RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
             AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2005-01319
                       INDEX CODE:  137.00

                       COUNSEL:  MR. STEPHEN J. FLODMAN

                       HEARING DESIRED:  NO

MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE:  21 OCT 06

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to allow him  to  reinstate  spouse  coverage
under the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

When he was divorced he stopped  the  SBP,  but  his  records  do  not
indicate he ever had SBP.

Applicant's complete submission,  with  attachments,  is  attached  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

Prior to his 1 October 1980 retirement, the applicant was married with
children and elected spouse and child coverage under the SBP.   On  28
December 1992, the applicant and J. were divorced.  On 6 January  1992
(sic), the applicant requested  the  Defense  Finance  and  Accounting
Service  (DFAS)  to  discontinue  his  participation  in  SBP.    DFAS
suspended the SBP premiums and forwarded the  applicant  a  refund  of
premiums.  The applicant married D. on 19 February 1994.   On  9 March
1994, the applicant requested  the  finance  center  reinstate  spouse
coverage; however, within the first year of his marriage  to  D.,  the
applicant requested the finance center terminate the SBP coverage.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPPTR states SBP spouse coverage is  suspended  when  the  spouse
loses eligibility.  However, Public Law (PL) 99-145 allows  a  retiree
to elect not to resume coverage for a  subsequently  acquired  spouse.
Once the SBP is terminated, the servicemember may not provide coverage
for future spouses,  unless  during  a  specifically  authorized  open
enrollment.  If the servicemember fails to submit a valid  request  to
terminate spouse  coverage,  the  new  spouse  will  be  automatically
covered at  the  previous  level  on  the  first  anniversary  of  the
marriage.  The premium for the  coverage  will  become  effective  the
first day of the thirteenth month.

On 17 October 1998, PL 105-261 established an SBP open enrollment from
1 March 1999 through 29 February 2000 for servicemembers who were  not
participating at the fullest extent and a non-participant could  elect
coverage.  However, a lump-sum buy-in amount, determined by  the  date
the servicemember first had an eligible beneficiary, had  to  be  paid
within 24 months.  In addition the servicemember  must  have  survived
for two full years from the effective date of  the  election  for  the
beneficiary to become eligible for new or enhanced SBP.

HQ AFPC/DPPRT further  states  the  applicant’s  contention  that  his
records did not indicate he ever had SBP coverage  is  without  merit.
The applicant’s records reflect his SBP coverage was terminated  under
PL 99-145 within the first year of his marriage to D.  PL 105-261  did
not prohibit  servicemembers  from  making  an  election  during  open
enrollment  if  they  had  not  resumed  spouse  coverage  when   they
remarried.  However, there is no evidence to  indicate  the  applicant
attempted  to  elect  coverage  on  his  current  spouse  during   the
authorized open enrollment period.  If the servicemember  had  elected
coverage for her, the lump-sum buy-in would  have  been  approximately
$9,000.00, based upon the five years since the  first  anniversary  of
his marriage to D.  PL  108-375  has  authorized  an  open  enrollment
period scheduled for  October  2005.   AFPC/DPPRT  further  states  to
provide the applicant an additional  opportunity  to  change  his  SBP
would be inequitable to other servicemembers  in  similar  situations;
therefore, they recommend denial of the applicant’s request.

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

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states on several occasions he contacted the SBP  office
at Davis-Monthan AFB regarding his records showing he
declined SBP in 1980.  On 3 June 2005, he went the to  SBP  office  at
Davis-Monthan and received a printout and the printout  showed  zero’s
where there should be amounts paid for SBP.  He needs  this  corrected
in order  to  enroll  his  current  spouse  in  SBP  during  the  open
enrollment starting in October 2005 (Exhibit D).

_________________________________________________________________

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 an error or an 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 its rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant’s SBP coverage not be  reinstated  on  his  current  spouse.
Although the applicant contends his records did not  reflect  he  ever
elected SBP, his records reflect he had SBP coverage  and  that  after
his divorce,  he  requested  the  SBP  coverage  be  terminated.   The
applicant remarried and requested the SBP coverage be  reinstated  for
his current spouse; however,  before  the  first  anniversary  of  his
current marriage he apparently requested the  coverage  be  terminated
which was done by DFAS.  Further, there is no evidence  the  applicant
attempted  to  elect  coverage  for  his  current  spouse  during  the
authorized 1999-2000 open enrollment period.  The Board notes that the
applicant will have another opportunity to elect coverage  during  the
upcoming authorized open enrollment in October  2005.   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 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 AFBCMR Docket Number BC-
2005-01319 in Executive Session on 7 July 2005, under  the  provisions
of AFI 36-2603:

                       Mr. Michael J. Novel, Panel Chair
                       Ms. Kathy L. Boockholdt, Member
                       Ms. Marcia J. Bachman, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

      Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 15 Apr 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit B. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 20 May 05, w/atchs.
      Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 27 May 05.
      Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 8 Jun 05, w/atch.




                             MICHAEL J. NOVEL
                             Panel Chair