RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-02078
INDEX CODE: 128.14
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX COUNSEL: NONE
HEARING DESIRED: NO
MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 16 JAN 2008
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:
His records be corrected to show he declined Family Member Servicemember’s
Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) coverage and he be reimbursed for FSGLI
premiums he paid covering the periods 1 November 2001 through 12 May 2006
in the amount of $483.00.
________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:
He first became aware of FSGLI when premiums were deducted from his pay in
April 2006, and once he became aware of FSGLI he immediately declined
coverage.
In support of his application, the applicant provided a copy of SGLV Form
8286A, Family Coverage Election and a copy of his DFAS Form 702, Defense
Finance and Accounting Service Military Leave and Earnings Statement (LES),
for the month of April 2006.
His complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A.
_________________________________________________________________
STATEMENT OF FACTS:
The applicant is currently serving in the Regular Air Force in the rank of
senior master sergeant. In April 2006, $483.00 was deducted from his pay
for FSGLI premiums. He declined FSGLI coverage on 12 May 2006.
_________________________________________________________________
AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
AFPC/DPFC recommends the application be denied. DPFC states in part the
Air Force took adequate steps as directed to inform all members of this new
program and the requirements to decline coverage when applicable.
In accordance with public law, the applicant’s spouse was insured for
$100,000 for the period 1 November 2001 to 31 May 2006.
Had the applicant’s spouse become a fatality during this period, the
proceeds of the coverage would have been paid to him IAW 38 U.S.C. 1970.
The DPFC evaluation, with attachments, is attached at Exhibit B.
_________________________________________________________________
APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:
The applicant states that on six of the examples given by the Air Force
office of primary responsibility, it states information was sent to all Air
Force bases, but no where does it state each and every Air Force member was
individually notified. He believes if personnel were going to be subjected
to monetary obligations, the Air Force should have had a positive means to
ensure each member was informed. On September 11, 2001, many members of
his squadron were recalled to duty and worked 12 to 18 hours each day, and
he deployed overseas to the combat zone in 2002 and did not spend much time
reviewing the remarks section of his LES. He has an insurance policy
covering him and his wife for nearly 12 years. Had the Air Force began
charging him premiums when this program was implemented he would have seen
the deduction and immediately declined the coverage. He was not aware of
the program or coverage until the deductions were reflected on his LES in
April 2006.
Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D.
_________________________________________________________________
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 an error or injustice. After a thorough review of the
evidence of record and applicant’s submission, we are not persuaded the
applicant should be reimbursed for the FSGLI premiums from November 2001
through May 2006. Applicant’s contentions are duly noted; however, we do
not find these assertions, in and by themselves, sufficiently persuasive to
override the rationale provided by the office of primary responsibility.
We therefore agree with their recommendation and adopt the rationale
expressed as the basis for our decision that the applicant has failed to
sustain his burden of having suffered either an error or an injustice. In
view of the above and absent persuasive evidence to the contrary, we find
no compelling basis to recommend granting the relief sought.
_________________________________________________________________
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 27 September 2006, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:
Ms. Marilyn M. Thomas, Vice Chair
Ms. Barbara R. Murray, Member
Mr. John E. B. Smith, Member
The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number
BC-2006-02078:
Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 30 Jun 06, w/atchs.
Exhibit B. Letters, AFPC/DPFC, dated 2 Aug 06, w/atch.
Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 11 Aug 06.
Exhibit D. Letter, Applicant, dated 18 Aug 06
MARILYN M. THOMAS
Vice Chair
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-02590
The applicant submitted excerpts from her November 2001 LES that stated “Family SGLI effective November 2001, reduce or decline spouse’s coverage by 31 December to receive a refund…” The applicant was provided ample time to decline coverage upon the start of the Air Force’s FSGLI advertisement campaign. She stated she was deployed in November 2001, but no orders were provided to support her case. According to DPFC the November 2001 statement clearly states to reduce or decline coverage by...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-06-03438
_________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFC recommends the application be denied. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 8 Dec 06, for review and comment within 30 days. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered this application...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-03487
In this respect, we note that 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. On 19 May 2005, she again declined FSGLI coverage and has been refunded the premiums from June 2005 through October 2005. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-02922
The applicant’s LES dated for the month of August 2006, indicates a total debt of $481 for FSGLI premiums from 1 November 2001 through 30 August 2006. DPFC states that the Air Force took adequate steps as directed to inform all members of this new program and that the member had adequate time between 1 November and 31 December 2001 to make an election decision. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 20 Oct 06, a copy...
AF | BCMR | CY2007 | BC-2006-02922
The applicant’s LES dated for the month of August 2006, indicates a total debt of $481 for FSGLI premiums from 1 November 2001 through 30 August 2006. DPFC states that the Air Force took adequate steps as directed to inform all members of this new program and that the member had adequate time between 1 November and 31 December 2001 to make an election decision. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: On 20 Oct 06, a copy...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01073
DPFC explains the law mandated that coverage for spouses (to include military-married-to- military couples (mil-to-mil)) and dependent children automatically go into effect on the date of implementation so long as the member was insured under the SGLI program. She notes the article does not specifically mention mil-to-mil, or that your active duty spouse is considered your dependent for this program, or that if an election is not made payments would automatically be deducted from your pay. ...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01324
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01324 INDEX CODE: 100.03 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 05 SEPTEMBER 2007 ___________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: He be reimbursed the Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums deducted from his pay from 1 November 2001 through 31 October 2005. In addition, the Air Force...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01671
In this respect, we note the applicant attempted to decline the FSGLI coverage in August 2005, therefore, a relief from back premiums for this period is warranted. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that on 1 September 2005, she executed an SGLV Form 8286A, Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) Election...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-01913
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2006-01913 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO MANDATORY CASE COMPLETION DATE: 25 DECEMBER 2007 _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reimbursed for premiums deducted from her pay for Family Servicemen’s Group Life Insurance (FSGLI). If her service record needs to be corrected, it must be to enroll her active duty spouse under...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2006-00964
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. Applicant claims that DEERS personnel explained that FSGLI applies only to service members with dependents and not to active duty military members with an active duty spouse who are already covered under SGLI. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and...