ADDENDUM TO
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2000-00961

		COUNSEL:  None

		HEARING DESIRED:  Yes

_________________________________________________________________

This request for reconsideration of the application for the correction of the records of XXXXXXXXXX (Deceased) was submitted by XXXXXXXXXX (former spouse).

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

In the applicant’s request for reconsideration, she requests the military records of her former spouse be corrected to show she is entitled to an annuity under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) program.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member and the applicant were married on 29 November 1968 and divorced on 22 May 1995.  The divorce decree indicates that both the applicant and the former member agreed to “execute the appropriate waiver relinquishing the wife’s rights to any benefits she may be entitled to under the Survivor’s Benefit Plan from the Air Force Retirement/Pension of the Husband.”  On 8 June 1995, the former member sent a letter to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) requesting cancellation of his SBP coverage.  In the HQ AFPC/DPPTR advisory opinion of 19 May 2000, they indicated the former member’s SBP premiums were suspended and he received a refund of premiums paid past the date of divorce (refer to Exhibit C to the Record of Proceedings).  The former member died on 8 March 1997.

A similar appeal was considered and denied by the Board on 5 October 2000.  A summary of the evidence considered and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board is set forth in the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit F.

On 10 January 2002, in response to a congressional inquiry, in behalf of the applicant, the AFBCMR denied the applicant’s request for reconsideration of her application (Refer to Exhibit G).

In the applicant’s most recent request for reconsideration, submitted through her congressman, she contends that the signature on the 8 June 1995 letter canceling her SBP coverage is not the former member’s signature.  To support this assertion, the applicant provided a personal statement, a statement from a Forensic Investigator who opines that the signature on the letter in question is not the signature of the applicant’s former spouse, and copies of additional correspondence concerning the issue under review.  Since the Forensic Investigator is not a board certified handwriting analyst, he suggested obtaining a military handwriting analysis of the document in question for its signature validity.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit H.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Pursuant to the Board’s request for an analysis of the former member’s handwriting through the Air Force Office of Special Investigation (AFOSI), the Forensic Document Division of the US Army Criminal Investigation Laboratory (CILA-FD) completed their analysis and submitted their findings to AFOSI on 1 September 2004.  The CILA-FD findings revealed that “XXXXXXXXXX--- probably wrote the original of the questioned “XXXXXXXXXX” signature.”  This complete evaluation is at Exhibit J.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Having been provided the CILA-FD analysis, through her congressman, the applicant submitted a personal statement for the Board’s review in which she notes the somewhat inconclusive findings provided by AFOSI and requests the Board also consider the analysis findings she provided from Forensic Investigations Unlimited.  The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit L.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support of the appeal, we remain unpersuaded that the records of applicant’s late husband should be corrected to show she is entitled to an annuity under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).  In her most recent submissions, the applicant asserts the signature on the 8 June 1995 cancellation letter to DFAS is a forgery.  Although the applicant provided an affidavit by a licensed private detective indicating it is his belief the signature is a forgery, we note that this individual is not a board certified handwriting analyst.  We are not unsympathetic to the applicant’s plight and applaud the extraordinary efforts on her part to support her case.  On the other hand, in fairness to the system, our decision must be based on the preponderance of the evidence submitted and of record.  In this regard, a handwriting analysis conducted, through the Office of Special Investigations (OSI), by the Forensic Document Division, Department of the Army, concluded the applicant’s former spouse “probably” wrote the signature in question.  In addition to the cited letter, we noted the applicant’s SBP eligibility was waived in the divorce decree.  In view of the foregoing and in the absence of a showing the applicant has a legal right to the relief sought, we believe she has failed to sustain her burden of establishing the existence of either an error or an injustice.  Therefore, we have no basis on which to favorably consider the requested relief.
_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of probable 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 2 December 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36‑2603:

	, Panel Chair
	, Member
	, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2000-00961.

	Exhibit F.  Record of Proceedings, dated 6 Oct 00,
                with exhibits.
	Exhibit G.  Congressional Inquiries, with atchs, dated 7 Feb
                01 and 20 Dec 02, and AFBCMR draft replies.
	Exhibit H.  Congressional Inquiry, dated 22 Aug 03, with
                atchs.
    Exhibit I.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Mar 04, with atchs.
	Exhibit J.  OSI/CILA-FD Report, dated 1 Sep 04.
	Exhibit K.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 5 Oct 04.
	Exhibit L.  Letter from Member of Congress, dated 4 Nov 04,
                with atchs.
1 2