APPLICANT REQUESTS:  That Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) deductions from his pay be stopped.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, when he remarried he initially requested SBP be re-instated.  His wife then agreed that she would not need SBP, so he requested cancellation.  He assumed that his request for cancellation was approved, since deductions stopped.  However, when support was transferred to the Defense Finance and Accounting Service - Cleveland (DFAS-CL), they began again.

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

He was born on 6 April 1921.  He initially entered the Army on 19 February 1943. He was placed on the retired list, from the Army National Guard, on 6 April 1981, upon reaching age 60, in grade O-5, after over 40 years of creditable federal service.

Upon his placement on the retired list, he elected SBP coverage for his spouse.  His first spouse died in 1992 and he duly notified DFAS, Indianapolis (DFAS-IN). He remarried in 1994, initially requested reinstatement of SBP but soon thereafter requested cancellation.  SBP deductions were stopped.  In April 1995, DFAS-CL began deductions again.

Public Law 92-245, 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.  Changes in SBP options are not authorized except in specific instances or authorized by law.

Public Law 95-397, the RCSBP, enacted 30 September 1978, provided that any person entitled to retired pay would be eligible to participate in the SBP.  

In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Headquarters Army Retirement Services Office, which stated that no action was required as no SBP costs were being deducted.

DISCUSSION:

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 the aforementioned requirement.
2.  Finance records show no record of SBP deductions.

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 injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

                       GRANT 

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION

                              			Loren G. Harrell
                              			Director