RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS. IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2015-00853 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His Survivor Benefit Program (SBP) Election Certificate completed in conjunction with his 1991 retirement be corrected from “None” to “Spouse Only.” APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was counseled in error about the cost of electing enrollment in the SBP. He was told the cost would be 50 percent of his monthly retirement pay; therefore, he elected not to participate because of the high cost. He was informed this year during estate planning that the actual cost of enrolling in the SBP is about 6.5%. The applicant believes an injustice has been done and provides statements in his support to correct this. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 19 Sep 91, according to information provided by the applicant, he elected “None” on his SBP Election Certificate. His spouse “concurred” with this election on 20 Sep 91. On 11 Sep 91, according to information provided by the applicant, he was notified by ARPC/DPAR of his eligibility to apply for retired pay. On 1 Oct 91, according to information provided by the applicant, he retired. 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. It cannot be confirmed if the applicant was or was not properly briefed on the premium costs of the SBP; nevertheless, there is a strong basis to presume the SBP counselors administratively discharged their duties correctly and in compliance with the laws controlling the SBP. Since the enactment of the SBP on 21 Sep 72, SBP premiums have never cost a retiree 50% of their retirement pay. It is the retiring member’s responsibility to elect the coverage that suits his family and the spouse’s right to concur or non-concur in any election that omits spouse coverage or bases spouse coverage on a reduced level of retired pay. The applicant bypassed at least three additional opportunities to provide SBP coverage for his spouse; therefore, coverage for her can only be provided if Congress authorized another open enrollment. The open enrollments required members to pay a lump-sum buy-in amount within 24 months after making the election. It is each member’s responsibility to ensure required actions are taken to provide current and future family members with military benefits and privileges available to them and pay the costs associated with these programs. Approval of this request would provide the applicant an additional opportunity to elect SBP coverage not afforded other retirees similarly situated and is not justified. 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 9 Sep 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 timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or injustice allowing the applicant to change his SBP election to “Spouse Only” coverage. 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. There is a presumption that the SBP counselors properly administered their duties when the applicant elected “None” as his SBP election and his spouse concurred. We also note the applicant has foregone three opportunities to elect Spouse Only coverage during open enrollments authorized by Congress. 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-2015-00853 in Executive Session on 2 Mar 16 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 24 Feb 15, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Military Personnel Record Exhibit C. Memorandum, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 22 Jul 15. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Sep 15.