Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 02520-01
Original file (02520-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF  THE  NAVY 

B O A R D   F O R   C O R R E C T I O N   O F   N A V A L   R E C O R D S  

2  N A V Y   A N N E X  

W A S H I N G T O N   D C   2 0 3 7 0 - 5 1 0 0  

JRE 
Docket  No:  2520-01 
22  April  2002 

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  11 April  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  noted  that on  10 October 2000, Department of  Veterans  Affairs (VA) 
rating officials determined that you  had  a hearing  loss which  was  partially  the result of 
acoustic trauma.  Those officials also concluded that you  had  been  exposed to acoustic 
trauma while serving in  the Navy,  based  on  your  receipt  of  the Combat Action  Ribbon and 
Vietnam  Service Medal  "which is indicative of  combat exposure".  The Board  concluded that 
those determinations were insufficient to warrant amending your  naval  record  to  show that 
you  were injured during combat.  Although  it is possible that your  tinnitus and  hearing loss 
may  be  related  to  noise exposure during your period  of  naval  service, which ended in  1974, 
there is no evidence of  any specific instance of  acoustic trauma which  required  medical 
evaluation or treatment.  In  addition, the Board  noted  that you  were found to have normal 
hearing acuity when  you  underwent your pre-separation physical examination. 

In  view  of  the foregoing, 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 Director 



Similar Decisions

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2012 | 20120010150

    Original file (20120010150.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Records showed the applicant had a back disability which pre-existed his service. However, the VA examiner stated he did not receive treatment from the VA for this claimed condition. Service-connection for VA purposes means the VA has determined that the disability was incurred or aggravated during military service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03842-01

    Original file (03842-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    There is no documentation of symptoms of depression, alcohol abuse, or any other psychiatric disorder. It is unlikely that symptoms of a post-traumatic stress disorder or major depressive disorder would have "caused or significantly contributed to the misconduct of record." In summary, it does not appear that this individual's diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder and depressive disorder were symptomatic during his period of service.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2004 | 08531-04

    Original file (08531-04.doc) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JRE Docket No. A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 6 October 2005. Consequently, when a plying for a correction of an official naval record, the bu den is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probabl material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07224-02

    Original file (07224-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 16 April 2003. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. 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 | CY2007 | 04871-07

    Original file (04871-07.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVYBOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS2 NAVY ANNEX WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100 JREDocket No. 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...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 03812-01

    Original file (03812-01.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. 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. In this regard, the Board noted that you were the subject of five disciplinary actions and two civil convictions within a period of less than three years.

  • ARMY | BCMR | CY2013 | 20130004139

    Original file (20130004139.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    Application for correction of military records (with supporting documents provided, if any). The applicant provides: a. copies of his CRSC request and three denial letters from HRC, b. medical documents reflecting the status of his hearing, and c. page 3 of a medical examination for his retirement showing he had a mild hearing loss and should protect his hearing. Without evidence to establish a direct, causal relationship of the applicant's VA-rated disabilities to war or the simulation of...

  • AF | BCMR | CY2014 | BC 2014 00980

    Original file (BC 2014 00980.txt) Auto-classification: Denied

    When determining if a person qualifies for CRSC due to tinnitus, the board looks for: 1) documentation confirming instances of direct exposure to a combat-related acoustic trauma, and, 2) confirmation the condition manifested while in service. Hearing Loss and Tinnitus Disability Benefits Questionnaire, dated 13 Dec 12, indicates a diagnosis of hearing loss; there is only a reference to the applicant’s “report” that he “noticed tinnitus just prior to retirement.” However, this document is...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02998-01

    Original file (02998-01.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. considered your application on 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. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 04455-01

    Original file (04455-01.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 February 2002. Those findings were not considered probative of the existence of error or injustice in your record, because obstructive sleep apnea, even when requiring the use of a CPAP device, is not unfitting per se. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...