APPLICANT REQUESTS: Removal of his Department of the Army (DA) imposed bar to reenlistment.
APPLICANT STATES: That he believes he received a bar to reenlistment due to discrepancies in his record caused by enlisted evaluation reports that were not a true evaluation of his worth as a soldier and a noncommissioned officer.
EVIDENCE OF RECORD: The applicant's military records show:
He enlisted in the Regular Army on 11 May 1977 and was honorably discharged on 11 August 1989 in pay grade E-5 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, chapter 13 for unsatisfactory performance.
On 14 October 1988 the applicant was informed that his records had been reviewed by a DA Qualitative Management Program (QMP) board and he had been barred from reenlistment. The QMP determined that he was deficient in several areas of performance including competence, training and personal values and should, therefore, not be permitted to reenlist.
The applicant appealed the findings of the QMP. His appeal did not cite specific examples of discrepancies in his records but rather contested the overall evaluation of his record by the QMP Board. Specifically, he stated that his enlisted evaluation reports (EERs) show that he was an above average NCO with room to grow in some areas. He contended that the scores on his EERs were average for his grade and military occupational specialty. On two EERs, he stated, that the low scores were the result of controversies between himself and his platoon sergeant, and because he had not completed the primary leadership development course, he received two other low evaluations. He stated that he subsequently completed the primary leadership development course and had also completed the basic NCO course (albeit after the cutoff date of the QMP review).
On 9 May 1989 the applicants appeal was denied. The appeals board judged that the applicants past performance and estimated potential were not in keeping with the standards of the NCO corps.
Army Regulation 600-200, chapter 4, 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 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.
Separation proceedings under chapter 13, 14 or other appropriate chapters of this regulation will be initiated within 60 days against soldiers for whom a DA imposed bar to reenlistment has been finally approved.
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 applicant has submitted no evidence of material error or substantive inaccuracy of any of his evaluation reports. His request to this Board, like his appeal of the bar to reenlistment, deals in generalities and his disagreement with the ratings he received.
2. Moreover, he does not deny the accuracy of the low ratings he received. But instead of refuting the reports, he attempts to explain the reason for the rating from his perspective and how he improved his performance.
3. Evaluation reports that are inconsistent with others in the OMPF do not mean that they are inaccurate or unjust. Some soldiers do not perform certain duties as well as others and this is one of the things the evaluation reporting system is supposed to reflect.
4. 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.
5. In view of the foregoing, there appears to be no basis for granting the applicants 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
DENY APPLICATION
Karl F. Schneider
Acting Director
ARMY | BCMR | CY2005 | 20050000196C070206
Counsel states that, contrary to the QMP board's determination, the applicant's military record was competitive enough for him to be recommended for promotion to E-6. A DA Form 4856-R shows the applicant was counseled by LTC T___ of his right to appeal the QMP bar to reenlistment and his options on 27 October 1988. Soldiers, whose continued service is not warranted, even if they recently reenlisted, receive a QMP bar to reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9510381C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his separation under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) be set aside and that he be allowed to reenlist to complete his military career. The applicants records went before the Calendar Year 1993 Sergeant First Class/ANCOC Promotion/Selection Board. Soldiers whose continued service is not warranted receive a QMP bar to reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9511133C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow enlistment. (2) On this EER, the rater stated that the applicant needed to improve his leadership abilities. A notification was sent on 14 October 1988 by the authorities at the U.S. Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (USAEREC) to the applicant advising him of the HQDA imposed bar to reenlistment, and of his options.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9507699C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. 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.
ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9509703C070209
On 18 April 1978, he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-1, for 3 years. On 24 January 1992, the commander indicated that he had presented the notification of the DA bar to reenlistment, explained the available options, and counseled the applicant on his rights, the provisions of the Enlisted Qualitative Early Separation Program, and Army Regulation 635-200. Soldiers whose continued service is not warranted receive a QMP bar to reenlistment.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072109C070403
In support of her application, she submits a packet containing several complimentary documents that she received throughout her tenure on active duty. On 15 December 1989, the applicant was notified by the Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC) that she had been barred from reenlistment by Department of the Army (DA) under the provisions of the Qualitative Management Program (QMP). The evidence of record confirms that she was barred from reenlistment by DA under the provisions of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709127
APPLICANT REQUESTS : In effect, that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show that he was separated due to Reduction in Force, not Qualitative Retention Program; that his reentry code be changed to “1;” and that he either be reinstated, granted a 15-year retirement, or granted full, rather than half, separation pay. On 15 January 1992, the applicant received a Department of the Army (DA) Imposed Bar to Reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP). Soldiers whose continued...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709127C070209
APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, that his DD Form 214 be corrected to show that he was separated due to Reduction in Force, not Qualitative Retention Program; that his reentry code be changed to 1; and that he either be reinstated, granted a 15-year retirement, or granted full, rather than half, separation pay. He reenlisted on 9 October 1979 and had continuous active service until his discharge. On 22 January 1993, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-6, under the provisions of...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130021404
The applicant provides copies of the following: * DA Form 2-1 * DA Form 2166-7 (NCOER) * DA Form 4/1 (Enlistment/Reenlistment Document Armed Forces of the United States) * Active Duty Retention Based on Duty Performance memorandum * Three QMP Appeal memoranda * Appeal to DA Bar to Reenlistment memorandum * Orders 024-00255 * DD Form 214 CONSIDERATION OF EVIDENCE: 1. A memorandum from the U.S. Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (EREC), Fort Benjamin Harrison, IN, dated 5 April...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9707405C070209
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 Board considered the...