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

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

(DECEASED)		COUNSEL:  

(APPLICANT)		HEARING DESIRED:  YES 

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her former husband’s records be corrected to reflect that she is entitled to “Former Spouse” coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).

RESUME OF CASE:

On 6 Oct 00, the Board considered and denied the applicant’s request to correct her former husband’s records to reflect she is entitled to annuity under the SBP.  For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s requests, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Record of Proceedings at Exhibit M.

On 15 Dec 04, the Board reconsidered and denied a similar appeal.  For an accounting of the facts and circumstances surrounding the applicant’s request, and the rationale of the earlier decision by the Board, see the Addendum Record of Proceedings at Exhibit N.

On 12 Jan 15, the applicant submitted a request for reconsideration.  As new evidence, she submits a handwriting analysis from a certified examiner, dated 26 Jan 12, indicating that it is “quite probable” that the signature on the letter addressed to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) is not the signature of the former service member.  She also includes a five page brief from her attorney, three supporting statements from her Senator and friends; and various other documents associated with her request.  

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit O.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  After again reviewing this application and the evidence provided in support of her appeal, we remain unconvinced that the applicant has been a victim of an error or injustice.  While we note the applicant’s submission of a new certified handwriting analysis indicating “that it is quite probable” that the former service member’s signature is not the same as the signature on the DFAS letter, we are not convinced that this evidence, in and by itself is sufficient to override the handwriting analysis conducted by the Forensic Document Division, Department of the Army, indicating the applicant’s former spouse “probably” wrote the signature in question.  Additionally, the applicant has not provided any evidence disputing the SBP eligibility waived in the divorce decree.  As such, we conclude the applicant has again failed to sustain her burden of proof that she has been of 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.

2.  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-2000-00961 in Executive Session on 11 May 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				, Panel Chair
				, Member
				, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit M.  Original Record of Proceedings, dated 6 Oct 00,
  w/Exhibits A-E.
	Exhibit N.  Addendum Record of Proceedings, dated 15 Dec 04,
  w/Exhibits F-L.
	Exhibit O.  DD Form 149, dated 12 Jan 15, w/atchs.
1 2