UNITED STATES AIR FORCE
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2016-04255

COUNSEL: NONE

HEARING: NO

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His record be corrected to show he elected spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He and his spouse were married in Angeles City, Philippines, on 20 Nov 69. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant is a retired Air Force technical sergeant. The applicant was married when he retired effective 1 Jul 70. For more information, see the excerpt of the applicant’s record at Exhibit B and the advisory at Exhibit C.

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPFFF recommends denying the application. The Retired Serviceman’s Family Protection Plan (RSFPP) was in effect until 20 Sep 72. Members were briefed and required to make their RSFPP elections before completing 18 years of service. Spouse notification was not required. Public Law (PL) 92-425, which established the SBP on 21 Sep 1972, authorized an enrollment period for retired members to elect SBP coverage. Public Laws (PLs) 97-35, 101-189, 105-261, and 108-375 later authorized four additional open enrollment periods. There is no evidence of enrollment in RSFPP. Records from the Air Force Accounting and Finance Center (AFAFC) reflect the applicant declined SBP coverage during the initial 21 Sep 72 open enrollment period. In addition, there is no record he applied during any of the other four SBP open enrollment periods.  The complete advisory is at Exhibit C.

APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Board sent a copy of the Air Force evaluation to the applicant on 5 Feb 18 for comment (Exhibit D), but has received no response.

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.	The application was not timely filed.

2.	The applicant exhausted all available avenues of non-judicial relief before applying to the Board.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974

3.	After thoroughly reviewing all Exhibits, it is the Board’s opinion that the applicant is not the victim of an error and injustice. The Board concurs with the rationale and recommendation of AFPC/DPFFF and finds that a preponderance of the evidence does not substantiate the applicant’s contentions. The Board also notes the applicant did not file the application within three years after the alleged error or injustice was discovered, or should have been discovered, as required by Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552, and Air Force Instruction 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR). Moreover, the applicant has offered no plausible reason for the delay in filing the application. The Board finds the application untimely and concludes it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay. Therefore, the Board recommends against correcting the applicant’s records.

THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT:

The applicant be informed the application was not timely filed; it would not be in the interest of justice to excuse the delay; and the application will only be reconsidered upon receipt of relevant evidence not already considered by the Board.

CERTIFICATION:

The following quorum of the Board, as defined in Air Force Instruction (AFI) 36-2603, Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records (AFBCMR), paragraph 1.5, considered Docket Number BC-2016-04255 in Executive Session on 12 Apr 18:

, Panel Chair
Panel Member Panel Member
All members voted not to correct the record. The panel considered the following: Exhibit A:   Application, DD Form 149, w/atchs, dated 13 Oct 16.
Exhibit B: Documentary evidence, including excerpts from official records. Exhibit C:   Advisory opinion, AFPC/DPFFF, dated 13 Jun 17.
Exhibit D:   Notification of Advisory, SAF/MRBC to applicant, dated 5 Feb 18.

Taken together with all Exhibits, this document constitutes the true and complete Record of Proceedings required by AFI 36-2603, paragraph 4.11.9.

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 2