SECOND ADDENDUM TO
                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  92-02824
            INDEX NUMBER:  137.02

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO
___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The records be corrected to reflect the former servicemember  made  an
election for Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage at the time  of  his
retirement (1 August 1982) and that the premiums that would result, if
the request is approved, be waived.
___________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

On 8 April 1993, the AFBCMR considered and  denied  a  similar  appeal
submitted by the former servicemember (Exhibits A through D).

The former servicemember died on 17 January 1994.  On 4 May 1997,  the
applicant   provided   additional    documentation    and    requested
reconsideration  of  her  husband’s   appeal   (Exhibit   E).    After
consideration of the additional  documentation,  the  Board  found  no
evidence of error or injustice and again denied the  application  (see
Addendum to Record of Proceedings).

On 15 June 1998, the applicant  submitted  another  application  which
contained essentially the same request  and  documentation  previously
considered by the Board (Exhibit F).  On 10 July 1998, she was advised
that unless she submitted  previously  unavailable  evidence  for  the
Board’s consideration, further  action  on  her  application  was  not
possible (Exhibit G).

By letter dated 22 March 1999, the applicant requested reconsideration
of the Board’s decision.  She provided additional documentation in the
form of a statement from a friend who  indicated  that  the  applicant
stayed with her during the period mid-March until mid-July  1982,  and
that during this period, to  the  best  of  her  knowledge,  applicant
received no certified US mail.   Applicant’s  complete  statement  and
attachment are at Exhibit H.
___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

We took note of applicant’s most recent submission,  as  well  as  the
documentation previously reviewed by the Board, in judging the  merits
of  this  case.   As  noted  in  the  Board’s  earlier  findings,  the
applicant’s case differs from the case of Barber v. United States,  in
that there is evidence in the record that  the  required  notification
letter  was  sent  to  the  applicant  notifying  her  of  the  former
servicemember’s decision not to participate in the SBP.  Specifically,
a letter dated 27 May 1982 was sent, by regular mail, as prescribed by
the governing regulation  in  effect  at  the  time,  to  the  address
provided  by  the   former   servicemember.    It   was   the   former
servicemember’s responsibility to furnish a change of  address  if  he
wanted his mail sent to an address other than the one he  provided  on
the AF Form 694 (Data for Payment of Retired Air Force Personnel).  In
our opinion, the Air Force made a good  faith  effort  to  notify  the
applicant  as  was  required  by  the  governing   regulation,   which
implements the law.  Based on the foregoing, and  in  the  absence  of
evidence showing the contrary, we find that the applicant  has  failed
to sustain her burden of establishing the existence of either an error
or  an  injustice  warranting  favorable  action   on   her   request.
Accordingly, we are unpersuaded that a revision of the Board’s earlier
determination is warranted.
___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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 25 May 1999, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Ms. Ann L. Heidig, Member
      Mr. Mike Novel, Member

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit E.  Letter from Applicant, dated 4 May 97, w/atchs.
    Exhibit F.  DD Form 149, dated 15 Jun 98, w/atchs.
    Exhibit G.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 10 Jul 98.
    Exhibit H.  Letter from Applicant, dated 22 Mar 99, w/atch.





                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair

                                 ADDENDUM TO
                            RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  92-02824
            INDEX NUMBER:  137.02
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

The records be corrected to reflect the former servicemember  made  an
election for Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage at the time  of  his
retirement (1 August 1982) and that the premiums that would result, if
the request is approved, be waived.

In the alternative, that the two-year waiting period for his  election
made during the 1992 open enrollment period be waived.

___________________________________________________________________

RESUME OF CASE:

On  8  April  1993,  the  AFBCMR  considered  and  denied  a   similar
application submitted by the former servicemember (Exhibits A  through
D).

The former servicemember died on  17  January  1994.   His  widow  has
requested reconsideration of her husband’s appeal, contending that she
never received the  letter  of  notification  advising  her  that  her
husband elected not to participate in the  SBP.   In  support  of  her
request, she provided a handwritten draft and typed copy of a  letter,
dated May 20, 1982, as evidence that she was not  at  the  address  to
which the letter of notification was sent.  (Exhibit E)

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

After a thorough review of the applicant’s  additional  documentation,
we are not persuaded that she has been  the  victim  of  an  error  or
injustice.  At the time of the former  servicemember’s  retirement  in
1982, the regulation governing the SBP required  that  the  spouse  be
notified by letter, sent by regular mail, if the member  elected  less
than full coverage on the spouse’s behalf. Unlike the case  of  Barber
v. United States, there is  evidence  in  the  former  servicemember’s
records that the required notification was sent to  the  applicant  at
the  address  provided  by  the  servicemember.   It  was  the  former
servicemember’s responsibility to provide a change of  address  if  he
wanted his mail sent to an address other than the one he provided.  We
noted  applicant’s  contention  that  the  SBP  briefer  should   have
clarified the cost of the coverage  with  her  husband.   However,  as
noted in the Board’s  earlier  decision,  information  concerning  the
monthly cost of SBP coverage was contained on the reverse side of  the
AF Form 694, Data for Payment of Retired Air Force Personnel, executed
by the former servicemember on 27  May  1982.   It  was  the  member’s
responsibility to verify any  information  he  was  unsure  of  before
making his decision with respect to participation in the SBP  program.
In view of the foregoing, and in the absence of  substantial  evidence
to the contrary, we conclude  that  no  basis  exists  to  change  the
previous decision to deny the applicant’s request.

___________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  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 reconsidered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 7 July 1997, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

      Mr. Henry C. Saunders, Panel Chairman
      Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
      Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Member

The following additional documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit E.  Letter from Applicant, dated 4 May 97, w/atchs.




                                   HENRY C. SAUNDERS
                                   Panel Chairman