RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-01599
		INDEX CODE:  137.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to permit him to provide Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage for his wife.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

At the time of his discharge from active duty and retirement from the United States Air Force on 31 December 1997, he had been divorced for almost two years.  At the time, he had no intention to remarry and did not foresee remarriage in the future.  Although he completed all of the preretirement briefings at Peterson AFB, he did not have any reason to participate in the SBP portions.  So, at the time of his retirement, he declined enrollment in the SBP program because he saw no need to participate.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a copy of DD Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel and a copy of the Certification of SBP Briefing.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant was unmarried and elected child only coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 January 1998 retirement.  Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records show that he and L--- married on 5 May 2000; however, he failed to make an election to add her to his existing coverage within the first year of their marriage.  His monthly premium for child coverage is approximately $7; costs for spouse and child coverage would be approximately $222 per month.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR states that although the applicant claims he was unaware of the one-year time limit to add his wife, a copy of the SBP RIP located in his records shows he signed the certification sheet on 29 October 1997, indicating he was properly briefed on the options and effects of the Plan.  Item H1 clearly and specifically describes the option for members, who have no spouse or child at retirement, are eligible to elect SBP for these dependents within one year of acquisition.  Additionally, the Afterburner, News for USAF Retired Personnel, published January 2000, four months before his marriage, reminded retirees of the opportunity to enroll their newly acquired spouse in the Plan within the first year of marriage.  It would be contrary to the letter and intent of the law, as well as inequitable, to grant this applicant an additional opportunity not afforded to other members similarly situated.  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 9 June 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

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, BC-2003-01599, in Executive Session on 30 September 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 5 May 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 5 Jun 03.
	Exhibit D.	Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jun 03.

					Panel Chair