Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 06304-05
Original file (06304-05.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
                                             2 NAVY ANNEX
 WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100



         CRS
 Docket No: 6304-05
 14 September 2006






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 16 August 2006. 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 reenlisted in the Na~ on 1 May 1984 after more than three years of prior active service. The record reflects that you received two nonjudicial punishments. The offenses included use of cocaine on two occasions, both of which were discovered due to positive urinalyses. One was a random urinalysis and the other was a unit sweep urinalysis.
On 4 August 1986 your commanding officer (CO) recommended that you be separated with an other than honorable discharge by reason of misconduct due to commission of a serious offense. The CO also stated that his recommendation was based on a positive urinalysis. When informed of the 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 but discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to drug abuse was directed. You were 50 discharged on 29 August
1986.
In its review of your application the Board carefully weighed all
 potentially mitigating factors, such as your contention that your positive urinalysis violated your constitutional rights. However, the Board concluded that these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge, given your two nonjudicial punishments and repetitive drug use. In this regard, it is well founded in law that random and unit sweep urinalyses do not violate constitutional rights, and may be used in disciplinary and administrative proceedings. 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 Dire ctor

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06979-00

    Original file (06979-00.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    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 | CY2006 | 09560-06

    Original file (09560-06.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 2 October 1984 you enlisted in the Navy at age 20. You subsequently attended a substance abuse...

  • 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 | CY2001 | 06881-01

    Original file (06881-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 3 April 2002. The recommendations of the medical board were to attempt to control the cluster headaches through medication and a six month period of limited duty. Additionally the Board considered the statements of your commanding officer concerning his investigation, your personal letter written concerning your positive urinalysis test and the fact that you were...

  • NAVY | DRB | 1999_Navy | ND99-00304

    Original file (ND99-00304.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND99-00304 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 981222, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. Chronological Listing of Significant Service Events :970111: Drug and Alcohol Abuse Report: Marijuana abuse, unit sweep, less than monthly ashore off duty. Chief of Naval Operations Instruction (OPNAVINST 5350.4B) of 13 Sep 99 entitled Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention and Control PART IV -...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 03673-07

    Original file (03673-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 7 February 2008. 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...

  • USMC | DRB | 2006_Marine | MD0600415

    Original file (MD0600415.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Before his nonjudicial punishment, Lance Corporal E_ was a Corporal with over three years of time in service. Whenever a Marine is involved in misconduct due to drug abuse, on the first offense, commanders shall process the member for administrative separation.

  • CG | BCMR | Discharge and Reenlistment Codes | 2011-249

    Original file (2011-249.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Navy classmate further stated that the applicant did not ask him to fabricate a story, that he did not see anyone put anything in their drinks while at the club, that the gentleman at the club bought two drinks for each of them and “was gay, acting like he was trying to pick someone up”; that the applicant did not act out of the ordinary after drinking at the club; and that he was unaware of the applicant taking any drugs. On May 2, 2006, the CO sent the Personnel Command a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2005_Navy | ND0501069

    Original file (ND0501069.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable or general (under honorable conditions). Petty Officer B_ (Applicant) went to NJP 23 July 1994 and was recommended for Administrative Separation for drug abuse. 950214: Applicant appealed nonjudicial punishment imposed on 950207.950412: An Administrative Discharge Board, based upon a preponderance of the evidence and by unanimous vote, found that the Applicant had...

  • CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2004-183

    Original file (2004-183.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    of the current Personnel Manual permits the administrative inspection of any unit, regular or Reserve, by mandatory urinalysis “to determine and maintain the unit’s security, military fitness, and good order and discipline.” Under Article 20.C.3.e., a positive urinalysis test result is sufficient to prove a drug incident. The applicant received his general discharge in 1985. Moreover, as the JAG stated, the applicant’s reliance on Article 31 of the UCMJ and the decision in Giles...