Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110008370
Original file (20110008370.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

		

		BOARD DATE:	  24 April 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110008370 


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 an adjustment of his date of rank (DOR) from 
26 August 2010 to 7 April 2010.

2.  The applicant states he was recommended for promotion to the rank and pay grade of chief warrant officer five (CW5)/W-5 in accordance with National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (Warrant Officers - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) on 7 April 2010.  The applicant states that his promotion to CW5 was not processed in a timely manner due to no fault of his own.  After exhausting all means to address the issue within the Army National Guard (ARNG), he filed a complaint with the National Guard Bureau Inspector General, (NGB-IG), whose inquiry was found in his favor.

3.  The applicant provides:

* a DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report), dated 
12 October 2007
* Orders 225-802, dated 13 August 2010, issued by the Tennessee Army National Guard (TNARNG), Joint Force Headquarters (JFH)
* Orders, 242-800, and Orders, 242-802, both dated 30 August 2010, issued by TNARNG, JFH
* an ARNG Position and Paragraph Number sheet for CW5
* an NGB Form 89 (Proceedings of a Federal Recognition Examining Board), dated 12 August 2010

* an NGB memorandum, subject:  Recommendation for Promotion - Warrant Officer, dated 7 April 2010  
* an NGB memorandum, subject: Recommendation for Promotion of Officer, dated 14 July 2010 
* an NGB memorandum, subject: Promotion as a Reserve Commissioned Warrant Officer (WO) of the Army, dated 30 August 2010 
* NGB Special Orders Number 189 AR, dated 30 August 2010
* an NGB-IG letter, dated 28 December 2010

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant had prior enlisted service.  On 29 November 1990, he was appointed as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army in the rank/grade of WO one (WO1)/W-1 in military occupational specialty (MOS) 153B (Utility Helicopter – 
1 Pilot).

2.  Orders Number 264-23, dated 24 November 1992, issued by U.S. Army Support Command, Hawaii, show he was promoted to the rank/grade of chief warrant officer two (CW2)/W-2, effective 29 November 1992.

3.  The applicant’s records contain a memorandum from the U.S. Total Army Personnel Command.  This memorandum states the applicant was promoted to the rank/grade of chief warrant officer three (CW3)/W-3, effective 29 November 1998. 

4.  NGB Special Orders Number 13 AR, dated 16 January 2001, show the applicant was transferred from the U.S. Army Reserve to the TNARNG, JFH, effective 1 October 2000.

5.  NGB Special Orders Number 133 AR, dated 29 April 2005, awarded the applicant permanent Federal Recognition in the rank/grade of chief warrant officer four (CW4)/W-4, effective 20 February 2005.

6.  NGB Orders Number 152-11, dated 1 June 2005, show he was ordered to active duty (apparently under Title 10, U.S. Code) in the Active Guard Reserve (AGR) program, effective 15 June 2005.  He was assigned to the Aviation and Safety Division, NGB.

7.  In a memorandum from the Chief, Aviation and Safety Division, dated 7 April 2010, thru the Chief, Officer Personnel Branch, NGB to the TNARNG, JFH, the applicant was recommended for promotion to CW5.  

8.  A memorandum from the Acting Chief, Officer Management Branch, NGB, dated 14 July 2010, to the TNARNG, JFH, shows the applicant's recommendation packet for promotion to the rank of CW5/W-5 was forwarded for appropriate action.  The TNARNG, JFH was authorized an additional temporary CW5/W-5 position, effective immediately.  

9.  Orders Number 225-802, issued by the TNARNG, JFH show the applicant was promoted to the rank of CW5/W-5 effective 26 August 2010.

10.  NGB Special Orders Number 189 AR, dated 30 August 2010, awarded the applicant permanent Federal Recognition in the rank of CW5/W-5, effective 
26 August 2010.

11.  The applicant provided a letter from the Chief, NGB-IG, dated 28 December 2010, which stated he was responding to the applicant's request for assistance regarding his delayed promotion to the rank of CW5.  The Chief, NGB-IG determined that:

* the applicant was recommended for promotion to CW5 on 7 April 2010
* he met the requirements for promotion to CW5
* the NGB Human Capital Management (NGB-HCM) was responsible for reviewing the request for promotion and if valid to forward the request for promotion to the warrant officer’s State
* the applicant’s recommendation for promotion was not appropriately forwarded to his State for over 7 months
* the applicant’s promotion recommendation was not handled in accordance with NGR 600-101

12.  Additionally, the Chief, NGB-IG stated that in July 2010 his office reviewed the findings with the ARNG Chief of Staff and the Deputy Director, ARNG.  He made recommendations to consider appropriate corrective action by retrieving the applicant’s promotion recommendation/validated packet and appropriately forwarding it to his State.  The Deputy Director, ARNG made a decision to forward the applicant’s promotion recommendation to his State.  

13.  The Chief, NGB-IG further stated “immediately following this decision, under appropriate delegated authority per NGB Memo 25-56 Coordinating NGB Policy Documents” the Deputy Director postponed further WO recommendations for promotion to States.  In the interim, the Deputy Director directed supplemental changes to be incorporated into NGR 600-101 that further describe and define 

the specific requirements and timing involved in making a supervisor recommendation, the organization process of validating that request and other pertinent leadership criterion to be published when complete.

14.  In the processing of this case an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Personnel Policy Division, ARNG.  The advisory official recommended denial of the applicant's request.  The advisory official stated that prior to the applicant's promotion his recommendation for promotion was received by the TNARNG, JFH on 13 July 2010.  The TNARNG, JFH issued the applicant Orders 242-802, dated 30 August 2010 promoting him to the rank of CW5, effective 26 August 2010.  The advisory official further stated that although the applicant met the minimum requirements for promotion to the higher grade, there was no expectation that promotions were automatic upon achieving promotion requirements.  Regardless of the fact that the applicant’s promotion packet was delayed at the NGB his promotion would have been no earlier than the Federal Recognition Board, which was 12 August 2010.

15.  The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal.  The applicant stated:

* he was recommended for promotion and his error free promotion packet was correctly submitted 
* the promotion process was subsequently delayed through no fault of his own
* after exhausting all means of redress through his chain of command, and with their concurrence, he and two other warrant officers sought relief from the NGB-IG
* the NGB-IG findings support his claim and the other WO's claims
* he also restates a number of points made by the Chief, NGB-IG

16.  NGR 600-101 provides procedures for the promotion of warrant officers in the ARNG.  Paragraph 7-11a states upon determining that a warrant officer serving on Title 10 AGR tours managed by NGB is eligible for promotion, a Memorandum prepared by the first line supervisor will be forwarded to Chief, Tours Management Office (now known as the NGB-HCM).  Paragraph 7-11b states the NGB-HCM will review the request and if determined to be valid will forward the correspondence to the warrant officer’s parent State recommending promotion action to the next higher grade.  NGB-HCM will grant an additional Table of Distribution and Allowances allocation commensurate to the 

recommended grade.  If the State concurs with the requested action and the officer is determined qualified for promotion by the Federal Recognition Board, the State will publish orders citing this regulation as the promotion authority.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's supporting evidence has been carefully considered.

2.  Orders show the applicant was promoted in the TNARNG, JFH under a unit vacancy position to the rank of CW5 effective 26 August 2010.  This promotion was accomplished at the discretion of the Adjutant General of the State of Tennessee.  

3.  While there was a delay in the processing of the applicant's promotion to CW5, the applicable regulation provides that in order for an officer to be concurrently appointed, promoted, or receive a branch transfer as a Reserve commissioned officer of the Army, the State action must be federally recognized.

4.  The applicant was awarded permanent Federal Recognition for the purpose of promotion to the rank of CW5 with an effective date of 26 August 2010.  He was properly promoted to CW5 on 26 August 2010, the date his promotion was Federally Recognized.

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant's request should be denied.

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)                                         AR20110008370



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110008370



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2008 | 20080004802

    Original file (20080004802.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, that his Chief Warrant Officer Two (CW2) promotion and Federal Recognition effective date be corrected to reflect 17 December 2007 vice 12 March 2008. The applicant provides the following documents in support of his application: Joint Force Headquarters (JFH), Tennessee Army National Guard (TNARNG) Memorandum, dated 6 March 2008; Promotion Checklist; Unit Memorandum, dated 5 December 2007; Personnel Qualification Record; JFH, TNARNG Orders 338-844, dated 4...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110006611

    Original file (20110006611.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    NGR 600-101 states that the recommendation will be forwarded to the state (which serves as the promotion authority). Regardless of the fact that the Soldier's promotion packet was delayed at NGB, the promotion still would have been no earlier than the date of the Federal Recognition Board (FRB) which was 15 July 2010. e. The State concurs with this recommendation. The evidence of record confirms he was eligible for promotion to CW5 on 3 December 2009, the date he was recommended for promotion.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130012162

    Original file (20130012162.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states he was recommended for promotion in accordance with National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (Warrant Officers - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) on 30 October 2009. The IG determined that: * at the time his supervisor recommended him for promotion, he met the minimum requirement for promotion, military education, and placement into an appropriately allocated CW5 control-graded position * the actioning of his promotion recommendation to his state...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110024942

    Original file (20110024942.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 March 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110024942 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests adjustment of his Federal recognition order for promotion to chief warrant officer five (CW5) from 11 August 2011 to 15 February 2011, the date he was eligible for promotion. The applicant provides: * Joint Force Headquarters, Kansas Orders 021-719, dated 21 January 2011 * NGB Special Orders Number 188 AR, dated 16 August 2011 * NGB memorandum dated...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110023169

    Original file (20110023169.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 31 January 2012 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110023169 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant states: * Prior to the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Army National Guard (ARNG) officers were promoted by the Chief, National Guard Bureau (NGB) * After the 2011 NDAA, the authority was elevated from the Secretary of the service to the President of the United States * When the new policy was signed into law, many officials were unaware of...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004606

    Original file (20090004606.txt) Auto-classification: Approved

    The applicant requests, in effect, correction to his date of rank for chief warrant officer two (CW2) from 16 August 2007 to 31 March 2007, with all back pay and entitlements. In this case of ARNG officers, the State will publish a State promotion order and forward it to the NGB-ARP no earlier than 90 days prior to the officer meeting the minimum time in grade requirement provided the officer had completed the WOBC and is otherwise eligible for promotion. As a result, the Board recommends...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100025158

    Original file (20100025158.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2011 | 20110018778

    Original file (20110018778.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant states: * nationally within the Army National Guard (ARNG), warrant officer (WO) promotions and appointments were held up due to a change outlined in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2011 * the NDAA procedurally changed the way WO's are promoted or appointed insofar as all WO promotions and appointments are now signed by the President of the United States or his designated representative * the National Guard Bureau (NGB) stopped all WO promotions and...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140016620

    Original file (20140016620.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests his effective date of promotion to chief warrant officer five (CW5) in the Army National Guard (ARNG) be adjusted from 19 August 2014 to 18 March 2014. He provides: * applicant's self-authored statement * memorandum, subject: Appointment as a Reserve Warrant Officer (WO) of the Army, dated 21 August 2014 * emails * Officer Record Brief * memorandum, subject: Results of the Fiscal Year (FY14) CW5 Review Advisory Panel, dated 19 December 2013 * NGB Forms 89 (Proceedings...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110000581

    Original file (20110000581.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...