RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
         AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

IN THE MATTER OF:	DOCKET NUMBER:  02-03642
		INDEX CODE:  100.00

		COUNSEL:  NONE

		HEARING DESIRED:  NO

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT:

Her record be changed to show she declined Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) coverage, premiums charged refunded and she be relieved of any obligation to pay any charges incurred.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT:

She submitted an SGFLV 8386A declining spouse coverage.  She resubmitted the same request in October 2002.  She should not have been charged at all.  Second, if she was subject to the premiums they should have been taken out at the times of her tours and not all at once.

In support of the appeal, applicant submits a personal statement, a copy of her SGLV Form 8286A, Family Coverage Election, declining coverage, a copy of her SGLV Form 8286, Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance Election and Certificate, 5 AF Forms 40A, Record of Individual Inactive Duty Training, 2 AF Forms 938, Request and Authorization for Active Duty Training/Active Duty Tour, and 5 DFAS Forms 702, Defense Finance and Accounting Service Military Leave and Earning Statement.  Applicant's complete submission is attached at Exhibit A.

_________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF FACTS:

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:

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.  Applicant’s notifications were mailed to:  3974 Windy Bluff Ct., Dayton, OH  45440.  Headquarters, Air Reserve Personnel Center extensively advertised the change to the program.  An article was included in the November/December 2001 issue of the Air Reserve Personnel Update.  The ARPC website had information about the change, along with instructions on what to do if you wanted decreased coverage or wished to decline coverage.  The applicant declined FSGLI on 19 September 2002 which became effective October 2002; the first day of the following month the election was declined.  Therefore, they recommend denial of applicant’s request.

A complete copy of the evaluation is attached at Exhibit B.

_________________________________________________________________

APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION:

On 17 January 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 in Executive Session on 15 April 2003, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603:

The following documentary evidence was considered:

	Exhibit A.	DD Form 149, dated 11 Nov 02, w/atchs.
	Exhibit B.	Letter, ARPC/DPS, dated 3 Jan 03, w/atchs.
	Exhibit C.	Letter, AFBCMR, dated 17 Jan 03.