RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-02112
                       INDEX CODE:  137.00

      APPLICANT  COUNSEL:  None

      SSN        HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be allowed to terminate spouse coverage under the Survivor  Benefit
Plan (SBP).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The SBP was added to his retired pay without his knowledge, advice  or
approval.

Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant and his first  spouse  were  married  on  14  May  1960.
Effective 30 November 1974, he  was  relieved  from  this  assignment,
removed from Reserve  status  and  assigned  to  the  retired  reserve
section on 1 December 1974, awaiting pay at 60.

Public Law (PL) 95-397, effective 30 September 1978, provided for  the
RCSBP.  Congress authorized  an open enrollment  period from 1 October
1978 through 30 September 1979, which was later extended to  31  March
1980.  According to the applicant's RCSBP Election Certificate,  dated
20 February 1979, he elected spouse  and  child  coverage,  Option  C,
immediate coverage, based on full retired pay.

According to the applicant, he and his first spouse were  divorced  in
the early 1980's and his youngest child lost eligibility in 1988.

The applicant began receiving retired pay effective 13 June 1992  when
he reached age 60.  At that time, RCSBP  coverage  and  premiums  were
suspended.  The RCSBP add-on charges for child coverage  continued  to
be deducted from his retired pay, as required by law.

The applicant and his current spouse were married on  29  August  1998
but he did not advise  the  Defense  Finance  and  Accounting  Service
(DFAS) that he did not want to resume coverage on his new spouse.

When DFAS-Cleveland (DFAS-CL) learned of his  remarriage  in  February
2001, RCSBP spouse coverage was reinstated and  recovery  of  premiums
retroactive to 1 September 1999 (first anniversary of the  remarriage)
was commenced by DAFS-CL.  The add-ons charges for child coverage were
suspended as a result of his remarriage.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR states that SBP  spouse  coverage  is  suspended  when  the
spouse loses eligibility.  Under Public Law (PL) 99-145 a  retiree  is
allowed not to elect to resume coverage for a newly  acquired  spouse;
however, if the service member fails to take action before  the  first
anniversary of the marriage the new spouse is automatically covered at
the previous level.  The premiums will become effective the first  day
of the thirteenth month and DFAS will recover any cost  retroactively.
The applicant's failure to notify DFAS in timely manner  to  terminate
spouse coverage and incurring this debt is unfortunate;  however,  his
spouse became an eligible beneficiary  on  the  first  anniversary  of
their marriage and would have received an annuity after  the  recovery
of the premium debt  if  the  applicant  had  died  before  then.   In
addition, the  Afterburner,  News  for  USAF  for  Retired  Personnel,
regularly publishes information to remind  the  retirees  that  it  is
their responsibility to keep their beneficiary information up to date.
 To provide  the  applicant  additional  time  to  terminate  his  SBP
coverage would be unfair  to  other  members  in  similar  situations,
therefore they recommend denying the applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 7
September 2001, for review and response.  As of this date, no response
has been received by this office.

_________________________________________________________________

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 opinion and the recommendation of  the  Air
Force and adopt their rationale as the basis for our  conclusion  that
the applicant has not been the victim of an  error  or  injustice.  In
this respect, PL 99-145 provides the service member the opportunity to
elect to not enroll or  resume  SBP  coverage  for  a  newly  acquired
spouse.  The service member must notify DFAS of the change in coverage
before the first anniversary of the marriage, if not  the  new  spouse
will be automatically covered at the previous  level.   The  applicant
had opportunities to obtain information regarding how to make  changes
in  his  coverage.   To  provide  the  applicant  additional  time  to
terminate his participation in SBP would be unfair to  other  retirees
in similar situations.  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 November 2001 under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

                       Mr. David C. Van Gasbeck, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Patricia D. Vestal, Member
                       Mr. Michael J. Novel, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 16 Jul 01, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 31 Aug 01.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MIBR, dated 7 Sep 01.




                             DAVID C. VAN GASBECK
                             Panel Chair