| Mr. Carl W. S. Chun | Director | |
| Mrs. Nancy Amos | Analyst |
| Ms. Irene N. Wheelwright | Chairperson | |
| Mr. Hubert O. Fry, Jr. | Member | |
| Mr. Donald P. Hupman, Jr. | Member |
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
| 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. |
ARMY | BCMR | CY2002 | 2002077997C070215
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: In his next NCOER covering the period from October 1999 through February 2000, he received the same ratings and the supporting comments indicate he failed to put mission above personal affairs, has had lots of unaccountable time, he failed to take a APFT despite numerous opportunities to do so, has not gained in...
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 | CY2013 | 20130022254
On 11 February 2003, this Board considered the applicants request to be credited with completion of PLDC; that her rank of sergeant, pay grade E-5 be restored; that the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) bar to reenlistment be overturned; and that she be restored to active duty in the Active Guard Reserve program with back pay. Army Regulation 635-5-1 (SPD Codes) provides the specific authorities and reasons for separating Soldiers from active duty and the SPD codes to be entered on the...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001061185C070421
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
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 | CY2001 | 2001063357C070421
APPLICANT STATES : In effect, that he received a DA bar to reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP) based on a NCOER ending in November 1999, which indicated that he did not meet the height/weight standards of Army Regulation (AR) 600-9 and that he was enrolled in the overweight program. EVIDENCE OF RECORD : The applicant's military records show: Furthermore, given the applicant’s specialty and position of personnel sergeant in the unit, the applicant had a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9609758C070209
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. Soldiers whose continued service is not warranted receive a QMP bar to reenlistment. Based on the applicants 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...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2010 | 20100000189
He also requests the separation program designator (SPD) code of "KGF" and the reenlistment eligibility (RE) code of RE-4 be removed from his DD Form 214. Paragraph 10-8 of Army Regulation 601-280 provides that a Soldier may appeal the bar to reenlistment imposed under the QMP based on improved performance and/or material error in the Soldier's record when reviewed by the selection board. This included persons being separated with a DA Bar to Reenlistment in effect.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2009 | 20090004575
On 20 January 1989, a memorandum was dispatched to the applicant informing him that the Calendar Year 1988 Sergeant First Class Board reviewed his Official Military Personnel File (OMPF) and determined that he was to be barred from reenlistment under the Qualitative Management Program (QMP). Army Regulation 635-200 sets forth the basis authority for the separation of enlisted personnel. Inasmuch as the applicant has failed to show through the evidence submitted or the evidence of record...
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...