DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORD
S
2 NAVY ANNE
X
WASHINGTON DC 20370-510
0
TRG
Docket No: 4315-01
31 October 2001
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 30 October 2001.
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
Board.
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.
You enlisted in the Navy on 27 December 1988 at age 19.
October 1989 you received nonjudicial punishment for an
unauthorized absence of about seven days.
were counseled and warned concerning financial indebtedness and
writing bad checks.
six months limited duty following surgery on your knee.
About three months later, you were placed on
On 12
On 19 January 1990 you
You
received another nonjudicial punishment on 27 June 1990 for use
of marijuana and an unspecified period of unauthorized absence.
Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an
administrative discharge.
you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board.
authority approved the recommendation of your commanding officer
that you be discharged for misconduct with a discharge under
other than honorable conditions.
August 1990.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, knee injury
and desire for veterans benefits.
contention that the command switched your urine sample so that
The Board found that these factors and
you would test positive.
contentions were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of
your discharge given your use of drugs and other misconduct.
There is no evidence in the record, and you have submitted none,
to support your contention that the command tampered with your
urine sample.
discharge under other than honorable conditions is not always a
complete bar to veterans benefits in regards to a service
connected disability.
grant benefits is a matter solely within the discretion of the
The Board concluded that the
Department of Veterans Affairs.
discharge was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
The Board is aware that an administrative
However, the decision whether or not to
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request..
The names and
recons.ider its decision upon submission of new and material
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
You are entitled to have the
favorable action cannot be taken.
Board
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 | CY2002 | 03659-02
The record On 30 July 2001 you appealed the NJP based on an investigation into the chain of custody of the urine samples, and a negative analysis of a hair sample you submitted to a private laboratory after the NJP. The Board concurred With regard to your contentions pertaining to the chain of custody of the urine samples, sample, the Board concurred with the remarks in the commanding officer's endorsement of your NJP appeal to the effect there was no chain of custody problem with analysis...
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 | CY2010 | 05108-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 February 2011. 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. On 18 August 1988, administrative separation action was initiated by reason of misconduct for drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 00592-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 October 2005. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08042-08
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 June 2009. 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04378-01
considered your application on 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. The Board noted that at the time of your reenlistment, you had two years of prior active service and should have been well aware of the consequences of abusing drugs. The Board believed that you were fortunate that CNMPC directed a general discharge since most...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 00477 12
On 4 May 1990, you were UA for three days, with no disciplinary action taken. On 5 September and 1 October 1990, you were UA one day each, and no disciplinary action was taken against you. On 8 July 1991, you were UA again for one day and no disciplinary action was taken.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 10707-07
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. As service members do not have the right to reenlist at the expiration of their enlistments, you would not be entitled to reinstatement or reenlistment even if the Board were to determine that you had not used illegal drugs. Since you have not established that you should have been...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06772-01
Your allegations of error and injustice were A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, 6 February 2002. reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 1 April 1983 the discharge authority directed discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to a pattern of misconduct. that the foregoing factors and contentions were insufficient...
NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00950
The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. As the FSM has not submitted any documentation in support of his claim, we as the representative, ask that consideration be given to equitable relief, as this is a matter that involves a determination whether a discharge should be changed under the equity standards, to include any issue upon which the Applicant submits to the Board’s discretionary authority, under SECNAVIST...