Citation Nr: 21021716 Decision Date: 04/13/21 Archive Date: 04/13/21 DOCKET NO. 16-15 834A DATE: April 13, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to an annual clothing allowance for the year 2015 due to the use of Ammonium Lactate cream is denied. REMANDED Entitlement to an annual clothing allowance for the year 2017 is remanded. FINDING OF FACT The skin medication (Ammonium Lactate cream) prescribed for the Veteran’s service-connected skin disability is not reasonably shown to have caused irreparable damage to his outer garments during 2015. CONCLUSION OF LAW The criteria for a clothing allowance for the 2015 calendar year for Ammonium Lactate cream have not been met. 38 U.S.C. § 1162; 38 C.F.R. § 3.810. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDING AND CONCLUSION The Veteran had active duty service from July 1973 to July 1993. This matter comes before the Board of Veterans’ Appeals (Board) on appeal from a September 2015 letter of determination by a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center. In January 2021, the Veteran testified at a Board hearing before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge. A transcript of the hearing is of the record. At such time, the Veteran raised the issue of a clothing allowance due to the use of his wheelchair. However, the Board does not have documentation for such issue, and it will not be decided at this time. The Board notes that the Veterans Appeals Control and Locator System (VACOLS) indicates that a 2017 clothing allowance case has been merged with the 2015 clothing allowance case. However, all of the relevant documents for the 2017 clothing allowance claim have not been associated with the record, which will be discussed below. The Board notes that additional evidence has been associated with the record since the issuance of the March 2016 statement of the case; however, such evidence is unrelated to the Veteran’s clothing allowance claim. Consequently, there is no prejudice to the Veteran in the Board proceeding with the adjudication of his claims at this time. 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. One annual clothing allowance per year is payable in a lump sum, when the following eligibility criteria are satisfied: (1) A VA examination or examination report from a private physician as specified in 38 C.F.R. § 3.326 (c) discloses that the veteran wears or uses certain prosthetic or orthopedic appliances which tend to wear or tear clothing (including a wheelchair) because of such service-connected disability or disabilities and such service-connected disability is the loss or loss of use of a hand or foot compensable at a rate specified in 38 C.F.R. § 3.350 (a), (b), (c), (d), or (f); or (2) The Undersecretary for Health or a designee certifies that, because of such service-connected disability or disabilities, a prosthetic or orthopedic appliance is worn or used which tends to wear or tear the veteran’s clothing, or that because of the use of a physician-prescribed medication for a skin condition that is due to the service-connected disability or disabilities, irreparable damage is done to the Veteran’s outer garments. 38 U.S.C. § 1162; 38 C.F.R. § 3.810 (a). A veteran is entitled to an annual clothing allowance for each such prosthetic or orthopedic appliance (including, but not limited to, a wheelchair) or medication used by the veteran if each appliance or medication affects a distinct type of article of clothing or outer garment. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810 (a)(2). A veteran is entitled to two annual clothing allowances if a veteran uses more than one such prosthetic or orthopedic appliance, (including, but not limited to, a wheelchair), medication for more than one skin condition, or an appliance and a medication, and the appliance(s) or medication(s) together tend to wear or tear a single type of article of clothing or irreparably damage a type of outer garment at an increased rate of damage to the clothing or outer garment due to a second appliance or medication. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810 (a)(3). In determining whether a clothing allowance is warranted, the Board shall consider the benefit-of-the-doubt doctrine. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1991). 1. Entitlement to an annual clothing allowance for the year 2015 due to the use of Ammonium Lactate cream. The Veteran contends that the Ammonium Lactate cream caused irreparable damage to his clothing. In this case, the Board acknowledges that the September 2015 denial noted that the Veteran was approved for a clothing allowance for the use of a medication (Benzoyl Peroxide) on his upper body. However, he was denied for medications that were used on his upper/lower body. Such medications included Ammonium Lactate, Tretinoin Cream, Mupirocin Ointment, Hydrocortisone, Clindamycin, Ketoconazole Shampoo, and Clobetasol Propionate, but it was noted that Mupirocin Ointment was not in his file. The claim was denied because the prescribed medications for a service-connected skin condition did not cause irreparable damage to outer garments according to VA’s Central Office medication list. In his November 2015 Notice of Disagreement (NOD) and April 2016 Form 9, the Veteran only addressed the Ammonium Lactate, which he contends was on the list of approved medications that cause irreparable damage to clothing. He further reported he had clothing in his possession that had been damaged by this medication. However, in the March 2016 statement of the case, the VAMC’s Prosthetics Representative reviewed the Veteran’s claim and determined that the Ammonium Lactate was considered non-staining to clothing and did not cause irreparable damage to the Veteran’s outer garments, according to the VA Central Office medication list. Moreover, the clothing allowance section of the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) Handbook indicates that the VA Prosthetics and Pharmacy workgroup has created a list of skin medications, ointments, or lotions that it found may cause irreparable staining, discoloration, bleeding, and damage to clothing, which is not removable by laundering or dry cleaning; and skin medications that it found may not cause such damage. This document lists Ammonium Lactate as a medication that does not tend to cause such damage. The document also lists Tretinoin Cream, Hydrocortisone, Clindamycin, Ketoconazole Shampoo, and Clobetasol Propionate as medications that do not tend to cause irreparable damage to clothing. The Board finds that the above evidence outweighs the Veteran’s description of the damage caused to his clothing. In this regard, the Board acknowledges the Veteran’s argument that the medication causes irreparable damage to his clothing. However, the Veteran has not produced any supporting evidence, such as photographs or other such evidence showing irreparable damage was done to the Veteran’s outer garments due to his medications. As stated above, under 38 C.F.R. § 3.810 (a)(1), VA law provides that the Veteran can only qualify for entitlement to a clothing allowance if his medication is certified by the Under Secretary for Health or designee to cause irreparable damage to the Veteran’s outer garments. However, the Veteran’s particular medications are not certified to cause irreparable damage to the Veteran’s outer garments. In light of the above, the Board concludes the preponderance of the evidence is against the Veteran’s claim of entitlement to an annual VA clothing allowance for the year 2015 due to use of Ammonium Lactate cream. Thus, the benefit of the doubt rule does not apply for this issue. 38 U.S.C. § 5107 (b); see also Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990). The appeal is denied. REASONS FOR REMAND 2. Entitlement to an annual clothing allowance for the year 2017 is remanded. The Veteran contends that he is entitled to a clothing allowance for the year 2017. However, the record does not contain all of the relevant documents for the Veteran’s claim or a written statement indicating that any of these documents could not be located.  In this regard, the denial letter, notice of disagreement, statement of the case, and substantive appeal are not of record. Therefore, the Board finds that a remand is necessary in order to obtain and associate these documents with the Veteran’s claims file.  The matter is REMANDED for the following action: Obtain and associate with the claims file any relevant records, to include the denial letter, notice of disagreement, statement of the case, and substantive appeal for the Veteran’s 2017 clothing allowance claim. The AOJ should make a formal finding of unavailability if the records cannot be obtained. TANYA SMITH Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Brennae L. Brooks, Associate 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.