Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 03492-03
Original file (03492-03.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD  FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX

WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

TR G

De&et No: 3492-03
29 October 2003

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 28 October 2003.
Your allegations of error and
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.
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 26 May 1981.
1981 you received nonjudicial punishment 
marijuana and paraphernalia in the barracks.
almost 18 months without incident.
On 24 June 1983, you received another NJP for disobedience and
two instances of drug use.
drug 
and 12 May 1983.
Based on the foregoing record, you were processed for an
administrative discharge.
In connection with this processing,
you elected to waive the right to have your case heard by an
administrative discharge board.
After review, the discharge
authority directed discharge under other than honorable
conditions and you were so discharged on 20 September 1983.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
potentially mitigating factors,
such as your youth and
contentions that you have never used marijuana and that the
urinalyses that resulted in your discharge were illegal.

It appears on the NJP record that the
use'was discovered by urinalyses which occurred on 29 March

On 14 December
(NJP) for possession of
You then served for

You

that the dates of the last two

Additionally, you did not contest the

also contend, in effect,
urinalyses should be 25 and 31 May 1983, and since those
urinalyses occurred only six days apart, they cannot be used to
show two separate instances of drug use.
The Board found that these factors and contentions were not
sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge.
The
,record, and you have
Board noted that there is no evidence in the 
submitted none, to indicate that the urinalyses were improperly
conducted or that the dates for the urinalyses entered on the NJP
record are in error.
discharge by requesting an administrative discharge board and the
discharge package was reviewed by a staff judge advocate and was
found to be sufficient in law and fact.
Finally, even if the
last two urinalyses showed only a single instance of drug use,
this still would have been your second drug related misconduct
during your enlistment.
was proper as issued and no change is warranted.
Accordingly, your application has been denied.
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.

The Board concluded that the discharge
The names and

Sincerely,



Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2012 | 01514 12

    Original file (01514 12.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. Shortly thereafter, on 30 April 1984, your commanding officer recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse as evidenced by three positive urinalyses, two NJPs for drug use, and civil conviction for DWI. Consequently, when applying...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 05807-08

    Original file (05807-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 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. Nevertheless, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge due to the seriousness of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 08363-08

    Original file (08363-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2002 | 00312-02

    Original file (00312-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 12 March 2002. Subsequently, you tested positive for marijuana on two random urinalyses of 22 June and 2 August 1983. 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 | CY2010 | 06430-10

    Original file (06430-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 13156-09

    Original file (13156-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 1 September 2010. 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 | CY2006 | 05227-06

    Original file (05227-06.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 19 May 1980 you reenlisted in the Navy at age 21 after a prior period of honorable service. On 26...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05595-01

    Original file (05595-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2013 | NR287 13

    Original file (NR287 13.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 October 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. Conseguently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 02523-07

    Original file (02523-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.You enlisted in the Navy on 12 June 1981 at age 19. On 1 October 1984 you received the BCD after...