2. The applicant requests correction of his military records to show that he separated from the service with entitlement to the voluntary separation incentive (VSI) option of the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP) instead of the special separation benefit (SSB) option he received. 3. The applicant states that he applied for voluntary separation under the VSIP and was approved for separation with entitlements under the VSI option. However, at the time of separation, he received payment under the SSB option. 4. The applicant’s military records show that the applicant, while serving in the pay grade of E-5 at Fort Stewart, Georgia, applied for voluntary separation under the VSI option of the VSIP on 16 January 1992. 5. The applicant’s records show that he was counseled regarding the VSI entitlements, methods of payment, and the requirement to be affiliated with the Ready Reserve in order to receive VSI payments. His request for the VSI was approved on 24 January 1992. However, when his orders were published on 14 April 1992, they authorized him to separate under the SSB option of the VSIP. There is no indication in his records to show that he requested a change of the VSIP option or that he was ever counseled on the SSB option. 6. On 4 May 1992 he was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8 and the Fiscal Year 1992 Enlisted Voluntary Early Transition Program. He had served 13 years, 5 months, and 22 days of total active service and received a one time lump-sum SSB payment of $36,465.90. 7. The applicant enlisted in the Washington State Army National Guard the day after his separation from active duty (5 May 1992) for a period of 3 years and was assigned to a unit in Tacoma, Washington. 8. In the processing of this case, an advisory opinion was obtained from the Retirements and Separations Branch of the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM). It opined, in effect, that the applicant had requested separation under the VSI option of the VSIP, and that in the absence of evidence to show that he requested a change in his separation option, his records should be corrected to show that he was separated under the VSI option of the VSIP. The PERSCOM also indicated that a collection of the SSB payment would be made by the Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) prior to issuance of VSI payments. 9. To assist in the drawdown of the Army, the VSIP was established to provide incentives to soldiers to voluntarily separate from active duty and accept an appointment or enlistment in, or transfer to, the Ready Reserve or a reserve component. Both separation incentive options, the VSI and the SSB, were offered jointly. Service members who were approved for the VSIP had the option of receiving either the VSI or the SSB. 10. Those who chose the SSB received a lump sum payment equal to 15 percent of his/her annual basic pay multiplied by his/her number of years of active military service. In return, they had to agree to serve in the Ready Reserve for a period of not less than 3 years after completion of any remaining service obligation. (Note: If involuntary separation pay was received, an offset of the SSB payment had to be made.) 11. Those choosing the VSI were to receive an annual payment equal to 2.5 percent of his/her annual basic pay, multiplied by the number of years of active Federal service. The member had to agree to serve in the Ready Reserve for the entire period that he/she received annual payments. (NOTE: If involuntary separation pay was received, an offset had to be made against future payments until the amount received was recouped.) CONCLUSIONS: 1. The applicant applied for, was properly counseled, and was approved for separation under the VSI option of the VSIP. However, for reasons not explained in his military records, he was separated under the SSB option of the VSIP. 2. Inasmuch as his records indicate that all actions taken by the applicant clearly indicate he requested separation under the VSI, it is apparent that the applicant was improperly separated under the SSB option of the VSIP and denied a financial benefit that he was otherwise entitled to receive. 3. While the applicant has not explained why he accepted the separation under the SSB option at the time of his separation, the evidence of record supports his contention that his separation was in error. 4. Consequently, it would be equitable and just to correct his records to show that he separated under the VSI option, provided that he remains affiliated with the Ready Reserve and is otherwise qualified. Additionally, the applicant must acknowledge that he understands that VSI payments will not be made until the SSB payment has been recouped. 5. 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 to show that the individual concerned was honorably released from active duty on 4 May 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, and the VSIP with entitlement to VSI benefits, provided he remains affiliated with the Ready Reserve and acknowledges that he understands that recoupment of SSB payments will be made before VSI payments will be made. BOARD VOTE: GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION GRANT FORMAL HEARING DENY APPLICATION CHAIRPERSON