RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02212
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reimbursed for the Family Member Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance
(FSGLI) premiums deducted from his pay during the period from January 2002
through April 2002.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He never received proper notification that FSGLI applied to active duty
military members with an active duty spouse who were already covered under
SGLI.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits copies of his Leave and
Earnings Statements (LESs) and his spouse’s LES.
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant and his spouse are serving on active duty in the grade of
colonel.
On 5 June 2001, Public Law 107-14, established the FSGLI program that was
implemented on 1 November 2001, making it possible for servicemembers to
provide up to $100,000 coverage for their spouse and $10,000 coverage for
their dependent children through the Office of Servicemembers’ Group Life
Insurance.
On 26 February 2002, the applicant completed an SGLV 8286A, electing to
decline FSGLI coverage for his spouse.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, that
adequate steps were taken to inform all members of the new program. The
applicant had adequate time between 1 November 2001 and 31 December 2001 to
make an election, and has not provided any documentation to indicate that
he was not aware of the change.
The AFPC/DPW evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states that the evaluation fails to address why the Air Force
classified his spouse as a dependent for SGLI purposes when in no other
situation, at any other time in their 23 years of marriage did it do so.
Furthermore, Public Law 107-14 does not address military couples.
In further support of the appeal, the applicant submits copies of news
articles.
The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, is at 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 error or injustice. Public Law 107-14 established the FSGLI
program that was implemented on 1 November 2001, making it possible for
servicemembers to provide up to $100,000 coverage for their spouse and
$10,000 coverage for their dependent children through the Office of
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance. 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. Members who did not desire coverage
had to complete an election declining coverage during the month of November
2001. The applicant contends that he never received proper notification
that FSGLI applied to active duty military members with an active duty
spouse who were already covered under SGLI. However, beginning on 19
October 2001, his base newspaper, the Space Observer, contained an article
entitled, Family Member SGLI Coverage is Automatic as of Nov. 1, which
clearly stated, “The SGLI program does not make the distinction between
spouses who are military members themselves and those who are not. Thus,
military members married to military members will also be automatically
enrolled Nov. 1.” No evidence has been submitted showing that the
applicant declined coverage during the month of November 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 premiums withheld.
Therefore, we find no 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 Docket Number 02-02212 in
Executive Session on 12 December 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member
Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jun 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPW, dated 26 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 02.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Sep 02, w/atchs.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02213
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02213 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reimbursed for the Family Member Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums deducted from her pay during the period from 1 November 2001 through 28 February 2002. The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. On 5 June 2001,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00665
On 5 June 2001, Public Law 107-14 established the FSGLI program that was implemented on 1 November 2001, making it possible for servicemembers to provide up to $100,000 coverage for their spouse and $10,000 coverage for their dependent children through the Office of Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance. The applicant married an active duty member of the Army on 2 August 2001. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPW recommends the...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-02897
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied, and states in part, that there is no evidence that an injustice occurred. 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. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number 02-02897...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03709
Apparently, Mountain Home AFB had failed to enter a code in their records to show joint spouse and exemption from SGLI spouse coverage. There is no declination statement in the member’s record. No premiums were deducted from her pay until she arrived at Laughlin AFB in September 2002.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00179
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 premiums withheld. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-00179 in Executive Session on 25 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein,...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00176
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 premiums withheld. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-00176 in Executive Session on 25 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein,...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2004-00134
They indicated Air Force leadership took adequate steps to inform all members of this new program and the applicant had adequate time to make an election decision. In accordance with public law, although premiums had not yet been deducted from her pay, the applicant’s spouse was insured for $100,000 for the period 1 November 2001 to present. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01779
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | bc-2003-03316
The coverage, by law, was automatic unless the member declined the coverage. In September 2003, he completed an SGLV 8286A, electing to decline FSGLI coverage for his spouse. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-03316 in Executive Session on 20 April 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Member Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member The...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-03710
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03710 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed for the Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums deducted from his pay. He states that had he seen the FSGLI premiums being deducted from his pay, he would have taken action to decline coverage. ...