IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  19 July 2012

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20120008769 


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 his date of rank (DOR) to Chief Warrant Officer Two (CW2) be changed from 25 April 2012 to 15 August 2011.

2.  The applicant states:

   a.  his CW2 promotion packet was delayed at the State level due to numerous errors that were through no fault of his own;
   
   b.  he was eligible for and completed all prerequisites for promotion to CW2 and requested his command to submit his promotion packet well in advance of 15 August 2011; and
   
   c.  he still has not received Federal recognition.

3.  The applicant provides:

* State of Ohio Memoranda (2)
* State of Ohio Promotion Order

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant's military records show that after having prior active enlisted service, he was appointed as a warrant officer one (WO1) in the Ohio Army National Guard (OHARNG) on 15 August 2009.  He successfully completed the Warrant Officer Basic Course and he was awarded military occupational specialty 120A (Construction Engineering Technician).

2.  On 15 November 2011, the Commander, Headquarters Support Company, 216th Engineer Battalion, submitted a memorandum to the Adjutant General’s Department, OHARNG.  In it he recommended the applicant be promoted to CW2.

3.  On 6 December 2011, the OHARNG published Orders 340-904 promoting the applicant to CW2 with a DOR and effective date of 5 December 2011.

4.  On 1 May 2012, the National Guard Bureau (NGB) published Special Orders Number 155 AR extending him Federal recognition for promotion to CW2 with a DOR and effective date of 25 April 2012.

5.  On 1 May 2012, the Personnel Branch Officer, OHARNG, certified:

   a.  The applicant's promotion packet for CW2 was delayed in submission to the NGB for permanent Federal recognition due to the State Headquarters’ failure to process his promotion packet promptly.
   
   b.  The applicant was fully eligible for promotion to CW2 on 15 August 2011; however, his packet was not forwarded by his command until November 2011.
   
   c.  Once his packet was received, it was approved by the Federal Recognition Board (FRB) on 5 December 2011.
   
   d.  Following approval by the FRB, the applicant's packet was subjected to numerous delays involving several uploads of documentation over a period of three months to the Guard Knowledge Online website and numerous other administrative errors for which the OHARNG takes full responsibility.
   
   e.  The OHARNG, Personnel Branch Office, experienced a significant turnover during the time of the applicant's promotion packet processing which caused an unnecessary delay of his promotion.
   
6.  The Personnel Branch Officer, OHARNG, further recommended the applicant be granted partial relief by backdating his promotion to the date of the FRB, 5 December 2011, or full relief to his original eligibility date of 15 August 2011.


7.  National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (Warrant Officers - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions) prescribes policies and procedures for ARNG WO personnel management.  Chapter 7 states that promotion of WO's in the ARNG is a function of the State.  As in original appointments, a WO 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 an FRB.

8.  A WO must complete the minimum years of promotion service as shown in Table 7-1 and the education requirements of Table 7-2 of NGR 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 CW2 is 2 years in the lower grade.  Table 7-2 states that the minimum military education requirement for promotion to CW2 is completion of the WO Basic Course or equivalent certification within 2 years from date of initial appointment as WO1.

9.  NGB Policy Memorandum 11-015, Subject: Federal Recognition of WO's 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 WO 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.  Requests for appointment will be staffed through the Department of the Army (delegated to the Secretary of Defense), 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.

10.  Section 502, Fiscal Year 2011 NDAA, authority for appointment of warrant officers in the grade of W-1 by commission and standardization of warrant officer appointment authority, mandates that all warrant officer appointments and promotions to chief warrant officer grades in the ARNG be made by the President of the United States.  This authority may be delegated to the Secretary of Defense.  

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The applicant contends his CW2 DOR should be corrected to reflect
15 August 2011.

2.  The evidence of record shows the applicant's DOR as a WO1 was 15 August 2009 and he completed the WO Basic Course in October 2010.  He was determined fully qualified for promotion to CW2 on 15 August 2011, as evidenced by the OHARNG, official.  OHARNG order announced his promotion to CW2 effective 5 December 2011 and the NGB granted him Federal recognition and issued orders promoting him to CW2 effective 25 April 2012, despite that he met promotion qualifications on 15 August 2011.

3.  As a result of the 2011 NDAA, the promotion of a WO1 to CW2 is now issued by the President of the United States and is delegated to the Secretary of Defense for approval.

	a.  Upon enactment of the 2011 NDAA, changes in WOs promotion procedures resulted in a delay of all WO promotions.  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.  This delay 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 and for promotion to CW2 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)                                         AR20120008769





3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20120008769



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1