MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF: 

	BOARD DATE:  28 July 1999                           
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999017787

	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. Loren G. Harrell		Director	
	Ms. Rosa M. Chandler		Analyst	

  The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Fred N. Eichorn		Chairperson	
	Ms. Lana E. McGlynn 		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson 		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, change the narrative reason for his separation from reduction in force to medical retirement. 

APPLICANT STATES:  He was forced out of the military after 17 years of service and he was 30% disabled.  He would like to be able to receive Veteran's Affairs (VA) benefits.

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

He enlisted in the Regular Army (RA) on 27 July 1976.  On 15 May 1978, nonjudicial punishment (NJP) was imposed against the applicant under the provisions of the Uniform Code of Justice (UCMJ) for wrongfully having in his possession a controlled substance on 4 May 1978.  His punishment included forfeiture of pay.  On 26 July 1979, he was honorably discharged.

On 27 July 1979, he enlisted in the US Army Reserve (USAR) and served successfully until he was honorably discharged on 10 March 1980.  

The applicant reenlisted in the RA and served honorably from 3 April 
1980-13 January 1982, from 14 January 1982-26 November 1985, from 
27 November 1985-28 April 1988, and from 29 April 1988-31 January 1991. 

On 1 May 1983, the applicant was promoted to the rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5.  On 1 May 1989, he was promoted to the rank of staff sergeant, pay grade E-6, which was the highest grade that he achieved.  His noncommissioned officer evaluation reports (NCOER) show that his overall ratings were successful between June 1979 and June 1993.  He had one overall rating of fair, that rating was for the period June 1992-November 1992. 

On 27 April 1989, the applicant received a Letter of Reprimand (LOR) after he was arrested for driving while under the influence of alcohol.

On 1 February 1991, he reenlisted in the RA for 3 years, pay grade E-6 and his current military occupational specialty (MOS) 31G (Tactical Communications Chief).

On 5 April 1993, a Department of the Army (DA) E-7 Selection Board identified the applicant for a DA bar to reenlistment under the Quality Management Program (QMP).  On 16 April 1993, the applicant was notified of the basis for the bar to reenlistment.  The Board cited the NJP, dated 30 May 1978, and the LOR, dated 27 April 1989, as the basis for the bar. 

On 5 August 1993, The DA Separation Evaluation Board (DASEB) denied the applicant's appeal to have the NJP under the provisions of an Article 
15 and the LOR, dated 27 April 1989, transferred from his performance to the restricted portion of his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF). 

On 3 September 1993, the applicant's unit commander recommended that he be medically boarded for a chronic facial skin condition.  The commander stated that during a field exercise his mild facial rash became of major concern when filthy conditions caused his face to become infected.  

On 28 September 1993, the applicant was diagnosed as having Rosacea, a skin disease on his face and nose.

On 29 November 1993, the applicant voluntarily requested to remain on active duty beyond his ETS for the purpose of receiving medical care/Physical Evaluation Board (PEB).  His scheduled expiration term of service (ETS) date was 31 December 1993.

On 3 February 1994, a PEB determined that the applicant was physically fit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank and MOS in accordance with a physical profile and assignment limitations. 

On 20 June 1994, the applicant was separated.  He had completed 17 years 
2 months and 18 days of prior active military service and 3 years, 4 months and 19 days on the enlistment under review.

In connection with this application, the Medical Advisory to this Board, opined (COPY ATTACHED), in essence, the Board found no evidence of a medical condition that warranted referral to the Disability Evaluation System under the provisions of chapter 3, Army Regulation 40-501.  There is noted a Permanent P2 Profile, undated, for Acne Roasacea and Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) ratings of 10% for Tinnitus (ringing in the ears), 10% for Ulnar Neuritis, left arm, and 10% for Neuritis, right arm.  Neuritis is an inflammation of the nerve.  An ETS physical examination, dated 4 November 1993, found the applicant qualified for separation.

The above advisory opinion was referred to the applicant for comment or rebuttal, but he failed to respond.

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 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 program.  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 estimates 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.  A soldier is entitled to only one appeal of the bar to reenlistment, and relook boards are not authorized.

Title 10, United States Code, at chapter 61, provides disability retirement or separation for a member who is physically unfit to perform the duties of his office, rank, grade or rating because of disability incurred while entitled to basic pay. 

Title 38, United States Code, section 310 and 331, permits the DVA to award compensation for a medical condition(s) which was incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  The DVA, however, is not required by law to determine medical fitness for further military service.  The DVA, in accordance with its own policies and regulations, awards compensation solely on the basis that a medical condition exists and that said medical condition reduces or impairs the social or industrial adaptability of the individual concerned.  Consequently, due to the two concepts involved, an individual’s medical condition, although not considered medically unfitting for military service at the time of processing for separation, discharge or retirement, may be sufficient to qualify the individual for DVA benefits based on an evaluation by that agency.

DISCUSSION:  Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, applicable law and regulations, and advisory opinion(s), 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 applicant was properly separated in accordance with the regulations, then in effect, governing those soldiers denied reenlistment under the QMP.

3.  On 3 February 1994, a PEB determined that the applicant was physically fit to perform the duties of his office, grade, rank and MOS in accordance with a physical profile and assignment limitations.

4.  The DVA awards compensation for medical condition(s) that were incurred in or aggravated by active military service.  There is nothing in the applicant’s record and he has submitted nothing that indicates that he was unable to perform the duties of his grade and MOS at the time of his discharge.

5.  The fact that the DVA, in its discretion, has awarded the applicant a disability rating it is a prerogative excised within the policies of that agency.  It does not, in itself, establish physical unfitness for Department of the Army purposes.

6.  The applicant was bared from reenlistment under the QMP after a DA Selection Board reviewed his record and determined that he was no longer eligible for reenlistment due to past performance and conduct.  Essentially, the Army found that the applicant had no potential for meaningful service beyond his ETS.

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:

FNE____  LEM____  MVT_____  GRANT

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

						Loren G. Harrell
						Director

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999017787	
SUFFIX		
RECON	YYYYMMDD	
DATE BOARDED	19990728	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	(HD)	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	19940620	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR601-280  	
DISCHARGE REASON	QMP	
BOARD DECISION	(NC)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY	Director	
ISSUES         1.	A24.00	
2.	A93.21	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.