top of page

Helping good Soldiers   get through bad times.


About Me



I am a military law attorney who is a retired Army Judge Advocate with an extensive background in military administrative law with a particular emphasis on U.S. Army personnel law. I have the knowledge and the experience to assist Soldiers who are facing adverse actions which have the potential to severely limit or even end their Army careers. If you are currently facing an investigation, a reprimand, a referred OER or NCOER, a bar to reenlistment, or an involuntary separation action or if you have been the subject of previous adverse action such as having had an Article 15, a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, a negative OER or NCOER, or other unfavorable action which has harmed your career, I may be able to help you to resolve your problem and help you to continue with a successful Army career.


In addition, if you have been turned down by a promotion board, you MAY have grounds to seek reconsideration by a Special Selection Board. While the results of promotion boards are presumed to be administratively correct, there are occasionally some instances in which the denial of a promotion can be due to some administrative error. This may occur when the individual's board file was incomplete due to the omission of documents which should have been seen by the board. In other cases, the board file may have included documents which should not have been seen by the board. These are documents which should have either been entirely removed from the file or else placed in the restricted fiche due to either the provisions of Army Regulations or as a result of previous action by the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board or the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records. When it can be shown that denial of promotion occurred due to such an error, it is possible to have a corrected file considered by a Special Selection Board.


This website contains descriptions of some of the types of situations which can effect a Soldier's career. These are provided as a matter of general information and should not be considered as legal advice. The facts and circumstances which pertain to each Soldier and each situation are unique and the consequences can vary to a great extent as a result of the specific and seemingly minor details of each case. No attorney can ever properly advise anyone without having had the opportunity to become fully familiar with all available relevant information as well as being able to discuss the matter with the client.


My Judge Advocate experience covered the entire spectrum from advising company commanders on legal issues that that had a direct and immediate impact on their responsibilities to the completion of actions to be signed by general officers and forwarded to Headquarters, Department of the Army for final action. All of my JAG experience was devoted to serving as a legal advisor in operational and functional units. In this capacity, I was a member of unit staffs at several levels to include battalion, brigade, and major command levels. This included three assignments as a Command Judge Advocate (senior judge advocate in the unit and personal legal advisor to the unit commander). One of these was as the Command Judge Advocate of a Civil Affairs unit which was deployed in Iraq. My responsibility in those assignments was to advise commanders and staffs on any legal issues that would arise during the course of unit operations and to ensure that all actions were conducted in accord with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. In addition, whenever it became necessary to take any legal action on behalf of the command, I was the one who was responsible to draft and prepare the documents needed to carry out these actions and to present the views of the command in a manner which would convince higher headquarters to carry out these recommendations.


I then spent the final six years of my time in the Army assigned to the headquarters of a major command. In that capacity, I advised the Commanding General and staff, and subordinate commanders and staffs of units within this command on complex administrative law actions, and military justice matters. I provided legal advice for criminal investigations and prepared cases for trial by Courts Martial. I advised investigating officers and reviewed legal actions and prepared legal opinions for AR 15-6 Investigations, and Commander’s Inquiries. These included reviewing numerous adverse personnel actions for legal and factual sufficiency and making recommendations for disposition by the two star commander. When these actions contained substantive and procedural errors which violated applicable Army regulations, I would take due notice and either return them to the initiating headquarters for corrective action or else recommend that they should be entirely disapproved. In each and every instance, I would thoroughly review the entire record and draft a detailed summary of the case along with a review of recommendations from the subordinate commands and prepare recommendations for the appropriate disposition by the commanding general. This was a two star level command. This is the level which has final approval authority for almost all enlisted separation actions and which also has the authority to initiate officer separation actions. During the course of this assignment I also acted as either Legal Advisor (Administrative Law Judge) or Recorder (Prosecutor) for numerous administrative separation hearings. This experience helped me to gain a great deal of insight into this process and to learn how these decisions are made as well as what factors will influence the decision makers in these cases.


In addition to learning the technical aspects of statutory military law and Army Regulations, my experience has also enabled me to understand how the Army works and how these legal rules are applied in a wide variety of situations which covered the entire spectrum from routine functions in a garrison environment to the consequences of critical decisions in the course of combat and stability operations in Iraq. Since I am representing Soldiers in legal matters relating to personnel actions which have an impact on their Army careers this is an insight that they can only get from a miltary law attorney who is experienced in dealing with these situations.


In addition to my Judge Advocate experience, I have also been a Battalion  S-1. This experience provided me with extremely valuable additional insight into these types of actions and to the way in which in which these matters are ultimately resolved.

If you are facing a legal problem that can have a substantial impact on your Army career, you should consider hiring an experienced military law attorney. You can contact me to discuss your case. My phone number, e-mail address, and mailing address are listed on the home page of this website. The contact page also provides a place for you to send me an e-mail in addition to my phone number and mailing address.
I will not charge you for an initial consultation. Anything that you tell me will be privileged information and I will maintain the confidentiality of anything that you tell me. No ethical attorney can ever guarantee the outcome of any situation. That is why I will always give you a candid and objective opinion as to the nature of your problem as well as the available courses of action and the likelihood of being able to successfully resolve your problem.
Most of these types of situations are handled by means of written materials which are sent to the appropriate authority.
Army Regulations typically allow periods of several years to file an appeal of a previous adverse action such as an unfavorable OER or NCOER, or to seek action by the Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board or the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records.
However, time is of the essence in responding to currently pending adverse actions. if you become the subject of an AR 15-6 investigation, or if you are currently facing adverse action such as the revocation of your security clearance, a referred OER or NCOER, a bar to reenlistment, or an administrative separation action, or if you have been notified that you are about to receive a General Officer Memorandum of Reprimand, you need to be very careful to take note of the suspense date for you to file your response. Currently pending actions will typically have a suspense date in the range of 7-30 days.
In each case, you will be formally notified of exactly how much time you have to respond. Failure to submit a timely response will be treated as a waiver of your rights. However, it is possible to request an extension of time to submit your response. This is allowed by Army Regulations in order to allow Soldiers to have time to seek legal advice in order to  prepare and submit a meaningful response in complex cases. Requests for extensions should always be filed within the time specified in the written notice of the pending action. That is why you should always seek legal advice from an experienced military law attorney as soon as you are notified of the proposed action. This will enable your lawyer to file for an extension and to immediately begin preparing your response.
Prior to beginning representation, I will let you know what I believe to be the appropriate course of action and I will indicate the fee for the particular situation. While most situations involve filing written materials with the appropriate authority, there are also a number of cases in which it would be necessary for me to represent you in an adversarial proceeding such as an administrative separation board, a Flight Evaluation Board, or a Medical Credentialing Hearing, etc. I can also represent you at hearings before the Army Board for the Correction of Military Records and the Army Discharge Review Board. If I have to travel, I would also charge for any expenses incurred. However, I will make every effort to minimize these expenses. Since I am retired from the Army, I am eligible to utilize on-post lodging and dining facilities, etc. and I will do so if possible. This will help to keep costs to a minimum.
I will not enter into a formal attorney-client relationship with you or charge any fee unless I believe that there is a reasonable chance that I will be able to help you to resolve your situation. Prior to beginning representation, I will provide you with a letter in which I fully explain how I will be able to handle your problem, and the scope of representation. Any additional charges related to expenses for substantial costs such as travel, witness expenses, extensive printing and copying, etc. will be specified in advance. When I take your case, it will always be on a flat fee basis and this will be as agreed to in advance and confirmed in writing. I do NOT bill by the hour. In addition, if you are an active duty Soldier, it will be possible to set up an arrangement for you to pay the fee over a period of several months. This will save you money by avoiding interest charges and other fees associated with charging the fee to a credit card. I believe that the chances of success are greatly increased when clients are actively involved in assisting with their own cases.
If you have a question you can always contact me by telephone or e-mail and you will not run up a bill every time you have a question. Likewise, if I need additional information from you, I will get in touch with you whenever it becomes necessary and I will always provide you with copies of any documents or correspondence related to your case.




Contact Me



Attorney at Law

Suite # 6-217

5201 Kingston Pike
Knoxville, TN 37919

(865) 583-6564


Area of Practice



I am a military law attorney and my specific emphasis is on Army personnel law, especially in those areas which will have a significant impact on your military career.


I represent Soldiers who are currently facing adverse actions which can have the potential to severely limit or even end their Army careers.


These include the following: 


Advising Soldiers who are facing AR 15-6 investigations and preparing rebuttals of unfavorable investigative findings.


OER and NCOER Referrals and Appeals


Representing Soldiers who are facing administrative separation actions, for all components of the Army; Active, National Guard, and Reserve, both Officer (Show Cause  proceedings and Boards of Inquiry) and Enlisted (Administrative Separation Boards)


Article 15 Hearings and Appeals


Bars to reenlistment


GOMOR rebuttals and filing decisions


Denial of promotions and Special Review Boards


Equal Opportunity (EO) Complaints


Inspector General (IG)Investigations


Grade Reduction Boards


Lautenberg Amendment Issues


Security  Clearance Suspensions, Revocations, and Appeals


Army Flight Evaluation Boards


Special Forces Tab Revocations


Line of Duty Investigations


Financial Liability Investigations


Medical Credentialing Actions


Qualitative Management Program

(QMP) cases


and other similar situations.


In addition, if you have previously had an adverse action it may be possible to get your career back on track by means of an appeal to one of the boards which comprise the

Army Review Boards Agency.


This can result in having the previous action moved to the restricted fiche of your military personnel file. In some cases it is possible to have adverse information entirely removed from your record.


The Army Review Boards Agency includes the following:


Department of the Army Suitability Evaluation Board 


Army Grade Determination Review Board


Army Discharge Review Board

(Upgrade of Unfavorable Discharge)


Army Board for the Correction of Military Records.








High-speed drawdown: Army ramps up force-outs


ARMY TIMES  October 21, 2013


The Army will use a full menu of involuntary separation programs, beginning immediately, to reach an end strength of 490,000 soldiers by the end of fiscal 2015, according to Army personnel chief Lt. Gen. Howard B. Bromberg.


The service had planned to reach 490,000 by the end of 2017, but the accelerated strategy is designed to help the service prepare for any additional manpower cuts generated by sequestration and other budgetary matters.


The new plan requires the Army to reduce the active force by nearly 42,000 soldiers by Sept. 30, 2015.


While the first years of the drawdown saw the separation of some 10,000 soldiers who had been backlogged in the disability evaluation system, and the involuntary separation of thousands more for misconduct and failure to comply with standards for fitness, weight control and grooming, the coming years increasingly will focus on balancing the grade and specialty content of a reconfigured force.


This means many soldiers who have good records, and who are fully qualified for continued service, will have to leave active duty because of the drawdown numbers game.


Since the Army began reducing end strength two years ago, 33,828 soldiers have come off the active-duty rolls. In total, the ongoing drawdown will reduce the active component by 75,000 soldiers.


Pentagon officials estimate 5,000 officers and 20,000 enlisted soldiers will be forced to leave active duty, through involuntary separation or early retirement, as a result of the force reduction.


“This does not mean we are going to have to do a bunch of things differently,” Bromberg said of the plan to accelerate the drawdown by two years. “We are on a pretty good glide path now, and the things we will have to do [to achieve 490,000 by 2015] are around the edges.


“I don’t have to put new programs in place, or greatly increase the numbers we are going after,” he added. “I am going to look at accessions first, because this could help us get at some of that [additional end strength reduction].”


The Army recruited 69,000 people for the active component in fiscal 2013. While the Army has not yet announced the recruiting mission for 2014, Bromberg said it likely will be smaller than 2013.


Steeper cuts forecast


Although 490,000 has been the objective manning goal since 2011, it now appears the drawdown could go much deeper, with cuts of up to 70,000 more soldiers targeted between 2018 and 2023.


Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno recently told the House Armed Services Committee that if the Army is to rebalance readiness and modernize, end strength should not drop below 420,000 in the active component, 315,000 in the Army National Guard and 185,000 in the Army Reserve.


Pentagon officials said if steeper cuts are ordered, the Army will use the same strategies and programs now in place to achieve additional reductions. Officials do not foresee the need to offer buyouts, which were key in the 1990s drawdown.


“These are different times now, and we have to really look at how we resize and reshape the Army to meet the operational requirements of the future,” Bromberg said. “We think the involuntary measures we have identified are a better way to shape for the future in terms of retaining soldiers in the right skills and abilities,” he said.


During the past two years, the Army introduced some drawdown management programs that involved retention screenings that focused on a soldier’s grade and specialty affiliation, such as the Qualitative Service Program for senior noncommissioned officers, and the Selective Early Retirement Board process for colonels and lieutenant colonels.


Those procedures have been retained and will be used in 2014 and beyond.


The QSP process, which involves retention screenings for Regular Army and Active Guard and Reserve soldiers, is designed to align military occupational specialties that are overstrength and have limited promotion opportunity.


In a change of policy that applies to the master sergeant boards that convene Oct. 22, and other boards that convene in the future, QSP panels will be provided access to officially documented derogatory information that is in the restricted folder of a soldier’s personnel file. Previously, these boards did not have access to such information.


While the Army has yet to announce the zones of consideration, it appears likely that SERBs and Enhanced SERBs will meet in 2014 and beyond, to align the Army’s inventory of field-grade officers, and possibly warrant officers, with projected requirements for the redesigned force.


RIFs for officers


For the first time since the 1970s, the Army will convene reduction-in-force boards for captains and majors in overstrength year groups. Bromberg said the Army is seeking approval for this initiative from the Pentagon “and we expect to convene Officer Selection Separation Boards for multiple year groups of captains and majors beginning in the spring of 2014.”


Pending Defense Department approval, Bromberg said the zone of consideration and other details for the officer boards will be available this fall.


The Army on Jan. 1 will launch a new leader development strategy that tightens the linkage between completion of NCO education courses and promotions. In support of that strategy, the Army leadership is considering a proposal that would deny continued service to staff sergeants and sergeants first class who fail to complete requirements for continued promotion eligibility.


Under this proposal, staff sergeants who fail to complete the Advanced Leaders Course and sergeants first class in the Senior Leaders Course after 48 months in grade as E-6s and E-7s would be subject to a retention screening under the Qualitative Management Program.





Senior NCOs face QMP screening


ARMY TIMES   August 12, 2013


By Jim Tice

Staff writer


The Qualitative Management Program again will be used in conjunction with senior noncommissioned officer promotion boards to screen out soldiers of the Regular Army and Active Guard and Reserve (Army Reserve) who do not measure up to service standards for personal behavior and performance of duties.


The QMP screenings will focus on sergeants first class, master sergeants, first sergeants, sergeants major and command sergeants major who are subject to denial of continued service because derogatory information has been placed in their official personnel file.


Under a policy change ordered last year by Army Secretary John McHugh, QMP is a stand-alone process, separate from the Qualitative Service Program, which is a force management tool prompted by the drawdown.


QSP requires certain NCOs in overstrength specialties to leave active duty involuntarily.


While QMP boards deal only with retirement-eligible soldiers, QSP affects staff sergeants and above in selected military occupational specialties, regardless of their time in service and retirement eligibility.


QMP and QSP reviews are conducted by senior NCO promotion boards after they have made their recommendations for promotion. The QMP reviews focus on sergeants first class and above when cases of indiscipline and poor performance are officially reported to Human Resources Command in one of the following documents:


■ General officer letter or memorandum of reprimand.


■ Conviction by courts-martial or Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.


■ A relief for cause NCO Evaluation Report (DA Form 2166-8).


■ A senior rater rating of 4 (fair) or 5 (poor) in the overall performance or potential blocks of the NCO Evaluation Report.


■ An annotation of “no” in Part IVa (Army Values) of an NCO Evaluation Report with an end date of April 30, 2011, and later.


■ An Academic Evaluation Report indicating failure of an NCO Education System course.


After soldiers are notified that they have been identified for a QMP screening, they have the option of submitting a request for voluntary retirement in lieu of being reviewed by a board. They also can submit a statement of mitigating or extenuating matters to the president of the board.


bottom of page