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