RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2004-00512
		INDEX CODE:  137.01

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED: YES

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Corrective action be taken that would allow him to change his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election to extend coverage to his spouse.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He is not aware of an error or an injustice, he is only trying to get his current spouse covered by SBP.  His first wife died in 1989 and he remarried on 12 September 1990.  He is looking for help in determining what records are necessary to get his wife covered.  He retired from the service in 1978 and at that time he did not feel he had a need for SBP.  He didn’t even think of SBP until recently.  He has begun receiving some of his retired pay (less than half) and can now afford to contribute to SBP.  He is 72 year’s old and would like to see his wife covered before he kicks off.

In support of his appeal, the applicant has provided a personal statement and a copy of his current marriage certificate.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Finance records show that he declined SBP coverage prior to his 1 October 1978 retirement effective date.  He married on 29 September 1990 but failed to notify the finance center of the change to his marital status.  He did not request SBP coverage to be established on his current wife’s behalf.  He had two opportunities to establish SBP coverage from 1 April 1992 through 31 March 1993 and again from 1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000.  He did not make an election at either opportunity.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR recommends denial.  While it is unfortunate the applicant failed to establish SBP coverage for his wife in a timely manner, it was his responsibility to ensure he exercised SBP options that provided the level of protection best suited to his family’s individual circumstances when he was entitled to elect that protection.  He had two opportunities to elect coverage for his wife, after their marriage, but failed to do so.  DPPTR states that SBP coverage is similar to commercial life insurance in that an individual must elect to participate and pay the associated premiums in order to have coverage.  It would be inequitable to those members, who chose to elect spouse coverage when eligible and subsequently received reduced retired pay, to provide an additional opportunity for the applicant to change his SBP election.

DPPTR’s complete evaluation is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

All he is asking for is a yes or a no regarding whether or not he can enroll his current wife in SBP.  As he was receiving Veterans Administration (VA) disability benefits and, as a result, not receiving his retired pay, he did not consider SBP as an option in his case as he had no retired pay to pay for it.  If he has to wait for an authorized enrollment period then so be it.  Otherwise he’d like the Board to know that he served 26 years of his life in the Air Force that included a tour in Korea and a tour in Vietnam.  He is proud of his service and would do it all again without hesitation as he loves his country and all that it stands for.  He’s just really tired of getting screwed out of all the benefits he is due.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit E.

_________________________________________________________________

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 office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.  He had two 

opportunities to establish SBP coverage for his current spouse and failed to take advantage of either.  Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.

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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2004-00512 in Executive Session on 20 July 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Feb 04, w/atchs. 
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 6 Apr 04.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Apr 04.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 12 Apr 04.

                                   Panel Chair