Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00988
Original file (BC 2014 00988.txt) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF: 	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00988

					COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  YES 


APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) election be 
changed to reflect spouse and child coverage in the Jun/Jul 
08 timeframe. 


APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The date in the system is still showing 31 Mar 07 (spouse and 
children) from her initial election.  However, the date should 
be Jun/Jul 08 when she faxed in a DD Form 2656 to add her newest 
child that was born on 31 May 08.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.


AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPTT recommends denial indicating the applicant did not 
notify the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) of her dependent 
change within the timeframe prescribed.  

In accordance with Title 10, USC Subsection 1448(a)(5)(B), 
"Manner and time of election, such an election must be written, 
signed by the person making the election, and received by the 
Secretary concerned within one year after the date which that 
person marries or acquires the dependent child."  Because ARPC 
has no record of the member's dependent change within the 
required time frame, she is not eligible to add her newborn 
child onto her RCSBP.

The complete DPTT evaluation is at Exhibit B.


APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant requests the recommendation to deny her RCSBP 
election be overturned.  DPTT stated that she had not turned in 
her election form within the required time frame.  However, 
after 17 years in the Force Support Squadron with the last 10 as 
the Superintendent she was well informed as to the requirement 
and accomplished the change request within the time frame.  

In Jun 14, she was able to locate a portion of the documentation 
that she faxed requesting her youngest child be added to her 
RCSBP election.  She has attached said documentation as proof 
that she requested the change within one year.

She was not expecting that her husband’s and his requests would 
be denied due to the office misplacing her faxed request.  She 
holds the Air Force Core Values in the highest regard and holds 
herself responsible for her actions.  

The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 
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 an error or injustice.  We took 
notice of the applicant’s complete submission, including the 
applicant’s response, in judging the merits of the case; 
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air 
Force Reserve office of primary responsibility and adopt its 
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.

4.  The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not 
been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel 
will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved.  
Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably 
considered.


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-2014-00988 in Executive Session on 16 Mar 15 under the 
provisions of AFI 36-2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Mar 14.
	Exhibit B.  Letter, ARPC/DPTT, dated 14 May 14.
	Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 May 14.
	Exhibit D.  Letter, Applicant, undated, w/atchs.

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00991

    Original file (BC 2014 00991.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00991 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP) election be changed to reflect spouse and child coverage in the Jun/Jul 08 timeframe. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He requests DPTT’s recommendation to deny his request to change his RCSBP election be overturned. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-01862

    Original file (BC-2012-01862.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    In support of her request, the applicant provides copies of DD Form 2656-10, Final Decree of Divorce, Domestic Relations Order [Military Retirement], letters from her attorney, letters from the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) and numerous other documents in support of her request. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 27 Jul 2012, copies of the Air Force evaluation were forwarded to the applicant and the...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 02962

    Original file (BC 2014 02962.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-02962 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. Since ARPC has no record that the applicant notified them of her election within the required timeframe, she is not eligible to add her children to her RCSBP. We took notice of the applicant’s complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2011 | BC-2011-00793

    Original file (BC-2011-00793.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 25 Aug 1994, the decedent and the applicant divorced. If the documents were provided within the required timeframe, DPTT would have been unable to update the member's RCSBP election due to the member not electing to participate in the Plan when eligible. _______________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In further support of her request, the applicant provides two letters.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 00362

    Original file (BC 2012 00362.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    On 3 May 93, the member completed an ARPC Form 123, Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan Election Certificate, and indicated that he had no eligible spouse or children and deferred participation. The applicant and the member were divorced on 24 Aug 93. As of this date, a response has not been received by this office (Exhibit C).

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05388

    Original file (BC 2013 05388.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her deceased husband and she thought they had complied with the marriage reporting requirements of the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP), when their marriage data was entered in the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) upon being issued new military ID cards on 4 Feb 11, less than two months after being married on 16 Dec 10. ARPC/DPTT has no record of the deceased member or his spouse reporting the marital change within the required...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2013 05185

    Original file (BC 2013 05185.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He made his RCSBP election when he entered retired status. 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 failed to sustain his burden of proof that he has been the victim of an error or injustice. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC 2012 05676

    Original file (BC 2012 05676.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The complete DPTT evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ 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. ...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00383

    Original file (BC 2014 00383.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He elected RCSBP child coverage. The applicant believes the Board should find it in the interest of justice to consider his untimely application as he was unaware he had to elect SBP spouse coverage within one year of marriage. THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that that the application...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2012 | BC-2012-00114

    Original file (BC-2012-00114.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    They have no record of receiving a facsimile from the applicant and even if they had, he did not elect to add his spouse within the one year window as prescribed by Title 10, U.S.C. In view of the fact the applicant is eligible for retired pay at age 60, his spouse is eligible for an ID card, Base Exchange, and commissary privileges. In response to the Air Force OPR evaluation, the applicant raises the possibility that his change of address somehow could have caused any...