RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01836 (MEMBER) COUNSEL: NONE (APPLICANT) HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased former husband’s records be corrected to reflect that he elected former spouse coverage under the Reserve Component Survivor Benefit Plan (RCSBP), naming herself as the beneficiary. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her former husband violated their divorce decree by not providing former spouse coverage under the RCSBP and naming her as the beneficiary. She received a portion of her deceased former husband’s retirement pay until his death. She believed that he was in compliance with their divorce decree until the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) notified her that her entitlements had been discontinued after her former husband’s death. In support of the appeal, the applicant provides copies of a Certificate of Death and a Separation Agreement. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The former member retired on 30 Jun 99. He did not elect coverage under the RCSBP prior to his retirement at age 60. At the time of his retirement, he did elect Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage for a person with an insurable interest in him. On 1 Aug 00 he requested to withdraw from SBP. The former member passed away on 26 Jun 06. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force, which is attached at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: DFAS recommends denial. The former member and the applicant were divorced on 3 Jul 96. The separation agreement and the amended qualified domestic relations order provided by the applicant are not enforceable documents to award the applicant an annuity under the RCSBP or SBP. The divorce decree/court order must specifically require the member to provide the former spouse coverage under either program. Since their separation agreement and amended qualified domestic relations order did not require the former member to provide SBP coverage for his former spouse, the applicant is not entitled to an annuity under the SBP. According to the court order, she was entitled to 50 percent of his disposable retired pay which she did receive until his death. The complete DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit B. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Jul 11 for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ 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 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 (OPR) and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of 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 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-2011-01836 in Executive Session on 19 Jan 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 May 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, DFAS, dated 24 Jun 11. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Jul 11.