RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-04785 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: The retroactive costs associated with adding his new spouse to his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) be waived, or his SBP be terminated. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was not informed of the price increase associated with his new spouse receiving coverage under SBP, or the fact the price increase would be retroactive, until after the coverage was initiated. Had he been told, he would have made better choices. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant retired from the Air Force in 1994 in the grade of Technical Sergeant (TSgt). 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 allows an SBP participant with suspended spouse coverage to elect not to resume coverage for a subsequently acquired spouse. However, if the member takes no action before the first anniversary of the new marriage, the new spouse will be automatically covered at the previous level. Premiums for the coverage become effective the first day of the thirteenth month and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service—Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) will compute the retroactive costs when evidence of the remarriage becomes a matter of record. The applicant was married at the time of retirement in 1994. He did not complete an SBP election prior to the effective date of his retirement. Therefore, DFAS-CL established full spouse and child coverage in compliance with the law. He and his first spouse subsequently divorced later in 1994. On 1 Apr 12, DFAS processed a request from the applicant to suspend SBP coverage on his ex-spouse and reimbursed him all premiums paid retroactive the date of his divorce. The applicant married his current spouse on 2 Jun 12, but before the first anniversary of his marriage he failed to inform DFAS-CL that he did not want to extend SBP coverage to her. Upon learning of the applicant’s remarriage, DFAS-CL reinstated spouse coverage retroactive to the first anniversary of the applicant’s marriage to his current spouse (2 Jun 13), monthly premiums began to be deducted from his retired pay as required by law, and the retroactive SBP premium debt of approximately $1,567 began to be recovered. If the applicant had died after his remarriage, his new spouse would have been entitled to the SBP payments, after the retroactive SBP premium debt had been satisfied. The appropriate SBP information is regularly published in the Afterburner News for USAF Retired Personnel. On 18 Nov 14, the applicant submitted a DD Form 2789, Waiver/Remission of Indebtedness Application, to DFAS-CL even though there is no basis in law to exempt him from paying SBP monthly premiums. The applicant failed to notify the finance center in a timely manner of his new marriage, in order to deny SBP coverage for her or to preclude a debt. 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 28 Apr 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 AFPC/DPFFF 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-2014-04785 in Executive Session on 18 Aug 15, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member Although ------- chaired the panel, in view of her unavailability, due to retirement, -------- has signed as Panel Chair. The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 18 Nov 14, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 27 Feb 15. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Apr 15. 3 4