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