RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF: BOARD DATE: 14 February 2008 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20070003901 I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual. x x The Board considered the following evidence: Exhibit A - Application for correction of military records. Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including advisory opinion, if any). THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, STATEMENT, AND EVIDENCE: 1. The applicant requests, in effect, adjustment to his date of rank and effective date of promotion to chief warrant officer two (CW2). 2. The applicant states, in effect, that his promotion from pay grade W-1 to pay grade W-2 should have taken place on 23 June 2002. The promotion took place on 16 November 2002. He states he had turned in all applicable paperwork two months prior to the expected promotion date and due to administrative delays at the battalion level, he was not promoted on time. 3. In support of his request, the applicant provides a copy of Orders 358-01, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Centennial, Colorado, dated 24 December 2002 and a copy of Orders 103-005, Departments of the Army and Air Force, State of Colorado, Englewood, Colorado, dated 30 May 2000. CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. The evidence shows the applicant was appointed in the Colorado Army National Guard (COARNG) and signed his Oaths of Office (NGB Form 337) as a warrant officer one (WO1) on 23 June 2000. On this same date, he was extended temporary Federal recognition as a WO1 in the COARNG. 2. The evidence shows the applicant was ordered to active duty for training on 23 June 2000 for the purpose of attending the Initial Entry Rotary Wing Aviator Course and Warrant Officer Basic Course. He successfully completed these courses of instruction and on 14 June 2001 he was released back to his Army National Guard unit from active duty for training in the rank and pay grade, WO1, W-1. The applicant's DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, shows on his release from active duty for training, he held the military occupational specialty (MOS) 153BO, UH-1 Pilot. 3. On 16 September 2002, the Department of the Army, COARNG, prepared and distributed a memorandum, Subject: Award of Military Occupational Specialty (MOS), Special Qualifications Identifier (SQI) and Additional Skill Identifier (ASI), awarding the applicant the MOS 153BO, UH-1 Pilot. 4. On 24 December 2002, the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs issued Orders 358-001, promoting the applicant to CW2, pay grade W-2, with an effective date of 16 November 2002. The additional instructions on the order indicate he was assigned the duties of a UH-60 Pilot, MOS 153DO in paragraph 302, line 04, of the authorization document, on 16 November 2002. 5. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was requested of the Departments of the Army and Air Force, National Guard Bureau, Personnel Division. 6. In an advisory opinion provided by the above referenced office, the Chief, Personnel Division, recommended disapproval of the applicant's request for an adjustment of the effective date of his promotion. The Chief, Personnel Division, based his recommendation in accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, on the fact that over three years had passed since the alleged error and the The Adjutant General of Colorado had given approval for the applicant's promotion to be effective on 16 November 2002. The advisory continued that, in accordance with National Guard Regulation 600-100, Chapter 8, the promotion authority for all Army National Guard officers was that of the The Adjutant General and if he chose not to promote an officer, he or she was not obligated to do so. 7. The advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant for acknowledgement and/or rebuttal on 10 September 2007. The applicant did not respond to the advisory opinion. 8. National Guard Regulation 600-101, prescribes the policies and procedures for ARNG WO personnel management. This regulation specifies that appointment and promotion of warrant officers in the ARNG is a function of the State The Adjutant General. A warrant officer in the grade of WO1 must complete a minimum of two years time in grade for promotion to CW2 and all warrant officers must be fully qualified under the term of this regulation. Promotions will be accomplished only when an appropriate position vacancy exists in the unit. Warrant officers assigned to positions for which they are not duty MOS qualified are not eligible for promotion until determined to be so qualified by certification from the DA MOS proponent. All warrant officers must complete proponent certification requirements for the new duty MOS within two years from the date of assignment. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: 1. The evidence shows the applicant was appointed to the rank and pay grade WO1, W-1, on 23 June 2000. Based on the requirement for completion of two years time in grade for promotion to CW2, his promotion eligibility date was 23 June 2002. 2. The evidence shows the applicant was awarded the MOS 153BO; however, there is no evidence he was assigned to a valid position vacancy within the unit. 3. The available evidence shows the applicant was not assigned to a valid position vacancy (Paragraph 302, Line 04 with duty MOS 153DO (UH-60 Pilot)) until 16 November 2002. Based on this assignment, he became fully eligible for promotion and was promoted to the rank and pay grade, CW2, W-2, with a date of rank and effective date of 16 November 2002. 4. In view of the evidence in this case, the applicant is not entitled to an adjustment to his promotion effective date and date of rank 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 INDEX CASE ID AR20070003901 SUFFIX RECON DATE BOARDED TYPE OF DISCHARGE DATE OF DISCHARGE DISCHARGE AUTHORITY DISCHARGE REASON BOARD DECISION DENY REVIEW AUTHORITY ISSUES 1. 131.0400 2. 131.0500 3. 4. 5. 6.