RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER: 02-02212

	 	COUNSEL:  NONE

	 	HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

He be reimbursed for the Family Member Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums deducted from his pay during the period from January 2002 through April 2002.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

He never received proper notification that FSGLI applied to active duty military members with an active duty spouse who were already covered under SGLI.

In support of the appeal, the applicant submits copies of his Leave and Earnings Statements (LESs) and his spouse’s LES.

The applicant’s complete submission is at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

The applicant and his spouse are serving on active duty in the grade of colonel.
 
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.

On 26 February 2002, the applicant completed an SGLV 8286A, electing to decline FSGLI coverage for his spouse.

_________________________________________________________________

AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

AFPC/DPW recommends the application be denied, and states, in part, that adequate steps were taken to inform all members of the new program.  The applicant had adequate time between 1 November 2001 and 31 December 2001 to make an election, and has not provided any documentation to indicate that he was not aware of the change.

The AFPC/DPW evaluation, with attachments, is at Exhibit C.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

The applicant states that the evaluation fails to address why the Air Force classified his spouse as a dependent for SGLI purposes when in no other situation, at any other time in their 23 years of marriage did it do so.  Furthermore, Public Law 107-14 does not address military couples.

In further support of the appeal, the applicant submits copies of news articles.

The applicant’s complete submission, with attachments, 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.  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.  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.  Members who did not desire coverage had to complete an election declining coverage during the month of November 2001.  The applicant contends that he never received proper notification that FSGLI applied to active duty military members with an active duty spouse who were already covered under SGLI.  However, beginning on 19 October 2001, his base newspaper, the Space Observer, contained an article entitled, Family Member SGLI Coverage is Automatic as of Nov. 1, which clearly stated, “The SGLI program does not make the distinction between spouses who are military members themselves and those who are not.  Thus, military members married to military members will also be automatically enrolled Nov. 1.”  No evidence has been submitted showing that the applicant declined coverage during the month of November 2001.  We therefore 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 find no 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 Docket Number 02-02212 in Executive Session on 12 December 2002, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

   	Exhibit A.  DD Form 149, dated 30 Jun 02, w/atchs.
  	Exhibit B.  Applicant's Master Personnel Records.
  	Exhibit C.  Letter, AFPC/DPW, dated 26 Aug 02, w/atchs.
  	Exhibit D.  Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Aug 02.
	Exhibit E.  Letter, Applicant, dated 23 Sep 02, w/atchs.