IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 3 March 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140009505 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). 2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his military records to show he and his spouse elected not to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP). 2. The applicant states: * he never consciously agreed to participate in the SBP program * his SBP counselor did not give him the opportunity to reject this plan, nor did she explain the monthly $200.00 deduction from his paycheck * she (the counselor) was more interested in finishing his paperwork and rushing him out the door * neither he nor his family want SBP * they already have life insurance coverage 3. The applicant provides: * a DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel) * a notarized statement from his spouse * a memorandum CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. After prior active duty service in the Regular Army, the applicant enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve. He was ordered to active duty on 11 October 2000 and served until he retired on 31 January 2014. 2. The applicant submitted a DD Form 2656, dated 2 December 2013, which he signed indicating that he elected full SBP coverage for his spouse and children. Item 32a (Spouse Signature) of the applicant's DD Form 2656 does not contain the signature of the applicant's spouse indicating that she concurred with the SBP election he made. However, her concurrence was not required because the applicant opted for full SBP coverage. 3. He submitted a notarized statement, dated 1 March 2014, from his spouse indicating that: * she was rejecting the SBP * she understood that cancellation of the SPB would not be in her best interest if the applicant died * she did not ask for nor did she agree to SBP * it is creating a financial burden on her family budget * she wants the deduction to stop immediately 4. Public Law 92-425, enacted 21 September 1972, established the SBP. The SBP provided that military members could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents. 5. Public Law 99-145, enacted 8 November 1985 but effective 1 March 1986, required a spouse’s written concurrence for a retiring member's election that provides less than the maximum spouse coverage. 6. Department of Defense Financial Management Regulation, volume 7B, chapter 43, provides guidance on SBP elections. This chapter states, in pertinent part, that effective 1 March 1986, a married member is enrolled with spouse coverage based on full retired pay at the time of retirement unless that spouse has concurred in writing to another election requested by the member. When the spouse’s concurrence is required, the signature indicating concurrence must be corroborated by one or more witnesses. This chapter also states, in pertinent part, that the Secretary of the Military Department concerned (or designee) may correct any election or any change or revocation of an election when the Secretary considers it necessary to correct an administrative error. 7. Public Law 105-85, enacted 18 November 1997, established the option to terminate SBP participation. Retirees have a 1-year period, beginning on the second anniversary of the date on which their retired pay started, to withdraw from the SBP. The spouse's concurrence is required. No premiums will be refunded to those who opt to disenroll. The effective date of termination is the first day of the first calendar month following the month in which the election is received by the Secretary concerned. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant's request to be disenrolled from SBP due to his misunderstanding of the program’s costs and benefits was carefully considered and found to be insufficient in merit. 2. The evidence shows that on 2 December 2013, the applicant elected to participate in the SBP and provide full coverage for his spouse and children. The spouse's concurrence is required when the retiring service member elects less than full coverage, which means the spouse’s concurrence was not required in the applicant's case. 3. The applicant became eligible to draw retired pay on 1 February 2014. Therefore, he will have a 1-year period beginning on 1 February 2016 in which to terminate his SBP enrollment. He is encouraged to contact the nearest Retirement Services Office prior to making his decision for more information. 4. In view of the above, the applicant's request should be denied. BOARD VOTE: ________ ________ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ____X___ ____X___ ____X___ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice. Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned. _______ _ X______ ___ CHAIRPERSON I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case. ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140009505 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20140009505 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1