RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03549
INDEX CODE: 128.14
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be reimbursed for premiums paid on her Servicemember’s Group Life
Insurance (SGLI).
_________________________________________________________________
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 is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 11 January 2002, AFPC/DPW notified the applicant that they were unable
to process her request without additional documentation. DPW requested the
applicant provide copies of her leave and earnings statements along with a
copy of her current SGLI election certificate. Applicant did not respond
within the prescribed time-frame.
The relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the
letter prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied. DPW states that the
applicant did not provide the additional information needed to sufficiently
evaluate her claim. DPW states that the Board disapprove
The DPW evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 19
April 2002 for review and response. As of this date, this office has
received no response.
_________________________________________________________________
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 error or injustice. The applicant was properly charged with a
debt as a result of the passage of Public Law 106-419, Section 312,
effective 1 April 2001, which automatically increased the level of SGLI
coverage. Since the applicant did not provide the additional information
requested in order to sufficiently evaluate her claim, it is our opinion
that no basis exists to reimburse the premiums withheld. Therefore, the
applicant’s request is not favorably considered.
_________________________________________________________________
THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT:
The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate
the existence of 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 24 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chairman
Mr. Jackson Hauslein, Member
Mr. Edward Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number
01-03549:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 November 2001.
Exhibit B. Letters, AFPC/DPW, dated 10 April 2002 and
11 January 2002.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 19 April 2002.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
DPW indicated that, by letter dated 3 January 2002, they requested that the applicant provide additional documentation, i.e., his leave and earnings statements along with a copy of his current SGLI election certificate. In addition, DPW states that Hanscom AFB took adequate steps as directed to inform all members of the increase in coverage and that the applicant had adequate time during the month of April 2001 to make a new election and avoid the increased premium. The DPW evaluation is...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03442
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 17 April 2002, the applicant provided additional information, with attachments, to support her appeal. Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW stated that the applicant was erroneously charged for SGLI for the period of 20 Feb 98 to 31 Mar 01. In their opinion,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02700A
The applicant's request to be reimbursed for his SGLI premiums was considered and denied by the Board on 15 April 2003. Lackland AFB notified its servicemembers of the pending change to SGLI coverage by using the base bulletins, newspapers, and the April 2001 pay statements. It would appear that he was notified of the SGLI increase and we find no evidence to support his miscounseling contention.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 01-03224 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for the Servicemember’s Group Life Insurance (SGLI) premiums automatically deducted from April through September 2001. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: The reasons the applicant...
Therefore, they recommend the Board approve applicant’s request and authorize reimbursement of all overcharged premiums effective 1 July 2001 and disapprove reimbursement of all charged premiums from 1 April 2001 through 30 June 2001. A copy of the Air Force evaluation is at Exhibit G. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 5 April 2002 for review and...
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATIONS: AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied due to a lack of sufficient evidence to support the claim. 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 and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02563
Members who had elected no coverage or less than $250,000 coverage prior to 1 April 2001, could avoid the higher premiums provided they completed a new election form in April 2001. No evidence has been submitted showing that the applicant declined coverage during the month of April 2001. We therefore 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 no basis exists to reimburse the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00116
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 25 April 2003, for review and comment. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded the applicant should be reimbursed for the FSGLI premiums she paid from November 2001 to December 2002. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 25 Apr 03.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04061
It was never fixed up to present day and he has paid $420 into the SGLI, which he did not want. After receiving the applicant’s DD Form 149 dated 19 December 2002, they need additional information to sufficiently evaluate his claim and make an appropriate recommendation. They did not receive any response from the applicant.. AFPC/DPW complete evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A...