SAMR-RB 13 February 2017 MEMORANDUM FOR Army National Guard Readiness Center, Appeals and Analysis (ARNG-HRH-A), 111 South George Mason Drive Building 2, Arlington VA 22204-1382 SUBJECT: Army Board for Correction of Military Records Record of Proceedings for, AR20150013237 1. Reference the attached Army Board for Correction of Military Records Record of Proceedings, dated 26 January 2017, in which the Board members unanimously recommended denial of the applicant's request. 2. I have reviewed the findings, conclusions, and Board member recommendations. I find there is sufficient evidence to grant partial relief. Therefore, under the authority of Title 1O, United States Code, section 1552, I direct that all Department of the Army Records of the individual concerned be corrected by correcting the applicant's date of rank to CW2 to 9 November 2011. 3. Request necessary administrative action be taken to effect the correction of records as indicated no later than 13 June 2017. Further, request that the individual concerned and counsel, if any, as well as any Members of Congress who have shown interest be advised of the correction and that the Army Board for Correction of Military Records be furnished a copy of the correspondence. BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: BOARD DATE: 26 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150013237 BOARD VOTE: _________ _______ ________ GRANT FULL RELIEF ____x___ ____x____ ___x_____ GRANT PARTIAL RELIEF ________ ________ ________ GRANT FORMAL HEARING ________ ________ ________ DENY APPLICATION 2 Enclosures 1. Board Determination/Recommendation 2. Evidence and Consideration BOARD DATE: 26 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150013237 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. BOARD DATE: 26 January 2017 DOCKET NUMBER: AR20150013237 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 promotion date in the Missouri Army National Guard (MOARNG) to 11 September 2011 with entitlement to back pay. 2. The applicant states: a. His promotion to chief warrant officer (CW2) was delayed by 14 months due to administrative errors concerning his military occupational specialty (MOS) qualification requirements. b. Upon appointment into the MOARNG, he was slotted into a 152FG Aviation Maintenance Officer position. This military occupational specialty (MOS) was no longer in the Army inventory nor was there a Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) approved MOS qualification course for this MOS at the time of his appointment. However, it was and still is on his unit Modified Table of Organization and Equipment (MTOE). c. The initial MOS he obtained was a 153D, UH-60 pilot. This was a projected/planned MOS due to the available slots in the State. However, due to a lack of proper administrative processing on how to request an MOS waiver to allow his promotion packet to go forward on time, he was denied promotion eligibility for 14 months. d. He was assigned and attended the wrong MOS training course [as per the MTOE]. e. His unit was mobilized during his initial appointment period and follow-on training period. This resulted in a high level of misinformation for him in regards to his non-qualified MOS status in the MOARNG. Upon return from his initial [MOS] training, he was placed in an MTOE position that was no longer an actively trained MOS (152F AH-64A Attack Pilot). He was placed into the AH-64D Aviation Qualification Course, which is a 152H MOS. Not realizing this MOS was still not the correct one for his position, he attended the course. f. While attending the aforementioned course, he was administratively transferred to another unit for less than 2 months. The new unit did not forward his promotion packet to State Headquarters, which was the only time period he was qualified for promotion. g. Upon his administrative transfer back, he was once again ineligible for promotion due to there being no MOS course. This meant he was now MOS qualified in two different MOS’s but neither made him Duty MOS Qualified (DMOSQ). h. These delays were completely unnecessary if the administrative personnel had initiated a waiver packet to get his promotion started at the correct time. It wasn’t until he pushed the issue with the S1 that any progress was made. The S1 submitted a waiver on his behalf and got his promotion packet sent through. i. The upcoming unit MTOE is scheduled to have the correct MOS listed. However, now that he know the process, he will be able to submit his chief warrant officer three (CW3) promotion packet in a timely manner. j. It should not be penalized for the lack of an incorrect MTOE and incomplete/improper administrative support. He should receive an adjusted CW2 date of rank (DOR) to 11 September 2011. This was at 24 month mark as a WO1. k. Worst case scenario, he would like his DOR adjusted to 1 October 2011 which is when he was assigned to a DMOSQ position for the first and only time in his career. This will ensure he stays current with his peer group for follow-on advancement opportunities. 3. The applicant provides copies of: * transfer orders dated 16 September 2009, 7 November 2009, 19 November 2009, 22 April 2011, 19 September 2011, 9 November 2011, 20 December 2011 * 30 September 2009 appointment orders (WO1) * 27 October 2009 amendment to orders * 26 April 2010 appointment orders * 1 March 2011 UH-60 course completion certificate * 17 October 2011 Federal Recognition Orders (WO1) * 17 November 2011 revocation of orders * 6 January 2012 UH-64D course completion orders * 20 March 2012 Request for Exception to Policy * 10 April 2012 award of Commissioned Officer Skill Identifiers * 9 November 2012 Federal Recognition Orders (CW2) * 23 July 2015 Sworn Statement CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. On 8 April 2009 and again on 11 September 2009, the applicant signed a Written Agreement Officer/Warrant Officer Accession Bonus Addendum agreeing to serve in the Area of Concentration (AOC)/MOS of 152F. 2. The applicant, with prior enlisted service, was appointed a WO1 in the MOARNG and as an Army Reserve Warrant Officer on 11 September 2009. 3. On 4 March 2011, he was awarded the Army Aviator Aeronautical Designation and the Army Aviator Badge as a graduate of the UH-60 course. 4. On 20 March 2012 1107th Aviation Group requested an exception to policy to award the applicant the MOS 152H since TRADOC no longer offered the MOS 152F course. 5. The record contains documentation showing the applicant's rank and MOS designations and duty position as follows: * 14 February 2012, MOS of 152F as an AH-64A Attack Helicopter Pilot * 10 April 2012, award of the primary MOS 152H (AH-64D Attack Helicopter Pilot), effective 6 January 2012 with a secondary MOS of 152D (UH-60 Pilot) effective 10 March 2011 * 21 June 2012, MOS of 152F * promotion to CW2 effective 6 November 2012 * 1 March 2013, MOS of 152H as an Aviation Maintenance Officer * 13 January 2014, MOS of 152H as an AH-64D Pilot * 14 December 2014, MOS 152FG as an Aviation Maintenance Officer * 2 March 2015, MOS of 152D as an OH-58 Pilot * 13 December 2015, MOS of 153DC as an Aeromedical Evacuation Pilot 6. The applicant received assignments as a pilot in the MOS's of 152D, 153D, 152F, 152FG, 152G, 152H, and as an aviation maintenance officer. 7. In a 25 May 2016 Memorandum for Record, the MOARNG, 1107th Aviation Group, Human Resources Technician states the Group S1 carefully reviewed the applicant's record and the details of his request. All documents within his file support the fact he was slotted in a position that was ineligible for duty qualification. This was due to the Army removing the training course from their inventory but the unit MTOE continuing the 152FG position. Only after thorough research it was determined to request an exception to policy to allow him to submit a promotion packet. All of these actions were not the fault of the Soldier; nor was there an expectation that he could resolve the issue at his level. It was recommended that applicant be granted full relief. 8. On 25 August 2016, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Chief, Personnel Policy Division, National Guard Bureau who recommended granting partial relief. The Chief states: a. The applicant was appointed a WO1 in the MOARNG and placed in an MOS 152G vacancy. He completed his Basic Officer Leadership Course as a UH-60 aircraft qualified pilot on 10 March 2011 to fill a projected vacancy in his State. At the time the applicant was eligible for promotion, but he was not in a qualified position and was advised to attend the AH-64D Aviation Qualification Course, completing the course on 6 January 2012. Due to administrative errors and inaccurate counseling from his leadership, he was not promoted to CW2 until 6 November 2012. b. Orders Number 313-044, dated 9 November 2011, transferred the applicant to a qualified position with an assign/loss reason of "Inactivation, Reorganization or Relocation, eligible for promotion." Orders Number 321-032, dated 17 November 2011, revoked his transfer (Orders Number 313-044), again making him ineligible for promotion based on his DMOS. c. National Guard Regulation 600-101 (Warrant Officers – Federal Recognition and Related Personnel Actions), paragraph 7-7d states, "Warrant Officers to be recertified in a new MOS due to reorganization or inactivation remain MOS qualified for promotion purposes for a period of 1 year from the effective date of the reorganization or inactivation provided all education requirements are met in the old MOS." d. The applicant met all eligibility requirements for promotion but was not recommended because his transfer was done in error and without his knowledge. e. The Chief recommended correction of his DOR to 9 November 2011, the date he was transferred to a qualified position, due to the fact that his unit assigned him to a position which TRADOC no longer offers training qualification. Additionally, the applicant attended an additional qualification courses to correct the issue without success. It would be fair and just to correct the Soldier's DOR. f. His request for the correction of the effective DOR and back pay should be disapproved. The promotion process for CW2 is a part of the scrolling process for federal recognition and not an automatic promotion process. g. The MOARNG concurs with this advisory opinion. 7. A copy of the advisory opinion was forwarded to the applicant. No response from the applicant was received. REFERENCES: 1. Title 10, U.S. Code, section 1552, the statutory authority for the ABCMR, gives the Board broad authority to correct Army records to remove errors or to remedy an injustice; however, the authority granted by this statute is not unlimited. The ABCMR may only correct Army records. The Board has no authority to correct records created by the other Services or the Department of Defense. 2. National Guard Regulation 600-101 prescribes the NGB policies and procedures governing the appointment, assignment, and management of warrant officers in the ARNG and provides eligibility requirements, administrative procedures, application processing, and other related warrant officer personnel actions to include military occupational specialty (MOS) redesignation, promotion, civilian education, and Federal Recognition. a. The promotion of warrant officers 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 which to function in the higher grade. However, to be extended Federal Recognition in the higher grade the officer must satisfy the requirements prescribed herein and the President, or the Secretary of Defense acting on behalf of the President, must first approve the promotion as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army. When the State promotion is federally recognized, the ARNG warrant officer is concurrently promoted as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army. b. Eligibility for promotion: (1) be in an active status and DMOS qualified, (2) be medically fit and meet the height and weight standards, (3) have completed the minimum years of promotion service, (4) have completed the minimum military education requirements, (5) passed an Army Physical Fitness Test, and (6) recommended by the warrant officer's immediate commander. c. Promotions will be initiated only when an appropriate MTOE or Table of Distribution and Allowances (TDA) position vacancy exists within the unit. d. Warrant officers may be promoted up to the grade of CW4 without regard to the Standard of Grades limitations shown in TOE/MTOE/TDA documents or limitations. e. Provided all education requirements of the previous MOS have been met, warrant officers who require redesignation into a new MOS due to reorganization or inactivation remain MOS qualified for promotion purposes for a period of 1 year from the effective date of the reorganization or inactivation. f. The promotion of warrant officers 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 which to function in the higher grade. However, to be extended Federal Recognition in the higher grade the officer must satisfy the requirements prescribed herein and the President, or the Secretary of Defense acting on behalf of the President, must first approve the promotion as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army. When the State promotion is Federally Recognized the ARNG warrant officer is concurrently promoted as a Reserve Warrant Officer of the Army. g. Promotion to CW2 requires 2 years? time-in-grade as a WO1. DISCUSSION: 1. The applicant followed the advice and recommendations in order to make himself promotion eligible; however, through no action or inaction on his part he was repeatedly placed in duty positions and training courses that did not meet full requirements for completion of all required educational and manning requirements per unit MTOEs. 2. As noted in the advisory opinion, the applicant was fully qualified for promotion to CW2 on 9 November 2011. Had he not been erroneously placed in a deactivated MOS, he would have most likely been promoted at that time. As such, there is a basis for correcting his DOR for CW2. 3. Any correction by the ABCMR must comport with other laws. The Board may not ignore a requirement contained in, or outcome dictated by, another statute. Typically, the ABCMR achieves this by changing an operative fact in the record, thereby making a correction in compliance with that statute. Where officer personnel issues are involved that require approval by the Secretary of Defense, the Board's hands are often tied. 4. The applicant's effective date of promotion can only be changed by amending the date Federal recognition was granted by the Secretary of Defense. The ABCMR has no jurisdiction over Department of Defense records and therefore cannot direct this type of correction. //NOTHING FOLLOWS// ABCMR Record of Proceedings AR20150000953 Enclosure 1 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150013237 2 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 1 ABCMR Record of Proceedings (cont) AR20150013237 7 ARMY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Enclosure 2