MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           27 April 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999026810

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Robert J. McGowan		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Elizabeth Buchanon		Chairperson	
	Mr. Thomas A. Pagan 		Member	
	Mr. Kenneth L. Wright		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  In accordance with Army Regulation 15-185, the application and the available military records pertinent to the corrective action requested were reviewed to determine whether to authorize a formal hearing, recommend that the records be corrected without a formal hearing, or to deny the application without a formal hearing if it is determined that insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

	The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that his Department of the Army (DA) imposed bar to reenlistment be removed; that his honorable discharge of 30 September 1992 be voided; and that he be returned to active duty.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that the DA-imposed bar to reenlistment denied him the opportunity to fulfill his enlistment and retire with a pension.  This was a breach of faith of an agreement between the applicant and the Army.  In support of his application he provides a lengthy submission including:  a 2-page letter to the Board; a copy of his DD Form 214, Certificate of Release or Discharge From Active Duty; a copy of orders assigning him to the Transition Point; a copy of his Honorable Discharge Certificate; a copy of the DA bar to reenlistment packet and his appeal with letters of support; a copy of his diploma from the Advanced NCO Course and his Academic Evaluation Report; miscellaneous certificates; copies of his leave and earnings statements.

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

He was a staff sergeant with 17 years, 4 months, and 2 days of creditable active service when he was separated with an honorable discharge under the DA Qualitative Management Program (QMP) on 30 September 1992.  The reason cited for his selection for the QMP was four substandard NCO evaluation reports which he received from September 1986 through October 1989 while serving as a motor sergeant in Germany.

The four NCOERs questioned the applicant’s leadership abilities and professional competence.  There is no indication in the file that the applicant ever appealed any of the reports.  The Calendar Year 1991Sergeant First Class Promotion Selection Board reviewed the applicant’s records, did not select him for promotion, but did identify him for separation under the QMP program.  He appealed his DA-imposed bar to reenlistment under the QMP program and, although he had support from his chain of command at Fort Hood, Texas, the appeal was denied.

Army Regulation 601-280, chapter 10, sets forth policy and prescribes procedures for denying reenlistment under the QMP.  This program is based on the premise that reenlistment is a privilege for those whose performance, conduct, attitude, and potential for advancement meet Army standards.  It is designed to (1) enhance the quality of the career enlisted force, (2) selectively retain the best qualified soldiers to 30 years of active duty, (3) deny reenlistment to nonprogressive and nonproductive soldiers, and (4) encourage soldiers to maintain their eligibility for further service.  The QMP consists of two major subprograms, the qualitative retention subprogram and the qualitative screening subprogram.  Under the qualitative screening subprogram, records for grades 
E-5 through E-9 are regularly screened by the DA promotion selection boards.  The appropriate selection boards evaluate past performances and estimate the potential of each soldier to determine if continued service is warranted.  Soldiers whose continued service is not warranted receive a QMP bar to reenlistment.

Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 16 covers discharges caused by changes in service obligations.  Paragraph 16-8 applies to personnel denied reenlistment and provides that soldiers who receive DA-imposed or locally imposed bars to reenlistment, and who perceive that they will be unable to overcome the bar may apply for immediate discharge.  Incident to the request the member must state that he understands that recoupment of unearned portions of any enlistment or reenlistment bonus is required and that later reenlistment is not permitted.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, it is concluded:

1.  In order to justify correction of a military record, the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.

2.  The applicant's administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The applicant’s contention that the DA-imposed bar only be issued to soldiers not having a separation date that would allow retirement is incorrect.  The instructions for imposing the DA-imposed bar to reenlistment and mandatory separation under the QMP state that soldiers who are retirement eligible (i.e., soldiers with at least 20 years of active Federal service) will be encouraged to retire in lieu of separation.  The applicant was not retirement eligible.

3.  In view of the foregoing, there is no basis for granting the applicant's request.

DETERMINATION:  The applicant has failed to submit sufficient relevant evidence to demonstrate the existence of probable error or injustice.

BOARD VOTE:

________  ________  ________  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

__eb____  __tap___  __klw____  DENY APPLICATION

						Karl F. Schneider
				     Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999026810	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000427	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	DIRECTOR	
ISSUES         1.	100.0600	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.