Search Decisions

Decision Text

ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709127
Original file (9709127.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
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.
APPLICANT STATES : That Army Regulation 635-200, Chapter 16-8 does not allude to any reference of the Qualitative Management Program (QMP), only to a Reduction in Force, and that the reentry code given is not supported by a Reduction in Force separation.

 EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant’s military records show he was born on 18 October 1958. He completed 12 years of formal education. He initially enlisted in the Regular Army on 29 June 1976 and was honorably discharged on 26 June 1979. He reenlisted on 9 October 1979 and had continuous active service until his discharge.

During his initial term of service, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice on three separate occasions for unlawfully selling government property, value of about $2.02; disobeying a lawful order; and failing to go to physical training formation, respectively. None of these Article 15s is filed on his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF).

On 9 December 1981, the applicant accepted non-judicial punishment under Article 15, Uniform Code of Military Justice, for striking an individual with a radio antenna and an M16 rifle, for failing to go to his appointed place of duty at time prescribed, and for two other offenses. His punishment was to be reduced to pay grade E-4 and to forfeit $250 pay for one month. The applicant appealed the punishment. The superior authority granted partial relief. Two offenses were struck from consideration and the reduction was suspended for 6 months.

On 15 January 1992, the applicant received a Department of the Army (DA) Imposed Bar to Reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP). DA cited two documents, the 1981 Article 15 and one adverse non-commissioned officer evaluation report (NCO-ER), as the documents which contributed most to its decision. The applicant appealed the Bar, but DA denied the appeal on
5 November 1992. The board “judged that the past performance and estimated potential of the soldier are not in keeping with the standards expected of the Noncommissioned Officer Corps.”

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 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.

On 22 January 1993, the applicant was discharged, in pay grade E-6, under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, which directed the early release of soldiers with a QMP bar to reenlistment when budgetary or authorization limitations require a reduction in enlisted strength. He was authorized separation pay. His characterization of service was honorable. His reentry code was “4.” He had completed 16 years, 3 months and 12 days of creditable active service and had no lost time.

The first early retirement program came into effect in Fiscal Year 1994.

 DISCUSSION : Considering all the evidence, allegations, and information presented by the applicant, together with the evidence of record, it is concluded:

1. The applicant’s DD Form 214 is not in error. The applicant’s administrative separation was accomplished in compliance with applicable regulations with no indication of procedural errors which would tend to jeopardize his rights.

2. The narrative reason for separation is correct for the chapter under which he was separated; the reentry code is correct for that reason.

3. In view of the foregoing, there appears to be 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
DENY APPLICATION




                                            Loren G. Harrell       
                 Director

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1997 | 9709127C070209

    Original file (9709127C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2001 | 2001061185C070421

    Original file (2001061185C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: By memorandum dated 26 September 1995, the applicant was notified that he had been determined to be barred from reenlistment under the Department of the Army Qualitative Management Program (QMP). Army Regulation 635-5-1, SPD/Reentry Code Cross-Reference Table states that RE code 4 will be used when a soldier is discharged under the QMP.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001065842C070421

    Original file (2001065842C070421.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: In effect, correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. 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.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9605630C070209

    Original file (9605630C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    He states that although his selection under the Army’s Qualitative Management Program and subsequent separation “weighed heavily on” him he had not “yet reached [his] “bottom” and continued to drink after his separation. The applicant states that his “discharge was a direct result of the Army’s failure to properly diagnose and treat [his] disease of alcoholism” and he is “now requesting that [he] be given something for the over 16 years of active service [he] gave [his] country.” EVIDENCE...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2007 | 20070006654

    Original file (20070006654.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 9 October 1992, the applicant was discharged under the provision of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8 by reason of “Reduction in Authorized Strength – Qualitative Early Transition Program.” He was assigned a separation code of JCC and a reenlistment eligibility code of RE-4. 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. He was barred from...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1995 | 9507699C070209

    Original file (9507699C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    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

    Original file (9509703C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY1995 | 9508951C070209

    Original file (9508951C070209.TXT) Auto-classification: Denied

    APPLICANT REQUESTS: Correction of appropriate military records to show a reentry eligibility (RE) code which would allow reenlistment. Under the qualitative screening subprogram, records for grades E-5 through E-9 are regularly screened by the DA promotion selection boards. Soldiers whose continued service is not warranted receive a QMP bar to reenlistment.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609758aC070209

    Original file (9609758aC070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    On 20 August 1987, he enlisted in the Regular Army, in pay grade E-4, for 3 years. He indicated that he would not appeal the bar to reenlistment. On 11 August 1993, the commander indicated that he would not submit a separate appeal on behalf of the applicant.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002072109C070403

    Original file (2002072109C070403.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...