MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:   

	BOARD DATE:           23 March 2000                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999034272

	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.

	Mrs. Joyce A. Hughes		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Ms. Shirley L. Powell		Chairperson	
	Mr. Roger Able		Member	
	Mr. James E. Anderholm		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, correction of appropriate 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.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he was a good soldier.  He had only one bad NCO Evaluation Report (NCOER) all the others were good.  He further states that he had some serious personal problems that kept him from doing his job as a NCO. 

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 August 1986, for 3 years.  His service thereafter was continuous through reenlistment and extension.  The highest grade he achieved was pay grade E-5.

On 2 May 1995, the Master Sergeant/Sergeant Qualitative Management Program (QMP) Selection Board reviewed the applicant’s Official Military Personnel File.  After a comprehensive review of his file, the QMP board barred the applicant from reenlistment.  The bar to reenlistment was based on the applicant’s record of service, his duty performance and future potential for retention in the Army.  The applicant was advised of his appeal rights.  His appeal to the departmental bar was denied by the DA Standby Advisory Board.  

On 11 March 1996, he was honorably discharged under the provisions of paragraph 16-8, Army Regulation 635-200 by reason of a reduction in authorized strength-qualitative early transition program.  He completed 9 years, 6 months and 13 days of creditable active service.  He was assigned RE code 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 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.

Army Regulation 635-200, provides that when a DA bar to reenlistment has been imposed, RE-4 will be the reentry code shown on the individual’s DD form 214.  It is a non-waivable disqualification, and the individual is not eligible for reenlistment. 

Pertinent Army regulations provide that prior to discharge or release from active duty, individuals will be assigned RE codes, based on their service records or the reason for discharge.  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.

RE-4 applies to individuals separated from the last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification and are ineligible for enlistment.

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 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 the 1995 Master Sergeant Selection/Sergeant QMP Board and he was properly identified for a DA bar to reenlistment under the QMP in accordance with AR 601-280.

3.  The QMP action was based on the applicant’s overall rating from all NCOER’s, and not the bad one as he stated.

4.  The applicant’s DA imposed bar to reenlistment was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations, with no indication or procedural errors, which would tend to significantly jeopardize the applicant’s rights.

5.  The Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel has ruled in similar cases that RE-4 has been the proper RE code for a soldier discharged, either voluntarily or involuntarily, with a QMP bar to reenlistment in place.

6.  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 that disqualification which established the basis for the reentry code.

7.  In view of the circumstances in this case, the assigned reentry code was and still is appropriate.

8.  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

__slp___  ___ra___  __jea___  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999034272	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20000323	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19960311	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR635-200, Paragraph 16-8	
DISCHARGE REASON	A07.20	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	144.0720	
2.	100.0300	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.