Citation Nr: 21069246 Decision Date: 11/17/21 Archive Date: 11/17/21 DOCKET NO. 15-18 632 DATE: November 17, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to service connection for irritable bowel syndrome is granted. FINDING OF FACT Affording the Veteran the benefit of the doubt, his irritable bowel syndrome is etiologically related to his active duty service. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for entitlement to service connection for irritable bowel syndrome have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from July 1981 to July 1984. The Veteran requested a hearing and was scheduled for a virtual hearing on September 7, 2021. The Veteran did not appear at the scheduled September 7, 2021 hearing nor did he request for it to be rescheduled. As such, the Veteran's hearing request is considered withdrawn. See 38 C.F.R. § 20.704(e). Entitlement to service connection for irritable bowel syndrome The Veteran contends that his current irritable bowel syndrome is etiologically related to service. Service connection is warranted where the evidence of record establishes that a particular injury or disease resulting in disability was incurred in the line of duty in the active military service or, if pre-existing such service, was aggravated thereby. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 1131; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. In order to establish service connection for the claimed disorder, there must be (1) medical evidence of a current disability; (2) medical, or in certain circumstances, lay evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation of a disease or injury; and (3) medical evidence of a nexus between the claimed in-service disease or injury and the current disability. See Hickson v. West, 12 Vet. App. 247, 253 (1999). Certain chronic diseases may also be presumed to have been incurred during service if they become manifested to a compensable degree within one year of separation from active duty. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1101, 1112, 1113, 1137; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.307, 3.309; see also 67 Fed. Reg. 67792 -67793 (Nov. 7, 2002). Service connection can also be established on the basis of continuity of symptomatology. Continuity of symptomatology may be shown by demonstrating "(1) that a condition was 'noted' during service or any applicable presumption period; (2) evidence of post-service continuity of the same symptomatology; and (3) medical or, in certain circumstances, lay evidence of a nexus between the present disability and the post-service symptomatology." Barr v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 303, 307 (2007). However, the Federal Circuit held that the theory of continuity of symptomatology can be used only in cases involving those conditions explicitly recognized as chronic in 38 C.F.R. § 3.309(a), such as organic diseases of the nervous system to include tinnitus. Walker v. Shinseki, 708 F.3d 1331 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Except as otherwise provided by law, a claimant has the responsibility to present and support a claim for benefits under the laws administered by VA. VA shall consider all information and medical and lay evidence of record. Where there is an approximate balance of positive and negative evidence regarding any issue material to the determination of a matter, VA shall give the benefit of the doubt to the claimant. 38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53 (1990). At the outset, the Board notes that the Veteran has a current diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome and has been receiving treatment for the same. See March 2014 VA examination. The Veteran's service treatment records indicate that he complained of gastroenterological problems repeatedly throughout service. On October 2, 1981, the Veteran complained of stomach pains for two months and was assessed with gastritis. The Veteran was afforded a VA esophageal conditions examination in March 2014. The examiner diagnosed the Veteran with irritable bowel syndrome. The Veteran denied having any issues prior to military service but suffering from diarrhea and abdominal pain since that time. The examiner nevertheless opined that it was less likely than not that that the Veteran's condition was incurred in or caused by an in-service injury, event, or illness. The examiner's reasoning consisted primarily of finding that "it is reasonable to assume these chronic [in service] complaints are likely from gastroesophageal reflux disorder (GERD)." The Veteran has alleged that he suffers from a condition that is a continuation of the symptoms he endorsed while on active duty. As noted earlier, in service treatment records show repeated complaints of stomach problems during service. These problems were often labeled gastritis or gastroenteritis, with the Veteran informing providers that the symptoms he was seeking care for were longstanding. Post-treatment records show the Veteran has sought and received treatment for irritable bowel syndrome and digestive system issues since her separation from service. In this case the Board finds that service connection is warranted for irritable bowel syndrome. The Board attributes great probative value to the Veteran's statements regarding the onset of symptoms. The Board recognizes that the Veteran was not diagnosed with irritable bowel syndrome until after his separation from active duty. However, regulations provide that service connection may be granted for any disease diagnosed after discharge, when all the evidence, including that pertinent to service, establishes that the disability was incurred in service. 38 C.F.R. § 3.303 (d). The Board acknowledges that the VA examiner in March 2014 provided a negative nexus opinion. However, after conducting a holistic analysis of the case, and considering the totality of the evidence, the Board finds that the evidence is in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran's irritable bowel syndrome had its onset in service. Resolving reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, service connection for irritable bowel syndrome is granted. John J. Crowley Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board V. Woehlke The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.