Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00488
Original file (BC-2003-00488.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

                       RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS


IN THE MATTER OF:      DOCKET NUMBER:  BC-2003-00488
            INDEX CODE:  128.00

            COUNSEL:  NONE

            HEARING DESIRED:  NO



_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reimbursed for premiums deducted from his pay  for  Servicemen’s
Group Life Insurance (SGLI) for the months of April  2001  to  January
2003.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

His records clearly state “I do not want insurance at this time.”  The
fact that SGLI coverage was increased in April 2001 is  absolutely  no
reason to initiate an SGLI policy in his name without notification and
especially without his consent.

In support of his request, the applicant submits a personal statement.
 The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is  at  Exhibit
A.
_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant’s is currently on active duty in  the  grade  of  second
lieutenant, with an effective date and date  of  rank  of  20 December
2002.
_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

HQ AFPC/DPW recommends the  application  be  denied  due  to  lack  of
sufficient evidence to support  the  applicant’s  claim.   On  7 March
2003,  DPW  sent  the  applicant  a   letter   requesting   additional
information in order for them to sufficiently evaluate his  claim  and
to make an appropriate recommendation.  The applicant did not  respond
to their letter.  The HQ AFPC/DPW evaluation, with attachment,  is  at
Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR STAFF EVALUATION:

A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded  to  applicant  on  9
June 2003 for review and response.  As of this date, no  response  has
been received by this office (Exhibit C).
_________________________________________________________________

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
appropriate Air Force office of primary responsibility and  adopt  the
rationale expressed as the basis for our decision that  the  applicant
has failed to sustain his burden that he has suffered either an  error
or an injustice.  In view of the above  and  absent  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  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 evidence was considered in  connection  with
AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2003-00488.

   Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 5 Feb 03, w/atch.
   Exhibit B.  Letter, HQ AFPC/DPW, dated 5 Jun 03.
   Exhibit C.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 9 Jun 03.




                                   JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
                                   Panel Chair

Similar Decisions

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01091

    Original file (BC-2003-01091.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant did not respond or provide the additional information needed to sufficiently evaluate her claim. _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02783

    Original file (BC-2003-02783.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    The coverage, by law, was automatic for all members of the Armed Forces who had a spouse or child(ren), unless the member declined coverage. 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 - 30 June 2003. 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01393

    Original file (BC-2003-01393.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DPW requested the applicant provide a copy of her SGLV 8286A, Family Coverage Election Certificate, declining coverage and any documentation to support her claim. Applicant did not respond or provide the additional information needed to sufficiently evaluate her claim. The HQ AFPC/DPW evaluation, with attachment, is at Exhibit B.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00860

    Original file (BC-2003-00860.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    ___________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02018

    Original file (BC-2003-02018.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    Applicant did not respond or provide the additional information needed to sufficiently evaluate her claim. As of this date, this office has received no response (Exhibit C). _________________________________________________________________ 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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02700

    Original file (BC-2002-02700.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02975

    Original file (BC-2002-02975.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied due to lack of sufficient evidence to support the applicant’s claim. Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 11 Sep 02. Exhibit C. Letter, HQ AFPC/DPW, dated 3 Dec 02, w/atch Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 13 Dec 02.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-02700A

    Original file (BC-2002-02700A.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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.

  • AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-04061

    Original file (BC-2002-04061.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    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-2003-00206

    Original file (BC-2003-00206.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    AFPC/DPW complete evaluation 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 28 March 2003, for review and response. After a thorough review of the evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded the applicant should be reimbursed for the SGLI premiums he paid from November 2001 to October 2002. Exhibit D. Letter,...