Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101572
Original file (0101572.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  01-01572
            INDEX NUMBER:  100.03
            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED: NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

She be refunded $40  for  the  Servicemembers’  Group  Life  Insurance
(SGLI) premiums deducted for April and May (2001).

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

The reasons the applicant believes the  records  to  be  in  error  or
unjust and the evidence submitted in support  of  the  appeal  are  at
Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from  the
applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared  by
the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ ARPC/DPS,  Customer  Assistance,  recommended  the  application  be
denied.  They state that on  1  November  2000,  Public  Law  106-419,
Section 312, enacted  by  President  Clinton,  raised  the  amount  of
coverage under  the  SGLI  from  $200,000  to  $250,000.   Under  this
provision, every eligible member of the Participating Individual Ready
Reserve (PIRR) was automatically  covered,  regardless  of  any  prior
election.  The provision also stated that within the  month  of  April
2001, any PIRR member could elect to withdraw or reduce their coverage
without being charged $20  per  month  for  the  maximum  coverage  of
$250,000.

HQ ARPC advertised this change to the program extensively.  An article
was included in the January/February 2001 issue of the ARPC Update and
again in the May/June 2001 issue, which were mailed to all  individual
mobilization augmentees (IMAs) at their home address.   Their  website
had information about the change, along with instructions on  what  to
do if you wished to change your election or  decline  coverage.   This
was also printed on the February 2001  Leave  and  Earnings  Statement
(LES).

They further state that the  applicant  indicated  that  she  did  not
receive a February 2001 LES.   However,  Denver  Reserve  Pay  office,
states that all members receive an LES regardless of  whether  or  not
they perform duty during the month.  The applicant further states that
she did not receive the ARPC update and that the website “does not say
that the older forms are not valid anymore or that I have to  resubmit
a form even though I already had  one  on  file.”   Additionally,  the
website contains a section  specifically  addressing  the  applicant’s
situation, “What if I want to  decrease  my  coverage  or  I  wish  to
decline coverage?  You will need  to  reaccomplish  a  new  SGLV  Form
8286….”

A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant stated that contrary to  what  the  Denver  Reserve  Pay
office states, she has only received an LES for the  months  that  she
worked and got paid.  She received an LES at the end of May showing an
SGLI debt balance for April and May, that is when she started  calling
about this issue.  Additionally, she addresses the  issue  of  the  HQ
ARPC website and the issues surrounding her situation (Exhibit E).

_________________________________________________________________

THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT:

1.  The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing  law
or regulations.

2.  The application was timely filed.

3.  Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented  to  demonstrate
the existence of probable error or injustice.  We took notice  of  the
applicant's complete submission in judging the  merits  of  the  case;
however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force
office of primary responsibility and  adopt  their  rationale  as  the
basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of
either an error or injustice.  Therefore, in the absence  of  evidence
to the contrary, we find no compelling basis to recommend granting the
relief sought in this application.

_________________________________________________________________



THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:

The  applicant  be  notified  that  the  evidence  presented  did  not
demonstrate the existence of probable  material  error  or  injustice;
that the application was denied without  a  personal  appearance;  and
that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission  of
newly  discovered  relevant  evidence   not   considered   with   this
application.

_________________________________________________________________

The following members of the  Board  considered  this  application  in
Executive Session on 25 October 2001, under the provisions of AFI  36-
2603:

      Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
      Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
      Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member

The following documentary evidence was considered:

    Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 31 May 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
    Exhibit C.  Letter, HQ ARPC/DPS, dated 25 Jul 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit D.  Letter, AFBCMR, dated 3 Aug 01, w/atchs.
    Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 22 Aug 01.




                                   JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200894

    Original file (0200894.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The coverage, by law, is automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who have a spouse and/or children, unless the member declines coverage. In addition to the letters, articles were published in the September/October and November/December 2001 Air Reserve Personnel Update explaining the change to the program. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number 02-00894 in Executive Session on 24 July 2002...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200351

    Original file (0200351.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B. The provision also stated that within the month of April 2001, any PIRR member could elect to withdraw or reduce their coverage without being charged $20 per month for the maximum coverage of $250,000. We took...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2001 | 0101603

    Original file (0101603.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The provision also stated that within the month of April 2001, any PIRR member could elect to withdraw or reduce their coverage without being charged $20 per month for the maximum coverage of $250,000. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00830

    Original file (BC-2003-00830.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The coverage, by law, was automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who had a spouse and/or children, unless the member declined coverage. His MPF could not find a copy of his letter declining coverage. HQ ARPC extensively advertised the change to the program, including an article in the Air Reserve Personnel Update, and the notifications sent to the applicant’s address contained information regarding the FSGLI changes.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01797

    Original file (BC-2003-01797.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: No FSGLI was collected from her pay until 15 May 2003 when 19 months ($380.00) of “debt” was suddenly taken. All members of the Participating Individual Ready Reserve (PIRR) were mailed a letter with information concerning the new law and declination procedures, in August and October 2001 (Atch 1). _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01911

    Original file (BC-2003-01911.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS recommended denial. She served two weeks as an IMA reservist in August of 2002 and received monthly LES statements from September 2002 on, even though she was obligated to one two-week tour a year. The applicant indicates that she was on active duty in April 2001 when the law was changed; however, she presents no documentation to indicate she declined coverage at that time.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0102519

    Original file (0102519.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    In view of the reasons listed, he contends that the SGLI was improperly started and that the associated bill should be removed from his record. Exhibit D. Letter from Applicant, dated 25 Nov 01. JOSEPH G. DIAMOND Panel Chair AFBCMR 01-02519 MEMORANDUM FOR THE CHIEF OF STAFF Having received and considered the recommendation of the Air Force Board for Correction of Military Records and under the authority of Section 1552, Title 10, United States Code (70A Stat 116), it is directed that: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2002 | 0200608

    Original file (0200608.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant's military records, are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force (Exhibit B). They indicated that HQ, Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) advertised the change to the program extensively. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02798

    Original file (BC-2003-02798.doc) Auto-classification: Approved

    There is no evidence in the applicant’s military personnel records indicating she declined SGLI coverage during April 2001. She failed to decline SGLI coverage prior to her effective retirement date of 1 November 2002. The evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 16 January 2004, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant for review and response...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01864

    Original file (BC-2003-01864.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He purposely declined SGLI coverage when he separated from active duty in April 2000 and entered the Individual Mobilization Augmentee (IMA) program. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003- 01864 in Executive Session on 2 December 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel...