IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  24 July 2012 

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120002059 


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 his promotion date as a chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) from 26 January 2012 to 22 April 2011. 

2.  The applicant states he graduated from the Special Forces Warrant Officer Technical and Tactical Certification Course (SFWTTCC) on 22 April 2011 but he was not granted Federal recognition until January 2012.  According to the National Guard Bureau's (NGB) guidance, a sergeant first class (SFC) with 2 years of time in grade is promoted to CW2 upon graduation from the Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC).  He completed the first phase of the SFWTTCC on 19 January 2011 and he was appointed to warrant officer one.  However, no official Federal recognition packet was submitted by the OHARNG.  After returning from the course, he submitted his promotion packet to the OHARNG on 30 April 2011.  His initial Federal recognition packet was not submitted until late May 2011.  On 27 July 2011, he received his initial Federal recognition to be effective 19 January 2011.  The OHARNG did not turn in his promotion packet to the NGB until the middle of October 2011 because the original packet contained errors and was returned by the State for correction.  By then, in June 2011, the NGB policy directed that all warrant officer appointments and promotions to WO grades be made by the President of the United States.  The significant time lost by this policy and the delay in submitting his initial appointment and promotion packets by the OHARNG directly affected his promotion to CW2. 

3.  The applicant provides:

* NGB Policy to Appoint SFC to CW2
* Certificate of completion of the SFWTTC
* DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report)
* State Orders 215-915 (amendment of promotion date)
* NGB Special Orders Number 170 AR (Appointment)
* NGB Special Orders 23 AR (Promotion)
* NGB Promotion memorandum

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Having had prior enlisted service in the Regular Army, the applicant's records show he enlisted in the OHARNG on 31 July 2000 and held military occupational specialties 11B (Infantryman) and 18C (Special Forces Engineer Sergeant).  

2.  He served in a variety of assignments including multiple calls to active duty and service overseas, and he attained the rank/grade of SFC/E-7 on 15 April 2007.  He was honorably discharged from the ARNG on 18 January 2011 for the purpose of accepting an appointment as a WO.

3.  He was appointed as a WO in the OHARNG and executed an oath of office on 19 January 2011.  He attended the SFWTTC at Fort Bragg, NC, from 2 January 211 to 21 April 2011.  

4.  On 24 May 2011, the OHARNG published Orders 144-925 promoting the applicant to CW2, effective 16 May 2011, and on 3 August 2011, the OHARNG published Orders 215-915 amending the effective date of his promotion to CW2 and date of rank (DOR) from 16 May 2011 to 21 April 2011. 

5.  On 27 July 2011, the NGB published Orders 170 AR extending him Federal recognition for initial appointment as a WO with an effective date and DOR as 19 January 2011. 

6.  On 8 August 2011, the NGB published Special Orders Number 181 AR extending him Federal recognition for a military occupational specialty change to 180A (SF WO), effective 21 April 2011. 

7.  On 17 October 2011, the OHARNG published 290-918, again promoting him to CW2, effective 21 April 2011.  However, on the same date, the OHARNG published Orders 290-940 revoking Orders 290-918, indicating it was an erroneous order. 

8.  On 26 January 2012, the NGB published Special Orders Number 23 AR extending him federal recognition for promotion to CW2 with an effective date and DOR as 24 January 2012. 

9.  NGB Policy memorandum Number 07-026, dated 14 August 2007, Subject: Policy to Appoint SFC to CW2, states that States are authorized to appoint an SFC/E-7 who has served a minimum of 2 consecutive years as an E-7 to the grade of CW2 in one of two ways: 

	a.  SFC/E-7 who is certified by the Department of the Army (DA) MOS proponent prior to initial appointment (attendance at WOBC is not required) may be appointed in the grade of CW2 upon completion of WOCS (warrant officer candidate school).  Constructive credit may be granted if the Soldier had satisfactorily completed an OCS within the previous 5 years.

	b.  SFC/E-7 who is eligible for MOS training may be promoted to CW2 after completion of WOCS and WOBC.  Constructive credit may be granted if the Soldier satisfactorily completed an OCS within the previous 5 years. 

10.  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 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 an FRB.

11.  A warrant officer must complete the minimum years of promotion service as shown in Table 7-1 (for promotion to CW2, two years in the lower grade) and the education requirements of Table 7-2 (completion of WOBC) of National Guard Regulation 600-101 to attain eligibility for promotion and receive Federal recognition in the higher grade.  Additionally, a WO must be medically fit and meet the height and weight standards as well as pass the APFT.

12.  NGB Policy Memorandum 11-015, Subject: Federal Recognition of Warrant Officers in the ARNG, dated 14 June 2011 states that ARNG WOs are initially appointed and are also promoted by the State or Territory to which the officer is assigned.  The Chief, NGB, reviews and approves those actions.  Title 10, U.S. Code, sections 571b and 12241b introduce a requirement that all WO appointments and promotions to chief warrant officer grades in the ARNG be made by the President of the United States.  As a result, effective 7 January 2011, all initial appointments of WOs and promotion to higher grades, by warrant or commission, will be issued by the President (delegated to the Secretary of Defense).  Requests for appointment will be staffed through the Department of the Army, Deputy Chief of Staff, G-1.  This requirement may add 90 days or more to the process for approval for appointments or promotions to be completed.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record shows the applicant was appointed as a WO in the OHARNG on 19 January 2011 but for unknown reasons, his Federal recognition packet may not have been timely forwarded by the State to the NGB for consideration.  The State issued promotion orders promoting the applicant to CW2 upon graduation from SFWTTC on 21 April 2011.  

2.  The promotion orders could not be processed until the State requested federal recognition for initial appointment.  This occurred on 27 July 2011 when the NGB issued the Federal recognition order for his initial appointment effective 19 January 2011. 

3.  Once the initial appointment was completed, the promotion would have processed.  However, by then, and as a result of the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), the promotion to CW2 is now issued by the President of the United States and is delegated 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.

4.  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 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)                                         AR20120002059



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120002059



5


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1