DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 

NAVY 

ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

CRS
Docket No: 6329-02
19 December 2002

This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, 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 11 December 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.
The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 14 February
2000.
The record reflects that on 27 April 2001 you received
nonjudicial punishment for use of ecstacy.
On 11 June 2001 the commanding officer recommended that you be
separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of
misconduct due to drug abuse.
recommendation, you elected to waive the right to present your
case to an administrative discharge board.
After review by the
discharge authority, the recommendation for separation was
approved and on 15 June 2001 you were discharged with an other
than honorable discharge.
The Board considered two advisory opinions furnished by the Navy
Environmental Health Center dated 15 March and 18 September 2002,
copies of which are attached.
that no service members were victimized by false positive
urinalyses for ecstacy.
urine sample tested positive for 

The opinions state, in effect,
Further, there is no doubt that your

When informed of the

Ecstacy.

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.
these factors were not sufficient to warrant reinstatement, given
your use of drugs.
two advisory opinions.
denied.
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

Enclosures

2

-XPARTMENT  OF THE NAVY
.r\VY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CENTER

620 JOHN PAUL JONES CIRCLE SUITE
23708-2103

PORTSMOUTH VA 

1100

Re.!-:

(a)  

Ha lti mo r-c  Sun  

ne\vs

 

a~-t~clc

 by A I-icl 

Sabar

 o f  14 

h4ar 02

lnformatlon described in 

Ireference  (a) is  provided. The

nev, ’ screening test for- the drug Ecstasy

clarification

 o f t he 
m s with a
infor m ation  is correct ho

1. A 
described proble
Program. Th is 
sailors as drug positive. In no uncertain ter
for the use of Ecstasy or 

 

m etha mphe ta m ine.

wever. leaves the i

m s,  were service 

% a\:~,

 

In  the 
mp ression thar the
m embers 

incon-ectl>,

nc ‘\\  
s 
;II-IIC]~
 
 
D I-us  
Testln_c
N a\;!:  
i‘alsel)
 reported 

 

ldentlfled
 
positi\,c

2 .  The Department of Defense (D
Progra m  is structured to ensure that a 
sa mp le before reported back to the co
tests are screening tests to separate negative sa
presu mp tive positive sa
an extensive che
(GUMS
question and is recognized in the forensic toxicology and legal
for the identification of drugs of abuse in urine drug testing progra

m ical extraction and analysis

mp les are then

).  The 

GUMS

futiher

 

 analysis provides a unique, identifying che

O D )  D rug Testing Progra

m  including the 

N ail\:  D rug Testing

m ini mum o
mm and as positive for an identified drug. 

f t hree separate tests. are conducted on a urine
The 

mp les fro m p resu mp tive positive sa

first and second

mp les.  A ll

 analyzed to confir
g  gas chro
usin
 

m  the presence of the drug through
spectro m etr)

m atography/

m ass 

m ical “fi ngerprint
ities  as the 

”  o f t he drug in
“gold standard

”

 

commun
m s.

mp any,  M icrogenics, have actively

  been involved to share

w as perfor m ed according to their reco
M icrogenics have cooperated to explore alternate screening test

mm ended specifications.

w ithout identifying co

mmon 

over-

3 .  The Navy and the screening reagent co
all  testing 
data and to ensure that 
Since January 02, the Navy and 
reagents 
the-counter cold 
laboratories 
amphe ta m ine-class screening kit that has been in use for the past five years 
Ecstasy but requires 

wh ich have an increased sensitivity for the drug Ecstasy 

mon ths. In the 

w ithin several 

m eanti m e, 

m edications. A solution is thought to be near and could be in the testing

mo re of the drug to be present in the urine to respond as a screened positive.

DOD  and the Navy continues to use the

wh ich does identify

4 .  The points of contact are
M anager at co

. +epu

mm ercial (757)
t y N avy Drug Testing Progra

933-0750,

bairdc @ nehc. m ed.navv. m iI.

_..
 address

- 
email
m M anager at co

M SC ,  USN ,  N avy Drug Testing Progra

m

mm ercial (757) 953-075

 

1,  

em ail  address

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH CENTER
620 JOHN PAUL JONES CIRCLE SUITE 1100

PORTSMOUTH VA 23708-2103

Suhj:

(‘OMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATION Ih

’  THE 

(‘.;\SI.Z 0

rid:

Encl:

(a) BCNR  

Irr 

AEGjdh

 Docket No.

 

0632902

 

01’  27 

ALIS 

02

) NDSL

I 
( 
(2) BCNR File
(3)

NEHC

Jacksonville

](I- 

5355 

Ser 

700:07/l

 140

01.

10

Sep

03

Itr  5350 

Ser CS-DUO0191 of 15 

Ma- 02

I. Upon receipt of reference (a), the Deputy, Navy Drug Testing Program Manager requested
that an administrative and technical review of the forensic test data and results for the
specimen with laboratory accession number (LAN) 50104062167 be conducted by a 
official at the Navy Drug Screening Laboratory, Jacksonville (NDSL JX) where  
sample was tested. A summary of that review is provided as enclosure (1).

-. A thorough review of enclosures (1) and (2) was conducted and the following comments
^)
are provided:

cei-tify~ns
the  member‘s

a. The urine specimen (SSN 592-48-9398) collected on 31 Mar 01, was received on

05  Apr 01 at NDSL JX and assigned LAN 50104062167. A portion of the specimen was
poured for the initial screening test and on 06 Apr 01, the specimen tested presumptive
positive by immunoassay (IA) for the amphetamine class of drugs. A second portion of the
specimen was poured for a second screening test and on 09 Apr 01, the specimen again tested
presumptive positive by IA for the amphetamine class of drugs.
specimen was poured for a gas chromatography/mass spectrometry  
the presence or absence of amphetamine, methamphetamine, or designer amphetamines
(MDA, 
the presence of MDMA (methylenedioxymethamphetamine). A fourth portion of the
specimen was poured for a 
specimen. The 
GC/MS
specimen at a concentration of 3,336  
h4DMA  and was, therefore, reported as positive for  
cutoff of 500 
submitting unit on 17 Apr 01. The four tests (2-IA and 2-GCNS) met all acceptance criteria
for quality control samples and identification of a positive specimen by  

 analysis on 13 Apr 01, determined that 

 This level is above the 

ng/mL  for 

 and 

h4DEA)

h4DMA,

ng/mL.

 in the specimen. The GCNS analysis on 10 Apr 01, identified

GC/MS

 confirmation test to determine the level of MDMA in the

A third portion of the

(GC/MS)

 test to determine

MAMA  was present in the
DOD  administrative

h4DMA  to the

DOD  standards.

r

.

Sulq:

ION IN  

Tf-1E CASE 0

 

 

 

 

t)i  

 test 

test

of‘ 

clari

provided

ncwsp;tpc~~

the  
the  month  

b.  Enclosure (3) is
\vhich is Included in  
Testing
the designer 
would allow 

 to 
 (2).  During 
new’  screening 
3 
 that 
(i.c.,
 MDA, MDMA, and MDEA).

~II~I~~III-~
 Program began using  
amphetamines
bettel- detection of these designer   drugs during the initial  
 

was better able to detect the designer amphetamines but it also detected
new
over-the-counter, amphetamine-like medications.   The Navy 
new  test could not be efficiently utilized for detection of designer 
many samples were being initially identified as presumptive positive for amphetamines.
GUMS?
When these presumptive positive samples were tested by  
amphetamine, methamphetamine, MDA, MDMA, and  
Program requires samples to be tested by a confirmatory method, such as 
releasing any positive result. A specimen is not reported positive on the basis of 
screening test alone. All positive urinalysis results were correctly reported.

IDEA.

labs quickly determined 

an~l~het~~n~incs

 they were negative 
 The Navy Drug Testing
GUMS.

foi-

 prior to
a positive

 

l‘rom  

 

article
 2002. the  
.,

Januarv,
\v;ts  reported to  

bc  

In 

ohx  words. 

scrccn~n~

Sun

 

.

the  
Bal~~rno~-c
N:i\  
v’ 
DI-11s
more  
~cnsitivc‘
tic\\  
the  
p~~o
ccss
 
.
many 
Icpl.
that
 because 

IO
 
ICY,~
~I‘lw
 

111~
 
I(,(,

c. A specimen will not test positive for MDMA  
dist.pills

 or ephedrine containing 

ephedr-ine
enlosure (2)) or any other legal, over-the-counter or prescription medication. A positive
report for MDMA will only result from the illegal use of the designer amphetamine. MDMA.
(also known as  “Ecstasy”).

 called

by GUMS  due to the ingestion of
in

“Yellow Jackets” (as referenced 

3. There is no doubt that the urine sample, which was tested at NDSL JX as LAN
5010462167, contained 
Date-Time Group 17 19242 
recommended as it pertains to the positive urinalysis result.

APROl.

MAMA  at the level reported by NDSL JX in the Naval message with

 Correction of the ex-service member ’s record is not

4.
07
eputy Navy 
have additional questions concerning this matter.

Navy Drug Testing Program Manager at (757) 

Drug’Testing

 Program Manager at (757) 953-075 1 if you

953-

--
,. 
tion

2