RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  98-03298
            INDEX NUMBER:  137.03

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to reflect he withdrew from  the  Survivor
Benefit Plan (SBP) retroactive to 1985 and that he be paid all back
premiums.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He was unaware that he could terminate  his  SBP  participation  in
1985 due to being 100% disabled  for  ten  consecutive  years.   He
withdrew from the SBP in 1996.  He should be paid all back premiums
since his tenth year of being 100% disabled.

Applicant’s complete statement and documentary  evidence  submitted
in support of his application are at Exhibit A.

___________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant retired on 1 August 1967.  He made  an  SBP  election
for spouse coverage based on  a  reduced  base  amount  during  the
initial open enrollment period (21  Sep  72  -  20  Mar  74).   The
Department of Veterans Affairs  (DVA)  rated  him  as  100  percent
disabled effective 11 March 1975 and his retired  pay  was  totally
offset by VA disability compensation at that time.  He made  direct
remittance payments for the SBP until 1 July 1996, when he withdrew
from SBP participation under the provisions of Public Law (PL)  96-
402.

___________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The Retired Pay Operations, DFAS-CL/FRAB, stated that  the  Jul-Aug
and Nov-Dec 1980 issues of the  Afterburner  contained  information
regarding disenrollment from SBP upon being rated totally  disabled
by the VA for a period of ten years.  The applicant  has  presented
no information  that  he  did  not  receive  these  issues  of  the
Afterburner.  If it can be established that he did not receive  the
issues indicated, favorable consideration should be  given  to  his
request.  However, the request should not be approved if he  cannot
establish that he did not receive the issues concerned.  It is each
retiree’s  responsibility  to  request  discontinuance  when   they
satisfy the time requirement, and the Services  have  no  means  of
determining when and if they are eligible.  (Exhibit C)

The  Retiree  Services  Branch,  AFPC/DPPTR,  stated  there  is  no
evidence of error  or  injustice  in  this  case;  therefore,  they
recommend denial of the  applicant’s  request.   DPPTR  stated,  in
part, that prior to passage of PL 96-402,  information  about  this
proposed legislation was contained in the Jul-Aug 80 issue  of  the
Afterburner, USAF News for Retired Personnel.  After the change was
adopted, a more detailed article was published in  the  Nov-Dec  80
Afterburner issue.  Furthermore,  the  81-82  SBP  open  enrollment
information package, mailed  to  all  retirees  regardless  of  the
status of their  SBP  coverage,  contained  information  about  the
withdrawal provision  for  totally  disabled  members.   While  the
Services provide important information to  retirees  about  benefit
and entitlement issues, it’s each member’s responsibility to ensure
they take appropriate action to request or effect changes in  their
SBP coverage as permitted by the statute.  There  is  no  provision
under the law for retirees  withdrawing  from  the  SBP  under  the
provisions of PL 96-402 to receive a refund of premiums paid  prior
to the first day of the  month  following  the  month  the  finance
center receives a valid request to withdraw.

The complete evaluation is at Exhibit D.

___________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

Applicant stated that  in  1972  the  VA  awarded  him  a  service-
connected disability rating of 70%.  In 1975, he was awarded a  30%
unemployability rating, for a combined rating  of  100%.   At  that
time, it was his understanding that his rating would revert back to
70% if and when he was able to go back to work.  To this  date,  he
is still evaluated at 30% unemployable.

He did not know officially that he could discontinue  SBP  and  his
wife would be eligible for DIC until he received  a  28  June  1996
letter from DFAS, with a copy of the SBP Withdrawal Fact Sheet.

He does not deny receiving the cited USAF newsletters.  He  had  no
intention of withdrawing from SBP as long  as  he  was  subject  to
being reverted back to a 70% disability rating.   If  he  read  the
information, he ignored it since it did not concern him  whatsoever
at that time.

Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit F.

___________________________________________________________________

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.  We  took
notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits
of  the  case;  however,   we   agree   with   the   opinions   and
recommendations of the Air Force offices 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.
Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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 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 20 April 2000, under the provisions of AFI 36-
2603:

      Mrs. Barbara A. Westgate, Panel Chair
      Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
      Mr. Mike Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 2 Nov 98, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, DFAS-CL/FRAB, dated 7 Apr 99.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFPC/DPPTR, dated 20 Oct 99, w/atch.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 26 Apr 99 and
                5 Nov 99.
    Exhibit F.  Letter from Applicant, dated 8 Nov 99, w/atchs.



                                   BARBARA A. WESTGATE
                                   Panel Chair