MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           14 September 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043202

	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. Raymond V. O’Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge, Jr.		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:  That his reenlistment code be changed from RE-4 to RE-1.

APPLICANT STATES:  That in 1986 a situation occurred of which he was innocent.  He turned down nonjudicial punishment and demanded trial by court-martial.  He was found innocent of the charge at the court-martial.  The RE-4 is a vindictive action which resulted from his being found innocent.  He provides his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty, DD Form 214, as supporting evidence.  

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 9 March 1976.  He was promoted to Sergeant, E-5 on 1 December 1979.

In June 1982, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice.  The Article 15 is not available.  In August 1986, the applicant received a letter of reprimand for attending a New Year’s Eve party at which he knew that others were using marijuana but he remained at the party. He appealed the letter of reprimand.  In his appeal, he noted that he had appeared before a board of officers which considered his case and determined that he was not guilty of misconduct.  The board action was not available at the time and is not available now.  His appeal was denied, the approving commander determining that the incident did not represent minor misconduct but rather a serious breach of professional standards.  The letter was filed in his Official Military Personnel File.

In September 1987, the applicant was notified that he had been selected for a Department of the Army imposed bar to reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program.  The notification cited the 1982 Article 15 and the letter of reprimand as the basis for his selection. 

In July 1988, the U. S. Total Army Personnel Agency (Provisional) (TAPA) informed the applicant that he had previously been selected for a QMP bar to reenlistment and he either did not appeal the bar or appealed and the appeal was denied.  He was informed that his separation was directed as a result of budgetary and manpower restrictions, that he would be separated within 90 days and that he would be given a reenlistment code of RE-4.

On 28 October 1988, the applicant was honorably discharged, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8 for reduction in authorized strength – qualitative early transition program.  He had completed    12 years, 7 months and 10 days of creditable active service and had no lost time. He received a reenlistment code of RE-4.

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 governs the separation of enlisted soldiers.  Paragraph 16-8 provides for the separation of soldiers prior to their expiration of term of service.  When authorization limitations, strength restrictions or budgetary constraints require the size of the enlisted force to be reduced, the Secretary of the Army or his designee will authorize voluntary or involuntary separation and the Commander, U. S. Total Army Personnel Command (formerly known as TAPA) will implement the program by issuing separation instructions pertaining to a specific class or category of soldiers.  

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 this requirement.

2.  The applicant received a Department of the Army QMP bar to reenlistment.  He was separated early because of the bar.  His administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.  The RE-4 was not given as a vindictive measure.  The narrative reason for his separation is correct for the paragraph under which he was separated; the reenlistment code of RE-4 is correct for that reason. 

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

__rvo___  __mkp___  __eja___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR200043202	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000914	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(DENY)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.