137.01 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husband and former military member’s record be changed to show he elected to participate in the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) and further that she receive the retired pay her husband had been eligible...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04812
However, there was no documentation in the evidence of record to indicate the deceased former member was incompetent at the time of his passing. The applicant has provided no evidence her deceased husband was incompetent prior to his death. The service member must live until the date of separation to be considered retired. A complete copy of the AFPC/JA evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPFD recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice.