IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 18 August 2009
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20090012312
THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE:
1. Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any).
2. Military Personnel Records and advisory opinions (if any).
CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE:
6. The applicant, a career military intelligence officer, had over 36 years of creditable service toward Reserve retirement. Following 11 September 2001, he volunteered to go on extended active duty. He remained on active duty until his mandatory retirement date and then accepted recall to active duty from a retired status.
7. On 25 August 2008 new information was received from the U.S. Army Human Resources Command, St. Louis, Missouri (HRC-St. Louis) about implementing the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) in Docket Number AR20060017758, dated 19 June 2007.
8. HRC-St. Louis stated:
a. the applicant's records were corrected to show he remained on the Reserve Component Selection List;
b. when he reached age 62 (on 18 July 2007) he was transferred to the Retired Reserve but continued to serve in a Retired Recall status;
c. on 13 November 2007 a Standby Advisory Board (STAB) considered and selected him for promotion to chief warrant officer five (CW5) under the 2005 promotion criteria;
d. however, because the applicant had already reached age 62, he was barred from attending the Warrant Officer Senior Staff Course (WOSSC);
e. he was not in a CW5 position at the time of selection and due to his age he was barred from being placed in a CW5 position; and
f. HRC-St. Louis was unable complete the Board-directed correction and requested additional guidance.
9. The record contains orders recalling the applicant to active duty in a Retired Recall status and orders twice extending him in this status.
10. The first WOSSC offered following the 2005 CW5 Promotion Selection Board met from 12 through 24 July 2005.
11. Department of the Army Message R 091801Z JUN 05 states, effective immediately, warrant officer training and education requirements were de-linked from promotion requirements. Personnel centers were to automatically consider officers for leader training, education, and development courses as they reached the appropriate phase of their career management models.
12. Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers) requires a Soldier to complete the WOSSC to be promoted to CW5 and to be serving in a CW5 position. Completion of the WOSSC is not required for selection; however, the officer must possess a position vacancy coded W5 and be a WOSSC graduate before promotion.
ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:
5. At the time of the decision of the ABCMR in Docket Number AR20060017758, dated 19 June 2007, it was the intent of the ABCMR to make the applicants record as administratively correct as possible.
6. The ABCMR's decision in Docket Number AR20060017758 failed to take into consideration the fact that the applicant would reach age 62 before a STAB could consider him and that he needed the WOSSC before he could be promoted.
7. Had the applicant been properly considered for promotion in 2005 he would have had sufficient time to attend the WOSSC and to have found a CW5 position in order to be promoted.
8. The 9 July 2005 message shows that the applicant would have automatically been scheduled for the WOSSC. He would have attended the July 2005 WOSSC.
9. There is no reason to believe that the applicant would have declined to attend the WOSSC or that he would not have successfully completed that training.
10. Following the events of 11 September 2001, this career military intelligence officer volunteered to serve on active duty and did so until he was forced to transfer to the Retired Reserve based on exceeding his mandatory retirement date. His skills were in such high demand that he was recalled to active duty from his retired status and twice extended. Based on this record, it is reasonable believe that he would have sought and been assigned to a CW5 position.
11. Therefore, as a matter of equity and justice, the applicant's records should be further corrected to show:
a. the applicant was selected for promotion to CW5 by a STAB under the 2005 criteria;
b. he successfully completed the WOSSC on 24 July 2005,
c. he was assigned to a W5 position immediately upon completing WOSSC,
d. he was promoted to CW5 with an effective date and date of rank of 25 July 2005;
e. he is entitled to all rights, privileges, pay, and benefits of that rank effective 25 July 2005, and
f. he retired in the rank of CW5.
BOARD VOTE:
____X____ ____X____ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF
________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING
________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION
BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:
2. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant amendment of the decision of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records set forth in Docket Number AR20060017758, dated 19 June 2007, to show:
a. the applicant was selected for promotion to CW5 by a STAB under the 2005 criteria;
b. he successfully completed the WOSSC on 24 July 2005;
c. he was assigned to a CW5 position immediately upon completing WOSSC,
d. he was promoted to CW5 with an effective date and date of rank of 25 July 2005;
e. he is entitled to all rights, privileges, pay, and benefits of that rank effective 25 July 2005, and
f. he retired in the rank of CW5.
___________X____________
CHAIRPERSON
I certify that herein is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in this case.
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090012312
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
SUPPLEMENTAL RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Supplemental Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20090012312
2
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080017881
On 29 February 2008, HRC-St. Louis officials requested revocation of the applicants mobilization Orders M-10-702757 due to the fact that he would turn age 62 on 8 April 2008 and must be removed from active service not later than 60 days after the date in which he turns age 62. On 14 April 2008, HRC-St. Louis published Orders C-04-807106, releasing the applicant from active duty by reason of completion of 20 or more years of Reserve duty and reassigning him to the Retired Reserve on 7 June...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100010265
The applicant requests reconsideration of the Board's denial of his previous request as follows: a. reinstatement to active duty until he can obtain a new surgical appointment and complete his surgery and recuperation; b. cancellation of his retirement until he has completed his surgery and recuperation; c. restoration of pay and allowances that the Army recouped as an indebtedness prorated through 13 June 2008, the date that the unexecuted portion of his active duty orders A-06-810144 were...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000581
The applicant requests promotion to chief warrant officer five (CW5). He had over 18 years of time in grade (TIG) as a chief warrant officer four (CW4), completed the Warrant Officer Senior Staff Course, selected by the State Adjutant General, and performed CW5 duties as the Detachment Commander, Detachment 25 (DET 25), OSA (Operational Support Airlift), Tennessee Army National Guard (TNARNG), Smyrna, TN, for 19 months (February 2008 through August 2009). The applicant provides: * a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025158
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 August 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20100025158 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. He was promoted to chief warrant officer three on 20 August 1993 and chief warrant officer four (CW4) on 8 October 1998. In his rebuttal, the applicant stated: * He was passed over for promotion, contrary to governing regulations * He was senior by date of rank and more educationally qualified than others * The IG agreed that the SCARNG broke the regulation * The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012026
The applicant requests promotion to the rank of chief warrant officer five (CW5). It further states assignment to a CW5 position is required for promotion to CW5. Evidence shows that while he successfully completed the WOSC, the applicant was never assigned to a CW5 position prior to his reassignment to the Retired Reserve on 28 February 2012.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130014636
The applicant was appointed as a warrant officer one (WO1) unit personnel technician in the South Carolina Army National Guard (SCARNG) on 22 September 1987. The applicant's official records indicate that he completed the Reserve Component Senior Warrant Officer Training Course by correspondence in 1993. It also provides that effective 1 April 1995, all warrant officers (civil service technicians and traditional warrant officers) may complete Reserve Component (RC) configured courses...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2006 | 20060009033
The applicant further requests: a. a statement explaining the absence of officer evaluation reports (OER) be included in his official military personnel file (OMPF); b. three non-selection for promotion references dated 14 October 1994, 16 October 1995, and 16 April 2004 be expunged from his record in accordance with the recommendations of this Board in AR2003089931, dated 15 July 2003; c. the difference in pay between lieutenant colonel and colonel for the period between 2 March 1998 and 31...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070012651C080407
The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Self-Authored Statement; Assumption of Command Memorandum, dated 20 May 2005; Assignment Orders, dated 5 July 2005; Unit Manning Report (UMR), dated 28 September 2005; State Promotion Orders, dated 28 July 2005 and 19 December 2006; Promotion/Federal Recognition Orders, dated 13 March 2006 and 8 January 2007; Officer Evaluation Reports (OERs), ending 3 April 2006 and 11 May 2007; Academic Evaluation Reports (AERs),...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080008046
The applicant also references paragraph 4 of "Consideration of Evidence" and paragraph 2 of "Discussion and Conclusion" in which the Board commented that no material error existed based on the failure of statements directed to be placed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) per paragraph 4b of Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) Decision Docket Number AR2001062261, dated 10 October 2001. The applicant further references ABCMR Decision Document Number AC97-08966,...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9607957C070209
Additionally, he was required to be assigned to a duty position authorized the grade of MW/W5 and have completed the Master Warrant Officer Training Course (MWOTC). The response went on to say that the applicant had an MRD of 31 July 1993 thus, even if an exception were granted he could not retire in the higher grade before his MRD (he would have had to serve at least 31 days in the new grade to retire in that grade). On 21 July 1993 the applicant was advised by his higher headquarters...