RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF:
DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04527
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be allowed to terminate spouse coverage under the Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was in an automobile accident and suffered from traumatic
brain injury and does not have any memory of the decision he may
have made when he got out of the military.
In support of the applicants appeal, he provides a personal
statement.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
________________________________________________________________
_
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The 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:
DPFFF recommends denial. DPFFF states the applicant and his
spouse were married, had dependent children, and he elected
spouse and child coverage based on full retired pay under the
SBP prior to being permanently retired for disability effective
19 April 1994. On 25 March 1994, the SBP counselor at MacDill
AFB FL, briefed him on the options and effects of the SBP, and
there is no indication he was confused or not capable of making
an SBP decision. The members retired pay has been exceeded by
the disability compensation awarded to him by the Department of
Veterans Affairs (VA) since his retirement. As a result, there
was and is not sufficient retired pay remaining after the VA
reduces his retired pay for DFAS-CL to collect monthly SBP
premiums. The applicant has directly remitted some of the SBP
premiums, but has accrued an outstanding and increasing debt of
approximately $3,980. The Defense Enrollment Eligibility
Reporting System (DEERS) reflect he and his spouse divorced on
29 September 1995, and he and his second spouse married on
10 November 1999. By operation of law, and absent an election
for former spouse coverage, or an election to not resume SBP
coverage on her behalf, the second spouse became the SBP spouse
beneficiary on the first anniversary of their marriage. DFAS-CL
provided a copy of the applicants 18 March 2011 DD Form 2656-6,
Survivor Benefit Plan Election Change Certificate, in which he
requested SBP coverage be established on his second spouses
behalf. The DD Form 2656-6 contained an additional statement,
signed by the applicant, that he would continue to pay back-
payments until there is no back-payments.
There is no indication the member was improperly counseled prior
to his retirement when he made a valid election for spouse
coverage. Following his marriage to his second spouse and
before they submitted their request to DFAS-CL to update his SBP
records, they had ample opportunity to investigate SBP
alternatives and options. The member offers no explanation of
why he requested DFAS-CL establish SBP coverage on his spouses
behalf and then subsequently, request that coverage be
terminated. In the event of his death, DFAS-CL would suppress
the spouses $397 monthly SBP payments until the retroactive
premium debt is recovered. It would be inequitable to those
members, who properly did not reinstate spouse coverage during
the time authorized to exercise this option, to provide an
additional opportunity for this member to change his SBP
election. There is no evidence of error or injustice in this
case.
The DPFFF complete evaluation is at Exhibit B.
________________________________________________________________
_
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states he desires to disenroll from SBP. He has
insurance that benefits him more than SBP.
The applicants response 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 an error or an injustice. 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 failed to sustain his burden of proof of the
existence 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 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.
________________________________________________________________
_
The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2012-04527 in Executive Session on 31 July 2013 and
1 August 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 September 2012, w/atch.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 26 October 2012.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 5 November 2012.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 19 November 2012.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03524
The Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records show the applicant requested spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 Nov 06 retirement. It is unfortunate that the applicant failed to notify DFAS in a timely manner of his marriage, in order to preclude a debt or to deny SBP coverage for her. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In a letter dated 5 Mar 15, he states his spouse provided a letter relinquishing the SBP benefit.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00206
Public Law (PL) 99-145 allows a participant, with suspended spouse coverage, to elect not to resume coverage for a subsequently acquired spouse. While the applicant acted in a timely manner when he notified DFAS-CL of his divorce from his first wife, it is reasonable to expect him to have also informed the finance center of any newly-acquired spouse. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03908
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Since the applicant was married at the time of his retirement, and he elected spouse coverage, SBP monthly premiums should have been deducted beginning the first month following his retirement....
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02386
In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal statement, copies of the former members death certificate, divorce decree, Separation and Property Settlement Agreement, marital status affidavit and various other documents associated with her request. None of the documents the applicant provided (Separation and Property Agreement or QDRO) had language that would entitle her to deem former spouse SBP coverage. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Her attorney submitted...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-05110
Records maintained by the DFAS-CL reflect spouse coverage was suspended effective 26 May 95, and SBP premiums ceased at that time. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to the DECEASED FORMER MEMBER be corrected to show that on 27 May 1995, he elected former-spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) based on full retired pay, naming his former spouse...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2012-03966
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03966 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. ________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00140
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-00140 COUNSEL: HEARING DESIRED: YES IN THE MATTER OF: ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to reflect he elected his former spouse as beneficiary of his Survivor Benefit Program (SBP) based upon full retirement pay. The court ordered the applicant to provide SBP coverage on the former spouse’s behalf, but did not...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00281
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00281 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to terminate spouse coverage under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) and to have his premiums reimbursed. DFAS states the applicant elected Option C (Immediate Annuity) of the RCSBP for his spouse and child effective...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002067415C070402
His notification of eligibility for retired pay at age 60 (his 20-year letter) is dated 7 November 1977. Premiums are normally deducted from retired pay. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the applicant completed his DD Form 2656 on 30 September 1996 and declined, with his spouse’s concurrence, to participate in the SBP, making the debt for SBP premiums invalid.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04670
The concurrence must be signed, dated and notarized to be valid. We took notice of the applicants 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 decision the applicant is not the victim of an error or injustice. ________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR...