RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBER: BC-2011-01699 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: 1. His date “entered active duty” (EAD) be corrected to reflect 31 Aug 09 versus 1 Sep 09, the date he entered his current extended active duty tour. 2. Joint Professional Military Education Phase II (JPME II) be annotated on his “official” military single unit retrieval format (SURF) and officer performance report (OPR). 3. He be given Special Selection Board (SSB) consideration by the CY06C Lieutenant Colonel (Lt Col) Central Selection Board (CSB). _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: 1. Special order AGA-1571 required him to “report for in- processing on 1 Sep 09” (report for duty). However, AFI 36- 2608, Military Personnel Records System, states the date for members who must travel from their homes to their first duty or processing station is based on the mode of travel. Since, he traveled by car he was authorized one travel day. 2. Joint Professional Military Education Phase II (JPME II) was not annotated on his official military SURF or OPR prior to his in-the-primary zone (IPZ) Lt Col CSB which met in 2006. In support of his request, the applicant provides copies of a special order, travel voucher summary, JPME II certificate of graduation, Joint Forces Staff College grade sheet, and other documents in support of his application. The applicant's complete submission, with attachments, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The Joint Federal Travel Regulation (JFTR), volume 1 states that members traveling by privately owned vehicle (POV) are allowed one travel day for each 350 miles of ordered travel. The remaining relevant facts pertaining to this application are contained in the letter prepared by the appropriate offices of the Air Force, which are attached at Exhibits C thru F. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPSIPR recommends denial of applicant’s request to change his EAD date. The applicant’s reporting date was established as 1 Sep 09 and since the travel distance to his duty station was less than 200 miles, his effective date of duty was also established as 1 Sep 09. With only one day of travel authorized, the applicant was required to travel and report on the same day. Accordingly, he was issued EAD orders (Special Order AGA-157) with an effective date of duty and reporting date of 1 Sep 09. The applicant’s effective date of duty was 1 Sep 09 and he was not authorized travel prior to 1 Sep 09. The EAD orders did not direct he report for duty, they directed he report to the 24- hour arrival point. The complete DPSIPR evaluation is at Exhibit C. AFPC/DPAPPO recommends denial of applicant’s request to annotate JPME II to his “official” SURF and OPR. The promotion board uses the officer selection brief (OSB) as the sole document (SURF) that encompasses a member’s career during the promotion board process. The applicant was awarded credit for JPME II (for attending Joint and Combined Warfighting School (JCWS)) in Nov 05; however, JPME II is not reflected on OSBs. Only Joint Qualified Officer (JQO) status is reflected on the OSB, and the applicant was not a JQO in 2006. To be awarded JQO status from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), a member must have completed JPME II and have been credited with a full joint tour. The applicant completed JPME II on 18 Nov 05, but did not receive full joint tour credit until 1 Sep 09. He was not awarded JQO status until Jul 10, both well after his Lt Col 06 IPZ board; therefore, JQO status was not reflected on his OSB. The complete DPAPPO evaluation is at Exhibit D. AFPC/DPSID makes no recommendation. DPSID states there is no action required as the comment JPME II has already been documented on the AF Form 475, Training Report rendered during the period 12 Sep 05 to 18 Nov 05. The complete DPSID evaluation is at Exhibit E. AFPC/DPPPO recommends denial of the applicant’s request for SSB consideration. The instructions attached to the Military Personnel Flight Memorandum (MPFM) 06-44, dated 30 Jun 06 that eligible officer’s were provided prior to the CY06C CSB states that completion of JPME II JCWS – resident 10-week temporary duty (TDY) will not be reflected on the OSB which the board actually reviews. The reason for this is that JCWS is an assignment-related formal training course of instruction, not an accredited Developmental Education (DE) school. AFPC/DPSID notified the applicant that his attendance at JPME II is documented in his training report (TR) rendered for the period 12 Sep 05 to 18 Nov 05, and they verified that the report was filed in his officer selection record (OSR) for CY06C CSB. Therefore, the board members were aware he attended JPME II. AFPC/DPAPPO confirmed the applicant was awarded credit for JPME II on 18 Nov 05, but that attendance at this school is not reflected on the OSBs. The complete DPPPO evaluation is at Exhibit F. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: Copies of the Air Force evaluations were forwarded to the applicant on 23 Mar 12 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit G). As of this date, this office has not received a response. _________________________________________________________________ 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 opinions and recommendations of the offices of primary responsibility (OPR) and adopt their rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, 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 BC-2011-01699 in Executive Session on 1 May 12, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: Panel Chair Member Member The following documentary evidence was considered: Exhibit A. DD Forms 149, dated 2 May and 27 Sep 11, w/atchs. Exhibit B. Applicant’s Master Personnel Records Exhibit C. AFPC/DPSIPR, Letter, dated 28 Nov 11. Exhibit D. AFPC/DPAPPO, Letter, dated 27 Dec 11. Exhibit E. AFPC/DPSID, Letter, dated 13 Feb 12. Exhibit F. AFPC/DPPPO, Letter, dated 23 Feb 12, w/atchs. Exhibit G. SAF/MRBR, Letter, dated 23 Mar 12. Panel Chair