IN THE CASE OF:
BOARD DATE: 17 September 2013
DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130012865
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 effective date of promotion and date of rank (DOR) as a chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the Oregon Army National Guard (ORARNG) from 9 January 2013 to 29 June 2012.
2. The applicant states he was eligible for promotion to CW2 on 29 June 2012. He did not receive the Federal recognition until 9 January 2013. No information was given to him about sending his promotion packet until 120 days prior to his eligibility date. He spoke with various officials at the battalion and brigade levels and he was given conflicting information.
3. The applicant provides:
* DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report)
* National Guard Bureau (NGB) Special Orders (SO) Number 163 AR
* NGB SO Number 12 AR
CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:
1. Having had prior enlisted service in the ARNG, he was appointed as a Reserve warrant officer of the ORARNG on 29 June 2010. The NGB published SO Number 163 AR on 29 July 2010 extending him Federal recognition for this initial appointment.
2. He entered active duty on 10 May 2010 and attended the Initial Entry Rotary Wing (IERW) UH-60A (Black Hawk) training from 29 June 2010 to 22 March 2012. He was honorably released from active duty on 22 March 2012.
3. On 25 July 2012, the ORARNG published Orders 207-010 awarding him military occupational specialty (MOS) 153D (UH-60) Pilot and on 2 August 2012, the NGB published SO Number 278 AR extending him Federal recognition for this MOS.
4. Although not available for review with this case, it appears that in August 2012 a Federal Recognition Board (FRB) was held by the ORARNG to determine if the applicant was qualified to be awarded Federal recognition for promotion to CW2. It appears the proceedings indicated the applicant was satisfactory in his physical qualifications, moral character, and general qualifications.
5. On 6 September 2012, the ORARNG published Orders 250-026 promoting him to CW2 effective 29 August 2012.
6. On 11 January 2013, the NGB published SO Number 12 AR extending him Federal recognition for promotion to CW2 with an effective date and DOR of 9 January 2013.
7. National Guard Regulation 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 WOs 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.
8. A warrant officer must complete the minimum years of promotion service as shown in Table 7-1 (for promotion to CW2, 2 years in the lower grade) and the education requirements of Table 7-2 (completion of Warrant Officer Basic Course (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.
9. NGB Policy Memorandum 11-015, subject: Federal Recognition of WOs 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, in accordance with the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), 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 ORARNG on 29 June 2010. He met the criteria for promotion to CW2 on 29 June 2012 in that he met the 2-year time in grade requirements and he had completed WOBC. However, the available evidence shows the FRB convened in or around August 2012 and recommended him for promotion and the State published the promotion order in September 2012, albeit with an effective date of 29 August 2012.
2. His promotion packet appears to have been forwarded through the State to the NGB for extension of Federal recognition. Since the promotion to CW2 is now issued by the President of the United States and is delegated to the Secretary of Defense, this requirement may add 90 to 120 days or more to the process for approval for appointments or promotions to be completed.
3. He was extended Federal recognition in January 2013 which is about within the 90 to 120 day requirement to finalize his promotion.
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) AR20130012865
3
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20130012865
4
ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140018523
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 8 January 2015 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20140018523 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests correction of his effective date of promotion and date of rank (DOR) as a chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the Minnesota Army National Guard (MNARNG) from 13 July 2012 to 18 February 2012. On 26 March 2012, a Federal Recognition Board (FRB) was held by the MNARNG to determine if the applicant was qualified to be awarded Federal recognition for...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130003384
IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 25 April 2013 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20130003384 THE BOARD CONSIDERED THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE: 1. 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. The evidence of record shows the applicant was appointed as a WO in the PRARNG on 30 March 2010.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120008635
The NGB Form 89 states: The applicant is qualified for appointment as a WO of the ARNG and is extended temporary Federal recognition as a WO, as provided in National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (Warrant Officers Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions), to be effective from the date of successful completion of Warrant Officer Candidate School (WOCS). c. Per the Soldier's NGB Form 89, Proceedings of a Federal Recognition Examining Board dated 20 April 2010, he is promotable to...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130019347
The applicant requests correction of his date of rank (DOR) to chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the New York Army National Guard (NYARNG) from 29 January 2013 to 20 August 2012. He further contends his DOR should be adjusted in accordance with (lAW) the NGB PPOM Number 13-006, dated 6 February 2013, which states in part, "Implement the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for WO promotions to CW2 which removed the requirement for a Federal Recognition Board (FRB) for promotion...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130000436
The applicant states: * he completed the Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC) on 5 November 2010 but his Federal recognition order shows an effective date of 23 January 2012 * he met the eligibility requirements for promotion to CW2 in the CAARNG upon completion of WOBC * National Guard Bureau (NGB) Policy Memorandum Number 07-026, dated 14 August 2007, subject: Policy to Appoint Sergeant First Class (SFC) to CW2, authorizes such promotion 3. He was promoted to SFC/E-7 on 30 May 2008. The...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120021053
The applicant requests correction of his date of rank (DOR) to chief warrant officer two (CW2) from 17 October 2012 to 29 June 2012. The applicant states his CW2 promotion packet was boarded by the State Federal Recognition Board (FRB) on 31 March 2012. The evidence of record shows the applicant was appointed as a WO in the ARNG on 29 June 2010 and he completed WOBC on 5 November 2010.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140011776
The applicant requests his date of rank for promotion to chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the New Jersey Army National Guard (NJARNG) be backdated to the date of the state promotion, on 27 July 2012. This law required the President of the United States to appoint and promote warrant officers to the next higher grade. As a result, the Board recommends that all appropriate Department of the Army records of the individual concerned by amending his date of rank (not effective date of rank)...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130017800
The applicant states that when his initial appointment packet was accepted and processed by NGB, he was placed on a scroll for newly-appointed lieutenants. Order Number 197 AR, dated 25 May 2012, shows the applicant's promotion effective date as 16 May 2012. d. Even with the delay, his promotion packet could not have been submitted for processing until he completed WOBC. Nevertheless, once he completed WOBC, on 16 December 2011, his promotion packet was processed by the NGB and his Federal...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2011 | 20110021250
The applicant requests adjustment of his Federal recognition order for promotion to chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the Florida Army National Guard (FLARNG) from 15 February 2012 to an earlier date. The applicant states: * His promotion packet was submitted in May 2011 after discovery of state procedures which were not being disseminated following his initial date of eligibility, 13 January 2011 * His promotion documents were forwarded to his battalion S-1 upon being informed of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120002793
An NGB official recommended approval and stated that the applicant met the educational and time in grade requirements; however, due to delays that snowballed into more delays, he was ultimately denied promotion for almost a year. If this had been done, the delays related to missing the state FRB in September, an outdated PHA, and the delays associated with the new Federal Recognition process for warrant officers could have been avoided. In an email, dated 2 October 2010, a state official...