RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2014-00192 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: YES APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His debt of 27 months of unpaid SBP premiums be removed/waived from his retired military pay records. APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He should not be charged 27 months of SBP premiums for SBP coverage he did not have for the period 1 Apr 11 through 31 Jul 13. His SBP premium payments should start 1 Jul 13, the date the AFBCMR ruling directed his military records be corrected to show he had elected SBP coverage while on active duty. This debt causes his family and him a financial hardship. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant initially entered the Regular Air Force on 31 Mar 83. On 12 Nov 10, the applicant elected not to participate in SBP. On 31 Mar 11, the applicant was released from active duty and retired, effective 1 Apr 11, and was credited with 28 years and 1 day of active service. On 1 Jul 13, as a result of the applicant’s 10 Aug 12 request to correct his records to reflect that he elected full coverage under the SBP prior to his 1 Apr 11 retirement, the AFBCMR directed that his records be corrected to reflect he elected full coverage for his spouse and children. 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: DFAS recommends denial indicating there is no evidence of an error or an injustice. In accordance with Title 10, USC, Section 1448, Application of Plan; “persons eligible to participate in the plan, persons entitled to retired pay, shall be participants in the plan when he becomes entitled to retired pay.” At the time of the applicant’s retirement on 1 Apr 11, he declined to participate in SBP. Subsequently, a ruling by the AFBCMR on 1 Jul 13, granted a change to his military records showing that he had enrolled in SBP with spouse and child coverage, effective 1 Apr 11, the date of his retirement. This change created a debt for SBP premiums for the period of 1 Apr 11 (retirement date), through 31 Jul 13 (last day of month AFBCMR change made effective). DFAS advised the applicant that they can lower a member’s debt payment amount, but the debt must be paid off in no more than 36 payments. In accordance to Title 10, U.S.C., Section 1448 Application of Plan; persons eligible to participate in the plan, persons entitled to retired pay, shall be participants in the plan when they become entitled to retired pay. According to law, SBP coverage cannot be established on the date requested by the applicant to avoid paying premiums that are due from the previous correction to his record as SBP coverage cannot be established on any other date than the effective date of his retirement. As such, his request should be denied as granting such a request would be contrary to law. A complete copy of the DFAS evaluation is at Exhibit C. APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: He does not think the law governing the SBP program intended for members to incur SBP premium costs for coverage they did not receive. His SBP election was restored by an AFBCMR ruling on 1 Jul 13, and that is when premium payments for his SBP coverage should begin, not 1 Apr 11, 27 months prior to having this coverage. 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. 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 DFAS and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error of injustice. We did note that DFAS has worked with the applicant to lower his SBP premium payments over a 36 month period. However, we do not find the evidence sufficient to conclude that we should recommend a correction to the applicant’s record that would be contrary to law. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the requested relief. 4. The applicant’s case is adequately documented and it has not been shown that a personal appearance with or without counsel will materially add to our understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the request for a hearing is not favorably considered. 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-2014-00192 in Executive Session on 27 Jan 15 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence pertaining to AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2014-00192 was considered: Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 4 Dec 13, w/atchs. Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C.  Memorandum, DFAS, dated 27 Jan 14. Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 28 Jul 14. Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 21 Aug 14, w/atchs. 2 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 1 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY – PRIVACY ACT OF 1974 1