MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           31 May 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027598

	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. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Nancy Amos		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. James E. Vick		Chairperson	
	Mr. Stanley Kelley		Member	
	Mr. John P. Infante		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 separation due to a Department of the Army Qualitative Management Program (DA QMP) bar to reenlistment be changed to an early retirement and that his separation code be changed to one that will allow him to enlist in the U. S. Army Reserve or Army National Guard.

APPLICANT STATES:  He had requested early retirement in 1994 which had been approved by his entire chain of command.  He voluntarily withdrew his request in order to help his unit.  He should have been counseled that the letter of reprimand he received several years earlier put him at risk for a DA QMP and the continued processing of his request for retirement would have been in his best interest.  He believes he was wrongly put out of the military due to a DA QMP; the only flaw in his service was the general officer letter of reprimand.  He had no opportunity to appeal because he felt his first sergeant, commander and brigade sergeant major were racist.  As supporting evidence he provides his DD Form 214 and two Army Achievement Medal citations.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 25 July 1979 and was awarded military occupational specialty 75B (Personnel Administrative Specialist).  He was promoted to Staff Sergeant, E-6 on 1 May 1992.

On 19 May 1993, the applicant was given a general officer letter of reprimand for driving under the influence of alcohol and obstructing an intersection.  It was directed to be filed in his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).  

On 19 September 1995, the applicant was notified of his DA bar to reenlistment under the QMP.  The specific reason for the DA QMP is not given in the documents available but, considering his lack of a disciplinary record and his generally favorable non-commissioned officer evaluation reports (NCO-ERs) (mostly “success” ratings with a number of “excellent” ratings and positive comments), so apparently it was the letter of reprimand that triggered the bar to reenlistment.  He had the options of submitting an appeal, not submitting an appeal and separating within 90 days, or requesting earlier discharge.  Separation would be under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8.  He elected not to submit an appeal.  

On 19 December 1995, the applicant was discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, reduction in force and given a separation code of JCC (involuntary discharge, reduction in force) and a reentry code of 4.  He was authorized half separation pay.  He had completed 16 years, 4 months and 25 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

Army Regulation 601-280, chapter 10, at the time set forth policy and prescribed 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, paragraph 16-8, directs the early release of soldiers when budgetary or authorization limitations require a reduction in enlisted strength. 

In the processing of this case, the Board asked the U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM), Enlisted Retirements section if they had a record of the applicant’s request for early retirement.  They responded that they did not keep records from that far back so they could not confirm or deny that an application had been sent to them.  They also stated that in 1994 PERSCOM was probably approving requests from 75-series soldiers going down to 17 years service for   E-7s and maybe to 16 years service for E-6s.  It was doubtful PERSCOM would have approved an early retirement for an E-6 75-series soldier with only 15 years of service.  A copy of the record of phone conversation was provided to the applicant for comment or rebuttal.  He did not respond within the time frame given.

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.

3.  The applicant was a Staff Sergeant with 16 years of experience in the Army.  He should have known an NCO with a letter of reprimand for driving under the influence of alcohol in his OMPF would be subject to a DA bar to reenlistment and made his own judgment concerning his early retirement accordingly.  As an experienced NCO, he made an informed choice not to appeal his bar to reenlistment.   He provides no evidence to show his chain of command was racist and such evidence would have been irrelevant to the fact he did not initiate an appeal.

4.  A reentry code of 4 for soldiers discharged due to a DA QMP bar to reenlistment is correct.

5.  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:

__jev___  ___sk___  __jpi___  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

    Carl W. S. Chun
    Director, Army Board for Correction
    of Military Records

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027598	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000531	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	136.00	
2.	100.03	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.