RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00771
		INDEX CODE:  137.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The applicant, widow of the above-named retired member, is requesting corrective action that would entitle her to a Surviror Benefit Plan (SBP) annuity.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

Election of children (disabled daughters) was made at time of retirement.  Retiree and spouse did not realize that other governmental benefits (social security medical) would be reduced for his disabled daughters and the family entitlements would be greatly reduced.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, six character references, a copy of the Certificate of Death, a copy of the former member’s DD Form 2656.

Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records show that the applicant and the member were married on 16 March 1974.  The member elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay and the applicant concurred in the election prior to his 1 February 1994 retirement.  The records properly reflect his daughters (XXXXX and XXXXX, dates of birth 21 August 1977 and 18 March 1981, respectively) are incapable of self-support.  There is no evidence the member returned an SBP election to establish coverage on the applicant’s behalf during the 1999-2000 open enrollment period.  The premium for child only coverage at the time of the member’s death was less than $3 per month.  Coverage for the applicant with the eligible children as contingent beneficiaries would have been approximately $83 per month.  The member died on 24 October 2001 and his daughters XXXXX and XXXXX are each currently receiving a $364 monthly annuity.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR states that while it is unfortunate that receipt of SBP annuity payments may adversely affect XXXXX and XXXXX‘s state benefits, there is no provision in the law to terminate coverage based on this circumstance.  The member could have added the applicant to the Plan during the 1999-2000 open enrollment period, but failed to do so.  SBP is similar to commercial life insurance in that an individual must elect to participate and pay the associatged premiums in order to provide coverage.  It would be inequitable to those members who chose to participate when eligible and subsequently received reduced retired pay, and to other widows who concurred in their sponsor’s choice not to elect spouse coverage, to provide entitlement to this widow on the basis of the evidence presented.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 2 May 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, no response has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling 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 26 June 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

				Panel Chair
				Member
				Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 25 Apr 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 2 May 03.

					
					Panel Chair