RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00351
INDEX CODE: 128.14
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
XXXXXXXXXXXXX HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reimbursed in the amount of $108.00 for premiums paid on his Family
Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He was not notified of the automatic coverage. He had requested
reassignment to the Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) effective October
2001 because of his move to New Orleans, Louisiana. He was unaware that
Stop Loss prevented his reassignment until he attempted to return to the
Air Force Reserve in September 2002. He discovered he was still assigned
to his old Reserve unit at Homestead Air Reserve Base, Florida. When he
inprocessed to his new Reserve assignment in New Orleans, he was not aware
of the FSGLI requirement. He would have declined the FSGLI coverage if he
had known about it.
In support of his application, the applicant submits a personal statement;
a copy of his Family Coverage Election form, dated 19 October 2002; and a
copy of his leave and earnings statement, dated 22 January 2003. The
applicant’s submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Air Force Reserve in the grade of
technical sergeant (E-6) with a paydate of 19 February 1980.
On 19 October 2002, the applicant declined FSGLI coverage on SGLV 8286A,
Family Coverage Election. The applicant’s Leave and Earnings Statement
dated 22 January 2003, indicates a debt payment in the amount of $135 for
FSGLI premiums from 1 November 2001 through 1 January 2003.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied. DPS states that the
applicant did not submit any evidence to indicate an error or injustice
occurred.
The Survivor Benefits Improvement Act of 2001 expanded Servicemembers’
Group Life Insurance (SGLI) program to provide spouse and/or children
coverage in the event of the servicemember’s death. 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. DPS states the applicant
was sent a letter to his home address in New Orleans explaining the new
FSGLI coverage. DPS indicates the applicant will be refunded $27 for
overpayment of FSGLI premiums for the period 1 November 2002 through 1
January 2003. The DPS 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 7
March 2003 for review and response (Exhibit C). 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 warranting reimbursement for the
applicant’s Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums
deducted from his pay. The applicant indicates that he was not notified of
the automatic coverage. However, we note that the Air Reserve Personnel
Center and the applicant’s unit took extensive measures to announce the
program changes and it was the applicant’s responsibility to make a new
election or to refuse these benefits. Additionally, we note that the
mailing address the Air Reserve Personnel Center used to send his
notification of the FSGLI increase is the same address indicated on his
BCMR application as: (APPLICANT’S MAILING ADDRESS). In view of the
foregoing, we believe that Air Force Reserve authorities made every
reasonable effort to notify the applicant of the requirements set forth in
Public Laws 106-419 and 107-14 and 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 do not 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 in Executive
Session on 25 July 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chairman
Mr. Jackson Hauslein Jr., Member
Mr. Edward Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2003-00351:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 28 Jan 2003, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letters, ARPC/DPS, dated 28 Feb 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Mar 03.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00442
She filed another declination form effective 15 January 2003. She finds it incredible that anyone, including the government, would take out a life insurance policy on her and her family without her knowledge or consent and then expect her to pay the expense. The ARPC website also had information about the change, with instructions regarding what to do if the member wanted to decrease coverage or wished to decline.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03546
The coverage, by law, was automatic unless the member declined the coverage. On 31 October 2002, the applicant completed an SGLV 8286A, electing to decline FSGLI coverage for her spouse. 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.
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03584
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. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied and states, in part, that the applicant’s June 2001...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01347
He sent in payments marking out family coverage but this was not sufficient to cancel. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPW recommends denial of the request and states the applicant claims he never has been notified of the automatic family coverage. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the...
AF | BCMR | CY2002 | BC-2002-03036
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2002-03036 INDEX NUMBER: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reimbursed for the Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums deducted from her pay. The coverage, by law, was automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who had a spouse and/or children, unless 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-2003-01378
The coverage, by law, was automatic unless the member declined the coverage. However, as of this date, no response has been received by this office. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC-2003-01378 in Executive Session on 2 December 2003, 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...
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-03441
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. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, that there is no record of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00830
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 | CY2004 | BC-2003-04021
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was never informed, nor did he enroll in the FSGLI program. HQ Air Reserve Personnel Center (ARPC) Entitlements sent a letter on the expanded SGLI coverage to all Reservists clearly explaining the program and extensively advertised the changes to the program. They conclude there has been no evidence of any injustice towards the member.