RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2013-01759
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show that he elected spouse only
Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He needs to change his SBP beneficiary to his current spouse.
In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of his
marriage license.
The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at
Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
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.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial. A member, who is unmarried at
retirement, may elect coverage for a spouse acquired after
retiring. However, the election must be made before the first
anniversary of the marriage. If a member fails to make an
election before then, SBP coverage for that person or another
person of that category may be elected only if Congress
authorizes an open enrollment period.
The applicant was unmarried prior to attaining age 60 and
elected to decline SBP coverage. On 20 May 99, his retired pay
commenced. On 29 Mar 00, the applicant and his spouse were
married; however, he failed to submit a valid election within
the first year of their marriage.
The Afterburner, routinely contained articles to advise
retirees of their SBP options when marrying after retirement and
until Aug 06, when the loss of funding prevented hard copies
from being produced. The newsletters were mailed to the
correspondence address the applicant provided the Defense
Finance and Accounting Service-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL). Had
he submitted an election within the first year of his marriage,
monthly premiums would have been approximately $65.00 and SBP
costs exceeding $8,000.00 would have been deducted from his pay
to date. He later had an opportunity to obtain additional
information about the plan and to elect coverage for his spouse
during the 2005-2006 open enrollment period, but failed to do
so.
Public Law 108-375, which authorized the most recent open
enrollment period, contained no provision for waiving or
extending the one-year period authorized to participate. If the
applicant had submitted an election during the 2005-
2006 opportunity, he would have been required to pay a lump-sum
buy-in of approximately $13,585.00 within 24 months, plus the
normal monthly premiums to provide SBP coverage for his spouse.
Providing the applicant additional time to elect SBP coverage
would be inequitable to other retirees in similar situations and
is not justified by the facts.
DPFFF states that there is no evidence of an Air Force error or
injustice.
The complete DPFFF evaluation is at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANTS REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
He disagrees with the recommendation to deny his request. In
2000, he and his spouse traveled to Little Rock Air Force Base,
Arkansas and talked to a man about requesting SBP coverage for
his spouse in the event he died. The man informed him that
there were certain days during the year he could sign-up; since
he did not know what days they were, he stated that he would
find out and let them know. They never heard back from him.
His health began to fail; he had heart and gall bladder surgery;
suffers with bronchitis two or three times a year; and has a
defibrillator inserted in his right side.
On 1 Dec 08, he blacked out and ran off the road travelling 68
miles per hour and suffered lower brain damage. He is weak most
days and has used a walker for the past four and a half years.
He came out of high school; joined the Air Force and proudly
served his country. His spouse deserves to be able to make the
house payment, pay the utility bills, buy food, and gas in the
event he is no longer around.
The applicants complete submission 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 injustice. We took
notice of the applicants 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 AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-01759 in Executive Session on 17 Jan 14, under
the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Vice Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2013-01759 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 2 Apr 13.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 7 Jun 13.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Jun 13.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, undated.
Vice Chair
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 03693
Since the applicant bypassed at least five opportunities to provide SBP coverage for an eligible spouse, coverage for his current spouse can only be provided if Congress authorized another open enrollment. The open enrollments required members to pay a lump- sum buy-in amount within 24 months after making the election. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00743
Had the applicant submitted a valid election within the time prescribed for making an SBP election after retirement, monthly premiums would be approximately $81. Approval of this request would provide the applicant an additional opportunity to elect SBP coverage not afforded other retirees similarly situated and is not justified. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02148
Providing the applicant additional time to elect SBP coverage would be inequitable to other retirees in similar situations and is not justified by the facts. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2005 | BC-2005-01729
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2005-01729 INDEX CODE: 137.00 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 28 NOVEMBER 2006 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to permit him to provide Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage for his spouse. He married P--- on 25 August 1990; however, there is no record he submitted a...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-00502
If a member fails to make an election before then, SBP coverage for that person or another person of that category may be elected only if Congress authorizes an open enrollment period. Providing this applicant additional time to elect SBP coverage would be inequitable to other retirees in similar situations and is not justified by the facts. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01423
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPTR notes if the member submitted an open enrollment election and survives for two years, his spouse would be entitled to an SBP annuity of approximately $685 per month upon his death. The applicant contends he was advised, in August 2004, that he had to wait for one year after his marriage to secure Survivor Benefit Plan coverage for his second spouse and subsequently, in July 2005, he was...
AF | BCMR | CY2009 | BC-2008-03740
The personnel advising him at the time he secured a military identification for his wife should have informed him of benefits available under the SBP. Under the SBP program, the law authorized enrollment periods 1 Mar 99 to 29 Feb 00 and 1 Oct 05 to 30 Sep 06, for retired member to elect SBP coverage. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01282
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was unmarried and elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 October 1992 retirement date. Records reflect the applicant and N--- married on 13 April 1993, but he failed to elect SBP coverage for her within the first year following their marriage. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the...
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).