RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-00181
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election be changed to the minimum threshold that is indicated on the original DD Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His wife was unavailable to sign before 2 Jul 2012 as she was out of state without any means of direct communication.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his DD Form 2656.
The applicants complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_______________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility at Exhibit B.
_______________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial. DPFFF states the applicant was married with eligible children when he retired effective 1 Jul 2012. He completed an election for $747 (threshold amount at the time of his retirement). However, his wife dated her concurrence after his retirement which invalidated the election. Consequently, the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) established coverage based on the full retired pay to comply with the law.
The applicant failed to respond to DPFFFs letter, dated 19 Apr 2013, requesting he provide a notarized statement signed by his wife to acknowledge she understood that if her husband dies, SBP coverage now in effect would provide her an SBP annuity currently valued at no less than $1196.00 and approval of his request would result in her receiving a reduced level of SBP coverage ($410.00). Absent a valid concurrent statement, the applicant may exercise his option under Public Law 105-85 to terminate all SBP participation beginning on 1 Jul 2014.
The complete DPFFF evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_______________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 31 May 2013, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C).
_______________________________________________________________
THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:
1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations.
2. The application was timely filed.
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 that 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 Docket Number BC-2013-00181 in Executive Session on 30 Oct 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
, Panel Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Dec 2012, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 16 May 2013.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 31 May 2012.
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02670
Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouses of married service members to concur in writing, prior to the service members retirement in SBP elections that provide less than full spouse coverage. The applicant was briefed on the options and effects of the SBP, and elected to decline SBP coverage prior to his 1 Aug 12 retirement. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 Aug 13.
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04957
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04957 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His DD Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, be corrected to reflect he declined the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and his spouse concurred. DPFFF states that the applicant completed an election to decline SBP coverage; however, his wifes...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00361
With regard to the applicants attempt to change his SBP election to a reduced level of coverage after his retirement date; item R(1) of the SBP Report of Individual Person (RIP) clearly states the DD Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, must be completed and provided to the SBP Counselor prior to his retirement date. The applicant's signature in Section XI, Item 30a, of the DD Form 2656 also indicates acknowledgment he received counseling that he could terminate SBP...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 04082
He was not advised prior to or during his out processing that he could elect spouse SBP coverage for his wife. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letter 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. We took notice of the applicants complete submission in judging the merits of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04172
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-04172 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husbands record be corrected to reflect he made a timely election for spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). On 31 Jul 98, the Defense Finance Accounting Service Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) received a DD Form 2656-2,...
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 | CY2013 | BC 2013 05896
Also, there is no evidence DFAS received a request from the applicant deeming a SBP election during the first year following the divorce. Subsequently, on 14 September 2012, a second DD Form 2656-10 was forwarded to DFAS; however, DFAS did not honor the applicants request because the 16 June 2011 court order was dated after the members retirement date. The member elected SBP coverage for his former spouse a month prior to establishing SBP coverage for his current spouse.
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04470
DPFFF states to preclude an injustice the applicants record should be corrected to show he elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay effective 1 March 2011. 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 his DAUGHTER, is permanently...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05461
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: At the time of her husbands retirement in June 1988, she was not informed of her survivor benefit rights as a spouse. Microfiche records produced by the Air Force Accounting and Finance Center (AFAFC) from July 1989 reflect the decedent declined SBP coverage with the applicant's concurrence prior to his 1 July 1988 retirement. Even though the applicant claims she was not provided an SBP election to sign and was not informed of the members election, finance...