RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 12 April 2007
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20060008684
I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.
Mr. Gerard W. Schwartz
Acting Director
Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.
Analyst
The following members, a quorum, were present:
Mr. Curtis L. Greenway
Chairperson
Mr. Michael J. Flynn
Member
Mr. Edward E. Montgomery
Member
The Board considered the following evidence:
Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records.
Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any).
THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant requests that he be credited with his previous time in grade as a National Guard chief warrant officer two (CW2).
2. The applicant states, in effect, that after serving as a CW2 for approximately
4 years and 10 months, he was appointed a commissioned officer. When he reverted to his previous status of CW2 he should have received credit for time in grade.
3. The applicant provides copies of his 1990 promotion memorandum to CW2, his 1994 commissioning certificate and orders, 2006 discharge orders as a captain, 2006 appointment orders as a CW2 and an exchange of email messages about his status.
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. The applicant was appointed and Federally recognized in the Army National Guard as a warrant officer one (WO1) on 16 December 1987. He was promoted to chief warrant officer two (CW2) on 31 May 1990. He served 4 years, 4 months and 24 days time in grade as a CW2.
2. He applied for and was appointed a second lieutenant in the United States Army Reserve (USAR) on 24 March 1995. Subsequently he was promoted to first lieutenant on 16 April 1997 and to captain on 1 August 2001.
3. After serving 4 years, 7 months and 7 days as a captain, the reverted back to CW2 effective 8 March 2006 with the same date of rank.
4. National Guard Regulation 600-101, chapter 2 provides that a warrant officer may be reappointed in the previous warrant officer rank satisfactorily held. Commissioned officers or former commissioned officers in the rank of captain and who have at least four years experience in the appointment specialty may be appointed to CW2.
5. Army Regulation 135-155 (National Guard and U.S. Army Reserve
Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers),Table 2-3 (Warrant officer time in grade and military education requirements) states that the education requirement for promotion to CW3 is the Warrant Officer Advance Course.
6. In a 20 October 2006 memorandum, the Director of Aviation Personnel Proponency, Headquarters, U.S. Army Aviation Warfighting Center and Fort Rucker, Alabama indicated that the applicant's request for constructive credit for the Aviation Warrant Officer Advance Course was not favorably considered. He went on to explain that the applicant needed to complete more recent training in order to demonstrate proficiency with current technology.
7. The Chief, Personnel Policy and Readiness Division of the National Guard Bureau noted, in a 26 October 2006 memorandum, that; in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-101, paragraph 7-4a; the Adjutant General of the Minnesota National Guard had the authority to adjust the applicant's date of rank to give him credit "for time previously served satisfactorily as a Chief Warrant Officer Two."
8. During the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the National Guard Bureau. The Chief, Personnel Division noted that the regulatory provision and the applicants time in grade and recommended that the applicants date of rank be adjusted to 16 May 2001 and that he be considered for promotion to CW3 by the next state promotion board.
9. The advisory opinion was provided to the applicant and he concurred.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
1. The applicants date of rank should be adjusted to 16 May 2001 and he should receive time in grade credit for promotion purposes.
2. Since both of these items are under the direct control of the state government, the Board can only recommend that the state take corrective action.
3. It is noted that the applicant does not have constructive credit for the Warrant Office Advance Course; therefore he is advised to immediately resolve this issue.
BOARD VOTE:
___ EM__ __CLG__ __MJF __ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that the Adjutant General of the Minnesota Army National Guard direct that the date of rank as a CW2 of the individual concerned be corrected to 16 May 2001 and that he be considered for promotion to CW3 at the appropriate time.
___Curtis L. Greenway___
CHAIRPERSON
INDEX
CASE ID
AR20060008684
SUFFIX
RECON
DATE BOARDED
20070/12
TYPE OF DISCHARGE
DATE OF DISCHARGE
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY
. . . . .
DISCHARGE REASON
BOARD DECISION
GRANT
REVIEW AUTHORITY
ISSUES 1.
102.07
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100008900
The applicant requests correction of his military records to show his date of rank to chief warrant officer three (CW3) as 15 May 2006. The applicant provides, in support of his application, copies of: a. email communications between himself and the MN ARNG; b. ABCMR Record of Proceedings, Docket Number AR20060008684; c. Request for Constructive Credit for Warrant Officer Education, dated 12 September 2006; d. Table 2-3 (Warrant officer time in grade and military education requirements),...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070011789
On 17 May 2005, by memorandum addressed to the President, Federal Recognition Board, PRARNG, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, Joint Forces Headquarters, PRARNG, concurred with the immediate commander's recommendation and requested the applicant's records be examined to determine his qualifications for Federal Recognition in the higher grade. On 15 June 2005, by memorandum addressed to the Adjutant General's Office, PRARNG, the President, Federal Recognition Board, PRARNG, stated...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120000479
The applicant provides: * October 2001 USAR Honorable Discharge Certificate * 1994 Selection for Promotion memorandum * 1995 Eligibility for Promotion Memorandum and Endorsement * 2001 Non-Selection Notification of Promotion * 2010 DA Form 71 (Oath of Office Military Personnel) * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Special Orders Number 189 AR * Orders 224-1126, issued by the TXARNG, dated 12 August 2010 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. b. Paragraph 7-4 (Computation of promotion service to determine...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130020423
The applicant states: a. By Army Regulation 135-155, he was not required to attend WOAC for promotion to CW3. By regulation, as an aviation WO in the ARNG, completion of WOAC was required before he could be promoted to CW3 in the AZARNG.
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 | CY2008 | 20080019246
The applicant requests adjustment of his promotion effective date and date of rank (DOR) to chief warrant officer three (CW3) from 5 December 2007 to 16 March 2007. He met the time in grade requirements of Table 7-1 of National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (Warrant Officer - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) and NGB Personnel Policy and Readiness Policy Letter 07-25, dated 29 August 2007, which state that the minimum time in grade requirements for promotion to CW3 is five...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060001522
The applicant requests, in effect, that his records be corrected to show that he was called to active duty under the Retired Aviators Program in the rank of major. The applicant could voluntarily withdraw from the Retired Aviators Program, apply for reappointment as a major in the United States Army Reserve, and then reapply for the Retired Aviators Program; or c. The Army Board for Correction of Military Records could direct Human Resources Command Alexandria to promote the applicant to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077278C070215
The applicant states, in effect, that a misinterpretation of the governing regulation related to his transfer from the United States Army Reserve (USAR) to the ARNG resulted in his receiving an incorrect promotion date to CW2. As confirmed in the NGB, because he was not transferred into the ARNG from an inactive status as defined by the regulation, the applicant was eligible to be promoted to CW2 on 8 August 1997, the same day he was appointed in the ARNG. Therefore, the Board concludes...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023520
The applicant requests an adjustment of his Federal recognition order for promotion to chief warrant officer three (CW3) from 12 August 2011 to 16 February 2011. Officials at the NGB opined, in effect, that the delay in the applicants Federal Recognition was due to a change in the law that required warrant officers (WO's) to be approved at a higher level and it took a period of time to refine the process; however, the delay was not the result of an error or injustice specifically related...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2015 | 20150001019
He provided email correspondence supporting the following contentions: * he notified the readiness NCO to submit his promotion packet in February 2013 * he verified his packet was complete with his unit readiness NCO in March 2013 * he spoke with the SAO regarding why his packet had not left the unit for the Army in June 2013 * he was informed his packet had been lost in November 2013 * he resubmitted his promotion packet in December 2013 * he was notified his packet was incomplete due to...