IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 17 November 2011 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20110001604 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) for chief warrant officer two (CW2) from 30 September 2010 to 20 August 2010. 2. The applicant states he was fully qualified and eligible for promotion to CW2 on 20 August 2010 but his promotion packet did not appear before his State's Federal Recognition Board until 29 December 2010, thus making his DOR 30 September 2010. 3. The applicant provides: * a memorandum for award of a commissioned officer skill identifier * his DA Form 1059 (Service School Academic Evaluation Report) * a memorandum for MOS [military occupational specialty] change CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. Having prior enlisted service in the Regular Army, the applicant was appointed as a warrant officer one (WO1) in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) effective 16 January 2008. He transferred from the USAR to the Missouri Army National Guard (MOARNG) on 19 September 2008 and he was appointed a WO1 effective 19 September 2008. 2. He completed the IERW/UH-60 [Initial Entry Rotary Wing/Utility Helicopter] Track Class on 20 August 2010. 3. MOARNG orders, dated 14 October 2010, show his MOS was changed to 153D effective 20 August 2010. 4. MOARNG orders, dated 29 December 2010, show he was promoted to CW2, effective 20 August 2010. 5. National Guard Bureau (NGB), Special Orders Number 4 AR, dated 6 January 2011, show he was extended Federal recognition for promotion to CW2, in MOS 153D, effective 30 September 2010. 6. In the processing of this case, on 7 October 2011 a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Personnel Policy Division, NGB. The advisory official recommends disapproval of the applicant's request to adjust his CW2 DOR to 20 August 2010. The opinion points out that the applicant: * transferred from the USAR to the MOARNG on 19 September 2008 * signed an NGB 337 (Oaths of Office) on 19 September 2008 as a WO1 * met his military education requirements on 20 August 2010 * became eligible for promotion to CW2 on 19 September 2010 7. The advisory official also states: a. eligibility for promotion does not mean automatic promotion to the next highest grade. National Guard Regulation 600-101 (Warrant Officer - Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions), paragraph 7-2, states, "promotions will be based on: DA [Department of the Army] duty proponent 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 a Federal Recognition Board. Promotion will not be used solely as a reward for past performance." b. he met the military education requirement upon completion of IERW/UH-60 Track Class but he had not met the time in grade (TIG) requirement of a minimum of 2 years. Additionally, NGB's Federal Recognition section informed the MOARNG that the promotion effective date could not be any earlier than 90 days prior to the date the State Federal Recognition Board was held, which was held on 29 December 2010, making the promotion effective date 30 September 2010. This is in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-101. Therefore, the time between when the applicant was eligible for promotion on 19 September 2010 and the date he was promoted to CW2 on 30 September 2010 is minimal and does not warrant an amendment to his DOR. 8. On 13 January 2011, a copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for information and to allow him the opportunity to submit comments or a rebuttal. The applicant responded that: * he would provide his original USAR appointment letter (dated 16 January 2008) if needed * he does not understand why the NGB states he did not meet the 2 years TIG requirement when he already had 2 years, 7 months, and 4 days TIG as a WO1 on 20 August 2010 when he graduated from flight school * he met the last requirement for advancement to CW2 on 20 August 2010 9. National Guard Regulation 600-101, table 7-1 (Minimum TIG for Promotion) states that the minimum TIG as a WO1 for promotion to CW2 is 2 years. 10. National Guard Regulation 600-101, table 7-2 (Minimum Military Educational Requirements for Promotion and Time in Current Grade Required for Course Enrollment) requires the completion of the warrant officer basic course or equivalent certification within 2 years from date of initial appointment as WO1 for promotion to CW2. 11. Paragraph 9-10 of NGR 600-101, states that applicants for promotion will be examined in accordance with chapter 7 of this regulation and the current Memorandum of Instruction providing the Secretary of the Army guidance to Federal Recognition Board members regarding the standards for promotion of ARNG warrant officers as Reserve warrant officers of the Army. An applicant for promotion may be examined for promotion not earlier than 3 months in advance of completing the prescribed requirements of chapter 7 of this regulation so that, if recommended by a Federal Recognition Board, promotion may be effected on the date the promotion requirements are met. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. Notwithstanding the advisory opinion which does not mention the applicant's USAR appointment, evidence shows he was appointed as a WO1 in the USAR on 16 January 2008. He transferred from the USAR to the MOARNG on 19 September 2008 and was appointed as a WO1. He met the TIG requirement (2 years) on 16 January 2010. He completed the IERW/UH-60 Track Class on 20 August 2010. 2. The NGB opinion also indicates the applicant could not be promoted earlier than 90 days before the FRB is conducted. However, the regulation in effect at the time indicates that a promotion packet may not be submitted to an FRB more than 90 days in advance of completing the prescribed requirements for promotion to allow for timely promotion. In this case the applicant had completed all of the requirements in August of 2010 and should have been placed before the FRB in such a time that would have allowed for his Federal Recognition to be granted in a timely manner. It is clear that he met the requirements for promotion based on the fact the MOARNG promoted him to CW2 with the effective date of 20 August 2010. 3. It is appears that several administrative errors occurred while processing the applicant's promotion and subsequent Federal recognition, therefore; it would be equitable to correct his records to show he was granted Federal recognition for promotion to CW2 effective 20 August 2010. BOARD VOTE: ___X____ ____X___ ____X___ GRANT FULL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION BOARD DETERMINATION/RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Board determined that the evidence presented was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for relief. As a result, the Board recommends that the State Army National Guard records and the Department of the Army records of the individual concerned be corrected by amending NGB Special Orders Number 4 AR, dated 6 January 2011, to show he was granted Federal recognition effective 20 August 2010 in the grade of CW2. 2. The Board further recommends that the applicant be paid all back pay and allowances due as a result of this correction. ___________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) AR20110001604 3 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20110001604 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 1