DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
ROAPD FOP CORRECTION OF NAVAI RECORDS
74 & COURTHOUSE ROAG. SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JET
Docket No. NRO757-14
10 Sep 14
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of 10 USC L552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 September. 2014. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted
of your application, together with all material submitted in
support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes,
regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the
advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/14U0971
of 21 Jul 14, a copy of which is attached.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was
insufficient to establish the existence of probable material
error or injustice. In making this determination, the Board
concurred with the comments contained in the advisory opinion.
In particular, the Board found that per your own statement you
voluntarily requested to separate from the Navy early rather
than serve in another rating. ‘Unable to continue in his chosen
career path and forced pay pack over one-half of his base pay
for the remainder of his Navy career, MM1 Pomaville voluntarily
separated from the Navy on 15 May 2013.”
Furthermore, the Board found that under MILPERSMAN 1910-120
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is one of the
conditions which do not amount to a disability per NAVADMIN
273/12, and which warrants recoupment of the unearned portions
of bonuses. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The
Docket No. NRO?757-14
names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished
upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such
that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have
the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and
Y -/ Jes -—= ae ne an oman e 1 1
waLlexial evidence or other matccr not Stevylouely considered by
the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that
a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an efficial
naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate ine
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. O'NEILL
Fxecutive Director
Enclosure: CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/14U0971 of 21 Jul 14
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 04512-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR5701 13
Jn your case, the Board agreed with the advisory opinions that, because you did not gain and maintain proficiency in the community and for the NEC that you received the bonus, in the Board’s view, recoupment of the unearned portion of the bonus was appropriate. After reviewing all the circumstances in your case, in the Board’s view, the decision to recoup the unearned portion of the bonus was just, and the half separation pay you received was properly awarded according the Separation...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 05852-12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 4 March 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/12U0862 dtd 2 Jul 12, a copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR8513 13
In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 97920 Ser N130D2/14U0900 of 9 Jul 14, a copy of which is attached. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. NR8513-13 n the applicant te demonstrate the naval record, the burden is o 1 error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 10044 12
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 August 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser Ni30D2/12U1287 dtd 11 Jul 13, a copy of which is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR6389 13
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/13U1135 Of MME, a copy of which is attached. Consequently, when applying fora correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR0796-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 September 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/13U0383 dtd 6 May 13, a copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR4764 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 December 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/13U0883 dta 11 Oct 13, a copy of which is attached.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR1293-13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 September 2013. In addition, the Board considered the ‘advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/13U0450 dtd 20 May 13, a copy of which is attached. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2013 | NR0727 13
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 December 2013. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. In addition, the Board considered the advisory opinion furnished by CNO Memo 7220 Ser N130D2/13U0885 dtd 11 Oct 13, a copy of which is attached.