RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01017
			COUNSEL:  NONE
			HEARING DESIRED:  NO

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her former spouse’s records be changed to reflect their marriage 
date as 31 May 73, rather than 29 Sep 73, so that she would be 
eligible for TRICARE benefits under the 20/20/20 marriage rule.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She was erroneously updated in the Defense Enrollment 
Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) as an eligible former 
spouse under the 20/20/20 marriage rule (renewable continued 
benefits) when she should have been a 20/20/15 (one year of 
medical only).  

She discovered this error when she reported her remarriage in 
Jan 13.  Had she been properly informed of this error, she would 
have purchased medical insurance long ago.

She received medical benefits for eight years beyond the one-
year she was actually eligible for.  

Based on this error, she is required to reimburse TRICARE for 
medical costs.  

In support of her request, the applicant provides a personal 
statement, copies of her marriage certificate, divorce decree 
and military dependent identification and privilege card.

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

________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

On 4 May 73, the former member enlisted in the Regular Air 
Force, and served continuously until 31 May 93, when he was 
released from active duty after serving 20 years and 27 days.

DEERS records reflect the applicant and her former spouse were 
married on 29 Sep 73, and divorced on 23 Jun 03.  

The applicant was eligible for former spouse medical benefits 
for one-year from the date of her divorce, ending on 23 Jun 04.

On 28 Jan 13, the applicant remarried.

The qualifying criteria for continued benefits as a 
20/20/20 former spouse are: 1) 20 years of marriage, 2) 20 years 
of creditable service for retirement for the sponsor, 3) 20 
years overlap of marriage and active service.  Overlap of 
between 15 and 20 years qualifies a former spouse as a 20/20/15 
and one year of medical from the date of the divorce.

________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPSIZ recommends approval.  DPSIZ states that TRICARE does 
not have a remission of indebtedness process to consider errors 
made in eligibility calculations or updates when it occurs 
through no fault of the beneficiary.  Changing the marriage date 
would validate eligibility for TRICARE medical coverage under 
the Uniformed Services Former Spouses’ Protection Act (USFSPA) 
and negate any debt that would be established for medical claims 
made during the period of non-eligibility.  The applicant 
remarried and is not seeking continuation of medical coverage 
from her date of marriage on 28 Jan 13.  She properly reported 
her remarriage in Jan 13, which prompted the relook at the 
eligibility data and discovery of the error.

DPSIZ states that when qualifying, former spouses receive a 
beneficiary ID & Privilege Card conveying various benefits 
including TRICARE medical.  Based on the established DEERS 
record, the applicant was issued ID cards in four-year 
increments reflecting the medical benefit as opposed to the one-
year in which she actually qualified.

The applicant received benefits based on an error in determining 
her eligibility made by a personnel representative nine years 
ago.  This error has caused an injustice to the applicant.  
Adjusting the marriage date in the DEERS record would validate 
TRICARE claims processed and preclude a debt that would be 
established for the medical claims paid between 24 Jun 03 and 
her remarriage date of 28 Jan 13. 

The complete DPSIZ evaluation is at Exhibit B.

________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 6 Apr 13, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to 
the applicant and former member for review and comment within 
30 days (Exhibit C & D).  As of this date, this office has 
received no response.

________________________________________________________________


ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:  

The SAF/MRB Legal Advisor reviewed this application and states, 
in part, that the Board has the authority to correct the 
marriage date for the limited purpose of relieving the applicant 
of medical debts incurred because of her use of TRICARE benefits 
erroneously provided by the Air Force.  However, the Board 
should adopt the limiting language recommended in the SAF/GCM 
opinion.

The applicant’s true marriage date of 29 Sep 73, leaves her four 
months shy of qualifying for the medical benefits enjoyed by so-
called 20/20/20 former spouses.  Because the Air Force 
erroneously coded her for receipt of such benefits and did not 
catch the error for nine years, the applicant incurred over 
$100,000 in medical expenses.  As the applicant puts it, “[h]ad 
I been properly informed of this grave error, I would have 
purchased medical insurance long ago.”  Because this debt arose 
from an admitted error of the Air Force in wrongly coding the 
applicant for 20/20/20 benefits, the Board could clearly find 
that the record contains an injustice that must be removed.

If the Board does find injustice in this case, then the simplest 
way of relieving the debt would be to adjust the marriage date 
in the military record for the limited purpose of establishing a 
TRICARE entitlement.  This is the remedy sought by the applicant 
and recommended by AFPC/DPSIZ.  Because the applicant has 
remarried, the entitlement would terminate as of 28 Jan 13, the 
date of her remarriage.

The Board has adjusted marriage dates before.  In 2004, SAF/GCM 
opined that “the Board may correct the marriage date in the 
military record, provided it clearly sets forth the limited 
scope of the record correction.”  The opinion cited the 
following language as important in fashioning a limited remedy: 
“[this correction will] only affect the applicant’s Air Force 
records for the sole purpose of affording the relief to rectify 
the injustice in this case and that this correction will have no 
impact on the applicant’s civil records.”  This language, 
recommended by SAF/GCM, has been validated by the Defense Office 
of Hearings and Appeals (DOHA), which determined that records 
corrections by the Secretary, acting through the Board under 
10 United States Code § 1552, are final and conclusive.  
Moreover, such a correction does not infringe on any state’s 
rights because the effects are deliberately limited in scope: 
“As long as the AFBCMR does not ask the state to correct the 
date of the claimant’s marriage in the state’s records, there is 
no state policy or interest in jeopardy.”

The complete SAF/MRB Legal opinion is at Exhibit E.

________________________________________________________________


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 3 Dec 12, via electronic mail, the applicant responded and 
reiterated that she was honest, sincere and forthright in her 
understanding that she was qualified for the 20/20/20 benefits.  
In fact, she was totally shocked when the Air Force notified her 
of their subsequently admitted error.  She was not responsible 
for the error.  This would not have happened if she had been 
informed of her status.  She should not be penalized 
retroactively for this unfortunate error.

The applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit H.

________________________________________________________________

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.  After 
thoroughly reviewing the evidence of record and considering the 
comments of AFPC/DPSIZ and the SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, we believe 
that relief is warranted.  In this respect, we note that the Air 
Force erroneously coded the applicant for receipt of the 
20/20/20 entitlement, which caused her to incur a debt of over 
$100,000.  In arriving at our decision, we are keenly aware that 
courts have held that correction boards have an abiding moral 
sanction to determine, insofar as possible, the true nature of 
an alleged injustice and take steps to grant thorough and 
fitting relief.  Therefore, to rectify the injustice in this 
case, we recommend that the applicant’s records be corrected as 
indicated below.  

________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air 
Force relating to FORMER MEMBER, be corrected (as an exception 
to policy) to show that he and former spouse were married on 
31 May 73 rather than 29 Sep 73, that this correction is of 
limited scope so as only to affect his military records for the 
sole purpose of affording the relief to rectify the injustice in 
this case; and that this correction will have no impact on his 
civil records.

________________________________________________________________



The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket 
Number BC-2013-01017 in Executive Session on 17 Dec 13, under 
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

All members voted to correct the records, as recommended.  The 
following documentary evidence was considered:

     Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Mar 13, w/atchs.
     Exhibit B.  Letter, AFPC/DPSIZ, dated 2 Apr 13.
     Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 13.
     Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 6 Apr 13.
     Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MRB Legal Advisor, dated 7 Nov 13,
                 w/atchs.
     Exhibit F.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 7 Nov 13, w/atchs.
     Exhibit G.  Letter, SAF/MRBC, dated 7 Nov 13, w/atchs.
     Exhibit H.  Email, Applicant, dated 3 Dec 13.




                                   
                                   Panel Chair