RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-00947
INDEX CODE: 137.00
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be reimbursed for the premiums paid on her Servicemembers’ Group
Life Insurance.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
Her SGLI was taken out of her check when she didn’t request it.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits a SGLV 8286,
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance Election and Certificate dated 10
April 1999, declining coverage.
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is an enlisted member of the Regular Air Force who has a
Total Active Federal Military Service Date of 13 October 1999 and a
pay date of 5 August 1998. She is currently serving in the grade of
senior airman.
On 10 April 1999, applicant signed a SGLV 8286 stating that she does
not want insurance at this time.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPW states that they needed additional information to
sufficiently evaluate her claim and make an appropriate
recommendation. On 18 April 2002 they sent a letter to applicant
requesting the additional information. They did not receive a
response. Therefore, they recommend disapproval of applicant’s
request. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 19 July 2002, a complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was
forwarded to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As
of this date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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. 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 Staff
and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of 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 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 on 12
December 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Mr. Edward Parker, Member
Mr. Jackson Hauslein, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 7 Mar 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPW, dated 1 Jul 02.
Exhibit D. Letter, AFBCMR, dated 19 Jul 02.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
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 | CY2002 | BC-2002-00733
Applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. On 7 July 2000, applicant signed a SGLV 8286 stating that he does not want insurance at this time. 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 Staff and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion that the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
On 4 February 2002, the applicant completed a new SGLV 8286 declining coverage _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPW recommended denial. It is their opinion that the Aviano AB leadership 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. We took notice of the...
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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02642
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 6 December 2002 for review and comment within 30 days. 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02700
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 provided sufficient evidence to support his claim. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC- 2002-02700 in Executive Session on 15 April 2003, under the...
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...
In April 1999, he discovered that he was enrolled and charged for SGLI coverage, even though he had other insurance coverage with another company, and declined SGLI coverage in January 1999. As of this date, no response has been received by this office (Exhibit C). ___________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application AFBCMR Docket Number 01-03488 in Executive Session on 24 July 2002, under the provisions of AFI...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00349
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. ________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and states that when she declined the SGLI coverage on 19 March 2001 she was aware of the increase that would be in effect on April 2001. The MPF technician informed her that since she was declining coverage so close to the new coverage, it would not be...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2001-03623
The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application, extracted from the applicant’s military records, are contained in the letters prepared by the appropriate office of the Air Force at Exhibits B, and E. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied due to lack of sufficient evidence to support the applicant’s claim. It is DPW’s opinion that the Maxwell AFB leadership took adequate steps as...