MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           14 September 2000                  
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2000043714

	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	
	Mr. W. W. Osborn, Jr.		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Raymond V. O'Connor, Jr.		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Elzey J. Arledge		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, reconsideration of his earlier appeal to correct his records by expunging a memorandum of reprimand and a relief-for- cause Noncommissioned Officer Evaluation Report (NCOER), by restoring his Drill Sergeant Identification Badge, reinstating him as a Drill Sergeant and authorizing back pay. 

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, he defers to his counsel.

COUNSEL CONTENDS:  In effect, that the applicant’s appeal of the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) bar to reenlistment was approved because the arguments previously submitted to the Board with the original appeal were accepted as legitimate and persuasive.  Counsel also states that the advisory opinion from the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board (DASEB) did not address the substance of that appeal and has little probative value.   He submits a 16 August 1999 memorandum to the effect that applicant’s QMP appeal has been approved.  The memorandum states that the individual cannot again be barred solely on the basis of the matters that resulted in this QMP.  It also states that, if the QMP was based upon a nonjudicial punishment or an administrative reprimand, they may be appealed to the DASEB.

NEW EVIDENCE OR INFORMATION: Incorporated herein by reference are military records which were summarized in a memorandum prepared to reflect the Board's previous consideration of the case on 16 June 1999 (COPY ATTACHED).

The fact that the applicant has overcome a QMP bar based on the LOR and the relief-for-cause NCOER is new evidence that requires Board consideration.

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.  The Board notes that the applicant successfully appealed the QMP and that he will be retained on active duty.  However, that decision reflects the determination that the applicant’s overall record of service and potential for further service outweighed the seriousness of the occurrence that brought about the QMP.

2.  However, that decision has no bearing on whether or not the incident should be expunged from the applicant’s record and the applicant made whole as if the incident never occurred.  

3.  By counsel’s own admission the arguments employed are the same. However, the questions at issue were different and this Board has already decided that those arguments do not demonstrate an error or an injustice that warrants the requested relief.  There is nothing new for this Board to consider except that the applicant successfully appealed the QMP and that counsel thinks that the DASEB opinion lacked substance and has no probative value. 

4.  The Board concludes that the applicant’s successful appeal of the QMP does not demonstrate that the requested relief is warranted.  

5.  Counsel’s opinion as to the probative value of the advisory opinion is moot.  That advisory opinion was considered by the members of original panel of this Board and is not currently before this panel.  

6.  The overall merits of the case, including the latest submissions and arguments are insufficient as a basis for the Board to reverse its previous decision.

7.   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	AR2000043714	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000914	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	AR134.01	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.