Citation Nr: 21065915 Decision Date: 10/27/21 Archive Date: 10/27/21 DOCKET NO. 17-19 127 DATE: October 27, 2021 ORDER Entitlement for a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 based on the use of bilateral knee brace is granted. Entitlement for a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 based on the use of a back brace is granted. FINDING OF FACT Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Veteran's bilateral knee and back braces, prescribed for service-connected disabilities, tend to wear and tear the Veteran's clothing. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 based on the use of bilateral knee brace have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.810. 2. The criteria for a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 based on the use of back brace have been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107; 38 C.F.R. §§ 3.102, 3.810. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active duty in the Marine Corps from February 2007 to August 2007. The matter is before the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board) from an August 2016 letter of determination issued by the Central Arkansas Healthcare System in North Little Rock, Arkansas. This letter of determination approved a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 for right knee brace and denied a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 for left knee brace and back brace. The Veteran filed a timely Notice of Disagreement (NOD) in November 2016 and a February 2017 Statement of the Case (SOC) was issued. In the February 2017 SOC, VA reversed its approval of the clothing allowance for right knee brace, erroneously stating that it was not prescribed for a service-connected disability; and continued its denial of the clothing allowance for left knee brace and back brace. The Board notes that the Veteran is service-connected for a right knee disability. In December 2020, the Board remanded to reconstruct the record and upload all documentation related to the appeal to the claims file. Clothing Allowance The law provides for payment of an annual clothing allowance for each veteran who, because of a service-connected disability, wears or uses a prosthetic or orthopedic appliance (including a wheelchair) which VA determines tends to wear out or tear the clothing of the veteran or uses medication which a physician has prescribed for a skin condition which is due to a service-connected disability and VA determines causes irreparable damage to the veteran's outer garments. 38 U.S.C. § 1162. The provisions of 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a) authorize a clothing allowance if the Under Secretary for Health or a designee certifies that a veteran, because of a service-connected disability or disabilities, wears or uses one qualifying prosthetic or orthopedic appliance which tends to wear or tear clothing. See 38 C.F.R. § 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1)(ii)(A). More than one clothing allowance can be awarded if multiple types of garments are affected, or if a single type of clothing is subject to an increased rate of wear and tear due to more than one prosthetic or orthopedic appliance, medication for more than one skin condition, or an appliance and a medication. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(2)-(3). 1. Entitlement for a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 based on the use of bilateral knee brace 2. Entitlement for a clothing allowance for calendar year 2016 based on the use of a back brace Pertinently, the Veteran is service-connected for chronic lumbar sprain (back disability) and bilateral knee patellofemoral pain syndrome with chondromalacia patella (bilateral knee disabilities). The evidence of record confirms that the Veteran has been in receipt of a clothing allowance award for calendar years 2014 and 2015 for his back brace and bilateral knee brace. The evidence does not show any change of braces occurred to change this determination in calendar year 2016. In the July 2016 evaluation by the Prosthetics and Sensory Aids Service (PSAS), the evaluator noted that the knee braces were neoprene knee sleeves issued in January 2016 and the back brace was a LSO flexible corset issued in June 2013 and July 2016. The medical evidence confirms that the Veteran was issued bilateral knee sleeves in January 2016. However, in a July 2013 VA medical record, it is noted that the Veteran was previously wearing regular knee braces and was prescribed hinged knee braces as the normal braces did not provide sufficient support. As explained by the Veteran in his November 2016 NOD, the January 2016 issued knee sleeves were prescribed to cover his existing hinged braces (the metal hinged braces prescribed in July 2013) as the braces destroyed his furniture and his clothing with their metal hinges. Essentially, the January 2016 knee sleeves are not the prescribed items that the Veteran is seeking a clothing allowance for in this matter, rather, it is for the bilateral knee metal hinged braces that he had already received clothing allowance for in 2014 and 2015. Further, there is no medical evidence of record demonstrating that the Veteran's VA issued LSO flexible corset had changed after its initial issuance in June 2013, as stated by the July 2016 PSAS evaluator. The Veteran confirmed this important fact in his November 2016 NOD when he stated that the same back corset had been approved since 2013 and described it as one with a metal bracket encased throughout the seams of the brace with metal rings. Therefore, the evidence does not show any change of the bilateral knee brace or back brace used to qualify for a clothing allowance from prior years. Compellingly, there is no evidence to challenge his testimony on these points or to undermine findings that his bilateral knee braces and back brace caused wear and tear on his clothing in the year 2016. Resolving all reasonable doubt in the Veteran's favor, the Board finds that the criteria for annual clothing allowances for 2016 are met, and the appeal is accordingly granted. L. M. BARNARD Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans' Appeals Attorney for the Board J. Lee 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.