Citation Nr: 21022142 Decision Date: 04/14/21 Archive Date: 04/14/21 DOCKET NO. 17-10 669A DATE: April 14, 2021 ORDER Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a back brace is denied. Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a left knee brace is denied. Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a right knee brace is denied. FINDINGS OF FACT 1. The Veteran’s back brace was not shown to cause abnormal wear and tear to his clothing during 2016. 2. The left knee brace that the Veteran was issued at VA treatment is not for treatment of a service-connected disability. 3. The right knee brace that the Veteran was issued at VA treatment is not for treatment of a service-connected disability. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. The criteria for a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a back brace have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.810. 2. The criteria for a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a left knee brace have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.810. 3. The criteria for a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a right knee brace have not been met. 38 U.S.C. §§ 1162, 5107; 38 C.F.R. § 3.810. REASONS AND BASES FOR FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS The Veteran had active service from August 1976 to September 1979. The Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans Law Judge at a videoconference hearing in February 2021. A transcript is of record. 1. Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a back brace 2. Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a left knee brace 3. Entitlement to a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of a right knee brace The Veteran is seeking a clothing allowance for 2016 due to wearing braces for his back and bilateral knee disabilities that cause abnormal wear and tear on his clothing. A veteran who has a service-connected disability is entitled to an annual clothing allowance upon meeting certain eligibility requirements, including 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). A veteran who uses skin medication for a service-connected skin disability that causes irreparable damage to the Veteran’s clothing is eligible for a clothing allowance. 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1). 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). VA treatment and examination records show that the Veteran used back and bilateral knee braces in 2016, although the record does not show that he was prescribed a back brace through VA. Regarding the back brace, service connection is in effect for degenerative joint disease of the lumbar spine. In the August 2016 notice of disagreement and March 2017 substantive appeal (VA Form 9), the Veteran wrote of damage to his clothing due to knee braces and did not mention his back brace. The Veteran testified at the February 2021 hearing that the back brace was a full support brace that he wore every day. It was noted at the hearing that it was underneath the chest area, and he testified that it provides relief and allows him to function. The Veteran further testified that the back brace caused discoloration and stains of his clothing. When asked if this is from friction, the Veteran said that and direct sunlight. He also said that he used creams for his back and knees, which stained his clothing and caused it to smell bad. The creams are used around and under the back brace. The preponderance of the evidence does not show that during 2016 the Veteran’s back brace tended to cause abnormal wear and tear on this clothing. Notably, the record is devoid of any objective evidence that the back brace caused abnormal wear and tear to the Veteran’s clothing during 2016. Furthermore, the hearing testimony indicates that overall, the damage to the clothing related to the back disability is due to topical medication and not the back brace. Regarding the use of topical medication for the back, service connection is not in effect for a skin disability. Instead, the Veteran’s testimony and treatment records indicate that he used capsaicin 0.025 percent cream for pain relief. Since the Veteran does not use topical medication for a skin disability, a clothing allowance cannot be granted based on the use of topical medication even if it is used due to the service-connected back disability. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1). Because the evidence preponderates against the claim of a clothing allowance for 2016 based on the use of a back brace, the benefit of the doubt doctrine is inapplicable, and the claim must be denied. 38 U.S.C. § 5107(b); 38 C.F.R. § 3.102; Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49, 55-57 (1990). Regarding the left and right knee braces that the Veteran wore in 2016, service connection is not in effect for knee disabilities. November 2015 VA treatment records discuss bilateral knee pain for which the Veteran wore braces and had had injections and physical therapy. A problem list from January 2016 VA treatment includes osteoarthritis. The record does not show that the knee braces were for service-connected disabilities. Therefore, the claim for a clothing allowance for the year 2016 for the use of left and right knee braces must be denied. See 38 C.F.R. § 3.810(a)(1). S. B. MAYS Veterans Law Judge Board of Veterans’ Appeals Attorney for the Board Scott Shoreman, 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.