RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-03023 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: Her deceased husband’s military records be corrected to reflect he elected full spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP), naming her as the beneficiary. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She was never made aware of SBP and does not recall signing any SBP documentation. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 31 Dec 89, the deceased former member was released from active duty and retired, effective 1 Jan 90. On 22 Oct 90, a transaction history report prepared on the former member revealed he elected child only SBP coverage with spouse concurrence. On 29 Jul 01, according to documentation submitted by the applicant, the former member passed away. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the memorandum prepared by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR), which is attached at Exhibit C. AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. Public Law (PL) 99-145 requires spouse’s written concurrence if a married member elects less than full spouse SBP coverage. PLs 101-189, 105-261 authorized enrollment periods (1 Apr 92 to 31 Mar 92, 1 Mar 99 to 29 Feb 00) for retired members to elect SBP coverage. Members were advised by direct mail of their eligibility to make an election, and enrollment packets, as well as the Afterburner, News for USAF Retired Personnel, were sent to the correspondence address each member had provided to the finance center, containing points of contact for the member to gain additional information on the enrollment periods. Upon review of the military member’s personnel records he married the applicant on 29 Aug 68. Records from Oct 90 reflect the member elected child only SBP coverage based on full retired pay with the applicant’s concurrence prior to his 1 Jan 90 retirement. The youngest child lost eligibility due to age on 1 Aug 98. The member died on 29 Jul 01. Although the applicant claims she was never made aware of the SBP, the deceased member’s personnel record reflect a letter (SBP information) was mailed to the applicant on 21 Sep 89, and finance records reflect she concurred with the deceased member’s election of child only SBP coverage. There is no record the member submitted an SBP election on the applicant’s behalf under PLs 101-189 or 105-261. While it is unfortunate Defense Finance and Accounting Service-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) did not ensure copies of SBP documentation (election forms, spouse’s concurrence statements) were safeguarded and retrievable, there is a strong basis to presume SBP counselors and Air Force pay technicians administratively discharged their duties correctly, and in compliance with the laws pertaining to SBP. Providing the applicant’s requested relief based on the evidence presented is not justified. Approval would provide this applicant an additional opportunity , after the fact, not afforded to other survivors, who concurred with the sponsor’s elections to decline SBP spouse protection coverage. A complete copy of the AFPC/DPFFF evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 11 Feb 15, for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). 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 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 an error of injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 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-2014-03023 in Executive Session on 12 Jun 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-03023 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 10 Jul, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 10 Nov 14. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Feb 15.