RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00206 XXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE EARING DESIRED: NO APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. He be allowed to terminate spouse only coverage under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). 2. SBP premiums previously withheld from his retired pay be refunded to him. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He has been married numerous times and after his first divorce and subsequent re-marriages, he was never contacted by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) to enroll or disenroll any of his former or current spouses. He now understands that he has to initiate the process to participate in the program. In midyear 2012, he sent an inquiry to the Retired and Annuitant pay personnel questioning as to what it would take to enroll his new spouse in the SBP program. In late 2013, he received a Retiree Account Statement (RAS) with a deduction of approximately $90.00. Shortly thereafter, he received another RAS accompanied by a letter and documents that he had incurred a SBP debt dating back to the anniversary of his marriage to his current spouse. Since this program is voluntary he and his wife have decided that they do not want to participate in the program. He already has civilian insurance and if he has to absorb the debt which has been levied by DFAS, he and his wife will not be able to meet their financial obligations. He and his spouse have been placed in an untenable position by participating in SBP. Simply stated, they will not survive financially if they have to wait until this debt to SBP is satisfied. In support of his requests the applicant provides a personal statement, a statement from his current spouse concurring with his decision to “non-participate” in SBP, copies of memorandums, his RAS and various other documents associated with his requests. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ? AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFFF recommends denial. There is no evidence of Air Force error or injustice in this case. SBP spouse coverage is basically irrevocable as long as there is an eligible beneficiary, but is suspended when the spouse loses eligibility. Public Law (PL) 99-145 allows a participant, with suspended spouse coverage, to elect not to resume coverage for a subsequently acquired spouse. However, the new spouse will be automatically covered at the previous level on the first anniversary of the marriage if the member takes no action before that date. Premiums for the coverage become effective the first day of the thirteenth month and DFAS - Cleveland Center (DFAS- CL) will compute the retroactive costs when evidence of the remarriage becomes a matter of record. Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System (DEERS) records show the applicant and his first spouse were married and he elected spouse and child SBP coverage based on full retired pay prior to his 1 October 1991 retirement. The parties divorced on 25 June 1992, and the applicant requested DFAS-CL stop coverage for his first wife. DFAS-CL suspended the spouse's portion of SBP coverage retroactive to the date of their divorce. DEERS records show the applicant married his second spouse on 20 November 1993; however, he failed to notify DFAS-CL of his re-marriage. On 22 September 2010, the applicant and his second wife divorced. The applicant and his current spouse were married on 14 January 2011, but he failed to inform DFAS of their marriage and that he did not want to extend SBP coverage to her before the first anniversary of their marriage. On 23 June 2012, DFAS-CL received a letter from the applicant, stating that he wanted his current spouse to have SBP coverage. Upon learning of the applicant’s re-marriage, DFAS-CL reinstated spouse coverage retroactive to 14 January 2012. Monthly premiums began to be deducted from his retired pay as required by law, and the retroactive SBP premium debt (approximately $1,768) began to be recovered. The youngest child lost eligibility in July 2012 due to age. The implementing SBP statute ensured that qualified, newly- acquired spouses are afforded the protection of the SBP regardless of the member's failure or delay in notifying the finance center. This automatic feature of the SBP was adjusted by PL 99-145, but requires a participant to take the appropriate action to prevent coverage from being established. It is unfortunate that the applicant failed to notify DFAS in a timely manner that he did not wish to extend SBP coverage following his previous remarriages or his marriage to his current spouse. Information is regularly published in the Afterburner, News for USAF Retired Personnel, reminding retirees of their options upon remarriage. Retired members are personally responsible to ensure they obtain or exempt their dependents' entitlement to military benefits. Participants must contact the finance center immediately upon gaining or losing a potential SBP beneficiary. While the applicant acted in a timely manner when he notified DFAS-CL of his divorce from his first wife, it is reasonable to expect him to have also informed the finance center of any newly-acquired spouse. In the event the applicant had died, his current spouse would have been entitled to receive approximately $824 after the SBP premium debt had been satisfied. To provide the applicant an additional opportunity to terminate his SBP election would be inequitable to other members in similar situations and is not justified by the facts. Although there is no basis in law to exempt a participant from paying SBP monthly premiums, based on the applicant's admitted financial hardship, he may complete a DD Form 2789, Waiver/Remission of Indebtedness Application, include copies of all pertinent documents, and submit the request to the address listed on his debt notification letter. The complete DPFFF evaluation is at Exhibit B. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF THE AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 25 April 2014, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and comment within 30 days. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). 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 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 the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of 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 this application in Executive Session on 22 November 2014, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: , Vice Chair , Member , Member The following documentary evidence was considered in AFBCMR BC- 2014-00206: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 December 2013, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Letter, ARPC/DPFFF, dated 14 April 2014. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 April 2014.