MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:       

	BOARD DATE:            7 February 2002
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001061234

	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. Jessie B. Strickland		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Margaret K. Patterson		Member	
	Mr. Lester Echols		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 discharge be voided and that he be granted a 15-year retirement.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he served 15 years, 2 months and 12 days of active military service in the administrative field and because the promotion cut-off scores were so high, he could not be promoted.  He contends that it was through no fault of his own and believes that he should be granted a 15-year retirement in lieu of the honorable discharge he received.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 27 August 1976 for a period of 3 years and training as a clerk-typist.  He remained on active duty through a series of continuous reenlistments and was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 on 9 July 1980.  He attained promotion list standing to the pay grade of E-6 in July 1981.

On 1 November 1991, a memorandum was dispatched by the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center, Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana, notifying the applicant that after a comprehensive review of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF), the Calendar Year 1991 Master Sergeant/Sergeant Selection and Qualitative Management Program (QMP) Board had determined that he should be barred from reenlistment.  The memorandum further explained that the QMP Board had determined that he should be barred from reenlistment because of the presence of four noncommissioned officer evaluation reports indicating deficiencies/weaknesses in fitness, the presence of a record of nonjudicial punishment (DA Form 2627) and the presence of information indicating that he was ineligible to reenlist because he was overweight.  At the time, the applicant’s expiration of term of service (ETS) was 6 November 1991 and there is no indication in the available records to show that he received the QMP notice prior to separation and all documents contained in his record indicate that he had begun separation processing well before his discharge.

On 6 November 1991, he was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200,chapter 4, due to ETS.  He had served 15 years, 2 months and 12 days of total active service and received one-half separation pay in the amount of $13,183.17.

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 enlisted career force, (2) selectively retain the best qualified soldiers to 30 years of active duty, (3) deny reenlistment to non-progressive 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 Department of the Army 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.

The PERSCOM message number 93-164, dated 20 April 1993, announced the criteria for the fiscal year 1993 early retirement program (the first year the program was offered). It stated, in pertinent part, that soldiers with at least 15 years of active federal service (AFS) but less than 20 years of AFS, in selected pay grades and military occupational specialties, could apply for early retirement. Personnel approved for early retirement will receive the same benefits as individuals with 20 years or more service, except that their retired pay will be reduced.  It also stated that individuals who had already separated under provisions of any other voluntary or involuntary separation program were not eligible for early retirement.  Additionally, personnel with a bar to reenlistment were not eligible for separation under the Voluntary Early Retirement Program (VERP) and the program was not made retroactive.

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.  At the time of the applicant’s separation from the service in 1991, the VERP did not exist.  When the VERP was implemented in 1993, it contained no retroactive provisions and specified that personnel who were barred from reenlistment were not eligible.

3.  Accordingly, the applicant was not eligible for a 15-year retirement and the Board finds no basis to grant him one at this time.

4.  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

___fe ___  __mkp___  ___le ___  DENY APPLICATION

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

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001061234	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	2002/02/07	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  338	136.0000/RET	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.