MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           3 December 1998                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AC98-06915

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. John N. Slone		Chairperson	
	Mr. Edward Williamson		Member	
	Mr. Roger W. Able		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That his Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) election be changed from “decline” to “spouse” coverage.

APPLICANT STATES:  He did not fill out the papers completely; he did not know what they were for.  He thought coverage for his spouse was automatic.  SBP premiums had been taken out of his pay for a short while but his retiree pay account was soon corrected.  Not until after he retired did someone explain the SBP to him.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He was born on 17 April 1936.  He enlisted in the Army National Guard on        17 April 1953.  He was appointed as a Reserve commissioned officer on 26 June 1967.  On 10 May 1973, he was notified that he was eligible for retired pay at age 60.  

The applicant completed his DD Form 2656, Application for Retired Pay, on      14 August 1995.  He checked that he elected not to participate in the SBP and signed the form.  His spouse signed concurring with his election and acknowledging that she received information that explained the options available and the effects of those options.

Public Law 92-425, the SBP, enacted 21 September 1972, provided that military members could elect to have their retired pay reduced to provide for an annuity after death to surviving dependents.  Changes in SBP options are not authorized except in specific instances or authorized by law.

In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Army Retirement Services.  The opinion recommended disapproval of the applicant’s request.  It noted that he properly completed the DD Form 2656, signed it, and his spouse signed acknowledging she concurred in his election.  The opinion could not explain why his participation would have been established as “automatic spouse” for a short period, then later corrected to his requested election, “decline,” unless his form was not forwarded to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service prior to his date of retirement.  Notwithstanding that occurrence, a military officer is fairly expected to research a topic such as SBP in order to make an informed decision before making an election which affects his family’s financial future.  No evidence of government error was found in this case. 

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion it is concluded:

1.	There is no evidence of government error.  The applicant completed the DD Form 2656, checked that he elected not to participate in the SBP and signed the form.  His spouse signed the form, concurring in his election.

2.	As a commissioned officer, the applicant had a responsibility to inform himself on the SBP before committing himself to an irrevocable decision.

3.  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

JNS_____  EW______  RWA_____  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AC98-06915	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	19981203	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	137.04	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.