RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-00832
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: YES
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to terminate his spouse only coverage under the
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
When he got married and enrolled his wife in the Defense
Enrollment Eligibility System (DEERS), he was never informed that
he had to take action to prevent SBP coverage from being
automatically established for his spouse.
The applicant's complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a retired Air Force technical sergeant (TSgt).
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.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial. DPSIAR notes the applicant was
married and elected SBP spouse and child coverage based on full
retired pay prior to his 1 Nov 96 retirement. The applicant was
divorced and the SBP spouse coverage was suspended. His youngest
child lost eligibility due to age in July 2007. The applicant
remarried on 2 Aug 08; and there is no evidence he requested
spouse SBP coverage not be reinstated on his current spouses
behalf prior to their first anniversary.
In accordance with Public Law (PL) 99-145, spouse coverage is
automatically reinstated when a servicemember does not submit a
timely request to terminate spouse coverage. Entering a new
spouse in DEERS does not update pay records or change SBP
coverage. Furthermore, information is regularly published in the
Afterburner, News for USAF Retired Personnel, reminding retirees
that it is their responsibility to keep their beneficiary
information up-to-date.
In the event the applicant had died his spouse would have been
entitled to receive an annuity of over $700.00 per month. To
provide the applicant an additional opportunity to terminate his
SBP coverage would be inequitable to other members in similar
situations.
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 8 Apr 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
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.
4. The applicant's case is adequately documented and it has not
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel
will materially add to our understanding of the issue(s)
involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably
considered.
_________________________________________________________________
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-2011-00832 in Executive Session on 27 Oct 11, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Mar 11, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, Letter, HQ AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 28 Mar 11.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Apr 11.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03937
DPSIAR states the applicant and XXXXX were married and had eligible step-children and a natural child, but he elected spouse only SBP coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay prior to his 1 February 2003 retirement. DPSIAR states that Air Force procedures require SBP counselors to provide not only a one-on-one briefing to retiring members, but furnish an SBP Report on Individual Personnel (RIP) that clearly and specifically outlines the features of the Plan. DPSIAR states there is...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-02752
There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, DPSIAR recommends the member's record be corrected to reflect on 10 Apr 2009, he elected to change SBP spouse to former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming the applicant as the former spouse beneficiary. There is no evidence of Air Force error; however, to preclude an injustice, we agree with AFPC/DPSIARs recommendation that the members records should be corrected to reflect that he made a...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC 2012 02752
The member did not request coverage for his former spouse be terminated and the fact that SBP premiums were deducted from his retired pay for over three years following their divorce are indicative of his intent to maintain the applicant as the eligible SBP beneficiary. There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, DPSIAR recommends the member's record be corrected to reflect on 10 Apr 2009, he elected to change SBP spouse to former spouse coverage...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01309
The deceased former member believed his three youngest children were beneficiaries of his SBP due to the fact that he elected spouse and child coverage. Subsequently, the applicant and the deceased member had three children, but there is no evidence the deceased advised DFAS-CL of the birth of these three children. The member’s failure to properly advise DFAS-CL of the children’s birth does not negate their eligibility as contingent SBP beneficiaries.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03360
Subsequently, the applicant and his wife were provided information and briefed on the options and effects of the SBP by their office. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 August 2012, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00286
DPSIAR indicates that since there is a possibility of Air Force error in this case, they recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to reflect he declined SBP coverage effective 21 June 2008. He wants his former spouse dropped from his SBP and is willing to pay for his son’s coverage since 30 June 2009. The following documentary evidence for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012- 00286 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 10 Feb 12, w/atchs.
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 | 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 | CY2010 | BC-2009-04619
When he requested termination of his SBP coverage, there was no termination of premiums based on age or any provision to stop premiums after a certain number had been paid. On 16 April 1999, the applicant submitted a valid request to the Defense Finance Accounting Service-Cleveland (DFAS-CL) under Public Law 105-85 to terminate his SBP coverage. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in...
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...