Citation Nr: 18157263 Decision Date: 12/12/18 Archive Date: 12/12/18 DOCKET NO. 15-41 898 DATE: December 12, 2018 ORDER Service connection for stomach conditions, to include hiatal hernia (stomach disability) is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, his stomach disability is a result of an in-service injury. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for service connection for a stomach disability have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107 (West 2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303 (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1961 to April 1964. This appeal comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) from a May 2014 rating decision of the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (RO) in Portland, Oregon. In September 2018, the Veteran and his spouse, T.V., testified at a videoconference hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of this hearing is of record. Service Connection for a Stomach Disability Service connection may be granted for disability resulting from disease or injury incurred in or aggravated during service. 38 U.S.C. § 1110 (West 2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (2017). That determination requires a finding of current disability that is related to an injury or disease in service. Service connection may be granted for a disability diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability is due to disease or injury that was incurred or aggravated in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303(d) (2017). At a September 2018 videoconference hearing, the Veteran asserted that the onset of his stomach issues occurred at Camp Matthews in 1961, when he sustained a blow to his solar plexus. He explained that he was at rifle training during boot camp, and at the time, himself and another recruit, J.T., marked their sea bags improperly. According to the Veteran, this upset a drill instructor, M., who was “noted for being somewhat sadistic”, and M. hit the Veteran and J.T. “extremely hard in the solar plexus . . . [w]ith “an upward blow”, from which other “officers use to call [M.] 80 pounder.” The Veteran indicated that he did not go to sick call for medical attention, but rather, he used antacid and various remedies to nurse his stomach issues. He also stated that he was unaware of any kind of stomach or esophageal issues when he enlisted into the Marines, and that he never used antacids prior to sustaining a blow to his stomach. At the videoconference hearing, his wife, T.V. reported that after the Veteran returned home from service, she recalled having a big meal or picnics in which the Veteran endured stomach problems on a lot of occasions; and at times, the Veteran threw up. In an August 2018 statement, E.E.G., a fellow Veteran, who was at basic training with the Veteran, provided a very detailed account of what he summarily described as “brutal and inhumane treatment” of the Veteran and other recruits, by a staff sergeant, L.P.M. In pertinent part, E.E.G. explained that “there was constant mental and physical harassment and sadistic torture from day one in the receiving barracks at San Diego, [California]”, in which L.P.M. was in charge. He explained that L.P.M.’s “terrorist tactics included screaming, shouting, threatening and punching recruits . . . .” E.E.G. additionally indicated that at a rifle range at Camp Mathews, L.P.M. regularly slapped and punched him and others who were unable to qualify their M-14 rifle. As an example, he explained that if a recruit did not shoot at least 190, among other abuses, L.P.M. would call each non-qualifying recruit into the duty tent and proceed to deliver one or more of his “famous and proudly self-proclaimed ‘80 pounder’ punches to the recruit’s abdomen.” Notably, E.E.G. relayed a particular incident involving a tent commander, J.T. (the same recruit that the Veteran referred to at his hearing, as indicated above), in which L.P.M. determined that a recruit had not made up his bed, and that suddenly, “out of the clear blue” sky, L.P.M. pivoted 90 degrees to his side, and his fist struck J.T. in the abdomen with tremendous force, which could have killed him, if J.T. had not been in “superb physical condition.” E.E.G. further explained that he received and witnessed “innumerable physical or emotional assaults” from L.P.M., and that he “enjoyed inflicting pain upon others, especially in the form of ‘80 pounders’ to an unwitting recruit’s abdomen.” He further noted that L.P.M. was “cunning enough not to leave any marks on the recruits that would get him in trouble and never beat up a recruit if a superior was nearby.” Service treatment records do not show any complaints, treatment, or diagnoses for a stomach condition. However, post-service treatment records reflect that the Veteran has been diagnosed with stomach disability, including and not limited to, esophageal reflux disease and hiatal hernia. In a September 2018 medical opinion, the Veteran’s private physician, Dr. A.H., opined that it is more likely than not that the Veteran developed his hiatal hernia as a direct result of an injury he sustained at boot camp. As the rationale for this opinion, Dr. A.H. explained that prior to enlistment, the Veteran did not have acid reflux symptoms; he developed onset of typical symptoms of acid reflux immediately after an unexpected blow to the upper abdomen; and that subsequently, the Veteran developed complications of chronic acid reflux. Dr. A.H. additionally explained that he has been treating the Veteran for these complications. In this regard, the Board finds that the probative evidence of record is in relative equipoise. Despite lack of objective evidence of treatment, complaints and/or a condition related to the Veteran’s current stomach disability, the evidence of record, includes and is not limited to, competent credible lay evidence from the Veteran and his spouse. Furthermore, the Veteran’s lay statements about the onset and nature of his in-service stomach injury are corroborated by the competent, credible lay statements of fellow Veteran, E.E.C., who served on active duty with the Veteran. Corroborating details from lay statements, include and are not limited to, the year, location (Camp Matthews, San Diego, California), offender (L.P.M.), and degree of force in implementing blows to the abdomen of recruits, including the Veteran. Furthermore, there is no competent medical opinion of record that explicitly refutes the September 2018 medical opinion from Dr. A.H. Thus, resolving all reasonable doubt in favor of the Veteran, service connection for a stomach disability, to include hiatal hernia, is granted. See Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990); 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (West 2012); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102 (2017). MATTHEW TENNER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD V-N. Pratt, Associate Counsel