MEMORANDUM OF CONSIDERATION

	IN THE CASE OF:         

	BOARD DATE:            13 January 2000
	DOCKET NUMBER:   AR1999027396

	I certify that hereinafter is recorded the record of consideration of the Army Board for Correction of Military Records in the case of the above-named individual.

	Mr. Joseph A. Adriance		Analyst	

The following members, a quorum, were present:

	Mr. Ernest M. Willcher		Chairperson	
	Mr. Ernest W. Lutz, Jr.		Member	
	Ms. Margaret V. Thompson		Member	

	The Board, established pursuant to authority contained in 10 U.S.C. 1552, convened at the call of the Chairperson on the above date.  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 applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein.

	The Board considered the following evidence:

	Exhibit A -  Application for correction of military 
                             records
	Exhibit B -  Military Personnel Records (including
	                  advisory opinion, if any)

APPLICANT REQUESTS:  In effect, that he receive a special separation bonus (SSB) that he should have received when he was separated in March of 1991.

APPLICANT STATES:  In effect, that he believes that he was inappropriately denied the right to participate in the SSB program that started in 1991.  He claims that the SSB program was designed to assist career soldiers with the transition to the civilian sector and reduce the Army’s strength.  He claims that his being denied the opportunity to participate in the voluntary separation incentive program (VSIP) by receiving a SSB was an injustice to him that needs to be corrected.  He concludes by stating that he understands that if he receives the SSB he may be required to serve in the USAR and wishes to do so in his former rank of staff sergeant/E-6 (SSG).  

EVIDENCE OF RECORD:  The applicant's military records show:

On 10 July 1978, the applicant enlisted in the Regular Army and remained on active duty through continuous reenlistments until his discharge on 8 March 1991.  At the time of his discharge the applicant was serving as a SSG and was performing duties as a Military Policeman.

On 19 February 1991, the applicant requested separation for dependency hardship reasons.  He requested a hardship discharge, under the provisions of Paragraph 6-3b, Army Regulation 635-200, based on his status as a sole parent.

On 25 February 1991, the appropriate authority approved the applicant’s request for discharge and directed his separation for hardship reasons.  Accordingly, on 
8 March 1991 the applicant was discharged, after completing 12 years, 
7 months, and 29 days of active military service.  

On 1 October 1991, in order to comply with Congressional intent to draw down the Army through voluntary separation, the Department of the Army announced the provisions of the Fiscal Year (FY) 1992 Enlisted Voluntary Early Transition Program, via electronic message.  

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 over strength inventories to encourage them to leave active duty voluntarily.  On 20 December 1991, the Department announced the provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of for FY92, which established the voluntary separation incentive program (VSIP) and two separation incentive options.  Both options, the variable separation incentive (VSI) and the SSB, were offered jointly.  Service members approved for the VSIP had the option of receiving either the VSI or the SSB.

The 20 December 1991 Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (DCSPER) message, which originally announced the VSIP to support the Army draw down, allowed soldiers to apply for a bonus if they had six or more years of service, as of 
5 December 1991; and if they were fully qualified for retention but were denied reenlistment under the new retention management provisions of Army Regulation 601-280.

This message also set forth the specific criteria for VSIP eligibility.  It provided the authority for enlisted members who had been approved for separation under the FY92 Early Transition Program, but had not yet separated, to apply under the VSIP, which became 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 were separated.  However, if a soldier eligible for VSI/SSB is separated prior to being notified or after being notified, but prior to applying for voluntary release under the VSI/SSB incentive program, that separation is valid and once executed may not be revoked or rescinded in order to allow the soldier to apply under the VSI/SSB program.  

In January 1992, the Army’s Personnel Command dispatched the provisions of the FY92 National Defense Authorization Act which stated, in pertinent part, that only members who met the basic eligibility criteria outlined above and whose career fields, pay grade, or year groups were identified as over strength were potentially eligible for the VSIP.

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

1.  The Board noted the applicant’s contention that he should have received a SSB in conjunction with his discharge.  However, after carefully examining the evidence of record and the independent evidence submitted by the applicant, the Board found no basis for granting this relief.  

2.  The evidence of record shows that the applicant was voluntarily discharged for hardship reasons on 8 March 1991 and that the VSIP was not implemented until 1 October 1991.  In addition, the provisions of the VSIP did not provide for the retroactive payment of a SSB to members who had already been separated. It is clear from the evidence of record that the applicant was discharged prior to the implementation of the VSIP; therefore, there is no basis for providing him benefits under the provisions of the VSIP, or more specifically a SSB.

3.  In order to justify correction of a military record the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board, or it must otherwise satisfactorily appear, that the record is in error or unjust.  The applicant has failed to submit evidence that would satisfy the aforementioned requirement.
4.  In view of the foregoing, there is 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

__mvt___  __ewl___  __ew____  DENY APPLICATION

Karl F. Schneider
Director, Army Review Boards Agency

INDEX

CASE ID	AR1999027396	
SUFFIX		
RECON		
DATE BOARDED	2000/01/13	
TYPE OF DISCHARGE	HD	
DATE OF DISCHARGE	1991/03/08	
DISCHARGE AUTHORITY	AR 635-200 C6	
DISCHARGE REASON	Hardship	
BOARD DECISION	DENY	
REVIEW AUTHORITY		
ISSUES         1.  283	128.0000	
2.		
3.		
4.		
5.		
6.