Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00737
Original file (BC-2011-00737.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00737 

 

 (FORMER MEMBER) COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 (APPLICANT) HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

Her former spouse’s record be corrected to reflect she is the 
former spouse beneficiary under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

According to the divorce decree, her former spouse was to 
maintain SBP coverage for her as the former spouse beneficiary. 
He has not provided proof that he has done so in accordance with 
the requirements of the decree. 

 

In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of 
court documents related to her divorce from the former service 
member. 

 

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

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted 
from the former member’s military personnel records, are 
described in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of 
the Air Force and the AFBCMR Legal Advisor, which are at 
Exhibits B and C. Therefore, there is no reason to recite these 
facts in this Record of Proceedings. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIAR indicates the former service member and the 
applicant were married on 12 Apr 80 and he elected spouse and 
child SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 
1 Aug 96 retirement. Their divorce was finalized on 3 Jan 07, 
and in the separation agreement, incorporated in the divorce 


decree, the member agreed the applicant would be deemed as the 
irrevocable beneficiary of the SBP. However, there is no 
evidence either party submitted a valid former spouse election 
within the first year following their divorce as the law 
requires. The member married S____ on 8 Sep 07, but did not 
notify DFAS of the change in his marital status or request 
spouse coverage be established on her behalf. Nevertheless, 
S____ became the eligible spouse beneficiary by operation of the 
law on the first anniversary of their marriage. Premiums for 
spouse SBP coverage continued to be deducted from the former 
service member’s retired pay until 18 Nov 10, when DFAS-CL 
updated the member’s beneficiary information and issued him a 
refund of premiums deducted after the divorce. Coverage was 
retroactively reinstated, effective 8 Sep 08, naming S____ as 
the eligible spouse beneficiary. S____ would receive $1,093.00 
per month in the event of the former service member’s death. 

 

A complete copy of the AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

The AFBCMR Legal Advisor recommends denial, indicating there are 
no extraordinary facts or equities which merit granting the 
requested relief, unless the competing spouse relinquishes her 
rights. The applicant provides little to no evidence of an 
error on behalf of the Air Force or DFAS. The only claim of 
injustice is the applicant is “not named as the beneficiary 
according to the divorce decree.” Even if the member did not 
comply with the court order, the applicant had the opportunity 
herself to request a “deemed election” within one year of the 
divorce (AFI 36-30-06, paragraph 6.4.6; and 10 USC 1450(f)(3)). 

 

A complete copy of the AFBCMR Legal Advisor evaluation is at 
Exhibit C. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

The applicant contends that she had no idea that she was 
required to provide a written valid former spouse election. She 
believed her divorce decree to be a legal document that would 
protect her rights. Secondly, her former spouse would have no 
inclination to submit paperwork on her behalf or inform her of 
the need for this documentation. If she had known about this 
requirement, she would have never jeopardized her potential 
future income by neglecting to submit proper documentation. 

 

________________________________________________________________ 

 

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. We took notice 
of the applicant's complete submission, including her response 
to the advisory opinions, in judging the merits of the case; 
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the 
AFBCMR Legal Advisor and adopt his rationale as the basis for 
our conclusion 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 for us 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-2011-00737 in Executive Session on 6 Dec 11, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 , Panel Chair 

 , Member 

 , Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

 Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 3 Feb 11, w/atchs. 

 Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 24 Mar 11. 

 Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, dated 2 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 29 Nov 11. 

 Exhibit F. Electronic Mail, Applicant, dated 29 Nov 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 | CY2009 | BC-2007-02993

    Original file (BC-2007-02993.DOC) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence he submitted a valid election to change spouse to former spouse coverage during the required time following their divorce. The Agency Legal Advisor indicates that, in his view, the Board has the legal authority to correct the record as requested, especially if it determines the legal requirements to make a deemed election were met. A complete copy of the Legal Advisor’s evaluation is at Exhibit...

  • 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-2011-02108

    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 | CY2011 | BC-2011-04466

    Original file (BC-2011-04466.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: She and her deceased former spouse were married on 10 Nov 1961 and divorced on 13 Dec 2002. While we do not take issue with the applicant’s assertion that her divorce decree ordered her deceased former husband to continue coverage for her under the SBP, he failed to convert the coverage to former spouse coverage within one year of their divorce as required by law. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-00058

    Original file (BC-2010-00058.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE ADVISORY: The AFRBA Legal Advisor recommends denial and states in part that despite the May 03 court order directing the member to convert to former spouse coverage, federal law makes the election unavailable when the deemed election is not timely filed. If there were not a competing eligible beneficiary, the AFRBA Legal Advisor would recommend correcting the record, but there is. The complete AFRBA...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02422

    Original file (BC-2012-02422.pdf) Auto-classification: Approved

    AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-02422 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: (APPLICANT) _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her former spouse’s records be corrected to show he made an election for “former spouse” coverage under the Survivor Benefit Program (SBP), naming her as the beneficiary. ______________________________________________________________ THE...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2009-00939

    Original file (BC-2009-00939.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Legal Advisor indicates the Board should not grant the applicant’s request regarding the SBP. If there were not a competing beneficiary, he would recommend granting the applicant’s appeal and correcting the record. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded the former member’s records should be changed to make the applicant an eligible former spouse SBP beneficiary.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04295

    Original file (BC-2010-04295.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2010-04295 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be entitled to benefits under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). ________________________________________________________________ THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR did not provide a recommendation. The complete AFRBA Legal Advisor...