RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01593 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be allowed to terminate spouse coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. He was unsure whether or not to sign up for SBP due to personal circumstances and he had not discussed it with his wife prior to being briefed. 2. He was briefed if he did not sign up for SBP now, he would not be able to add his spouse later. He was also briefed he could change it later, but was not informed that once he separated from the Air Force he could not remove his wife from SBP for two years. 3. He and his wife discussed the situation and decided it was something they should not do. He contacted the Defense Finance and Accounting Services (DFAS) and was told he could not stop the payments because he was already in a retired status and therefore, would not be able to remove his wife for one year. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of a signed letter from his wife. The applicant's complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant was married and elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 Mar 11 retirement. Since he elected maximum spouse and child coverage, his wife’s concurrence was not required. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIAR recommends denial. DPSIAR states each person attends a one-on-one SBP briefing given by an SBP counselor prior to their retirement and while SBP counselors present facts and explain the provisions of the program during the pre- retirement counseling, members are ultimately responsible for making the election that best meets their particular situation. The applicant’s wife did not attend the SBP briefing; however, a notification letter was forwarded to her on 18 Aug 10, fully describing the options and effects of the SBP. The applicant had time to change his election, with his wife’s concurrence, prior to his retirement date. The SBP counselor provided the applicant a copy of the SBP Report on Individual Personnel (RIP) the applicant signed, acknowledging he understood his options and the effects of his actions pertaining to his SBP election. Notwithstanding his allegation that he was told that once he separated from the Air Force he could not remove his wife from the SBP for two years, Item N1(A) of the RIP clearly states there is a one year window to request to terminate all participation which opens on the second anniversary of his retirement. Approval of this request would provide the applicant an opportunity not afforded other retirees. The applicant may exercise his option to disenroll with his wife’s written concurrence, during the one year period beginning 1 Mar 13 as authorized by PL-105-85. The complete AFPC/DPSIAR evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant disagrees with the recommendation in the Air Force evaluation stating, in part, he has lived the Air Force core values for almost 25 years, would not lie to get something in his favor, and would not waste the Director of Personnel’s or the Board’s time to listen to his case. He was going through a tumultuous time in his life with the unexpected transition to civilian life one year earlier than expected, marital problems and a sibling who was having health and financial issues. He skimmed over the paperwork and initialed/signed the areas corresponding to his elections. However, he does not recall seeing the one year window statement after two years. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit E. _________________________________________________________________ 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. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and the applicant’s complete submission, to include his response to the Air Force evaluation, we do not find his assertions that he was miscounselled, in and by itself, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR). Therefore, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force OPR and adopt its rationale as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or injustice. In the absence of persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find no 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01593 in Executive Session on 22 Sep 11, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2011-01593 was considered: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 27 Apr 11. Exhibit B. HQ AFPC/DPSIAR, Letter, dated 3 Jun 11. Exhibit C. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 17 Jun 11. Exhibit D. Applicant’s Rebuttal, Letter, dated 6 Jul 11, w/atch.