IN THE CASE OF:	   

		BOARD DATE:	  13 March 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20110012376 


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, in effect, correction of his permanent Federal recognition date for promotion to the rank of chief warrant officer three (CW3) to 18 April 2011 and back pay from that date.

2.  The applicant states:

* his promotion packet was received by the Tennessee Army National Guard (TNARNG) on 8 March 2011
* the March board convened mid month and his promotion packet was sent forward
* his packet fell in the middle of passage of the recent National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) where all warrant officer packets are put on a scroll
* the information about this was given by the TNARNG Command Chief Warrant Officer after his packet went forward
* his state promotion orders, dated 17 March 2011, show his date of rank (DOR) as 18 April 2011 and state, "individual WNB [will not be] paid as CW3 until Federal recognition is confirmed"
* this is a great disservice through no fault of his own 

3.  The applicant provides:

* TNARNG promotion orders, dated 17 March 2011
* email from the TNARNG Command Chief Warrant Officer, dated 11 March 2011, relaying information from the NDAA

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant was appointed as a warrant officer candidate in the ARNG on 22 September 2004.

2.  He executed his oaths of office with the TNARNG in the rank of warrant officer one (WO1) effective 1 April 2005.

3.  National Guard Bureau (NGB) Special Orders Number 127 AR, dated 22 April 2005, awarded the applicant Federal recognition for his initial appointment to the rank of WO1 effective 1 April 2005.

4.  On 18 April 2007, a Federal recognition board determined the applicant was qualified for Federal recognition in the rank of chief warrant officer two (CW2).

5.  NGB Special Orders Number 102 AR, dated 30 April 2007, awarded the applicant permanent Federal recognition for promotion to the grade of CW2 effective 18 April 2007.

6.  TNARNG Orders 076-849, dated 17 March 2011, show he was promoted to CW3 via unit vacancy effective 18 April 2011.

7.  NGB Special Orders Number 189 AR, dated 16 August 2011, awarded the applicant permanent Federal recognition for promotion to the grade of CW3 effective 12 August 2011.

8.  ARNG Policy Memorandum Number 11-105, dated 14 June 2011, pertains to Federal recognition of warrant officer appointments in the ARNG.  This memorandum states all initial appointments of warrant officers and appointments in a higher grade (promotion) by warrant or commission will be issued by the President of the United States effective 7 January 2011.

9.  An ARNG information paper, dated 22 July 2011, subject:  NDAA 2011 Changes to Warrant Officer Federal Recognition Process, states:

	a.  Previous to 7 January 2011, all warrant officer Federal recognition appointments and promotions were approved by the Secretary of the Army.  The Secretary of the Army delegated this authority to the Director, NGB, and NGB published all Federal recognition orders for warrant officers.

	b.  On 7 January 2011, NDAA 2011 was signed and a new requirement was created that all warrant officer appointments and promotions would have to be signed by the President of the United States.  This new requirement removed NGB authority to approve and publish all warrant officer Federal recognition orders.  All warrant officer appointments and promotions are now required to go on a scroll and processed through various channels from the Department of the Army G-1 up to the Secretary of Defense.

	c.  Before NDAA 2011, all National Guard warrant officer promotions effective DOR was the date of the State promotion orders as stated by the Federal recognition board recommendations.  NDAA 2011 did not stipulate what the effective DOR of promotions would or would not be.  Currently the assumption is that all warrant officer Federal recognition promotions will be the date the Secretary of Defense signs the scroll.

10.  An ARNG information paper, dated 9 August 2011, subject:  Warrant Officer Federal Recognition Scroll 01-11 Status and Update for Scrolls 02-11 through 10-11, states the DOR will not be retroactive to the DOR on the State promotion orders.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant's contentions and his supporting evidence have been carefully considered.

2.  By law, effective 7 January 2011, all warrant officer promotions are required to go on a scroll and be processed through various channels up to the Secretary of Defense.

	a.  The delay in the applicant's promotion resulted from a statutory change in the procedures for the promotion of WOs that was mandated by the 2011 NDAA that WOs be placed on a scroll and staffed to the President (delegated to the Secretary of Defense) for approval.  The law took effect on 7 January 2011.  There followed a period of time during which the procedures for processing WO appointment and promotion scrolls were developed and refined.

	b.  Although this process was modeled on the existing process of scrolling commissioned officer appointments and promotions, there was still a period during which the WO scrolling process was being perfected.  This development process did result in the delay of the promotions of all ARNG WOs, and probably WOs from other components, recommended for promotion during the months immediately following the enactment of the scrolling requirements.  

	c.  The delay in question was not the result of an error or an injustice as much as it was the inherent consequence of elevating the appointment and promotion authority for WOs to such a high level.  While it is true the processing time has been materially reduced as the service learned how to streamline the new process, the fact remains that the delay is an organic feature of the new scheme mandated by Congress and not an error or an injustice specific to the applicant.

3.  In view of the foregoing evidence and the change in law, the applicant's effective date of promotion seems appropriate and reasonable and should not change.

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 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)                                         AR20110012376



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20110012376



4


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1