| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mr. Jessie B. Strickland | Analyst |
| Mr. Melvin H. Meyer | Chairperson | |
| Ms. Deborah S. Jacobs | Member | |
| Mr. Jose A. Martinez | Member |
APPLICANT REQUESTS: That his date of rank (DOR) for promotion to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3) be adjusted to 2 August 1998.
APPLICANT STATES: In effect, that his DOR for promotion to CW3 should be adjusted to 2 August 1998, 6 years from his DOR for promotion to the rank of chief warrant officer two (CW2). He further states that while on active duty he was selected for promotion to CW3 in 1997, but was released from active duty on 8 August 1998. He missed the 1998 United States Army Reserve (USAR) selection board but was selected by the 1999 selection board and was promoted on 15 October 1999.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He was honorably discharged from the Vermont Air National Guard on 22 May 1989, to enlist in the Army. He enlisted in the Regular Army on 23 May 1989 under the warrant officer flight training enlistment option for a period of 4 years.
He completed his training and was honorably discharged on 1 August 1990, to accept a commission as a warrant officer with a concurrent call to active duty.
He was appointed as a USAR warrant officer one (WO1) on 2 August 1990 and was promoted to the rank of CW2 on 2 August 1992.
He was selected for promotion to the rank of CW3 by the Fiscal Year 1997 Promotion Selection Board on 17 October 1998. His scheduled promotion eligibility date was 20 July 1998. However, on 2 April 1998, the applicant submitted a declination of appointment into the Regular Army in order to accept his promotion to the rank of CW3.
On 22 April 1998, the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM) dispatched a message to the applicant's command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, directing that the applicant be released from active duty upon completion of his active duty service obligation on 7 August 1998.
Accordingly, he was honorably released from active duty (REFRAD) in the rank of CW2 on 7 August 1998, due to completion of required active service. He had served 9 years, 2 months and 15 days of total active service and was transferred to a USAR Troop Program Unit (TPU) in Florida.
He was selected for promotion to CW3 by the 1999 USAR Components Warrant Officer Selection Board that was approved on 8 July 1999. However, on 11 August 1999, a suspension of his promotion was initiated because he was not assigned to a valid TPU position and did not have a current maximum allowable weight standard on file. The issues were finally resolved and he was promoted to CW3 on 15 October 1999, when all of the qualifications were met.
Army Regulation 135-155 prescribes policy and procedures used in the selection and promotion of commissioned and warrant officers of the USAR. It provides, in pertinent part, that for promotion to the rank of CW3, warrant officers must have served a minimum of 6 years in the rank of CW2 to be eligible for consideration to the rank of CW3. That regulations also provides, in pertinent part, that a promotion to the next higher grade is not valid if the officer is not in a promotable status.
DISCUSSION: Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:
1. In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust. The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy this requirement.
2. At the time the applicant was REFRAD, after having declined integration into the Regular Army, the USAR Components Selection Board for that year had already been convened and thus he was considered by the next board that convened and was selected. This was the first board in which he was eligible to be considered for given the timing of his REFRAD.
3. Unfortunately, he was not in a promotable status until 15 October 1999, when he was promoted to the rank of CW3.
4. Although it is the intent of the USAR promotion system to promote officers as close to the time they meet the service requirements (6 years in grade), in many cases this cannot be accomplished for a variety of reasons, some of which are the result of actions by the soldiers themselves. In this case, the Board finds, after reviewing the available evidence of record, that he was promoted at the soonest time he was eligible to be promoted under the circumstances and that there is no basis to antedate his promotion.
5. In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.
DETERMINATION: The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.
BOARD VOTE:
________ ________ ________ GRANT
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
__dj ____ __jam ___ __mm___ DENY APPLICATION
| CASE ID | AR2003083924 |
| SUFFIX | |
| RECON | YYYYMMDD |
| DATE BOARDED | 2003/05/20 |
| TYPE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DATE OF DISCHARGE | |
| DISCHARGE AUTHORITY | |
| DISCHARGE REASON | |
| BOARD DECISION | DENY |
| REVIEW AUTHORITY | |
| ISSUES 1. 315 | 131.0500/DOR |
| 2. | |
| 3. | |
| 4. | |
| 5. | |
| 6. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001051136C070420
The applicant was considered by the next available Reserve CW3 Promotion Board, the FY94 promotion board, but was not selected for promotion. The effective date for the applicant’s promotion to CW3 from the FY95 board His present promotion memorandum to CW4, dated 1 August 2000, should be corrected to be dated 19 May 2000, the adjournment date of the promotion board and therefore the effective date for promotion to CW4 and the date from which CW4 pay and allowances should be paid.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2004 | 20040001962C070208
The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Separation Document (DD Form 214), ARNG Oath of Office (NGB Form 337), ARNG Special Orders Number 95, ARNG Separation Document (NGB Form 22), ARNG Separation Orders, ARNG Special Orders Number 42. A promotion memorandum issued by the United States Army Reserve Personnel Command (ARPERSCOM), dated 25 October 2001, authorized the applicant’s promotion to CW3 with a DOR of 19 September 2001. The evidence of record...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003084908C070212
The applicant requests reconsideration of previous application to correct his military records by backdating his date of rank (DOR) for promotion to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3). After hearing the testimony and reviewing the evidence presented, the board of officers found the applicant innocent of the allegation that he had abused the illegal drug – marijuana, that his unknowing ingestion was from an over-the-counter product called Hemp Liquid Gold. Army Regulation 600-85,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120022354
Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 2-5d, specifies "Warrant officers serving in a grade below chief warrant officer four (CW4), in an active Reserve status, may be selected for promotion provided they meet the minimum promotion time in grade (TIG) and military education requirements in Table 2-3 (Warrant Officer TIG and Military Education Requirements) not later than the date the selection board convenes." ...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008107
The applicant requests, in effect, that his rank be restored to Chief Warrant Officer Two (CW2) and that he be promoted to Chief Warrant Officer Three (CW3), that he receive additional compulsory service, and that he be paid back pay as a CW3 for his 13-month tour in Iraq. Paragraph 4-33a of Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) states that USAR warrant officers in grades CW2 and CW3 who twice fail to be selected for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050005330C070206
The applicant requests that he be reinstated as a warrant officer and promoted to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3). Meanwhile, the applicant was selected for promotion to the rank of major; however, because he was serving as warrant officer, he could not accept the promotion. He was again nonselected for promotion before he had completed 1 year working as an engineer warrant officer, before he received an evaluation as a warrant officer, and before he was deemed eligible to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120006743
He understood that if he declined promotion while on active duty, once he completed the course requirements, his DOR would be back dated to the original date of promotion on active duty in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-101 (Warrant Officers Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) to keep him on track with his peers. He provides * Declination of Promotion memoranda * 2006 CW3 promotion orders * Revocation of CW3 promotion orders * DD Form 214 (Certificate of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2003 | 2003090992C070212
On 10 October 2000, he was promoted to major by AR-PERSCOM with a date of rank of 1 September 1992 (the date of his appointment as a Reserve captain), based on the selection for promotion by the 1993 RCSB. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers) specifies that mandatory selection boards will be convened each year to consider Reserve and ARNG officers for promotion to captain through lieutenant colonel. The applicant is entitled to correction to his...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120005102
As he was serving as a CW2 in the NYARNG when he was notified of his promotion to LTC, when the board considered him for promotion to COL he did not have any Officer Evaluation Reports (OER) as a LTC in his records. He was recalled to active duty from a retired status and served on active duty in the rank of LTC as follows: * 16 November 2008 - 1 April 2009 * 28 June 2009 - 27 June 2010 * 1 August 2010 - 31 July 2011 13. Given that he was not selected for promotion to COL by three...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080015400
The applicant requests that he be granted promotion consideration for promotion to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3) by a Promotion Advisory Board based on the 2008 criteria. Army Regulation 135-155 (Army National Guard and USAR Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) prescribes the policies and procedures for the promotion of officers of USAR and includes the procedures for the conduct of selection boards as well as Promotion...