Citation Nr: 21006207
Decision Date: 02/03/21	Archive Date: 02/03/21

DOCKET NO. 16-58 826A
DATE: February 3, 2021

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for an esophageal condition is denied.

FINDING OF FACT

The preponderance of the evidence is against finding that an esophageal condition began during active service or is otherwise related to an in-service injury or disease.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for an esophageal condition have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107 (West 2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.303, 3.310 (2019).

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty from December 1989 to February 1994 and was awarded numerous medals, to include the Southwest Asia Service Medal with 3 Bronze Service Stars.

In April 2020, the Board remanded the issue below on appeal for further development, and the case has since been returned to the Board. The Board finds that the AOJ has substantially complied with the remand directives.  See Stegall v. West, 11 Vet. App. 268, 271 (1998).

Entitlement to service connection for GERD

The Veteran contends that her GERD is the result of her active service in SW Asia.

Service treatment records (STRs) are silent for any complaints, diagnosis, or treatment for an esophageal condition. 

In December 2015, the Veteran contended a VA Esophageal Conditions examination. The examiner diagnosed GERD and opined that it was less likely than not related to a specific exposure event experienced by the Veteran during service in Southwest Asia with a rationale that:

There is no current objective documented evidence that there are specific       exposure events experienced by the Veteran during service in Southwest Asia that cause GERD.

However, in a subsequent April 2020 Board remand, the Board noted that this examination was lacked an additional direct opinion. 

Thereafter, the Veteran attended a VA Esophageal Conditions examination in April 2020. The examiner diagnosed eosinophlilic esophagitis and opined:

Veteran was diagnosed with eosinophlilic esophagitis in 2014 which is over 20 years after service. Less likely it was incurred in service given the large span of time since separation and onset of symptoms. Eosinophlic esophagitis has a clear etiology and less likely due to gulf war exposures 20 years prior. 

The remaining evidence of record indicates complaints and treatment of esophageal conditions but no indication as to their etiology.

Based on the foregoing evidence of record, the Board finds that service connection is not warranted.

To that end, the only medical evidence of record is against the claim. Indeed, the December 2014 and April 2020 VA examiners collectively found that the esophageal condition was not due to her active service to include her SW Asia service. This opinion was based on a review of the Veteran’s entire claims folder, considered the Veteran’s lay statements, and provided clear conclusions with supporting rationale.  Therefore, the Board finds it highly probative. 

Based on the evidence cited above, the Board finds that the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim of service connection for an esophageal condition. As the preponderance of the evidence is against the claim, the benefit of the doubt rule does not apply. 38 C.F.R. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102.

 

 

L. M. BARNARD

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans’ Appeals

Attorney for the Board	R. A. Elliott II, Counsel

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.