RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2012-03461

		COUNSEL:  NONE 

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The automatic Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) deductions from her 
retirement pay be terminated and she be refunded the premiums 
paid.  

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Due to lack of proper counseling, she did not realize the high 
cost of the SBP premium she would be required to pay.  She tried 
to find out the cost from the Defense Finance Accounting Service 
(DFAS) but no one could tell her what the cost would be.  She 
was told she had to make an election now and that the premium 
would not cost much.  She elected coverage for spouse and 
children.  She had the legal right to receive SBP counseling 
from the nearest active duty base since she was being medically 
retired by the Air Force.  When she received her retirement 
summary she tried to cancel the SBP coverage because her 
Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) compensatory benefits 
depleted her retirement pay because she is not eligible for 
Concurrent Retired and Disability Pay (CRDP).  

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

1.  According to documents extracted from the Automated Records 
Management System (ARMS) the applicant enlisted in the Air 
National Guard on 2 October 1989.  

2.  The applicant was processed by a Medical Evaluation Board 
(MEB) in September 2011 for extreme depression, anxiety and a 
history of multiple medical issues.  The MEB revealed that the 
applicant could not perform the duties commensurate with her 
current assignment due to numerous duty limitations.  

3.  On 17 October 2011, the Informal Physical Evaluation Board 
(IPEB) evaluated the applicant’s case and found Category I 
unfitting conditions of Depression with Anxiety Disorder with 
Undifferentiated Somatoform Disorder and Conversion Disorder and 
Chrohn’s Disorder.  The applicant also had a category II 
disorder of obstructive sleep apnea- controlled with CPAP.  The 
IPEB’s recommended disposition was “Unfit – Awaiting DVA 
Ratings.  

4.  On 1 March 2012, the DVA completed a Disability Evaluation 
System Proposed Rating Decision for the applicant’s unfit 
conditions.  The DVA proposal for her total combined rating for 
unfitting and claimed service connected disabilities was 100 
percent.  

5.  On 20 March 2012, the IPEB evaluated the applicant’s case 
with the proposed DVA ratings and concluded that the applicant’s 
medical conditions prevented her from reasonably performing her 
military duties and were not likely to change over the next 
several years.  In accordance with Department of Defense (DoD) 
guidance for applying the Veterans Administration Schedule for 
Rating Disabilities (VASRD) guidelines, the IPEB found the 
applicant unfit and recommended permanent retirement with a 
compensable disability rating of 80 percent, for Category I 
conditions: Depressive Disorder NOS, Anxiety Disorder NOS, 
Undifferentiated Somatoform Disorder NOS, and Category II 
conditions:  Obstructive sleep apnea controlled with CPAP, S/P 
Hysterectomy, Right Foot Tibial Neuralgia, and Left Foot Tibial 
Neuralgia.  The Category II conditions did not affect the 
applicant’s ability to perform her duties and were not deemed 
unfitting for duty.  

6.  On 19 April 2012 the applicant completed a DD Form 2656, 
Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, electing spouse and 
children coverage based on full gross pay.  

7.  Effective 28 May 2012, the applicant was permanently, 
disability retired in the grade of Master Sergeant with a 
compensable percentage for physical disability of 80 percent.  
She was credited with 13 years, 11 months and 29 days of active 
service for retirement and 22 years, 07 months and 27 days of 
service for basic pay.  

8.  According to a message from the Defense Finance and 
Accounting Service (DFAS) Retirement and Annuitant office; since 
the applicant was still within her first year of retirement her 
SBP election could be treated as an administrative error.  They 
advised that the request for correction should go through the 
Air Force (AF) SBP program manager for authorization that the 
SBP election was the result of an administrative error and 
should be changed.  

9.  The AF SBP program manager responded that the request for 
correction should be turned over the National Guard Bureau (NGB) 
for administrative correction because they could not determine 
the facts of the applicant’s claim that she was not provided any 
SBP information from her National Guard unit.

10.  Through NGB/A1PS, the 151 Force Support Squadron (FSS) 
Superintendent submitted a memorandum, dated 4 March 2013, which 
outlined the unit’s retirement processing procedures.  Attached 
to the letter were local checklist, retirement briefing 
pamphlet, and a copy of the applicant’s signed DD Form 2656.  
NGB/A1PS states through an email message that they were able to 
verify that the applicant attended the Transition Assistance 
Program (TAP) briefing at Hill Air Force Base (AFB) Utah in 
October 2011.  

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by 
existing law or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.  

3.  Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to 
demonstrate the existence of error or injustice warranting 
relief.  After thoroughly reviewing the circumstances of this 
case, the Board notes that through no fault of the applicant it 
appears she may not have been afforded proper counseling before 
electing to participate in the SBP.  We also note that the 
Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) stated that since 
the applicant was still within her first year of retirement her 
SBP election could be treated as an administrative error.  As 
such, we believe that favorable consideration of the applicant’s 
request is warranted.  Accordingly, we recommend the applicant’s 
records be corrected as indicated below.  

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 RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 
19 April 2012, she declined Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) 
coverage, and her spouse concurred with her decision.

________________________________________________________________

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 in AFBCMR 
Docket Number BC-2012-03461:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149 dated 10 June 2012.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant’s Master Personnel Record.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair