IN THE CASE OF

		BOARD DATE:	    5 June 2014

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20130017800 


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 date of rank (DOR) to chief warrant officer two (CW2) in the Oklahoma Army National Guard (OKARNG) from 16 May 2012 to a different date. 

2.  The applicant states his promotion packet was uploaded and scrolled by the Joint Force Headquarters, OKARNG; however, when it was accepted by the National Guard Bureau (NGB), he was placed on an incorrect scroll with newly-appointed lieutenants.  This error was not rectified until he had been in the scroll process for 90 days.  As a result, he has lost approximately 90 days of time in grade as he was restarted through the scrolling process.  Since warrant officer (WO) promotions are time sensitive, this will have a negative impact on his future promotions and attendance at schools.

3.  The applicant did not list any attachments on his application.  However, he attached the below documents: 

* Statement from The Adjutant General (TAG)
* NGB Special Orders Number 197 AR (promotion to CW2)
* State Promotion Orders 058-017
* NGB Special Orders Number 69 AR (initial appointment) 
* U.S. Army Reserve promotion memorandum
* NGB Form 337 (Oaths of Office)
* DA Form 71 (Oath of Office - Military Personnel)
* DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report)

CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  The applicant previously served in an enlisted status in the ARNG from 22 December 1997 to 23 September 2011.  He held the rank/grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 as of 28 June 2007. 

2.  He was appointed as a Reserve WO one of the OKARNG and executed an oath of office on 24 September 2011.  The State published Orders 270-002 on 
27 September 2011 appointing him to WO one on 24 September 2011. 

3.  The applicant completed the Human Resources Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC) from 12 October to 16 December 2011. 

4.  On 27 February 2012, the OKARNG published Orders 958-017 promoting him to CW2 in the OKARNG with an effective date and DOR of 11 December 2011. 

5.  Also on 27 February 2012, NGB published Special Orders Number 69 AR extending him Federal recognition for initial appointment as a warrant officer one with an effective date and DOR of 24 September 2011. 

6.  On 25 May 2012, NGB published Special Orders 197 AR extending him Federal recognition for promotion to CW2 with an effective date and DOR of 16 May 2012. 

7.  An advisory opinion was received from the NGB on 26 September 2013 in the processing of this case.  An NGB advisory official recommended disapproval of the applicant's request.  This official stated: 

	a.  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.  The error was not rectified until he had been in the scrolling process for approximately 90 days.  As a result, he lost time in grade due to his initial appointment packet having to be re-scrolled due to an administrative error, which was of no fault of his.

	b.  The error was discovered when the State submitted this promotion packet to NGB Federal Recognition (FEDREC) Section for processing.  At that time it was found that his initial appointment packet had been erroneously submitted on a scroll for second lieutenants as opposed to a scroll for WO appointments.  His promotion packet could not be processed until after he had been federally recognized as a warrant officer one.  OKARNG had submitted his initial appointment packet on 10 June 2011 to FEDREC for processing.  The error was not discovered until 28 September 2011.  The initial appointment packet was resubmitted on 3 October 2011.  FEDREC Order Number 69 AR, dated 
27 February 2012, shows the applicant's initial appointment was approved and given an effective date of 24 September 2011.

	c.  Based upon NGB Policy Memorandum Number 07-026, "Effective on the date of this memorandum, States are authorized to appoint an SFC/E7 to the grade of CW2 if they meet the criteria.  An SFC who has served a minimum of two consecutive years as an E7 may be appointed to CW2 in one of two ways."  The second scenario is applicable in this instance, which states in part, "SFC/E7 who is eligible for military occupational specialty (MOS) training may be promoted to CW2 after completion of Warrant Officer Candidate School (WOCS) and WOBC."  His interactive Personnel Electronic Records Management System (iPERMS) file shows that he completed WOCS on 24 September 2011.  Documentation provided by the applicant shows he completed WOBC on
16 December 2011.  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.  The processing of his promotion packet falls under new guidance established on 7 January 2011.  The statute governing WO appointments in a higher grade changed by adding a new requirement that the President (acting by a delegation through the Secretary of Defense) appoint (promote) warrant officers to a higher grade.  Regardless of the error that resulted in the processing of his promotion packet, this guidance would be applicable.  The Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) may only correct Army records.  The Board has no authority to correct records created by the other Services or the Department of Defense.  As a result, ABCMR does not have the authority to recommend an amendment to his promotion effective date.  Additionally, in accordance with Army Regulation 135-155 (Promotion of Commissioned Officers and Warrant Officers Other Than General Officers), paragraph 4-17b, a warrant officer’s DOR and promotion eligibility date are one and the same.

	e.  The State concurs with this recommendation.

8.  The applicant was provided a copy of this advisory opinion on 8 October 2013 for an opportunity to submit a rebuttal.  He did not respond. 

9.  National Guard Regulation (NGR) 600-101 (WOs - 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 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 DA 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 a Federal Recognition Board (FRB) (the FRB requirement was eliminated in 2013).

10.  A WO 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 WOBC) of NGR 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 Army Physical Fitness Test.

11.  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 CWO 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, 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 applicant was appointed as a WO1 in the OKARNG on 24 September 2011.  He completed WOBC on 16 December 2011.  This is the earliest date he could have been eligible for promotion to CW2. 

2.  For unknown reasons, the State issued him a promotion order to CW2 prior to having received his Federal recognition for his initial appointment and prior to completion of WOBC.

3.  Nevertheless, once he completed WOBC, on 16 December 2011, his promotion packet was processed by the NGB and his Federal recognition order was issued with an effective date and DOR of 16 May 2012.  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.

4.  He was extended Federal recognition in May 2012 which is about within the requirement to finalize his promotion.  Therefore, in view of the foregoing evidence and the change in law, the applicant's effective date of promotion as well as his DOR seem 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)                                         AR20130017800



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20130017800



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1