PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           10 August 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000040341

	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.  

	Mr. Carl W. S. Chun		Director	
	Mrs. Joyce A. Hughes		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Mark D. Manning		Chairperson	
	Mr. John Saputo		Member	
	Ms. Karen A. Heinz		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:
                                                                  
	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that his service records be corrected to show his date of birth as 30 August 1947 instead of 30 December 1947 and correction of his military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment.  In effect, this constitutes a request for removal or waiver of those disqualifications, which preclude reenlistment.

3.  The applicant states in effect, that his date of birth is incorrect.  He also states in effect, that his reenlistment code is wrong and that he tried to reenlist during the Gulf war but due to the RE-3C code he was unable to do so.  He submits a copy of his birth certificate in support of his application.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 21 July 1967, for a period of 4 years.  On 13 February 1970, the applicant was honorably discharged and immediately reenlisted on 14 February 1970 for 
4 years.  The applicant’s enlistment contracts and other documents shows two different dates of birth, some documents shows his date of birth as 30 August 1947 and other documents shows his date of birth as 30 December 1947.

5.  On 30 May 1973, the applicant was notified that he had been identified for evaluation by the qualitative screening process of the Qualitative Management Program.  Under the provisions of chapter 4, Army Regulation 600-200, the Qualitative Management Program, Department of the Army screens the records of all personnel with upcoming ETS.  Based on EER’s, MOS test scores and data from the enlisted master tape record, DA selects personnel whose record is such that further evaluation is required.  On 8 August 1973, the applicant was denied further reenlistment.  However, the Board did not identify the reason (s) for the bar to reenlist.

6.  On 13 February 1974, the applicant was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 2, Expiration Term of Service (ETS).  He completed 6 years, 6 months and 23 days of honorable military service.  His pay grade at the time of separation was E-5.  He was assigned 
RE code 3C, in accordance with AR 601-280.

7.  Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basic authority for the separation of enlisted personnel.  Chapter 4 of that regulation provides, in pertinent part, for the discharge or release from active duty upon termination of enlistment, and other periods of active duty or active duty for training.  A soldier separated upon ETS or fulfillment of service obligation will be awarded a character of service of 
honorable, unless the soldier is in entry-level status and service is uncharacterized.

8.  Army Regulation 601-210 covers eligibility criteria, policies, and procedures for enlistment and processing into the Regular Army (RA) and the US Army Reserve.  Chapter 3 of that regulation prescribes basic eligibility for prior service
applicants for enlistment.  That chapter includes a list of armed forces RE codes,
Including RA RE codes.

9.  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 performance 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.

10.  RE-3C applies to persons who have completed more than 4 months service who do not meet the basic eligibility pay grade requirements of chapter 2, Army Regulation 601-280, or who have been denied reenlistment under the Qualitative Retention Process according to chapter 10, Army Regulation 601-280.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record and evidence furnished by the applicant (copy of his birth certificate) clearly shows the government made an administrative error.  Therefore, the applicant’s service record should be corrected to show his date of birth as 30 August 1947 instead of 30 December 1947.

2.  The QMP is an administrative measure by which the DA is able to maintain
the quality of its career enlisted force and is based on the premise that reenlistment is a privilege for those soldiers whose overall performance and potential for advancement meet Army standards.  The applicant’s military records
were screened by a qualified board of officers and senior enlisted personnel and
he was properly identified for a DA bar to reenlistment under the QMP in accordance with AR 601-280.

3.  The applicant’s DA imposed bar to reenlistment was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations, with no indication of procedural errors, which would tend to significantly jeopardize the applicant’s rights.
4.  The applicant was discharged and assigned a reentry code in accordance with regulations then in effect.  There appears to be no basis for removal or waiver of the disqualification, which established the basis for the RE code. 

5.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected by issuing the individual concerned a DD Form 215 (Correction to the DD Form 214), to show his date of birth as 30 August 1947.

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__mdm___  __js____  __kah___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Mark D. Manning
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2000040341	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000810	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.0300	
2.	100.0100	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.