DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
7018S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490
JRE
Docket No. 7709-12
202
12 December
oe ht
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
tates Code, section 1552.
Rh three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 5 December 2033 Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administr
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of
this Board. Documentary material considered by t
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 5 August 2002, aEter
obtaining a waiver of disqualifying pre-service drug abuse. The
waiver was apparently required because of your admission of
having used marijuana about 50 times prior to enlisting, and
a positive drug test on a urine specimen provided during your
accession physical examination. You were discharged under other
than honorable conditions on 22 December 2003 by reason of drug
abuse based on your use of marijuana. Your final conduct mark
average was 3.1, which is below the level which would have been
required for an honorable discharge had you not been discharged
by reason of misconduct.
The Board was not persuaded that there was any connection
between the effects of undiagnosed posttraumatic stress
disorder and your use of illegal drugs and your theft of the
property of three fellow Marines. The Board rejected your
characterization of those offenses as “minor infractions”. It
concluded that the nanogram level recorded in the report of a
urinalysis dated 28 August 2003 does not indicate that your use
of marijuana was “de minimus”. In this regard, it noted that
at some time after marijuana is used, x nanograms of THC
metabolites will be present in the user’s urine, and that that
amount will diminish over time until the nanogram level falls
below the cut-off level for a positive tetst result. Thus, the
amount of THC metabolites found in a urine specimen does not
indicate how much marijuana was used by the person being tested,
or when the use took place. The Board also concluded that you
failed to demonstrate that you were denied any substantial right
during the nonjudical punishment proceedings you underwent for
the offense of larceny, the summary court-martial for wrongful
use of marijuana, or the administrative separation processing
by reason of misconduct/drug abuse. The Board did not consider
your service apart from your drug abuse to be honorable, and
concluded it would not be in the interest of justice for it to
upgrade your discharge as a matter of clemency, notwithstanding
the favorable aspects of your naval record and the extenuating
and mitigating evidence you submitted in support of your
application.
In view of the foregoing, your application has been denied. The
names and votes of the panel members 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. Inthis 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,
Ls Sasa ig
Executive Dire
NAVY | BCNR | CY2005 | 07685-05
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 May 2006. (13) to investigate the possibility of a positive urine drug test as a result of daily ingestion of various amounts of these “new’ t preparations, with total daily doses of THC ranging from 0.09 to 0.6 mg (equivalent to 45-300 g of hulled hemp seeds containing 2 /Lg/g THC or 19—120 mL of hemp-seed oil at 5 mg/L THC) in the form of blends of hemp- seed...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 06158-01
g. A Navy pharmacologist submitted a report to the ADB in which she stated that both marijuana and hemp will produce the metabolite THC. The majority notes that the DAA.R reporting the accession urinalysis was apparently never acted upon by anyone and it was not considered in the discharge processing. The foregoing report of the Board is submitted for your review and action.
CG | BCMR | Alcohol and Drug Cases | 2002-093
of the Personnel Manual, his CO was recommending that he be administratively discharged from the Coast Guard. He argued that because the applicant acknowledged his rights, declined to make a statement, and signed the first endorsement on his CO’s recommendation for his discharge, the applicant was not denied any due process regarding his discharge. He contended that the “irregularity” with which the CO handled the charges against him likely resulted in his command applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 10826-02
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 CRS Docket No: 10826-02 11 September 2003 The Board also considered an advisory opinion on.a from the Navy Environmental Health Your allegations of error and application for correction of your provisions of title 10 of the United This is in reference to your naval record pursuant to the States Code section 1552. commanding officer's decision at NJP that you had used drugs was reasonable, given...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01329
The applicant’s squadron commander made the recommendation to the Air Wing commander. On 13 October 2000, her commander notified her of his intent to impose NJP and to discharge her from the NYANG for violating NY State law by wrongfully using THC, a controlled substance. Applicant’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant contends the cutoff level for determining a...
AF | BCMR | CY2006 | BC-2005-01329_2nd_Board
The applicant’s squadron commander made the recommendation to the Air Wing commander. On 13 October 2000, her commander notified her of his intent to impose NJP and to discharge her from the NYANG for violating NY State law by wrongfully using THC, a controlled substance. Counsel’s complete response is at Exhibit D. _________________________________________________________________ ADDITIONAL AIR FORCE EVALUATION: The AFBCMR Medical Consultant contends the cutoff level for determining a...
ARMY | BCMR | CY2001 | 2001053822C070420
The applicant requests correction of military records as stated in the application to the Board and as restated herein. APPLICANT REQUESTS: Through counsel, that her name be removed from the subject block of Criminal Investigation Division (CID) Report of Investigation (ROI) #0012-00-CID-142-50897-5L2, dated 29 February 2000. The CID titled the applicant based solely upon her testing positive for marijuana use during a random drug test; however, the legal standard under Article 112a,...
AFPC/JA states that THC marijuana has a half-life in urine samples. Therefore, they do not feel that the Legal Advisor's refusal to instruct the board on the discharge characterization options constitute reversible error, A complete copy of the Air Force evaluation is attached at Exhibit C. APPLICAN TIS RE VIEW OF AIR FORCE E VALUATIO8: The applicant reviewed the Air Force evaluation and indicated that he disagrees with their findings. While the applicant believes his rights to due process...
USMC | DRB | 2003_Marine | MD03-00810
The Applicant requests the characterization of service received at the time of discharge be changed to honorable. A_ D_ H_ (Applicant).” Per enclosure (7), PFC H_’s (Applicant) specimen tested positive for marijuana.
ARMY | BCMR | CY2014 | 20140007240
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.