RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03693
XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show he made a timely election for
spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His first wife had money outside of his income. Therefore, SBP
was not necessary until his remarriage in June 2012.
The applicants complete submission, with attachments, is at
Exhibit A.
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant served in the Regular Air Force and retired
effective 1 September 1975.
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. The Defense Enrollment Eligibility
Reporting System (DEERS) shows the applicant and his former spouse
were married on 4 July 1954, and he declined SBP coverage prior to
his 1 September 1975 retirement. There is no evidence he returned
a valid SBP election during the 1981, 1992, 1999 or 2005 open
enrollment periods on his former spouses behalf. Furthermore,
there is no indication in any retired pay system or microfiche
reflecting SBP premiums were ever deducted from the applicant's
retired pay. His former spouse died on 9 September 2008, and the
applicant married his current spouse on 18 June 2012. 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. The
amount of the buy-in was based upon the earliest date the member
was first eligible to elect coverage. In this case, the
applicant's lump-sum buy-in amount would have been approximately
$78,000 and the monthly cost would be about $131. If the
applicant had submitted a 2005-2006 open enrollment election and
survived for two years, his former spouse would have been the SBP
beneficiary until her death, and his current spouse would have
become the eligible beneficiary upon the anniversary of their
marriage. His current spouse would have been entitled to an SBP
annuity of approximately $1,110 per month upon the applicants
death. It is each member's responsibility to ensure required
actions are taken to provide current and future family members
with military benefits and privileges available to them and pay
the costs associated with these programs' protection. SBP is
similar to commercial life insurance in that an individual must
elect to participate and pay the associated premiums in order to
have coverage. 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.
A complete copy of the DPFFF evaluation, with attachments, is at
Exhibit C.
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 23 December 2014, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days.
To date, a response has not been received (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 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 the
rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion 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 this application in
Executive Session on 12 June 2015, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:
, Vice Chair
, Member
, Member
The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket
Number BC-2014-03693 was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 8 September 2014, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicants Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 26 November 2014,
w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 23 December 2014.
AF | BCMR | CY2013 | BC-2013-01759
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. 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 BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
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 | CY2006 | BC-2006-01326
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPPRT states even though his retiree account statements have erroneously reflected his full retired pay as the annuity base amount for over seventeen years, the monthly cost deducted is based on the reduced annuity he elected prior to his retirement. 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001055925C070420
Had the enrollment form used been accepted, the applicant would have been eligible for the SBP had the FSM survived for only three more weeks. The Board cannot change the date of the FSM’s death; however, the Board concludes that it would be appropriate to correct his records to show that he enrolled in the SBP on 12 June 1979. That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by showing that the FSM completed the DA Form 4240 on 12 June 1979 and enrolled in...
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 | CY2005 | BC-2005-01319
On 17 October 1998, PL 105-261 established an SBP open enrollment from 1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000 for servicemembers who were not participating at the fullest extent and a non-participant could elect coverage. The applicant’s records reflect his SBP coverage was terminated under PL 99-145 within the first year of his marriage to D. PL 105-261 did not prohibit servicemembers from making an election during open enrollment if they had not resumed spouse coverage when they remarried....
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003085
A letter from DFAS shows $80.69 was paid in premiums each month in 2000. b. DFAS states the additional money her husband was paying was due to the buy-in premiums or "Open Season" cost. However, only the spouse SBP premiums are refundable through Public Law 92-425. c. Public Law 105-261 states all SBP premiums will be terminated effective 1 October 2008 for all members who are at least 70 years old and have paid SBP premiums for 360 or more months.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002627
The applicant requests the records of her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), be corrected to show he elected to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) for spouse coverage, based on the full amount. The FSM was honorably retired on 31 July 1992 and he was placed on the retired list in his retired rank of MAJ on 1 August 1992. Prior to retirement the FSM was provided an opportunity to make an SBP election.
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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100023396
The applicant states her deceased husband, a former service member (FSM), applied for spouse and child(ren) SBP participation during the open season extending from 1 October 2005 to 30 September 2006. Had the FSM's SBP application been processed correctly his effective date would have been 1 January 2006 and he would have paid up the buy-in premium on 30 December 2008. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: *...