RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-01550
			INDEX CODE:		 137.01, 137.04
			COUNSEL:  None

	 		HEARING DESIRED:  No
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

His records be corrected to show that he elected child only coverage under the survivor benefit plan (SBP) rather than spouse coverage.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His wife was out of town and was unable to sign the DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel) while he was on active duty.

In support of his request, applicant provided a notarized copy of DD Form 2656, Application for Correction of Military Record Under the Provisions of Title 10, U.S. Code, Section 1552, and a statement from his wife.

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

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The former member was married and had dependent children prior to his 1 March 2003 retirement.  The SBP counselor at the Pentagon briefed the member and he elected child only SBP coverage; however, his wife did not concur in the election until after his retirement date, invalidating the election.  Consequently, the DFAS-CL established automatic spouse coverage based on full retired pay to comply with the law.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPPTR recommends denial.  The applicant’s claim that his wife was unable to sign because she was out of town is without merit.  On 6 December 2002, the SBP counselor at the Pentagon mailed the form and a letter to his wife, the date the applicant made the election, requesting her concurrence.  The letter also explained that if she agreed with her husband’s child only election, she must sign and date the DD Form 2656 in the presence of a notary or a Military Personnel Flight (MPF) representative, and the form must be returned before her husband’s retirement date or maximum spouse coverage and costs will take effect.  The counselor also provided a copy of the SBP Report of Individual Person (RIP) the applicant had signed, acknowledging he understood the options and effects of his actions pertaining to his SBP election.  

The applicant’s wife signed the election form eighteen days after his retirement date, evidence that the letter was received, and her signature was notarized in Lakewood LA.  Furthermore, the member failed to respond to our 7 May 2003 letter requesting he obtain a notarized statement completed by his wife in which she acknowledges retired pay ceases when the member dies, and approval of his request would result in her receiving no monetary benefit from the Air Force in the event of the applicant’s death.  

Approval of this request would provide the petitioner an opportunity not afforded other retirees and is not justified.  The applicant may exercise his option under PL 105-85 to terminate all SBP participation beginning on 1 March 2005.

The DPPTR evaluation is at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 9 June 2003, for review and response.  As of this date, this office has received no response.

_________________________________________________________________

HE 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.  After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant's submission, we are not persuaded that the releif requested should be granted.  Applicant's contentions are duly noted; however, we do not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to override the rationale provided by the Air Force.  We therefore agree with the recommendation of the Air Force and adopt the rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice.  In view of the above and absent of persuasive 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 an material error or an 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 Docket Number BC-2003-01550 in Executive Session on 30 September 2003 under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 23 Apr 03, w/atchs.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPPTR, dated 5 Jun 03.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jun 03.

                                   Panel Chair