RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03938
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
1. Her record be changed to show she elected child only coverage
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), rather than spouse
coverage.
2. She be reimbursed the difference from spouse to child
coverage retroactive from the time her child turned 23.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
She retired on 1 October 1996. During her retirement out-
processing she completed paperwork for SBP for her daughter, but
was charged instead for a spouse. She has been divorced since
16 February 1983 and provided a copy of the divorce decree to
personnel to have her status changed.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
According to DFAS-CL, the applicants account has been adjusted
based on the divorce decree and her daughters birth certificate.
The credit issued to the applicant in the amount of $5,219.14 was
subject to the 6-year barring statute. Her account is currently
showing as no beneficiary.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application,
extracted from the applicants military records, are contained in
the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at
Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIAR recommends approval. DPSIAR states the applicant was
not married and attempted to elect child only coverage based on
full retired pay prior to her 1 October 1996 retirement.
Instead, DFAS-CL established spouse coverage based on full
retired pay. DPSIAR requested DFAS-CL retrieve the members
DD Form 2656, but the document has not yet been located. The
applicant provided a copy of her 16 February 1983 divorce decree
and a notarized statement that she was unmarried on the date of
her retirement. DPSIAR forwarded these documents to DFAS-CL and
requested her SBP record be adjusted to reflect child only
coverage based on full retired pay under the SBP, retroactive to
her 1 October 1996 retirement, stop spouse SBP premium and refund
the difference in monthly premiums subject to the 6-year statute
of limitations.
DPSIAR recognizes the need to ensure the spouse of a married
member is not excluded from SBPs protection when the member
fails or refuses to submit a valid election prior to retiring.
Nevertheless, it is a burden for unmarried individuals to have
6.5 percent of their retired pay suppressed when DFAS-CL
automatically assumes every retiring member is married. While
the six-year statute of limitations is a long-standing and
commonly-acknowledged government principle, the applicants
explanation of the many challenges she faced after retiring gives
merit to her delay in requesting correction.
There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case, but in the
interest of injustice, they recommend approval.
The complete DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 October 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days
(Exhibit C). 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to
demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice. We took
notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the
merits of the case and agree with the recommendation of
AFPC/DPSIAR. Evidence has been provided that supports the
applicant was not married and attempted to elect child only
coverage prior to her 1 October 1996 retirement. As such, we
believe the evidence is sufficient to find it in the interest of
justice to correct the record. Therefore, we recommend that the
records be corrected as indicated below.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:
The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force
relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 1 October
1996, she elected child coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan
(SBP) based on full retired pay.
_________________________________________________________________
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-03938 in Executive Session on 7 May 2013, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The
following documentary was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 5 August 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 26 September 2012.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 October 2012.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-03982
The former service member may file and election change or the former spouse may request the service member be deemed to make an election on his or her behalf. In the latter case, the former spouse must provide legal documentation the service member agreed, or the court ordered the service member, to establish former spouse coverage. She has not provided any evidence showing the former service member made an election for former spouse coverage within one year of their divorce as required by law.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01917
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 18 Feb 82, the applicant and his former spouse were married, and he elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his August 96 retirement. 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. After a thorough review of the facts and circumstances of this...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01101
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01101 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO IN THE MATTER OF: _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her former spouse’s records be corrected to establish former spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR indicates that since the request...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01572
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her late husband paid SBP premiums for his former spouse’s SBP coverage from January 1996 to June 2004, even though the former spouse remarried in September 2003 before her 55th birthday. The complete DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit B. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, dated 15 Nov 12, Exhibit E. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 4 Dec 12, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01307
If neither the member nor the spouse requests the election change during the one-year eligibility period, former spouse coverage may not be established thereafter. Even though a member fails to notify DFAS—Cleveland (DFAS-CL) of the divorce and continues to pay SBP premiums afterword, the former spouse is not eligible for annuity payments upon the member’s death. However, should the applicant provide a notarized statement from the deceased former member’s widow relinquishing her...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-01771
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant and his former spouse were married on 5 September 1959 and he elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 March 1983 retirement. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicants current spouse states that the applicants former spouse is entitled to any SBP coverage and provides a...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00128
DPSIAR states there is no evidence of Air Force error in this case; however, in the interest of justice and absent a competing claimant, DPSIAR recommends the member's record be corrected to show he elected SBP former spouse coverage based on the previous reduced level of retired pay effective 31 May 2007, naming his former spouse as beneficiary. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C). _______________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00429
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial, indicating there is no evidence of an error or injustice. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: She was not provided or informed on the law and requirements of SBP. Had she been informed or provided the information on the requirements of the law pertaining to SBP she would have been able to make a...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-01105
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. DPSIAR states there is no evidence of Air Force error and absent evidence of a competing spouse it would be appropriate to enforce the parties’ court-ordered agreement to continue SBP coverage in the applicant’s behalf. Although the Air Force office of primary responsibility recommends approval, in the absence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05512
The Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records reflect the applicant remarried on 29 Aug 1998; however, he failed to submit a valid SBP election within the first year of their marriage. The instruction indicates no penalty for failing to enroll all subsequent spouses after retirement. _______________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 29 Aug 2013, under the provisions of...