RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03937 INDEX CODE: 137.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His records be corrected to show he elected child only coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was erroneously advised by the SBP counselor at Fort George Meade, Maryland that his daughter had to live with him in order to be included in the SBP. In support of his appeal, the applicant provided copies of a DD Form 2656, Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, a letter to his spouse concerning applicant’s SBP election, and SBP Cost and Annuity Estimate. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was relieved from active duty on 31 January 2003 with 23 years, 11 months, and 11 days of service and retired in the grade of master sergeant effective 1 February 2003. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial of the applicant’s request. DPSIAR states the applicant and XXXXXXXXXX were married and had eligible step-children and a natural child, but he elected spouse only SBP coverage based on a reduced level of retired pay prior to his 1 February 2003 retirement. Records at the Defense Finance and Accounting Service-Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL) reflected that XXXXXXXXXX concurred in the election. Based on the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS), the parties divorced on 5 July 2006. SBP coverage and premiums were suspended, and there is no evidence the decree required SBP coverage to be established on XXXXXXXXXX behalf. DEERS reflects the applicant and XXXXXXXXXX married on 5 July 2007. Absent a valid request submitted before the first anniversary of their marriage to establish SBP spouse coverage on her behalf, the law requires DFAS-CL to reinstate reduced spouse coverage on 5 July 2008. DPSIAR states that Air Force procedures require SBP counselors to provide not only a one-on-one briefing to retiring members, but furnish an SBP Report on Individual Personnel (RIP) that clearly and specifically outlines the features of the Plan. Members are required to sign the RIP at the end of their briefing to indicate they received information and understand the provisions of the Plan. Item “C2” describes an election for child only coverage. The copy of the applicant’s RIP was obtained from his master personnel record and it bears his 14 November 2002 signature below the certifying statement “I have been briefed on and understand the provisions of SBP as outlined in Items A through K on pages 3 and 4 of this RIP.” Notwithstanding the applicant’s claim that the SBP counselor provided erroneous information, there remains a strong presumption that administrators of the SBP discharge their duties correctly, lawfully, and in good faith. DPSIAR states there is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice and no basis in law to provide relief in this case. The DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 8 February 2008, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received no response. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 probable error or injustice. After reviewing the evidence of record, we are not persuaded that the applicant has been the victim of an error or injustice. We note the applicant’s contention that he was erroneously advised that his daughter had to live with him in order to be included in the SBP; however, he has provided insufficient evidence that the SBP counselor provided misleading or inaccurate information at the time of his retirement. Therefore, in the absence of substantive evidence to the contrary, 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. Accordingly, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. ________________________________________________________________ _ 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 this application in Executive Session on 26 June 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered in connection with AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2007-03937: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 1 Apr 06, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPSIAR, dated 30 Jan 08. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 8 Feb 08.