RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03156
MEMBER: (DECEASED) COUNSEL: NONE
APPLICANT:
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her late ex-husbands record be corrected to show that he
elected former spouse coverage under the Reserve Component
Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP), naming her as beneficiary.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She did not know she could request an RCSBP election. She never
signed-off on pension benefits during their divorce.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to copies of documents extracted from the Automated
Records Management System (ARMS), the decedent was a member of
the Connecticut Air National Guard and retired effective
16 May 2002 in the grade of Master Sergeant.
According to documents submitted by the applicant, the decedent
died on 20 December 2010.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are
contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of
the Air Force at Exhibit C.
______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPTT recommends denial. DPTT states that based on the
facts provided, the decedent did not elect to participate in
RCSBP as prescribed by law Title 10, U.S.C., § l448.
1. The decedent was notified of his eligibility to participate
in the RCSBP on 19 May 1992 via certified mail. He made no
election and as prescribed by Title 10 U.S.C., §1448, he was
automatically enrolled into Option A, Decline To Make An
Election Until Age 60 effective 16 August 1992.
2. The decedent and the applicant divorced on 06 June 1995. A
final divorce decree was issued along with a Separation
Agreement dated 08 June 1995. The divorce decree failed to
address former spouse coverage under the RCSBP. In addition,
the Separation Agreement did not award former spouse coverage
and was not filed within the one year required by law.
3. The decedent was afforded one opportunity to upgrade his
election after the original election was updated. Congress
declared an SBP Open Enrollment Season from 1 March 1999 through
29 February 2000. Members, who had previously elected less than
full coverage or no coverage for their spouse/children, were
afforded the opportunity to change their election to cover their
families. The decedent did not elect to participate during this
Open Season.
The complete ARPC/DPTT evaluation is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the
applicant on 24 September 2012 for review and comment within
30 days (Exhibit D). To date, a response has not been received.
________________________________________________________________
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. We took notice
of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of
the case; however, we noted that the decedent was afforded an
opportunity to change his election during the SBP Open
Enrollment Season from 1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000,
but elected not to participate. In view of the above, 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.
________________________________________________________________
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
in Executive Session on 7 May 2013, under the provisions of AFI
36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-03156:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149 dated 18 July 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Record.
Exhibit C. Letter, ARPC/DPTT, dated 6 September 2012,
w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 24 September 2012.
Panel Chair
AFBCMR
1500 West Perimeter Road, Suite 3700
Joint Base Andrews NAF Washington, MD 20762
Dear:
Reference your application submitted under the provisions of AFI 36-2603 (Section 1552,
10 USC), AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-03156.
After careful consideration of your application and your late ex-husbands military records,
the Board determined that the evidence you presented did not demonstrate the existence of
material error or injustice. Accordingly, the Board denied your application.
You have the right to submit newly discovered relevant evidence for consideration by the
Board. In the absence of such additional evidence, a further review of your application is not
possible.
BY DIRECTION OF THE PANEL CHAIR
Chief Examiner
Air Force Board for Correction
of Military Records
Attachment:
Record of Board Proceedings
3
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
WASHINGTON, DC
DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
Office of the Assistant Secretary
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00973
DPTT states that in view of the fact that the decedent would have been eligible for retired pay at age 60, the applicant is eligible for an Identification Card and Base-Exchange and Commissary privileges effective 6 March 2000. 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 the applicant has...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00112
Records indicate that he did not elect to participate during these timeframes. 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. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 September 2014.
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02547
In view of the fact that the deceased former service member was eligible for retired pay at age 60, the applicant is eligible for an ID card, Base Exchange and Commissary privileges. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and the recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of proof of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 03261
Congress declared two RCSBP Open Enrollment Seasons from 1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000 and 1 October 2005 through 30 September 2006. The application was not timely filed; however, it is in the interest of justice to excuse the failure to timely file. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02904
___________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The Survivor Benefit Plan Election Certificate was sent during the time they were being transferred to Red River Army Depot, Texas. ___________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00793
On 25 Aug 1994, the decedent and the applicant divorced. If the documents were provided within the required timeframe, DPTT would have been unable to update the member's RCSBP election due to the member not electing to participate in the Plan when eligible. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of her request, the applicant provides two letters.
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 | CY2013 | BC 2012 01718
DPTT states the member and/or his former spouse had one year from the date of the QDRO, dated 9 Oct 01, to make a former spouse deemed election to the Secretary concerned. He states the QDRO does not provide the required election data necessary to complete the SBP enrollment form. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2010 | BC-2010-04415
The record shows the decedent elected not to participate at this time. The applicant stated the decedent was not married at the time of eligibility; however, the record shows Headquarters Air Reserve Personnel Center sent a spousal notification letter to the members spouse because the member did not make an election. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00961
She made several inquiries in regards to the decedents elected survivor benefits, only to be told each time that she was not eligible due to his type of retirement. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) which is attached at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPTT recommends denial, indicating the decedent was...