RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2007-03277 INDEX CODE: 128.14 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: She be reimbursed for erroneous Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (FSGLI) premiums deducted from her pay from March to April 2006. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: A total of $570 was deducted from her pay in March and April 2006 ($285 each month). Upon investigation, she determined the $570 was an erroneous backdated payroll deduction for FSGLI from November 2001 to February 2006. She did not opt to receive FSGLI coverage during that time. She and her husband (who was active duty in 2001 and retired in 2006) decided not to participate in FSGLI because they both already had Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI). The FSGLI would prove of no benefit to them. She and her husband both clearly remember completing the paperwork to opt out. The erroneous deductions were listed under “Stipend Overpayment.” In support of her request, the applicant provided copies of her myPay Leave and Earnings Statements for March and April 2006. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. ________________________________________________________________ _ STATEMENT OF FACTS: On 5 Jun 01, President Bush signed the Veteran’s Survivor Benefits Improvement Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-14) into law, which was the enabling legislation for the FSGLI program. FSGLI, which was implemented DoD-wide on 1 Nov 01, made it possible for servicemembers to take out low cost insurance on their spouse for up to $100,000 (premium charged) and $10,000 life insurance for dependent children (no cost) through the Office of Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance. The law mandated that coverage for spouses (to include military-married- to-military couples) and dependent children automatically went into effect on the date of implementation so long as the member was insured under the Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance (SGLI) program. Specific instructions were also provided to all Air Force bases on the procedures they needed to follow in order to ensure that military married to other military members were properly charged for this new benefit. ________________________________________________________________ _ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPFC recommends denial. In addition to comments about FSGLI appearing in the remarks of every member’s LES from 30 Aug 01 to 15 Nov 01, officials at Keesler Air Force Base advised DPFC that information about the program was also provided through the local public affairs releases and wing commander’s call. DPFC states that it is their opinion that Keesler Air Force Base leadership took adequate steps as directed to inform all members of the new program and that the applicant had adequate time between 1 Nov 01 and 31 Dec 01 to make an election decision. Additionally, she did not provide any documentation to indicate she was not aware of this change and her responsibility to make an election decision. In accordance with public law, the applicant’s spouse was insured for $100K for the period 1 Nov 01 to 28 Feb 06. Had the applicant’s spouse became a fatality during this period; the proceeds of the $100K coverage would have been paid to her in accordance with 38 U.S.C. 1970. The AFPC/DPFC complete evaluation is at Exhibit B. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The applicant states she has concerns about the AFPC/DPFC opinion, as it does not accurately address the facts of her case. She states DPFC appears to believe that she is claiming she was unaware of FSGLI during the fall of 2001. However, her application to the AFBCMR clearly states she was aware of FSGLI. The applicant states her and her husband each signed the paperwork to not participate in FSGLI. She states she was aware of FSGLI and chose not to participate in the program when it began in 2001. From 1 Nov 01 through 28 Feb 06, the Air Force honored her election decision to not participate in FSGLI. The applicant requests the AFPC/DPFC opinion be re-issued after her application is reviewed again. The applicant's complete response, with attachments, is at Exhibit D. ________________________________________________________________ _ ADDITIONAL’S AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPWC recommends denial. DPWC states that the absence of premium payments does not support the applicant’s assertion that the Air Force honored her election to not participate in FSGLI. In order to honor a declination of FSGLI coverage, a service member must complete an SGLV Form 8286A, Family Coverage Election. Although the applicant states she declined coverage, both her and her husband’s official personnel file revealed no SGLV Form 8286A declining coverage by either member; furthermore, she provided no documents to support her claim. The complete AFPC/DPWC evaluation is at Exhibit E. ________________________________________________________________ _ APPLICANT’S REVIEW OF ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 15 Feb 08 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit F). 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. Sufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of error or injustice. Although the applicant has not provided concrete evidence that she submitted the required form to opt out of the Family Servicemembers’ Group Life Insurance coverage, through her application to the Board she has stated that she clearly remembers taking such action. The Air Force office of primary responsibility (OPR) has indicated that an aggressive campaign was mounted to inform all Air Force members in advance of this program and what was required if they did not desire to participate. Additionally, they indicate that individual leave and earnings statements contained comments regarding the program from 30 Aug 01 through 15 Nov 01. In weighing both sides of this issue, it initially appears that based on the presumption of regularity in the conduct of government affairs, the applicant should not be granted relief. However, we believe that since the coverage started in Nov 01 and premiums were not deducted until Mar 06, and then in two large payments, this in itself provides a reasonable basis for the applicant to believe she was not participating in the program. We take this view based on the applicant’s statement she opted out of the program and was unaware of coverage until being alerted by the deduction of premiums from her pay. The Air Force OPR points out that the applicant received the benefit of this coverage and had she experienced a loss while covered under the program she would have received the proceeds. While this may be true, the issue to us is whether the applicant was disadvantaged by the lengthy period her pay did not reflect the deduction of premiums. We believe so, for even if the applicant did not opt out before the program started, she could have exercised this option during a subsequent time. We do not find it reasonable the applicant would have knowingly let coverage continue over several years with the intent to eventually recover the premiums. Consequently, we believe any doubt as to how this situation occurred should be resolved in favor of the applicant. Therefore, we recommend her records be corrected as indicated below. ________________________________________________________________ _ THE BOARD RECOMMENDS THAT: The pertinent military records of the Department of the Air Force relating to APPLICANT, be corrected to show that she filed a Family Coverage Election, SGLV 8286A, on 1 November 2001, declining coverage for her spouse and that she be refunded the premiums paid. ________________________________________________________________ _ The following members of the Board considered Docket Number BC- 2007-03277 in Executive Session on 9 July 2008, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: All members voted to correct the records, as recommended. The following documentary evidence was considered for Docket Number BC-2007-03277: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 26 Sep 07, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Memorandum, AFPC/DPFC, dated 6 Nov 07. Exhibit C. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 7 Dec 07. Exhibit D. Applicant’s Rebuttal, dated 6 Jan 08, w/atchs. Exhibit E. Memorandum, AFPC/DPWC, dated 1 Feb 08. Exhibit F. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 15 Feb 08.