Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 01748-08
Original file (01748-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS

2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100

 

BAN
Docket No: 01748-08
6 October 2008

 

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 30 September 2008. 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 the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy on 22 August 1990, and served without
disciplinary incident until 6 October 1992, when you received
nonjudicial punishment for failing a command urinalysis screening
test for illegal drug use, specifically, codeine. You contend
that you received Tylenol-3 (Tylenol with codeine) in September
1992 from a medical facility for flu-like symptoms which caused
you to have a positive drug result. However, your initial
command urinalysis testing was on 26 August 1992, and your
medical records indicate you received medical treatment for your
flu-like symptoms on 23 September 1992, approximately one month
after you received a positive urinalysis. Therefore, on 9
October 1992, you were notified of your pending administrative
separation due to illegal drug use with an other than honorable
discharge and an RE-4 reenlistment code. On 19 October 1992, the
separation authority approved the request and on 29 October 1992,
you were so discharged.

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your youth, post service conduct, and the passage of time.
Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not
sufficient to warrant changing your characterization because of
the seriousness of your misconduct. 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,

\y

W. DEAN PF
Executive DMie

~~

  
  
  

or

Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY1996 | 9610952C070209

    Original file (9610952C070209.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    That specimen when tested by urinalysis resulted in the positive indication of cocaine in her system. The commandant indicated that the applicant had claimed that the positive urinalysis was the result of her taking prescription medication. While the applicant’s chain of command chose not to punish her for her illegal drug use, that in itself does not invalidate the results of the positive urinalysis.

  • NAVY | DRB | 2015_Navy | ND1500289

    Original file (ND1500289.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The majority of board members at the NDRB view this as a validation of the presumption of regularity in the findings resulting from the Applicant’s sample as urinalysis specimens arriving at a Navy Drug Screening Laboratory (NDSL) are inspected for container damage or evidence of tampering, with particular attention to the condition of the box seals, which should be intact with the command’s Urinalysis Program Coordinator’s signature printed across the taped box seams. Summary: After a...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2003_Navy | ND03-00081

    Original file (ND03-00081.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the applicant, was considered:Copy of DD Form 214 PART II - SUMMARY OF SERVICE Prior Service (component, dates of service, type of discharge): Inactive: USNR (DEP) 891216 - 900228 COG Active: USN None Period of Service Under Review :Date of Enlistment: 900301 Date of Discharge: 941103 Length of Service (years, months, days):Active: 04 08 03 Inactive: None After a thorough review of the...

  • NAVY | DRB | 2001_Navy | ND01-00315

    Original file (ND01-00315.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    ND01-00315 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review, received 010122, requested that the characterization of service on the discharge be changed to general/under honorable conditions. I had no history of drug abuse; I had taken random urinalysis for over five years in the military, and never came up positive for any drugs or alcohol. 901023: Commanding Officer, 2d Medical Battalion recommended discharge under other than honorable conditions by reason of misconduct due to...

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007240

    Original file (20140007240.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    The unit conducted a urinalysis on 10 December 2011 and the applicant tested positive for cocaine. He does not do cocaine but he did use the coca tea. c. At the applicant's administrative separation board, a doctor from the drug testing lab states that for the level of cocaine in the applicant's specimen, he would have had to drink five cups of tea within four to five hours of the urinalysis, based on the rate at which it metabolizes.

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0501088

    Original file (MD0501088.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requests the Discharge Characterization of Service received at the time of discharge be changed to general (under honorable conditions) the Narrative Reason for Separation be changed to “Something Good (If possible).” The Applicant requests a documentary record discharge review. I Thank you for your time, & would want my RE code eligable to Join the Air Force.” Documentation In addition to the service record, the following additional documentation, submitted by the Applicant,...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 05353-06

    Original file (05353-06.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 10 September ±982 you enlisted in the Marine Corps at age 18 and served without incident for about...

  • USMC | DRB | 2005_Marine | MD0500232

    Original file (MD0500232.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The Applicant requested the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. Necessary corrective actions explained, sources of assistance provided, disciplinary and discharge warning issued.010829: NJP for violation of UCMJ, Article 92: Failure to obey an order or regulation.Awd red to PFC/E-2, forf of $650.00 per month for 1 month, and 30 days CCU. Recommendation was to return to duty without further counseling and submit separation package per...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2008 | 00572-08

    Original file (00572-08.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 September 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 | MD0600200

    Original file (MD0600200.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    MD06-00200 Applicant’s Request The application for discharge review was received on 20051107. When I was informed I tested positive, I told my 1 st Sgt at the time first Sergeant C_ that I believe the only thing it could have been was my medication. Which I had told them I was taking before I took the urinalysis test.