RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2003-03259
INDEX CODE: 128.14
COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
She be reimbursed for premiums paid on her Family Servicemembers’
Group Life Insurance (FSGLI).
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
The amount was deducted from her check based on the Family SGLI
program. Her husband and she were both in the military in November
2001. There would not have been any reason for them to elect to have
family coverage. Her husband retired in May 2003. In June 2003, she
elected to claim her husband as a dependent. As a result, a back pay
deduction was taken effective November 2001. Both her husband and she
were paying their normal SGLI payments. Her daughter was under her
husband as a dependent. She does not feel that she should have been
held responsible for a debt that was not elected or her responsibility
to pay this debt if it was from her husband.
In support of the appeal, applicant submits six copies of their leave
and earnings statements (LES) from varies months and a copy of her
husband’s DD Form 214.
Applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is a member of the Regular Air Force who is currently
serving in the grade of staff sergeant.
On 5 June 2001, the President approved Public Law 107-14, Survivor
Benefits Improvement Act of 2001. Within the context of the law, the
expanded SGLI program was established 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:
AFPC/DPW states that they recommend denial of applicant’s request. It
is their opinion that the Air Force leadership took adequate steps as
directed to inform all members of this new program. A complete copy
of the evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
On 21 November 2003, a copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded
to the applicant for review and response within 30 days. As of this
date, no response has been received by this office.
_________________________________________________________________
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 Air Force
and adopt their rationale as the basis for the conclusion that the
applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice.
Therefore, in the absence of 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
pertaining to BCMR Docket Number, BC-2003-03259, in Executive Session
on 20 April 2004, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Mr. Joseph G. Diamond, Panel Chair
Mr. Jackson A. Hauslein, Jr., Member
Mr. Edward H. Parker, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 6 Aug 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPW, dated 12 Nov 03, w/atchs.
Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 21 Nov 03.
JOSEPH G. DIAMOND
Panel Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2004 | BC-2003-02449
On 13 June 2003, the applicant declined FSGLI coverage on SGLV 8286A, Family Coverage Election. The applicant’s Leave and Earnings Statement dated for the month of May 2003, indicates a total debt of $360 for FSGLI premiums from 1 November 2001 through 30 April 2003. DPW states that in accordance to 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 through 30 June 2003.
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2002-03848
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ 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. Applicant's Master...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02783
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-2003-02974
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and stated despite what the OTS personnel stated she had provided the Board with only information she was given regarding the SGLI program. She states that had she seen the FSGLI premiums being deducted from her pay, she would have taken action to decline coverage. _________________________________________________________________ THE...
AF | BCMR | CY2003 | BC-2003-02018
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 | 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-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-2002-03849
Applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A. ___________________________________________________________________ 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. Applicant's Master...
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-2002-03862
_________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: In January 2002, she went to the Customer Service Section at the Military Personnel Flight (MPF) in Keflavik, Iceland, to decline the spousal portion of the new FSGLI coverage. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant explained that she did not respond to AFPC/DPW’s request for additional documentation because there was...