PROCEEDINGS

	IN THE CASE OF:  

	BOARD DATE:           15 January 2002                   
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR2001063973

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the true and complete record of the proceedings 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:

	Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright		Chairperson	
	Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr.		Member	
	Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr.		Member	

	The applicant and counsel if any, did not appear before the Board.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A - Application for correction of military 
                records
	Exhibit B - Military Personnel Records (including
	            advisory opinion, if any)

FINDINGS:

1.  The applicant has exhausted or the Board has waived the requirement for exhaustion of all administrative remedies afforded by existing law or regulations.

2.  The applicant requests that the Army Commendation Medal (ARCOM) (fifth award) be added to his Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,   DD Form 214, and that his reentry (RE) code be changed.

3.  The applicant states that he received the ARCOM after his DD Form 214 was prepared.  He would like his RE code upgraded so he may enlist in the Army National Guard or the U. S. Army Reserve and serve his country.  A review of his entire military record should reveal that an RE-4 is not warranted.

4.  The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted in the Regular Army on 7 November 1985.  He was promoted to Staff Sergeant, E-6 on 1 March 1991.

5.  On 10 August 1998, the applicant was notified that a review of his records determined he was to receive a Department of the Army Bar to Reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP).  Three noncommissioned officer evaluation reports (NCOERs) were identified as the specific reasons for the bar.  One of the NCOERs showed that he was rated as “needs much improvement” in all five categories of NCO responsibilities.  There is no evidence to show he appealed any of the three identified NCOERs.  On 2 September 1998, he elected not to submit an appeal to the QMP bar to reenlistment.

6.  On 20 October 1998, the applicant was recommended for award of the ARCOM 4th oak leaf cluster (fifth award).  The recommendation was approved on 30 October 1998.  The applicant may have been on transition leave at this time.  He was discharged on 26 November 1998 after completing 13 years and 20 days of creditable active service.  The narrative reason for separation was non-retention on active duty.  His separation code (SPD) was JGH (involuntary discharge – non-retention on active duty) and his RE code was 4.

7.  The applicant’s separation authority on his DD Form 214 was listed as “to be determined.”  The conversion of the QMP from a Headquarters Department of the Army bar to reenlistment to a Headquarters Department of the Army administrative separation program was approved around early 1998.  The provisions of the QMP would be moved from Army Regulation 601-280 to Army Regulation 635-200 when the new Army Regulation was published (which it was in 2000).  Until then, the provisions of the QMP as listed in Army Regulation   601-280 would continue to be used.

8.  Army Regulation 601-280, chapter 10, set forth policy and prescribed 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.

9.  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 U.S. 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.

10.  RE-4 applies to persons not qualified for continued Army service and the disqualification is not waivable.  

11.  Army Regulation 635-5-1, SPD/RE Code Cross Reference Table provides that when the SPD is JGH then RE-4 will be given.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence shows that the applicant was awarded the ARCOM (fifth award) and it should be listed on his DD Form 214.

2.  The Board appreciates the applicant’s desire to service his country but in light of the reason for his separation, the RE-4 given was and still is appropriate.

3.  In view of the foregoing, the applicant’s records should be corrected as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

1.  That the applicant’s DD Form 214 be amended to show he was awarded the Army Commendation Medal (fifth award).

2.  That so much of the application as is in excess of the foregoing be denied.

BOARD VOTE:  

__inw___  __hof___  __dph___  GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

________  ________  ________  GRANT FORMAL HEARING

________  ________  ________  DENY APPLICATION

			Irene N. Wheelwright
		______________________
		        CHAIRPERSON

INDEX

CASE ID	AR2001063973	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	20020115	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE		
DATE OF DISCHARGE		
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY		
DISCHARGE REASON		
BOARD DECISION	(GRANT)	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.	100.03	
2.	110.04	
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.