DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 967-01
12 July 2001
Dear
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10 of the United
States Code section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 10 July 2001.
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.
Your allegations of error and
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.
On that same day, you completed an "Illicit
On 30 June 2000 you enlisted in the Delayed Entry Program of the
Naval Reserve.
Behavior Screening Certificate"
use; were advised that drug abuse in the Navy would not be
tolerated; and acknowledged that you would be subjected to a
urinalysis within 72 hours of arrival at recruit training, and
would be discharged if the result was positive for drug use. On
that same date, you also denied prior drug use on the Record of
Military Processing-Armed Forces of the United States (DD Form
1966).
in which you denied prior drug
On 28 July 2001 you enlisted in the Navy for 4 years.
On that
same date, you certified that the information you provided on the
DD Form 1966 was still correct.
laboratory reported that the accession urinalysis showed that you
had used marijuana.
processed for an administrative separation.
be separated and requested retention in the Navy.
A recruit
evaluation done at that time rated you as poor in your use of
spare time, fair in six other categories and good in one
category.
The evaluation comments noted that you often
frequented
sickcall and you did not participate in division
Based on the positive urinalysis, you were
On 7 August 2000 a Navy drug
You did not wish to
Subsequently, your request for retention was denied.
evolutions.
On 22 September 2000 the separation authority directed an entry
level separation and you were so separated on that same day. At
that time you were not recommended for reenlistment and were
assigned an RE-4 reenlistment code.
In support of your application you have provided a letter of
appreciation concerning your outstanding performance while
serving at the Recruit Training Command from 29 July to 21
However, this letter may have been issued in
September 2000.
error since the recruit evaluation report indicates that your
performance was not outstanding and is signed by the Commanding
Officer, Recruit Training Command, the same individual who
directed your separation on 22 September 2000.
it was properly issued, the Board assumed that the commanding
officer was aware of both the favorable and unfavorable aspects
of your performance, and decided that your drug use warranted
separation.
advised that such abuse would not be tolerated and would result
in separation.
In this regard, the Board noted that you were
However, even if
Regulations require the assignment of an RE-4 reenlistment code
to individuals separated from recruit training by reason of
erroneous enlistment due to drug abuse.
treated no differently than others separated for this reason, the
Board could not find an error or injustice in the assignment of
the RE-4 reenlistment code.
Since you have been
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
The names and
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously 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 official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
W. DEAN PFEIFFER
Executive Director
2
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05792-01
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. separated under similar circumstances, the Board could find no error or injustice in your assigned reenlistment code. 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 | CY2002 | 07324-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2001. 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. Consequently, when...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07425-00
1552 (1) Case Summary (2) Subject's naval record Pursuant to the provisions of reference (a), Petitioner, a 1. former enlisted member of the Navy filed enclosure (1) with this Board requesting that his record be corrected by changing the 4 reenlistment code assigned on 25 September 2000. was within days of completing recruit training when he was separated. "JFC", The record should then be corrected to show that "Erroneous entry (other)" and The RE-3E reenlistment code The Board further...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04114-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 November 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Given all the circumstances of your case, the Board concluded your discharge and reenlistment code were proper as issued and no change is warranted. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00069-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 26 June 2001. Regulations allow for the assignment of an RE-3J reenlistment code when an individual in an entry level status tests positive for marijuana use, served less than 30 days in the DEP, confessed to the use of marijuana during the moment of truth, and was processed for separation by reason of fraudulent enlistment. Consequently, when applying for a...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06992-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 June 2001. 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2003-100
The applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard on April 27, 2001. The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard on April 10, 2001. On April 10, 2001, the applicant also signed a page 7 advising him that drug use was against Coast Guard policy, that upon reporting to recruit training he would be tested by urinalysis for drug use, and that if his urine tested positive for drugs he would probably be discharged from the Coast Guard with a general discharge.
CG | BCMR | OER and or Failure of Selection | 2003-100
The applicant was discharged from the Coast Guard on April 27, 2001. The applicant enlisted in the Coast Guard on April 10, 2001. On April 10, 2001, the applicant also signed a page 7 advising him that drug use was against Coast Guard policy, that upon reporting to recruit training he would be tested by urinalysis for drug use, and that if his urine tested positive for drugs he would probably be discharged from the Coast Guard with a general discharge.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 00571-00
refrigerator first, the other individual who was unable to provide a full sample placed the bottle in the refrigerator after him. stated that you had not used LSD. map" for the commanding officer's use in deciding However, the February 1992 issuance of Navy When it was issued with OPNAVINST The Board concluded that since the CO did not have (NA.VADMIN) "road the appendix was clearly designed to The Board believed that the urinalysis was conducted in accordance with regulations and was...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07008-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. on the urinalysis you were processed for an administrative separation by reason of erroneous enlistment due to drug abuse. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...