Citation Nr: 18153310 Decision Date: 11/27/18 Archive Date: 11/27/18 DOCKET NO. 16-15 466A DATE: November 27, 2018 ORDER Clothing allowances for the year 2015 are granted. A clothing allowance based upon the nonservice-connected left-hand disability is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT The evidence is in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran consistently uses her VA-issued back brace and skin medication for her service-connected lumbosacral strain and dermatitis that collectively tend to wear or tear distinct types of article of clothing. Service connection for a left-hand disorder has not been established and the Veteran is ineligible for a clothing allowance based upon this disorder. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Resolving all reasonable doubts in the Veteran’s favor, the criteria for entitlement to clothing allowances for 2015 due to the Veteran’s use of a back brace and skin medication are met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.810(a) (2017). The criteria for entitlement to clothing allowances due to the Veteran’s nonservice-connected left-hand disability are not met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107 (2012); 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.810(a) (2017). REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran served on active duty from March to September 1983, in May 1987, and from November 1990 to May 1991. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from July and August 2015 decisions issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Prosthetics and Sensory Aids Service in North Little Rock, Arkansas. Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2015 A veteran who has a service-connected disability is entitled to an annual clothing allowance upon meeting certain eligibility requirements. One way is if the veteran, because of a service-connected disability or disabilities, wears or uses a qualifying prosthetic or orthopedic appliance which tends to wear or tear clothing. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1) (2017). A veteran is entitled to more than one clothing allowance when multiple types of garments are affected, such that an annual clothing allowance for each prosthetic or orthopedic appliance or medication used is warranted when each use satisfies the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1) outlined above; and such use affects a distinct type of article of clothing or outer garment. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(2) (2017). Further, a veteran is entitled to two annual clothing allowances if he or she uses more than one prosthetic or orthopedic appliance where each use satisfies the requirements of 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1) outlined above; and together tends to wear or tear a single type of article of clothing at an increased rate of damage to the clothing due to the second appliance. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(3) (2017). The Veteran contends that clothing allowances for the year 2015 is warranted for her use of a back brace and topical cream for her service-connected lumbar spine and skin disabilities. See August 2015 Notice of Disagreement. She maintains that her back brace “does tear and cause clothes to wear out sooner than they should as has always been the case” given “. . . a piece [of] hard mesh” in the brace. See id. As for her use of skin medication, she reports that “the cream . . . constantly stains [her] clothing causing permanent damage [because] there is a lot of oil in that steroid and when used frequently it causes grease-like stains to [her] clothing.” See id. She further contends that her use of topical cream “requires clothing to be washed after each use causing clothing to wear away a lot quicker if cream was not used” and specified that the cream “affects clothing on back, socks/hose.” See April 2016 Substantive Appeal (via VA Form 9). Evidence of record reflects that the Veteran has consistently received clothing allowances for the years from 2012 through 2018, except for the year 2015. See VETSNET Compensation and Pension Award Summary. Further, in her April 2016 substantive appeal (via VA Form 9), she has generally indicated that the nature of the use of her VA-issued back brace and topical cream remained unchanged from the various years (i.e. in the years 2012, 2013, 2014, 2016, 2017, and 2018) when she received clothing allowances for the same or similar appliance and skin medication. She has also suggested that her back brace, affecting the back, and skin medication, affecting “clothing on back, socks/hose,” wear or tear distinct types of clothing. The Board has carefully reviewed the evidence of record and finds that the evidence supports the award of annual clothing allowances for the year 2015 for the Veteran’s use of her back brace and skin medication. In this regard, the Veteran is competent to describe whether her orthopedic appliance and skin medication cause wear, stretching, or tearing of her clothing. See Buchanan v. Nicholson, 451 F.3d 1331, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2006). It appears from the record that VA has previously recognized that such use can collectively wear or tear clothing given that the Veteran received clothing allowances for the same or similar appliances for all years from 2012 through 2018 other than 2015. The Board finds that the evidence is at least in relative equipoise as to whether the Veteran’s use of her back brace and skin medication wears or tears distinct types of article of clothing. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(2). Resolving all reasonable doubts in the Veteran’s favor, the Board finds that the criteria for annual clothing allowances for 2015 due to her use of a back brace and skin medication are met. As for the Veteran’s use of a left-hand brace, she contends that such use is due to her service-connected lumbar spine disability. See July 2015 Application. Service connection has not been established for a left-hand disability. Even if, for the sake of argument, the Veteran’s use of a left-hand brace was related to a service-connected disability, the record fails to show that such use affected a distinct type of article of clothing distinguished from articles of clothing affected by her use of a back brace or skin medication to warrant an additional clothing allowance for the year 2015. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(2). The record also fails to show that the left-hand brace, together the Veteran’s back brace or skin medication, tends to wear or tear a single type of article of clothing at an increased rate of damage to warrant an additional clothing allowance under 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(3). The Veteran has not contended otherwise. An additional clothing allowance due to the Veteran’s use of a left-hand brace is not warranted. MARJORIE A. AUER Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD S. Kim, Associate Counsel