GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX DISEASE (GERD)

Summary

The Veteran, a Marine Corps Veteran who served from January 1966 to May 1969, appeals the denial of service connection for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). The Veteran contends that his GERD is exacerbated by anxiety and sleep disturbances related to his service-connected PTSD, noting that his GERD symptoms began around the same time as his PTSD symptoms, which he states began during service. The Board reviewed the evidence of record at the time of the September 2025 AOJ decision. The Board acknowledged the Veteran's theory of secondary service connection due to PTSD but focused on the primary claim of GERD onset during service. Applying the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine, the Board found that a simple temporal relationship between the GERD onset and service was sufficient for service connection, especially given the conceded GERD diagnosis and the application of the benefit-of-the-doubt standard. The Board found the evidence sufficient to trigger the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine concerning the in-service onset of the conceded GERD disability. Consequently, service connection for GERD was granted. The case was decided on March 9, 2026.

Rationale

Disability diagnosed in service; Temporal relationship to service; Benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine applied

Full Decision Text

Citation Nr: A26020699
Decision Date: 03/09/26	Archive Date: 03/09/26

DOCKET NO. 260107-627031
DATE: March 9, 2026

ORDER

Entitlement to service connection for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is granted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Veteran has a diagnosed GERD disability. 

The Veteran's symptoms of GERD began in service.

CONCLUSION OF LAW

The criteria for service connection for GERD have been met.  38 U.S.C. §§ 1110, 5107; 38 C.F.R. 3.102, 3.303.

REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSION

The Veteran served on active duty in the Marine Corps from January 1966 to May 1969. The Board recognizes his service to our country and the sacrifices it necessarily entailed.  

In the January 2026 VA Form 10182, Decision Review Request: Board Appeal (Notice of Disagreement), the Veteran elected the Direct Review docket.

Therefore, the Board may only consider the evidence of record at the time of the September 2025 agency of original jurisdiction (AOJ) decision on appeal. 38 C.F.R. § 20.301. Any evidence submitted after the AOJ decision on appeal cannot be considered by the Board. 38 C.F.R. §§ 20.300, 20.301, 20.801. 

However, because the Board is remanding the claim, any evidence the Board could not consider will be considered by the AOJ in the adjudication of those claims. 38 C.F.R. § 3.103(c)(2)(ii). 

Service connection for GERD.

The Veteran contends that his GERD is exacerbated by anxiety and sleep disturbances from his service-connected PTSD. The Board notes that the Veteran's PTSD is in fact service-connected, and that his GERD diagnosis was conceded in the decision on appeal in this case.

However, the Veteran's theory that his GERD is caused by PTSD is based on the fact his symptoms of GERD began at roughly the same time as his symptoms of PTSD. See Statement in Support of Claim, February 2025.  He also stated that his PTSD began during service. Id. 

A disability is service connected if it resulted from an in-service injury, disease, or event. See 38 U.S.C. § 1110; 38 C.F.R. § 3.303. If a disability's onset occurs during service, it is service connected based simply on the timing of the disability. 38 C.F.R. § 303(a); Flynn v. Brown, 6 Vet. App. 500, 503 (1994) (noting "a simple temporal relationship between the incurrence of the disability and the period of active duty" establishes service connection).  

When the evidence before the Board is insufficient to overcome all reasonable doubt as to whether a material fact is true, the Board applies a balancing test between the evidence for and against a finding in favor of the claimant. That test does not take place on a level playing field, however-rather, the benefit-of-doubt doctrine tilts the scales in favor of the claimant from the outset of the analysis.  38 U.S.C. § 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.102. 

The benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine is a "generous" standard of proof unique in American jurisprudence, deliberately created by Congress to recognize the nation's debt to those who served by giving veterans an extra evidentiary advantage when applying for benefits. Wise v. Shinseki, 26 Vet. App. 517, 531 (2014). See also, Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 53-54 (1990) (recognizing that in terms of stringency, among the standards of proof applicable to various tribunals, the VA's the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine lies at "the farthest end of the spectrum....").  

As a result, unless the totality of the evidence persuasively weighs against them, the claimant receives the benefit of the doubt, and the Board finds in their favor. Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F.3d 1361, 1364-1365 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776, 781-82 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc); Mattox v. McDonough, 56 F.4th 1369, 1378-1379 (2023).

The Board finds the evidence is sufficient to trigger
 doctrine lies at "the farthest end of the spectrum....").  

As a result, unless the totality of the evidence persuasively weighs against them, the claimant receives the benefit of the doubt, and the Board finds in their favor. Ortiz v. Principi, 274 F.3d 1361, 1364-1365 (Fed. Cir. 2001); Lynch v. McDonough, 21 F.4th 776, 781-82 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (en banc); Mattox v. McDonough, 56 F.4th 1369, 1378-1379 (2023).

The Board finds the evidence is sufficient to trigger the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine concerning in-service onset of the conceded GERD disability.  As such, service connection is warranted, and this appeal is granted. 

 

Timothy Cothrel

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	Rippel, Chloe M.

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.