IN THE CASE OF:	  

		BOARD DATE:	  27 January 2015

		DOCKET NUMBER:  AR20140005417 


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 adjustment of his date of rank (DOR) to chief warrant officer two (CW2) from 29 June 2012 to 16 December 2011 or 23 February 2012.

2.  The applicant states:

	a.  His current DOR is incorrect.  Based on the supporting documents and the policy at the time, his DOR should be 16 December 2011, his Warrant Officer Basic Course (WOBC) graduation date or 23 February 2012, the published date of his initial appointment.

	b.  Due to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2011, the approval process for initial appointments to warrant officer one (WO1) changed from the National Guard Bureau (NGB) to the Secretary of Defense.

	c.  The change delayed initial appointments and Federal recognition requests by up to 3 1/2 months.  The delay in his initial appointment caused subsequent promotion packets to be delayed as the initial appointment did not come through until 23 February 2012, pushing the promotion request that should have been submitted with the initial appointment per late guidance from NGB Personnel Policy Operational Message (PPOM) Number 12-022 to after the initial appointment was published.

	d.  Had NGB published guidance from PPOM 12-022 sooner, the initial appointment – or the NGB Form 89 (Proceedings of a Federal Recognition Examining Board) – would have contained the proper verbiage from paragraph 
3 of PPOM 12-022 and the request for promotion would have been simultaneous with his initial appointment pending provisioning of the DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) from WOBC completion.  His DOR would have been adjusted accordingly.  

	e.  The initial appointment was not submitted in a timely manner as it was input nearly 2 months after Warrant Officer Candidate School graduation.

3.  The applicant provides:

* NGB Form 62E (Application for Federal Recognition as an Army National Guard (ARNG) Officer or Warrant Officer and Appointment as a Reserve Commissioned Officer or Warrant Officer of the Army in the ARNG of the United States), dated 1 November 2010
* NGB Form 89, dated 20 January 2011
* NGB PPOM 11-045, dated 26 July 2011, subject:  Guidance Concerning Applications for Federal Recognition of Warrant Officers
* DA Form 71 (Oath of Office – Military Personnel), dated 24 September 2011
* NGB Form 337 (Oaths of Office), dated 24 September 2011
* Texas ARNG Orders 271-1116, dated 28 September 2011
* NGB Special Orders Number 68 AR, dated 23 February 2012
* NGB PPOM 12-022, dated 5 March 2012, subject:  Procedures for Promotion and Military Occupational Specialty Awarding for Warrant Officers within the ARNG
* Headquarters, 36th Sustainment Brigade, memorandum, dated 3 March 2012, subject:  Recommendation for Promotion – (Applicant)
* NGB Special Orders Number 86 AR, dated 13 March 2012
* NGB Form 89, dated 22 March 2012
* Texas ARNG Orders 083-1077, dated 23 March 2012
* NGB PPOM 12-037, dated 11 April 2012, subject:  Documentation of Professional Military Education Completion for Promotion of Officers and Warrant Officers and Execution of DA Form 71 When Promoting from WO1 to CW2
* NGB memorandum, dated 5 July 2012, subject:  Promotion as a Reserve Commissioned Warrant Officer of the Army
* NGB Special Orders Number 246 AR, dated 5 July 2012



CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE:

1.  Following prior enlisted service in the Regular Army, the applicant enlisted in the Texas ARNG (TXARNG) on 15 July 2005.  He was promoted to the rank and grade of sergeant first class (SFC)/E-7 effective 16 November 2007.

2.  He was appointed to WO1 effective 24 September 2011.

3.  On 16 December 2011, he completed the Human Resources WOBC.

4.  NGB Special Orders Number 68 AR, dated 23 February 2012, extended Federal recognition to his initial appointment to WO1 effective 24 September 2011.

5.  Texas ARNG Orders 083-1077, dated 23 March 2012, promoted him to CW2 effective 22 March 2012.

6.  NGB Special Orders Number 246 AR, dated 5 July 2012, extended Federal recognition to his promotion to CW2 effective 29 June 2012.

7.  NGB memorandum, dated 14 August 2007, subject:  Policy to Appoint SFC to CW2 (NGB-ARH Policy Memorandum Number 07-026), provides that a SFC who has served a minimum of two consecutive years as an E-7 may be appointed (promoted) to CW2 in one of two ways:

* a SFC who is certified by the Department of the Army MOS proponent prior to the date of initial appointment may be appointed in the grade of CW2 upon completion of WOCS (attendance of WOBC not required)
* a SFC who is eligible for MOS training may be promoted to CW2 after completion of WOCS and WOBC

8.  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 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 military occupational specialty 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 a Federal Recognition Board.
9.  NGB Policy Memorandum 11-015, dated 14 June 2011, subject:  Federal Recognition of WO's in the ARNG, states that ARNG WO's 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, introduced 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 WO's 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 requests adjustment of his DOR to CW2 to 16 December 2011 or 23 February 2012.

2.  The evidence of record shows he was promoted to SFC by the Texas ARNG on 16 November 2007 and he held this rank until he was appointed to WO1 on 24 September 2011.  The evidence of record also shows he completed the Human Resources WOBC on 16 December 2011.  

3.  Based on NGB Policy Memorandum Number 07-026, he was eligible for promotion to CW2 upon completion of WOBC and his records should have been corrected to show he was promoted to CW2 with a DOR and effective date of    16 December 2011, the day he completed WOBC.

4.  The NGB ultimately issued him Federal recognition orders promoting him to CW2, effective 29 June 2012.  This Federal recognition and promotion required approval by the Secretary of Defense.  

5.  The Army Board for Correction of Military Records (ABCMR) may only correct Army records.  The decision by the Secretary of Defense to approve his promotion is not an Army record, but rather a Department of Defense record.  As such, the ABCMR is without authority to change the date on which the Secretary of Defense approved his promotion.  As such, the ABCMR has no authority to change the effective date of his promotion.  

6.  The applicant's effective date of promotion to CW2 cannot be adjusted; however, his DOR is not tied to the requirements of NDAA 2011.  Therefore, in accordance with NGB Policy Memorandum Number 07-026, his DOR should be adjusted to 16 December 2011.  
BOARD VOTE:

___x____  ___x____  ___x____  GRANT FULL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF 

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION:

The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief.  As a result, the Board recommends that all appropriate Department of the Army and State ARNG records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending his DOR (not the effective date of promotion) for CW2 to 16 December 2011.




      __________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)                                         AR20140005417



3


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1

ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont)                                         AR20140005417



2


ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS


1