RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2012-01863 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NOT INDICATED ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) option be corrected to establish coverage for another natural person with an insurable interest (NIP) due to the death of her previous beneficiary. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: Her long-standing SBP option was dropped without her knowledge. In a letter to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) in October 2008, she had reported the death of her original beneficiary, her sister, and provided details on her new beneficiary. She assumed her records were corrected to reflect the new beneficiary but they were not. She discovered the error in the fall of 2011 and sent a fax to DFAS with the information contained in the October 2008 letter. DFAS denied her election of a new beneficiary on the grounds that her request was submitted 180 days after the death of her previous beneficiary. Her sister died in France in August 2008. Getting her death certificate took lots of time and red tape. She received the death certificate, in French, in October 2008 and called DFAS to report the death and change her beneficiary. The DFAS clerk who took her call told her she would have to report these changes in writing. As instructed, she sent the letter the next week. She wants to emphasize that she followed DFAS rules and reported her new beneficiary within 180 days of the death of her previous beneficiary. DFAS records are in error because they do not reflect her new beneficiary. In support of her request the applicant submits a personal statement, copies of her sister’s death certificate, DFAS letter dated 9 December 2011 and documents pertaining to her SBP election. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: According to documents submitted by the applicant, she served as a commissioned officer in the United States Air Force from 1953 until her retirement as a Colonel, O-6, in 1988. ________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR recommends approval. DPSIAR states Public Law (PL) 92-425, which established the SBP, permits a person, who is not married and has no eligible children at the time of retirement, to elect SBP coverage on behalf of an insurable interest beneficiary (10 USC 1448(b)(1)). No proof of the beneficiary interest in the continuation of the retiree’s life is required if the parties are more closely related than cousins. PL 109- 364 (17 Oct 06) allows a participant with NIP coverage to elect coverage for another NIP individual within 180 days of the original beneficiary’s death. The applicant, a Reservist, was unmarried and elected Reserve Component SBP (RCSBP) insurable interest coverage for her sister effective 1 October 1979, the date she completed her military service obligation. The applicant’s retired pay commenced effective 26 April 1988, the date of her sixtieth birthday. The applicant’s sister passed away on 8 August 2008. DFAS-CL received the copy of her death certificate and suspended NIP monthly premiums and coverage. However, there was no evidence the applicant submitted a request to name another NIP beneficiary within 180 days after her sister’s death. The applicant claims there was a delay in obtaining her sister’s death certificate from French authorities, which may have contributed to DFAS-CL’s decision to not honor her request to name a new NIP beneficiary. It is reasonable to assume that had there been no delay in receiving the death certificate, the applicant could have complied with the provisions of PL 109-364, and submitted her election within the appropriate time. While there is no evidence of Air Force error in this case, in the interest of justice, they recommend the applicant’s record be corrected to show she submitted a valid election for insurable interest, effective 7 February 2009. Approval should be contingent upon the applicant’s providing documentation that the NIP has on-going interest in the applicant’s life and upon recoupment of all relative costs. The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: In her response the applicant indicates that the person named as her new beneficiary has a long-standing and ongoing interest in her life. The applicant provided documentation to show that the NIP and the applicant have shared the address for decades and states that the applicant is named as the beneficiary on the NIP’s retirement IRA account. The applicant further states that the NIP has been her primary caregiver, throughout their years together, when serious medical issues have challenged her. The applicant reiterates her previous contention that her sister died in France and getting a death certificate was a big problem which may have been a factor that may have delayed processing the change in beneficiary. Another factor is that she is 84 years old with many medical issues that often delay her response to situations like this. The applicant’s complete response, with attachments, is at 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an injustice. After reviewing the evidence of record, we are persuaded that favorable consideration of the applicant’s request is warranted. We took note that a participant with NIP coverage to elect coverage for another NIP individual must be accomplished within 180 days of the original beneficiary’s death. Due to the obstacles the applicant faced in obtaining her sister’s death certificate, we believe it is reasonable to assume that had there been no delay in obtaining the death certificate, the applicant would have complied with the governing provisions. Therefore, we are in agreement with the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) to recommend approval. We would like to point out, however, that it appears the applicant has provided the requested documentation to verify that the NIP has on-going interest in the applicant’s life. We will provide a copy of this documentation to the OPR for their information. Accordingly, we recommend the applicant’s records be corrected as set forth below. 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 issue(s) involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. ________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT be corrected to show that on 1 October 2008, she elected SBP coverage on behalf of an insurable interest beneficiary. The following members of the Board considered this application in Executive Session on 12 February 2013, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2012-01863 considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149 dated 28 March 2012, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, DFAS/DPSIAR, dated 18 June 2012. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 July 2012. Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 27 July 2012, w/atchs. Panel Chair