DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-00689 
COUNSEL:  NONE  
HEARING DESIRED: NO 

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 
 
IN THE MATTER OF:   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 
 
His  minor  son  be  reflected  as  the  beneficiary  on  his  Reserve 
Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) at the full retired pay 
level.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 
 
When  he  retired  in  1997  he  was  single  and  had  no  minor 
dependents  and  had  no  reason  to  make  an  RCSBP  election.  
Therefore, he had no knowledge of the RCSBP program.  In 2002, 
he  called  HQ  Air  Reserve  Personnel  Center  (ARPC),  well  within 
one  year  of  his  new  marriage,  to  obtain  a  copy  of  his  DD  Form 
214,  Certificate  of  Release  or  Discharge  from  Active  Duty, 
update  his  records  and  sign  his  wife  and  stepdaughter  up  for 
appropriate benefits.  At no time did the technician mention or 
explain RCSBP procedures or offer to send application documents 
and he assumed he had taken the appropriate steps to ensure his 
retirement  would  automatically  transfer  to  his  spouse  upon  his 
death.   
 
While  going  through  his  divorce,  he  again  contacted  ARPC  to 
ascertain procedures to ensure his minor son, born 15 June 2007, 
receive his retirement annuity in the event of his death.  The 
ARPC  Technician  explained  the  RCSBP  program  and  informed  him, 
(inaccurately),  that  although  his  son  was  ineligible  for  RCSBP 
benefit at that time, he (the applicant) would be able to list 
him  as  his  beneficiary  upon  his  divorce  which  is  considered  a 
“significant  life  event.”  His  divorce  was  finalized  on 
18 January 2012.   
 
The  ARPC  Entitlements  Section  indicated  his  son  was  not 
currently  entitled  to  the  RCSBP  benefit  because  he  did  not 
originally  identify  his  spouse  as  the  RCSBP  beneficiary  within 
one year of their marriage which voids divorce as a “significant 
life event” for the purposes of changing his election to reflect 
his son as the RCSBP beneficiary.  He made several calls to ARPC 
to  obtain  documents  and  verify  procedures  and  explained  his 
situation to each customer service technician he spoke to but he 
was not informed that his son was ineligible until he faxed the 
DD  Form  2656-6,  Survivor  Benefit  Plan  Election  Change 

Certificate,  to  the  Entitlements  Section  then  called  to  verify 
its receipt on 8 February 2012.   
 
He  served  his  country  honorably  on  active  duty  for  more  than 
13 years  and  as  an  Air  Force  Reserve  member  for  an  additional 
7 years.  He made a good faith effort to ensure his dependents 
received  the  retirement  benefits  his  service  provided.    He 
received  inadequate  and  inaccurate  information  and  guidance 
which  has  resulted  in  the  current  situation.    He  respectfully 
requests  this  injustice  be  corrected  to  ensure  his  4-year-old 
son is properly taken care of in the event of his death.   
 
In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of his 
correspondence documents with ARPC as well as a copy of his DD 
Form 2656-6.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  submission,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit A.  
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
STATEMENT OF FACTS: 
 
Information submitted by the applicant reflects he retired from 
the Air Force Reserves on 29 May 1997 in the grade of Captain, 
(O-3). 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
HQ  ARPC/DPTT  recommends  denial.    DPTT  states  the  applicant  was 
notified of his eligibility to participate in the RCSBP program 
on  11 September  1997  via  certified  mail.    The  package  was  sent 
to the applicant’s address at that time and the applicant signed 
the  receipt  for  the  notification  package  on  24  September  1997.  
The  applicant  made  no  election  at  that  time  and  effective 
23 December, 1997, as prescribed by Title 10 USC, Section 1448; 
he  was  automatically  enrolled  in  Option  A,  “Decline  to  make  an 
election  until  age  60.”    The  applicant’s  records  reflected  no 
dependents at that time.   
 
In  2002,  when  the  applicant  married  his  spouse  and  acquired  a 
stepdaughter he stated that he contacted ARPC about updating his 
dependents information for RCSBP benefits within one year of his 
marriage as required by law.  He also stated he wrote a letter 
to  confirm  the  conversation  with  ARPC  personnel  about  his 
request.    ARPC  has  no  record  of  receiving  this  document.    The 
applicant acknowledged that he was not informed about providing 
his  marriage  certificate  nor  completing  the  required  paperwork 
to  designate  his  eligible  dependents  for  RCSBP  coverage  but  he 
believed  his  spouse  and  stepdaughter  were  covered  under  the 
RCSBP program at that time.   
 

 

2 

because 

of 

his 

election 

automatic 

ARPC was not notified of the birth of his son within one year of 
the  event  as  required  by  law.    According  to  Title  10  USC, 
Section 1448, (3) (A) (iii), any such election must be written, 
signed,  by  the  person  making  the  election,  and  received  by  the 
Secretary concerned within one year after the date of the event.  
On  18 January  2012,  the  applicant  submitted  his  divorce  decree 
and  a  DD  Form  2656-6  to  ARPC.    The  DD  Form  2656-6  reflected  a 
change  of  RCSBP  election  to  full  and  immediate  coverage  for 
child  only.    The  applicant  was  informed  that  his  election  was 
invalid 
declining 
participation until age 60.  He stated that he was consistently 
misinformed by ARPC personnel about updating his RCSBP election 
based on his life changing events.  As prescribed by law Title 
10  USC,  1448(a)(5)(A)(B),  “a  person  who  is  not  married  and  has 
no dependent child upon becoming eligible to participate in the 
Plan  but  who  later  marries  or  acquires  a  dependent  child  may 
elect to participate in the Plan within one year after the date 
of the event.” 
 
The  complete  ARPC/DPTT  evaluation,  with  attachments,  is  at 
Exhibit B.   
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 
 
The  applicant  states  while  he  has  no  additional  evidence  to 
provide, he respectfully disagrees with the ARPC analysis which 
relies heavily on rules that may be familiar to ARPC personnel, 
but  are  somewhat  arcane  to  those  who  are  no  longer  closely 
associated  with  the  Reserve  Personnel  system.    When  he  retired 
in  1997  he  had  no  dependents  and  therefore,  had  no  need  to 
memorize  the  various  requirements  associated  with  the  RCSBP 
program.   
 
The  applicant  reiterates  his  contention  that  he  contacted  ARPC 
within  a  year  of  his  marriage.    He  acknowledges  that  ARPC’s 
analysis  that  he  did  not  report  his  son’s  birth  in  2007  is 
valid.  However,  based  on  his  conversation  with  the  ARPC 
technician in 2002, he believed his son was not eligible for any 
benefits  except  Base  Exchange  and  Commissary  privileges  which 
were  not  really  pertinent  for  an  infant.    He  believed  that  in 
the event of his death his, then, wife would receive his retired 
pay to assist with his son’s upbringing. 
 
The  events  leading  up  to  the  current  situation  occurred  5,  10, 
and 13 years after he retired and he therefore relied heavily on 
the  ARPC  Customer  Service  Personnel  to  help  him  navigate  a 
system that was not a daily presence in his life.   In hindsight 
he should have asked more questions and verified the information 
he received, but it is clear that he made a sincere effort and 
unfortunately  received  inaccurate  and  incomplete  guidance.    He 
urges  the  Board  to  please  consider  this  as  his  AFBCMR 
application  is  reviewed.    He  hopes  to  utilize  his  retirement 

 

3 

benefits and see his young son well into adulthood.  However, if 
anything  should  happen  to  him  before  then,  this  single  benefit 
provided  to  his  young  son  would  be  the  greatest  gift  he  could 
give him and it would be a fitting culmination of his 20 years 
of military service.   
 
The  applicant’s  complete  response,  with  attachment,  is  at 
Exhibit D. 
 
________________________________________________________________ 
 
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  warranting 
corrective action regarding the applicant’s election of Survivor 
Benefit  Plan,  child-only  coverage.    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.    While  the 
applicant’s circumstance is regrettable, we are not persuaded by 
the evidence provided that the applicant exercised due diligence 
regarding  RCSBP  coverage  for  his  dependent  son.    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  this  application 
BC-2012-00689 in Executive Session on 25 October 2012, under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603: 
 
 
 

Panel Chair 
Member 
Member 

 
 

 

4 

 
The following documentary evidence was considered: 
 
    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 10 February 2012, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPTT, dated 23 March 2012, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 March 2012.  
    Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, dated 13 April 2012, w/atch. 
 
 
 
 

                                              
Panel Chair 

 

 

5