MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           10 February 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999030401

	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.

	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Van B. Cunningham		Chairperson	
	Mr. James P. Steuve		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		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 records be corrected to show he declined Survivor Benefit Plan (SBP) coverage.

APPLICANT STATES:  That his first language is Spanish.  He was not aware that he was submitting his daughter’s name for annuity purposes.  He was under the impression he was providing her name as his insurance beneficiary.  His daughter is not a dependent and is married.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records from his last period of service are not available.  The information contained herein was obtained from his prior service records and information provided by the applicant and the Defense Finance and Accounting Service – Cleveland Center (DFAS-CL).

The applicant was born on 5 April 1938.  When he applied for retired pay in April 1998, he elected SBP coverage for a person with insurable interest, his daughter who was 26 years old at the time.

On 9 June 1999, the applicant wrote to DFAS-CL requesting cancellation of his SBP and reimbursement for any cost already collected.

On 28 December 1999, DFAS-CL confirmed that the applicant’s SBP status is currently “no beneficiary.”

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.  A person who is not married and does not have a dependent child upon becoming eligible to participate in the SBP may elect to provide an annuity to a natural person with an insurable interest in the member.  

Public Law 103-337, enacted 5 October 1994, allowed withdrawal of insurable interest elections at any time.  Once participation is discontinued, benefits may not be paid in conjunction with the earlier participation and premiums paid may not be refunded (because SBP coverage had been provided during the period enrolled).  Participation in the SBP may not later be resumed except where a person who was not married or had no dependent children upon becoming eligible to participate later marries or acquires a dependent child.

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.  The Board concludes that there is no evidence of government administrative error in this case.  The applicant’s SBP election was properly made at the time he enrolled.  His daughter was an eligible beneficiary as a person with an insurable interest in him.  If the applicant had died, his daughter would have received an SBP annuity.  DFAS-CL disenrolled him effective 1 July 1999 upon his request.

2.  As a senior non-commissioned officer, the applicant had a responsibility to himself to become as informed as possible prior to making such a financial decision.  If he felt he did not fully understand the guidance provided by the SBP or transition counselor, he should have sought out a Spanish-speaking counselor, such as from nearby Fort Buchanan, PR prior to signing any documents. 

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

__vbc___  __jps___  __klw___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999030401	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000210	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	128.18	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.