IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  13 December 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110003973 


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).


THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant requests correction of her date of rank (DOR) as a chief warrant officer three (CW3) from 23 June 2010 to 28 April 2010.

2.  The applicant states, in effect:

* Federal Recognition Board (FRB) approval was delayed due to an erroneous request for an exception to policy related to completion of the Warrant Officer Advanced Course (WOAC)
* She graduated from the WOAC on 28 December 2008
* Her line/paragraph number (position) was frozen due to deployment with another command
* She returned to the same position upon redeployment
* Her packet was forwarded with the packets of two other individuals who required exception to policy requests

3.  The applicant provides:

* DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report)
* DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
* Orders 119-1178 (transfer to another position)
* Orders 196-1212 (deployment orders)
* Orders 179-004 (orders to active duty)
* National Guard Bureau (NGB) Form 89 (Proceedings of a Federal Recognition Examining Board)
* Exception to policy approval memorandum
* NGB Special Orders Number 154 AR

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Having had prior enlisted service, the applicant was appointed as a warrant officer one in the Indiana Army National Guard (INARNG) and executed the oaths of office on 15 April 2004 with concurrent call to active duty.

2.  She successfully attended and completed the Property Accounting Technician Warrant Officer Basic Course from 14 June to 17 August 2004.  She was awarded military occupational specialty (MOS) 920A (Property Accounting Technician).

3.  On 24 May 2006, the NGB published Special Orders Number 134 AR extending her Federal recognition for promotion to chief warrant officer two (CW2) with an effective date and DOR of 27 April 2006.

4.  She successfully attended and completed the Property Accounting Technician WOAC from 6 October to 10 December 2008.

5.  On 9 April 2009, the INARNG published Orders 119-1178 assigning her to Headquarters and Headquarters Company, Aviation Brigade, 38th Infantry Division, Shelbyville, IN.

6.  On 5 July 2009, she was honorably released from active duty for the purpose of entering active duty in another status.

7.  On 6 July 2009, she was ordered to active duty in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.  She served in Kuwait/Iraq from 31 July 2009 to 23 June 2010.

8.  On 28 April 2010, an FRB was held by the INARNG to determine if the applicant was qualified to be awarded Federal recognition as a CW3.  The proceedings indicated the applicant was satisfactory in her physical qualifications, moral character, and general qualifications.  She was qualified for appointment as a CW3.

9.  On 4 May 2010, the INARNG published Orders 124-1002 promoting the applicant to CW3 with an effective date and DOR as 28 April 2010.

10.  On 23 June 2010, by memorandum, an NGB official approved an exception to policy to promote the applicant to CW3 in a rear detachment position.  The approval stipulated that her DOR would not be earlier than 14 July 2010, her position in her parent unit would remain vacant during her deployment, and that she would be placed in that position upon redeployment.

11.  On 16 July 2010, the INARNG published Orders 197-1037 amending Orders 124-1002, published on 4 May 2010, promoting her to CW3 with an effective date and DOR of 28 April 2010, to show an effective date and DOR of 23 June 2010.

12.  On 19 July 2010, NGB Special Orders Number 154 AR extended her Federal recognition in the rank of CW3, effective 23 June 2010.

13.  On 30 July 2010, she was honorably released from active duty to the control of the ARNG.

14.  National Guard Regulation 600-101 (Warrant Officers - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) prescribes policies and procedures for ARNG warrant officer personnel management.  Chapter 7 states that promotion of warrant officers in the ARNG is a function of the State.  As in original appointments, a warrant officer promoted by State authority has a State status in the higher grade under which to function.  However, to be extended Federal recognition in the higher grade, the officer must satisfy the requirements for this promotion.  Promotions will be based on the Department of the Army proponent duty MOS certification via satisfactory completion or constructive credit of appropriate level of military education, time in grade, demonstrated technical and tactical competence, and potential for service in the next higher grade as determined by a FRB.  Promotion will not be used solely as a reward for past performance.

15.  A warrant officer must complete the minimum years of promotion service as shown in Table 7-1 and the education requirements of Table 7-2 of National Guard Regulation 600-101 to attain eligibility for promotion and receive Federal recognition in the higher grade.  Table 7-1 states, in pertinent part, that the minimum time in grade for promotion to CW3 is 4 years in the lower grade.  Table 7-2 states, in pertinent part, that the minimum military education requirement for promotion to CW3 is completion of the common core prerequisite correspondence studies and the duty MOS WOAC or equivalent.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows her DOR as a CW2 was 27 April 2006 and she completed WOAC on 10 December 2008.  She met the minimum time-in-grade requirements for promotion to CW3 on 28 April 2010 and she was favorably considered by an FRB that found her satisfactory in her physical qualifications, moral character, and general qualifications.
2.  An exception to policy was submitted by her State to the NGB requesting favorable consideration of her promotion.  The NGB approved the exception with a stipulation that her DOR would not be earlier than 14 July 2010, her position in her parent unit would remain vacant during her deployment, and that she would be placed in that position upon redeployment.

3.  Her State then published amendment orders adjusting her promotion to show her promotion to CW3 with an effective date and a DOR as 23 June 2010.  The NGB ultimately published official orders to extend her federal recognition for this promotion with an effective date and DOR of 23 June 2010 (the date she completed her combat tour).  The 23 June 2010 date is earlier than the 14 July 2010 date stipulated by her exception to policy approval memorandum.  In effect, she has already received relief.   

4.  In view of the foregoing evidence she is not entitled to the requested relief.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

____x___  ____x___  ____x___  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The evidence presented does not demonstrate the existence of a probable error or injustice.  Therefore, the Board determined that the overall merits of this case are insufficient as a basis for correction of the records of the individual concerned.



      _______ _   __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)                                         AR20110003973



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110003973



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1