RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00534
COUNSEL: YES
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
Her former spouses records be corrected to reflect the following:
a. She was listed as the beneficiary on his Veterans Group Life Insurance (VGLI).
b. She was maintained under term life insurance coverage.
c. She had former spouses coverage under his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her former spouse, pursuant to a court order, was to list and maintain her as a beneficiary on his VGLI, maintain term life insurance for her, and deem an election for SBP coverage on her behalf. However, she discovered that her former spouse did not adhere to the court order.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
Data extracted from the Air Force advisory shows the member retired on 1 November 1993.
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are described in the letters prepared by the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR), which are attached at Exhibits B and C.
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial of the applicants request to deem herself as an eligible beneficiary under SBP. The applicant and the member were married on 8 June 1973. Prior to the members retirement, he elected spouse and child SBP coverage. The parties divorced on 2 August 1995. There is no evidence the member submitted a valid election to voluntarily change his spouse to former spouse SBP coverage within the first year following their divorce as the law requires. Premiums for the spouses portion of the SBP coverage continued to be deducted from the members retired pay until the Defense Finance and Accounting Service-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) retroactively suspended spouse coverage. The Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records show the member married on 16 May 2009, but he did not notify the DFAS-CL of the change in his marital status or request spouse coverage be established on his new wifes behalf. Even though he failed to notify DFAS-CL of the divorce and continued to pay SBP premiums afterwards, the former spouse would not be eligible for annuity payments upon the members death. Nevertheless, his new wife became the eligible SBP beneficiary by operation of the law on the first anniversary of their marriage. In this case, the applicant did not submit any documentation that would deem her entitled to former spouse SBP coverage and there is no evidence of an error or injustice.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFFF evaluation is at Exhibit B.
AFPC/DPFC recommends denial of the applicants request to have her former spouses records reflect her as a beneficiary of his VGLI. The applicant should present this matter to the court with jurisdiction in civil matters. In this case, the applicants former spouse has VGLI coverage; however, in accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the designated beneficiary was not disclosed. The Office of Servicemembers Group Life Insurance (OSGLI) advised that they are not bound by a state court decree, separation agreement or other state or municipal court documents. Should the BCMR accept this case and not redirect the applicant to the court with jurisdiction, OSGLI does not have the authority to change the beneficiary designation to the applicant, thereby leaving this matter unresolved. Under the VGLI program, the former member has the absolute right to maintain or drop coverage and name or change beneficiaries at any time under federal law.
A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFC evaluation is at Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 22 September 2014 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (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 opinions and recommendations of the Air Force offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief.
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material 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-2014-00534 in Executive Session on 16 March 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Vice Chair
Member
Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 22 January 2014, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letter, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 22 May 2014.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPFC, dated 2 June 2014.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 22 September 2014.
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 | CY2014 | BC 2014 02658
The service member responded with a signed and notarized affidavit, dated 29 July 2014, which indicates he is currently married effective 16 November 2002 and his current spouse did not complete a Release of Benefits (Exhibit C). He did not request SBP benefits for his current spouse because he did not know that she was eligible. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice; the application was...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05614
There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, DPFFF recommends the decedents record be corrected to reflect that on 1 Jul 87, he elected to change RCSBP spouse to former spouse coverage based on full retired pay, naming the applicant as the eligible beneficiary. SBP premiums were deducted from the decedents retired pay until his 28 Jun 11 death. THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to...
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 02998
However, there is no evidence either party submitted a valid former spouse election during the required time following their divorce. Neither the applicant nor the former spouse submitted a valid election within the one-year period required by law to establish former spouse coverage. Exhibit D. Letter, Member, dated 3 Sep 2013, w/atch.
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00704
He submitted DD Form 1882, for former spouse and child coverage; however, DFAS-CL did not honor the election because it was not received until after the one-year eligibility period. However, while the applicant contends the election for former spouse coverage was made within the required time, no evidence has been provided, to our satisfaction, that she or the deceased former member submitted a valid former spouse election during the first year following their divorce. THE BOARD DETERMINES...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00167
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00167 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be designated as the former spouse beneficiary under the Survivors Benefit Plan (SBP). There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, DPFFF recommends the decedents record be corrected to reflect that on...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 01931
When his former spouse died, he has letters from DFAS informing him, when there is no eligible spouse beneficiary (which he believes is the case because his former spouse is not alive to be a beneficiary), the law provides the following options (1) Resume coverage with annuity and cost amounts increased by applicable cost-of-living increases; (2) Increase coverage up to and including your full retired pay; or, (3) Elect not to have the spouse portion of coverage resumed. For a brief...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00712
A person's eligibility as an SBP spouse beneficiary terminates upon divorce; however, the law provides two mechanisms for changing spouse coverage to former spouse coverage. The court order awarded the applicant the SBP and DFAS-CL records continued to reflect the applicants name as the eligible spouse beneficiary and SBP premiums continued to be deducted from the member's retired pay until his 14 Oct 13 death. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit D).
AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-04712
________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained 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 approval. There is no evidence either party submitted a valid election to change spouse to former spouse coverage within the...
AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00195
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In a two-page brief, through counsel, the applicant contends the following: Her former spouse intended for her to be the SBP beneficiary from the date of their divorce on 18 May 99, to the date of his death. The Board should consider her untimely application in the interest of justice because she did not discover the error until after the death of her former spouse. There is no evidence of Air Force error in this case and absent a competing claimant, we recommend...