RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02563
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reimbursed for the Servicemember’s Group Life Insurance (SGLI)
premiums paid during the period August 2000 through April 2001, and SGLI
premiums paid since April 2002 (sic).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
His records were never corrected to reflect that he declined SGLI coverage.
The applicant states that he signed up for $100,000 SGLI coverage, and was
charged for the maximum coverage from August 2000 through April 2001. In
addition, he was charged premiums after 1 April 2002 (sic), despite the
fact that he declined coverage.
In support of the appeal, the applicant submits copies of his Leave and
Earnings Statements (LESs).
The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 4 August 2000, the applicant elected SGLI coverage in the amount of
$100,000.
Effective 1 April 2001, Public Law 106-419, automatically increased the
level of SGLI coverage to $250,000 for all military members, until the
members could elect reduced coverage or no coverage, regardless of any
prior election.
On 29 April 2002, the applicant completed an SGLV 8286, electing to decline
SGLI coverage.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPW recommends the Board take no action on reimbursing the applicant
for the period 1 September 2000 through 31 March 2001, this has been
administratively resolved through DFAS. They recommend denial of his
request for reimbursement for premiums paid during the period 1 April 2001
through 30 April 2002. AFPC/DPW states that, in their opinion, the
applicant’s base of assignment took adequate steps as directed to inform
all members of the increase in SGLI coverage and that the applicant had
adequate time during the month of April 2001 to make a new election.
The AFPC/DPW evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant
on 20 September 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. Public Law 106-419, Section 312,
effective 1 April 2001, automatically increased the level of SGLI coverage
to $250,000 for all eligible military members, regardless of any prior
election. 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 premiums
withheld for the period 1 April 2001 through 30 April 2002. Therefore, we
find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application.
4. The Air Force has advised that reimbursement for premiums covering the
period 1 September 2000 through 31 March 2001, has been administratively
resolved through DFAS. Therefore, no action is required by this Board with
respect to this portion of the applicant’s request.
_________________________________________________________________
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 02-02563 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 6 Aug 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPW, dated 17 Sep 02, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 20 Sep 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,...
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 | CY2002 | BC-2002-01908
Effective 1 April 2001, Public Law 106-419, automatically increased the level of SGLI coverage to $250,000 for all military members, until the members could elect reduced coverage or no coverage, regardless of any prior election. The AFPC/DPW evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states, in part, that Kirtland AFB leadership did not advise that if you had...
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. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the Pentagon leadership took adequate steps to inform all members of the increase in coverage and the...
_________________________________________________________________ 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...
_________________________________________________________________ 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. 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. Exhibit B.
Applicant did not complete a new SGLV 8286 declining coverage until 30 November 2001. A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Applicant states that it is noted that notification of the SGLI reenactment was posted in their base newspaper. He further states that if the period of 1 April–30 November 2001 is disapproved for reimbursement he request that the Board...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00860
___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: SGLI premiums for the $250,000 coverage have been taken out since August 2000 until March 2003, while his records reflect $100,000 coverage since August 2000. It is their opinion that the applicant’s Air Force base leadership took adequate steps to inform all members of the increase in coverage and that the applicant had adequate time during the month of April 01 to make a new election and avoid the...
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...