| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Mr. Mark D. Manning | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Lester Echols | Member | |
| Ms. Karen Y. Fletcher | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his records be corrected to show he declined to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and that his spouse concurred in his declination. He states that his duty station was in Lubbock, TX and he and his spouse lived in Lubbock. His out-processing station was Fort Sill, OK. His spouse was not able to accompany him to his SBP briefing. He declined the SBP but, due to her not being there to sign her concurrence, it was forced upon him against his wishes. His spouse provides her concurrence, stating she believes the SBP is a financially irresponsible program for their circumstances. He provides no supporting evidence.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records are not available. Information contained herein was obtained from alternate sources.
The applicant retired on 1 January 2001. On or about 6 November 2000, he completed a Data for Payment of Retired Personnel, DD Form 2656. In section IX, item 26g he checked that he elected not to participate in the SBP. His spouse did not sign in section XI concurring in his declination. The instructions on the DD Form 2656 for item 26g stated that if this item is marked then section XI must be completed, if married. The instructions for section XI state that the law requires that an otherwise eligible spouse concur if the member declines to elect SBP coverage. The spouse’s concurrence must be obtained and dated on or after the date of the member’s election but before the retirement date. If concurrence is not obtained when required, maximum coverage will be established for the spouse if appropriate.
On 14 November 2000, the Fort Sill, OK Personnel Operations Branch forwarded a letter to the applicant’s spouse, at his current mailing address, explaining the SBP, explaining that the applicant declined to participate in the SBP, and informing her that the SBP could not be declined without her concurrence. A pre-printed spouse concurrence statement was provided for her signature. The statement was not returned to Fort Sill.
Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided that military members on active duty could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents. Retiring members and spouses were to be informed of the SBP options and effects. Public Law 99-145, enacted 8 November 1986, required a spouse’s written concurrence for a retiring member’s election that provides less than the maximum spouse coverage.
Public Law 105-85, enacted 18 November 1997, established the option to terminate SBP participation. Retirees have a one-year period, beginning on the second anniversary of the date on which their retired pay started, to withdraw from 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: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
2. The evidence of record shows the applicant completed the DD Form 2656 almost two months prior to his retirement date. The instructions for completing the form clearly stated that his spouse’s concurrence in section XI was required if he declined to participate in the SBP. In addition, Fort Sill forwarded a letter to his spouse informing her that he declined the SBP and, if she concurred in his declination, to sign and return an attached spouse concurrence statement. The letter was sent to the applicant’s current mailing address. It appears his spouse did not return the statement prior to his retirement and it appears he did not otherwise inquire into how his spouse’s concurrence was to be provided prior to his retirement date.
3. The applicant retired on 1 January 2001. Effective 1 January 2003, he will have a one-year opportunity to disenroll, with his spouse’s concurrence, from the SBP.
4. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__mdm___ __le____ __kyf___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2001066266 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | |
| DATE BOARDED | 20020523 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | (DENY) |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. | 137.03 |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001830C070206
Michael J. Flynn | |Member | The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. On 30 November 2003, the applicant completed a DD Form 2656. The instructions for Section XI of the DD Form 2656 inform the member, in part, that an otherwise eligible spouse must concur if the member declines to elect SBP coverage.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080011716
The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his records to show he elected not to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) with his spouse's concurrence. By doing so, he also acknowledged he had been counseled that he can terminate SBP participation, with his spouse's written concurrence, within one year after the second anniversary of commencement of retired pay. Completion of Section XI (SBP Spouse Concurrence) of DD Form 2656 is required when a service member is married and...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050001830C070206
On 30 November 2003, the applicant completed a DD Form 2656. The instructions for Section XI of the DD Form 2656 inform the member, in part, that an otherwise eligible spouse must concur if the member declines to elect SBP coverage. The available evidence shows his spouse did not sign in Section XI concurring with an election not to participate in the SBP at the time the DD Form 2656 was originally prepared.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080019169
The applicant requests, in effect, that her records be corrected to show she elected, with her spouse's concurrence, not to participate in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and reimbursement of SBP premiums deducted from her retired pay. Evidence of record shows that the applicant declined SBP coverage on 12 May 2008. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: a. showing that the applicant's spouse concurred with her...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021185
The applicant provides: * DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel), dated 2 March 2011 * SBP Spouse Election Concurrence Statement, dated 8 March 2011 * Retiree Account Statement, dated 29 September 2011 * letter of explanation/correction request, dated 14 October 2011 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. By law, his spouse was required to authenticate this form on or after the date he made this election but prior to the date of retirement. As a result, the Board recommends that all...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110012530
The applicant provides: * DD Form 2656 (Data for Payment of Retired Personnel) * SBP Spouse Election Concurrence Statement * Retiree Account Statement CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant's Retiree Account Statement, dated 9 March 2011 (effective 1 April 2011), shows an SBP deduction for spouse coverage. As a result, the Board recommends that all Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by: * showing the applicant accurately completed the DD Form 2656,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008254
The applicant states that he and his spouse elected not to participate in the SBP; however, when they completed the DD Form 2656 (Date for Payment of Retired Personnel), she erroneously entered the date "20061214" instead of "20071214," resulting in a "default" spouse coverage based on the full amount. The applicants DD Form 2656, dated 14 December 2007, shows he elected Not to participate in the SBP" and placed an "x" in Item 26g (I Elect Not to Participate in the SBP). As a result, the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001582
The applicant's Retiree Account Statement, dated 9 July 2008, shows an SBP deduction of $268.84 for spouse only coverage, indicating that he was covered under the SBP for spouse coverage. The evidence of record shows that the applicant submitted a DD Form 2656 wherein he elected, in the presence of an RSO counselor, not to participate in the SBP. The SBP spouse concurrence statement shows she concurred with his decision after the date he made that decision but not before he retired.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100029388
The spouse's signature MUST be notarized] of the DD Form 2656 is neither signed by his spouse to indicate her concurrence or non-concurrence with his election nor by a witness and/or retirement services officer. The evidence of record shows he retired on 13 July 2009 by reason of temporary disability. By law, his spouse was required to authenticate this form on or after the date he made this election but prior to the date of retirement.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090001114
The applicant requests, in effect, that her records be corrected to show that she declined participation in the Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) and that she receive a refund for all SBP premiums taken from her retired pay. The applicant states that she did not request the SBP deduction and her spouse signed her application for retirement indicating he knew he would not receive SBP benefits. The evidence of record shows the applicants 20-year letter was dated 5 May 1995.