2. The applicant requests correction of his records to show that he was separated under the Voluntary Separation Incentive Program (VSIP) and that he receive all entitlements authorized under the Special Separation Benefit (SSB) option. 3. The applicant states that he originally applied for separation under the Voluntary Early Transition (VET) Program. However, before he was separated, the VSIP was announced and he was afforded the opportunity to apply for separation under the SSB option of the VSIP. Unfortunately, he was improperly advised to continue to separate under the VET program and that he would receive his new orders at the time of separation. However, on the day of his separation he was informed that his request for separation under the VSIP had not been completed and his orders had not been changed. Furthermore, he would have to separate under the VET with no entitlement to separation pay. He goes on to state that he would have gladly extended any additional time necessary to receive the SSB since he had already served over 10 years. In support of his application he submits a copy of his request to revoke his separation under the VET in order to apply for the SSB option and a copy of the message which announced his eligibility. 4. The applicant’s military records show that he enlisted on 29 October 1976 and served until he was honorably released from active duty on 22 October 1979 and transferred to the USAR. He again enlisted on 21 February 1984 and remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments. He was promoted to the pay grade of E-5 in military occupational specialty 12B on 1 June 1985. 5. On or about 8 October 1991, while stationed at Fort Carson, Colorado as a combat engineer, he applied for separation under the fiscal year (FY) 1992 VET program. His request was approved and orders were published on 10 December 1991 directing his separation on 16 January 1992 without entitlement to separation pay. 6. On 13 January 1992 the applicant simultaneously submitted a request to withdraw his separation under the VET program and a request to separate under the SSB option of the VSIP. There is no indication that his request was ever acted on. 7. On 16 January 1992 he was honorably discharged under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, and the VET program. He had served 10 years, 10 months, and 20 days of total active service and was separated without entitlement to separation pay. 8. In the processing of this case, a staff advisory opinion was obtained from the Total Army Personnel Command (PERSCOM). It opined that the applicant was eligible for separation under the VSIP and that favorable action should be taken in his case. 9. In order to comply with Congressional intent to drawdown the Army through voluntary separation, the Department announced the provisions of the FY 1992 VET program through electronic message on 1 October 1991. 10. In the interim, the Secretary of Defense was in the process of drafting guidance for the administration and payment of separation incentive pay for both officer and enlisted personnel in overstrength inventories to encourage them to leave active duty voluntarily. On 20 December 1991 the Department announced the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 1992, which established the VSIP and two separation incentive options. Both separation incentive options, the Voluntary Separation Incentive (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. 11. Those who chose the SSB received a lump sum payment equal to 15 percent of his/her annual basic pay multiplied by 12 and multiplied again 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 statutory obligation. 12. The 20 December 1991 message also set forth the specific criteria for VSIP eligibility and provided the authority for enlisted members who had been approved for separation under the FY 1992 VET program BUT had not yet separated to apply under the VSIP which was effective 1 January 1992. Commanders were instructed to “make every effort to contact soldiers in this category and notify them of this option before they are separated. However, if a soldier eligible for VSI/SSB is separated under existing programs prior to applying for voluntary release under the VSI/SSB incentive program, that separation is valid and that separation, once executed, may not be revoked or rescinded in order to allow the soldier to apply under the VSI/SSB program. Soldiers who do not wish to amend their original requests will be separated as scheduled. All others will be extended and offered VSI/SSB . . ..” CONCLUSIONS: 1. Although fully qualified and eligible to participate in the VSIP, the applicant was not properly afforded the opportunity to do so. Consequently, the applicant has suffered an injustice. 2. Through no fault of his own, the applicant has been denied a financial gain afforded to others in similar circumstances. 3. Inasmuch as the applicant previously submitted his request for separation under the SSB option of the VSIP, it would be equitable and just to correct his records as requested. 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 to show that the individual concerned was honorably released from active duty on 16 January 1992 under the provisions of Army Regulation 635-200, paragraph 16-8, and the VSIP with entitlement to SSB benefits. BOARD VOTE: GRANT AS STATED IN RECOMMENDATION GRANT FORMAL HEARING DENY APPLICATION CHAIRPERSON