RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-03848
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her late husbands (decedent) records be corrected to show he
made a timely election for spouse coverage under the Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP).
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her husband declined to participate in the SBP without her
knowledge or consent.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
_______________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained
in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air
Force. Accordingly, there is no need to recite these facts in
this Record of Proceedings.
_______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial. DPSIAR states that the
decedents election form was not located; however, the Air
Force Finance and Accounting Center (AFAFC) transaction history
made at the time of his retirement shows that the required
spouse acknowledgement was received. This authorized AFAFC to
validate his election to decline the SBP prior to his 1 Feb
1985 service retirement. Moreover, there is no evidence he
elected coverage on the applicant's behalf during any of the
three open enrollment periods after his retirement and before
his 24 Jun 2012 death. The intent of the spouse notification
codified in Title 10 USC Section 1455(b)(1) was to ensure
spouses, upon the sponsor's death, did not learn for the first
time that they were not covered by SBP. Notwithstanding the
fact the applicant has provided a sworn statement alleging that
she was not aware her husband did not elect SBP coverage and
AFAFCs failure to retain documentation of that notification,
the history transaction annotated in the decedent's record
confirms standard procedures regarding the spouse notification
requirement was properly accomplished.
The complete DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 9 Oct 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded
to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. To
date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C).
_______________________________________________________________
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 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 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 in AFBCMR BC-
2012-03848:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Aug 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 24 Sep 2012.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Oct 2012.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC 2007 03821
DFAS records reflect the decedent elected maximum child only SBP coverage prior to his 1 Sep 89 retirement. Records further contain an annotation that the applicant concurred with the members SBP election prior to his retirement. 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 that the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 01987
She filed for the SBP annuity and was informed that her husband never elected SBP spouse coverage. DPSIAR notes that in all of these cases, the facts were essentially the same as in this case except the applicant failed to request correction within six years of the members death and her notarized statement claiming the member had told her over and over again that she was to receive his pension does not meet the standard criteria for a Barber affidavit, i.e., (1) she was not notified at...
AF | BCMR | CY2008 | BC-2007-02361
With no SBP election annotated, full SBP coverage should have been established for her unless there was another AF Form 1266 completed. DFAS-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) did not properly ensure copies of critical SBP documents, such as members' election forms and spouses' concurrence statements, were safeguarded and retrievable following Oct 93 when DFAS-CL assumed Air Force retired pay responsibilities. Assuming possible facts most favorable to the applicant, at its best possible, the...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2011-02061
_______________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to the information provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility, the applicant and the decedent were married on 29 May 1961. After the death of the retired member, the widow provided a sworn statement that she did not receive notification that her husband had declined SBP coverage. To date, a response has not been received (Exhibit C).
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01796
Neither the decedent’s election form nor evidence that the required notice was or was not sent to the applicant could be located. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 19 June 2012, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military...
AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-02755
The U.S. Court of Claims has consistently ruled that widows of members retiring after SBP's implementation, who were not given notice of the sponsor's election, are entitled to full SBP coverage-Barber v. U.S., 676 F.2d 651 (CI. In this case, although this applicant claims she does not remember seeing the notification letter when the decedent declined SBP coverage prior to his retirement, clearly the spouse notification letter was sent to her by the Air Force as required by law. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02773
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. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. The Board would be willing to reconsider her request upon receipt of the applicants affidavit stating she did not receive the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00454
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...
An AFAFC letter to the decedent, dated 7 October 1972, explained that SBP coverage had been established on his spouse's behalf in compliance with the provision of the law that required establishment of maximum spouse and child coverage if a member, such as the applicant, made no election before retirement. Documents provided by the applicant include a copy of a 7 Oct 72 letter to the decedent from the Air Force Accounting and Finance Center (AFAFC) which explained SBP coverage had been...
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...