DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
B O A R D F O R C O R R E C T I O N O F N A V A L R E C O R D S
2 N A V Y A N N E X
W A S H I N G T O N D C 2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0
TRG
Docket No: 312-02
13 March 2002
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 12 March 2002. 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.
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 Marine Corps on 28 June 1982 at age 20
following a period of service in the Marine Corps Reserve. On 1
June 1983 you received nonjudicial punishment for use of
marijuana on or about 9 May 1983. Subsequently, you tested
positive for marijuana on two random urinalyses of 22 June and 2
August 1983.
Based on your record of drug abuse, you were processed for an
administrative discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug
abuse. In connection with that processing, you apparently waived
the right to have your case heard by an administrative discharge
board. Subsequently, the commanding officer recommended
discharge based on the two positive random urinalyses. After
review, the discharge authority directed discharge under other
than honorable conditions. You were so discharged on 21 October
1983.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth, and the
contention that you did not use marijuana after the first time
and the subsequent urinalyses were so close together that the
marijuana did not have time to leave your system. The Board
found that these factors and contentions were not sufficient to
warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your record of
drug abuse. The Board noted that the record shows that you
tested positive for marijuana on 9 May, 22 Jun and 3 August 1983.
This spacing of the urinalyses led the Board to conclude that
there were multiple incidents of drug abuse. The Board concluded
that the discharge was proper as issued and no change is
warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The 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 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
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05595-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2 0 0 2 . 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 | 06958-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 April 2 0 0 2 . 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 21 December 1983 your commanding officer recommended you be separated under okher than honorable conditions due to drug abuse.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2000 | 06134-00
A three-member panel for the Board for Correction of Navy Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 March 2001. * You were advanced to RM3 (E-4), extended your enlistment for an additional period of four months, and served without further incident until 15 March 1982, when you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for use of marijuana. Counsel also noted that the senior member of the ADB was not an 0-4 line officer.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07617-02
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 20 May 2003. 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 28 August 1983 the discharge authority then directed an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse, and on 30 August...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06979-00
in which his division officer, LT (G) upon returning ETCS (St.C) recalls an event on March 17, 1997 aboard USS SAIPAN from morning officers' call, informed him that the CSD division had been selected for urinalysis screening. that had the whatever division I am in. contention that CSF division was selected only because you were a However, every individual who testified member of that division.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 01732-02
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, and the record of the two previous reviews of your application by the Board. In addition, the Board considered an advisory opinion furnished by the Director, Naval Council of Personnel Boards dated 1 May 2002, a copy of which is attached. An SNMHAS record entry dated 12 August 1987 indicates...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 08758-01
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 8 ' ~ u n e 2002. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found 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...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 06329-02
Additionally, the Board concurred with the Accordingly, your application has been The names and votes of the members of the panel will be In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all such as your youth and immaturity potentially mitigating factors, and the contention that you should be reinstated since your positive urinalysis for ecstacy was flawed, based on a newspaper However, the Board concluded that article on Navy drug testing. The Department of Defense (D Progra...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08363-08
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 22 September, 5 October, and 10 October 1983, your urinalyses tested positive for marijuana. The Board noted that as a result of your prior periods of honorable service, you may be eligible for veterans' benefits.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06430-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 April 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...