Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03345
Original file (BC-2012-03345.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 

AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS 

 

IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03345 

 

 COUNSEL: NONE 

 

 HEARING DESIRED: NO 

 

___________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 

 

His former spouse be added as the beneficiary of his 
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity. 

 

___________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 

 

He added his current wife as his SBP beneficiary in 2011. 
He believes he was misinformed when he made this election. 

 

The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is 
at Exhibit A. 

 

___________________________________________________________ 

 

STATEMENT OF FACTS: 

 

The applicant retired from the Air Force on 1 April 2001. 
On 25 February 2013, the applicant was provided an advisory 
(Exhibit D) prepared by SAF/GCM on similar cases considered 
by the Board. The Board has been advised that it should 
not consider cases involving disputed claims between 
competing beneficiaries unless a court of competent 
jurisdiction has ruled in the case or pushes the AFBCMR to 
make such determination. 

 

The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application 
are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate 
office of the Air Force which is at Exhibit B. 

 

___________________________________________________________ 

 

AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

AFPC/DPSIAR does not provide a recommendation as the 
application involves two potential SBP beneficiaries. 

 

Prior to the applicant’s retirement, he elected spouse and 
child SBP coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay. 
He and his former spouse divorced on 25 November 2002. The 
Voluntary Separation and Property Settlement Agreement did 


not clearly and satisfactorily address the SBP. There is 
no evidence he or his former wife submitted a valid former 
spouse election within the year following their divorce 
decree, as required by law. However, he continued to pay 
the SBP premiums. 

 

The applicant married his current spouse on 21 August 2009. 
On 15 December 2009, he added her as the SBP beneficiary. 
He was issued a refund of overpaid premiums on 23 August 
2010. 

 

The complete DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B. 

 

___________________________________________________________ 

 

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: 

 

Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the 
applicant on 17 September 2012 and 15 February 2013, for 
review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit C and D). As of 
this date, this office has received no response. 

 

___________________________________________________________ 

 

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. The 
applicant has not demonstrated that extraordinary 
circumstances exist as required for this Board to grant 
relief in cases of competing SBP beneficiaries. We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging 
the merits of the case and his deemed election for his 
current spouse to gain entitlement to the benefit. By 
operation of law, she is now the eligible beneficiary. 
Therefore, we are precluded from granting the applicant’s 
request as there has been no showing of extraordinary 
circumstances. Unless his current spouse relinquishes her 
entitlement, we find no basis to grant the applicant’s 
request. 

 

 

 

 

 

 


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-2012-03345 in Executive Session on 7 May 2013, 
under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: 

 

 Panel Chair 

 Member 

 Member 

 

The following documentary evidence was considered: 

 

Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 20 Jul 12, w/atchs. 

Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 30 Aug 12. 

Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 17 Sep 12. 

Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 25 Feb 13, w/atchs. 

 

 

 

 

 Panel Chair 

 



Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-02265

    Original file (BC-2012-02265.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant was also provided an advisory (Exhibit C) prepared by SAF/GCM on similar cases considered by the Board. The Board has been advised that it can consider cases involving potential claims by more than one spouse or former spouse if there is evidence that the member or former spouse timely notified the Government within one year after the divorce was final, or if there are extraordinary circumstances that would justify correction of the record. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00454

    Original file (BC-2012-00454.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    To comply with federal law, AFAFC established spouse coverage based on full retired pay under the SBP, updated the applicant’s date of birth as the eligible spouse beneficiary and began deducting premiums from the service member’s retired pay. The DPSIAR complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. The Board has been advised that it can consider cases involving potential claims by more than one spouse or former spouse if there is evidence that the member or former spouse timely notified...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03529

    Original file (BC-2012-03529.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Board has been advised that it can consider cases involving potential claims by more than one spouse or former spouse if there is evidence that the member or former spouse timely notified the Government within one year after the divorce was final, or if there are extraordinary circumstances that would justify correction of the record. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force which is at...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2011-05066

    Original file (BC-2011-05066.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant and service member were provided an advisory (Exhibit C) prepared by SAF/GCM on similar cases considered by the Board. The applicant has not demonstrated that extraordinary circumstances exist as required for this Board to grant relief in cases of competing SBP beneficiaries. Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 27 March 2012.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2011-04704

    Original file (BC-2011-04704.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    He elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay, and his wife concurred in his election. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 Jan 2012, the applicant requested additional time to provide supplementary evidence in support of her request and her case was administratively closed. In the absence of evidence that there was a “deemed election” by the applicant within one year 3 after the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02121

    Original file (BC-2011-02121.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The SAF/MRB Legal Advisor’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states the current spouse of her deceased former spouse never spent a day with him during his military career but is reaping the benefits that she earned. She is being denied SBP because of a mistake DFAS and the Air Force has made by not upholding Air Force regulation (if you are married to a military...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-04556

    Original file (BC-2011-04556.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 23 May 2012, the applicant and the former member were provided advisories (Exhibit D) prepared by SAF/GCM on similar cases considered by the Board. ___________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The former member wrote on behalf of his former spouse stating he elected the applicant as the SBP beneficiary upon his retirement and was unaware another declaration was to be made within a year of the divorce. While we note the...

  • 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-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 | CY2012 | BC-2012-02752

    Original file (BC-2012-02752.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    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/DPSIAR’s recommendation that the member’s records should be corrected to reflect that he made a...