RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-00830
INDEX CODE: 100.03
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
He be reimbursed the Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance
(FSGLI) premiums deducted from his pay.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He and his military spouse declined additional coverage on 2 Dec 01
while attending their monthly reserve drills. His spouse was also
charged for several months, but she was able to locate her signed
SGLV form and her premiums were refunded. Since he does not get a
Leave and Earnings Statement (LES) each month, he was not aware of
the error until his wife attended her annual tour and received her
refund. At the recommendation of the military personnel flight he
completed another form.
In support of his appeal, applicant submitted a copy of his SGLV
Form 8286A, dated 12 Nov 02; a copy of his spouse’s SGLV Form
8286A, dated 2 Dec 01; copies of his LESs for the periods 8 Nov and
29 Nov 02; and a copy of an excerpt of a memo from the Chief,
Casualty Services Branch.
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.
___________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
On 5 June 2001, Public Law 107-14, Survivor Benefits Improvement
Act of 2001, established an expanded SGLI program to provide spouse
and/or children coverage in the event of their 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.
___________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
HQ ARPC/DPS reviewed this application and recommended denial. They
state applicant claims he was not notified of the automatic family
coverage. All members of the Participating Individual Ready
Reserve (PIRR) were notified concerning the new law and declination
procedures in October 01. HQ ARPC extensively advertised the
change to the program. An article was included in the
November/December 2001 issue of the Air Reserve Personnel Update
(ARPU). HQ ARPC’s website had information about the change, along
with instructions on what to do if you wanted decreased coverage or
wished to decline coverage. Notifications were mailed to the
applicant’s current mailing address. He declined FSGLI on
13 Nov 02, which became effective Dec 02; the first day of the
following month the election was declined. The applicant owes for
family coverage from 1 Nov 01 through 1 Nov 02 in the amount of
$280 prior to his declination.
A complete copy of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit
C.
___________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
Applicant reiterated his original contention and gave a further
explanation of the circumstances surrounding his declination of the
FSGLI. His MPF could not find a copy of his letter declining
coverage. At their suggestion, he signed another one using the
date he actually signed the second one since he had no way to prove
he had signed the first one.
Applicant’s complete response 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. The implementing
guidance stipulated that members eligible for SGLI would have
coverage extended to family members beginning 1 Nov 01. Spouses
and children would automatically be covered if the military member
was an SGLI participant. The member could decline spouse coverage
if submitted in writing. We have thoroughly reviewed the
circumstances surrounding the applicant’s appeal and find no
evidence that he was not aware of the change to Public Law 107-14
regarding Family SGLI 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. It was
the applicant’s responsibility to make a new election or to refuse
this benefit. Other than his own assertions, the applicant has not
provided corroborative evidence that he executed an election
certificate declining coverage prior to Nov 02. Based on this, we
find no basis to favorably consider his request for reimbursement
of the FSGLI premiums deducted for coverage during this period.
___________________________________________________________________
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 AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2003-00830 in Executive Session on 25 July 2003, under the
provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Mr. Edward Parker, Member
Mr. Jackson Hauslein Jr., Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Feb 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, HQ ARPC/DPS, dated 4 Apr 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Apr 03.
Exhibit E. Letter, Applicant, dated 3 May 03, w/atchs.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
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.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03642
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She submitted an SGFLV 8386A declining spouse coverage. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS states that all members of the Participating Individual Ready Reserve were notified concerning the new law and declination procedures in August and October 2001. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03371
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: HQ AFPC/DPS states the applicant alleges she declined SGLI coverage in March 2000 and again in April 2002, however, since the law was not effective until 1 November 2001, her March 2000 declination was not applicable and she needed to decline the coverage again on 1 November 2001 to ensure that she had not incurred a debt. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-00615
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: She changed Reserve status from inactive to active, Category E on 23 September 2002, but she did not receive a notification to update her SGLV 8286 until late November or early December 2002. She received her bill and was charged for September through December 2002 for spouse coverage. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered...
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 | 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 | CY2003 | BC-2003-00351
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. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS recommends the application be denied. DPS states the applicant was sent a letter to his home address in New Orleans explaining the new FSGLI coverage.
_________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: Title 38 U.S.C., Section 1965(5)(B) and Section 1967(a) states that a member who is assigned to a participating position shall be automatically insured under SGLI for an automatic coverage for $250,000, unless the member reduces or declines coverage. They indicated that Title 38 U.S.C., Section 1965(5)(B) and Section 1967(a) states that a member who is assigned to a participating position shall...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03449
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: ARPC/DPS states that they do not have a copy of the December declination in their files, nor is there one in her personnel records. As of this date, no response has been received by this office. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-01393
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.