2. The applicant requests, in effect, correction of his military records by changing his separation program designator (SPD) code.

3.  The applicant states that his SPD code of “KGH” is incorrect.

4.  The applicant was born on 28 August 1964.  He completed 12 years of formal education.  He served in the Regular Army (RA) from 14 July 1982 through 13 July 1985.  On 2 July 1987, he enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserve (USAR) Delayed Entry Program, in pay grade E-4.  On 20 August 1987, he enlisted in the RA, in pay grade E-4.  His Armed Forces Qualification Test score was 34 (Category III).  He was promoted to pay grade E-5 effective 1 December 1988.  His military occupational specialty was 13B (Cannon Crewmember). He remained on active duty through an extension and reenlistment until his discharge on 22 October 1993.

5.  A Personnel Action indicates that the applicant was absent without leave from 26 July 1989 to 2 August 1989.

6.  On 24 August 1992, the applicant accepted nonjudicial punishment (NJP) under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, by operating a passenger car, in a reckless manner, by crossing the center line and causing his vehicle to force another vehicle off the road; by operating a passenger car, in a reckless manner, by crossing the center line and causing his vehicle to exit the roadway, roll an unknown amount of times causing extensive damage to the vehicle; and by wrongfully leaving the scene of the accident without making his identity known.  His imposed punishment was reduction to pay grade E-4, a forfeiture of $600 pay per month for 2 months, 1 month suspended, to be automatically remitted if not vacated before 24 February 1993, and extra duty for 45 days.  He did not appeal.  On 6 May 1993, the punishment of reduction to pay grade E-4 was remitted.

7.  On 30 March 1995, the applicant’s commander recommended that the applicant be barred from reenlistment based on the foregoing NJP, letters of indebtedness, and his delinquent club account.  The applicant was counseled and advised of the basis for the action, and indicated that he did not desire to submit a statement in his own behalf.  On 1 April 1993, the local bar to reenlistment was approved.  On 7 April 1993, the applicant was advised that the bar to reenlistment was approved.  He indicated that he would not appeal the bar to reenlistment.  On 1 July 1993, his commander indicated that he had reviewed the applicant’s bar to reenlistment and recommended that it not be removed.

8.  The following is a record of the applicant’s available noncommissioned officer evaluation reports (NCOER)
(DA Form(s) 2166-7):  The rating system depicted below is limited to three entries:  the first entry is derived from Part Va (the rater’s rating of the NCO’s overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility), expressed in Roman numerals, with “I” (Among the Best) the highest and “III” (Marginal) the lowest; and the last two entries are derived from Part Vc (the senior rater’s rating of the NCO’s overall performance) and Part Vd (the senior rater’s rating of the NCO’s overall potential for promotion and/or service in positions of greater responsibility) respectively, also expressed in Roman numerals, with “I through III” indicating a rating of “Successful/Superior,” “IV” indicating a rating of “Fair,” and “V” indicating a rating of “Poor.”

	Period	Score/Rater/  Rank	Position     Type of 			     Senior Rater				   Report

Sep 88-Jun 89	II/III/III    SGT   Asst Ammo    Change of 								Chief	   Rater (COR)
Jul 89-Jun 90	I/II/II	    SGT   Gunner       COR
Jul 90-Apr 91	II/II/II	    SGT   Control NCO  COR
May 91-Dec 91	II/II/II	    SGT   Ammo Team    COR
						     Chief
Jan 92-Jun 92	II/IV/V	    SGT   Ammo Team    COR*
							Chief
Jul 92-Jun 93	II/II/II	    SGT   Gunner       Annual




*The senior rater stated that the applicant was always late to unit formations; that the applicant should learn to manage his time properly; and that the applicant’s assigned missions were rarely completed by him; usually passed them on to someone else.

9.  On 10 July 1993, a notification was sent to the applicant by the authorities at the U.S. Army Enlisted Records and Evaluation Center (USAEREC) indicating that the Calendar Year 1993 Master Sergeant Selection/Sergeant Qualitative Management Program (QMP) Board, after a comprehensive review of his Official Military Personnel File, determined that he was to be barred from reenlistment. He was advised of the appeal procedures.  The foregoing NJP and a NCOER covering the period from January 1992 through June 1992 were the bases for the Department of the Army (DA) bar to reenlistment.

10.  On 4 August 1993, the applicant was officially notified of the DA bar to reenlistment under the QMP.  On 9 August 1993, he indicated by initialing Option 2 that he would not submit an appeal, and that he understood that he would be separated within 90 days as of the date of the option statement under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8.  On 11 August 1993, the commander indicated that he would not submit a separate appeal on behalf of the applicant.

11.  The applicant’s DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty) indicates that he was honorably discharged on 22 October 1993, in pay grade E-5, under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5a, b, or c (non-retention on active duty).  He was given a separation code of “KGH, and a reentry code of “3.”  He had completed a total of 9 years, 1 month, and 26 days active military service, and 2 years, 8 months, and 21 days inactive military service.  He received the following decorations and awards:  the Army Achievement Medal (Second Oak Leaf Cluster), the Good Conduct Medal, the National Defense Service Medal, the NCO Professional Development Ribbon, the Army Service Ribbon, the Overseas Service Ribbon, and the Driver and Mechanic Badge.  He received separation pay of $8,159.95. 

12.  A staff member of the Board was informally advised by the authorities at the QMP Section, USAEREC, that, since the applicant selected Option 2, he should have been discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, with a SPD of “JCC” and a reentry code of RE-4.  Soldiers selecting Option 2 are entitled to separation pay.  Soldiers selecting Option 3 are not entitled to separation pay, and these soldiers are separated under Army Regulation 635-200 paragraph 16-5a, b, or c, with a separation code of “KGH.”

13.  Army Regulation 601-280, chapter 10, sets forth the policy and prescribes the 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.

14.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5, provides for the voluntary separation of soldiers denied reenlistment.  Soldiers denied reenlistment may be voluntarily separation before their expiration of term of service.  Soldiers who perceive that they will be unable to overcome a Headquarters, DA, bar to reenlistment will be discharged upon their request.




15.  Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, provides for the early separation of soldiers prior to expiration of term of service or period for which ordered to active duty due to reduction in force, strength limitations, or budgetary constraints.

16.  Army Regulation 635-5-1 provides the SPD codes.  It indicates that enlisted personnel who are voluntarily discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5a, b, or c (non-retention on active duty) will be given a SPD of “KGH.”  Enlisted personnel who are involuntarily discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8 (reduction in force) will be given a SPD of “JCC.”

17.  Army Regulation 601-210, chapter 3, provides the basic qualifications for enlistment in the RA and the USAR of prior service personnel.  Table 3-6 provides the Armed Forces reentry eligibility (RE) codes, and the RA RE codes. The reentry code of RE-3 applies to persons who are not qualified for continued Army service, but the disqualification is waivable.  The reentry code of RE-4 applies to persons separated from their last period of service with a nonwaivable disqualification.  (Includes persons being separated with a DA bar to reenlistment in effect.)  Table 4-2 provides the nonwaivable moral and administrative disqualifications, which includes persons barred from reenlistment by the DA.

CONCLUSIONS:

1.  The evidence of record indicates that the applicant was barred from reenlistment by the DA under the QMP, and that he selected Option 2 when notified of the DA bar to reenlistment.

2.  There is no evidence in the available records that the applicant changed his Option or that he voluntarily requested discharge.  Therefore, he was erroneously discharged by Departmental personnel under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-5a, b, or c (non-retention on active duty), and he was erroneously assigned the separation code of “KGH,” and a reentry code of “3.”
3.  Based on the applicant’s selection of Option 2 when he was notified of the DA bar to reenlistment, he should have been involuntarily discharged under Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8 (reduction in force), with a separation code of “JCC,” and a reentry code of “4.”

4.  In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate to correct the applicant’s records as recommended below.

RECOMMENDATION:

That all of the Department of the Army records related to this case be corrected:

	a.  by showing that the individual concerned was discharged on 22 October 1993 under “Army Regulation 
635-200, paragraph 16-8 (reduction in force);”

	b.  by showing that he received a separation code of “JCC” at the time of his discharge on 22 October 1993; and

	c.  by showing that he received a reentry code of “4” at the time of his discharge on 22 October 1993.

BOARD VOTE:  

                       GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION

                       GRANT FORMAL HEARING

                       DENY APPLICATION




		                           
		        CHAIRPERSON