Notice and Assistance Requirements and Technical Correction, 23353-23356 [E8-9454]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
This rule does not use technical
standards. Therefore, we did not
consider the use of voluntary consensus
standards.
Environment
We have analyzed this rule under
Commandant Instruction M16475.lD
which guides the Coast Guard in
complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and
have concluded that there are no factors
in this case that would limit the use of
a categorical exclusion under section
2.B.2 of the Instruction. Therefore, this
rule is categorically excluded, under
figure 2–1, paragraph 34(g) of the
Instruction from further environmental
documentation. This rule establishes a
security zone and as such is covered by
this paragraph. A final ‘‘Environmental
Analysis Check List’’ and a final
‘‘Categorical Exclusion Determination’’
are available in the docket where
indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
For the reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Coast Guard amends 33
CFR part 165 as follows:
I
38 CFR Part 3
PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION
AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS
1. The authority citation for part 165
continues to read as follows:
I
I 2. A new temporary § 165.T09–004 is
added as follows:
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
§ 165.T09–004 Security Zone; Cleveland
Harbor, Dock 32.
(a) Location. The following area is a
temporary security zone: all waters of
Cleveland Harbor, Cleveland, OH,
within a 200 yard radius originating
from the north east corner of dock 32.
(b) Effective period. This section is
effective from 12 noon until 5 p.m. on
May 22, 2008.
(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with
the general regulations in § 165.33 of
this part, entry into, transiting, or
anchoring within this security zone is
prohibited unless authorized by the
Captain of the Port Buffalo, or his onscene representative.
(2) The security zone described in
paragraph (a) of this section is closed to
all vessel traffic, except as may be
Jkt 214001
RIN 2900–AM17
Notice and Assistance Requirements
and Technical Correction
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 701; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 33 CFR
1.05–1, 6.04–1, 6.04–6, and 160.5; Pub. L.
107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department of
Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.
16:50 Apr 29, 2008
Dated: April 14, 2008.
S.J. Ferguson,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the
Port Buffalo.
[FR Doc. E8–9479 Filed 4–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–15–P
Harbors, Marine Safety, Navigation
(water), Reporting and record keeping
requirements, Waterways.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
permitted by the Captain of the Port
Buffalo or his on-scene representative.
(3) The on-scene representative of the
Captain of the Port is any Coast Guard
commissioned, warrant, or petty officer
who has been designated by the Captain
of the Port to act on his behalf. The onscene representative of the Captain of
the Port will be onboard either a Coast
Guard or Coast Guard Auxiliary vessel.
(4) Vessel operators desiring to enter
or operate within the security zone shall
contact the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative to obtain
permission to do so. The Captain of the
Port or his on-scene representative may
be contacted via VHF Channel 16.
Vessel operators given permission to
enter or operate in the security zone
shall comply with all directions given to
them by the Captain of the Port Buffalo
or his on-scene representative.
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) is amending its regulation
governing VA’s duty to provide a
claimant with notice of the information
and evidence necessary to substantiate a
claim and VA’s duty to assist a claimant
in obtaining the evidence necessary to
substantiate the claim. The purpose of
these changes is to clarify when VA has
no duty to notify a claimant of how to
substantiate a claim for benefits, to
make the regulation comply with
statutory changes, and to streamline the
development of claims. Additionally,
we are making a non-substantive,
technical correction to the statutory
references in a separate part 3
regulation.
DATES: Effective Date: This amendment
is effective May 30, 2008.
Applicability Date: The amendments
to 38 CFR 3.159 apply to applications
for benefits pending before VA on or
filed after the effective date of this rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Maya Ferrandino, Consultant,
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23353
Regulations Staff (211D), Compensation
and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration, Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (727) 319–5847.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
October 31, 2006, VA published in the
Federal Register (71 FR 63732) a
proposal to revise VA’s regulation
regarding VA assistance in developing
claims, 38 CFR 3.159. Interested persons
were invited to submit written
comments on or before January 2, 2007.
We received two comments from
members of the public.
Proposed Rule
38 CFR 3.159(b)(3)
Under 38 U.S.C. 5103(a), upon receipt
of a substantially complete application
for benefits, VA must ‘‘notify the
claimant and the claimant’s
representative, if any, of any
information, and any medical or lay
evidence, not previously provided to the
Secretary that is necessary to
substantiate the claim’’ (section 5103(a)
notice). VA implemented section
5103(a) in 38 CFR 3.159, which reflects
section 5103(a)’s requirement that VA
give the notice upon receipt of a
substantially complete application. See
38 CFR 3.159(b)(1). In addition, VA
defined ‘‘substantially complete
application’’ for purposes of section
5103(a) notice. See 38 CFR 3.159(a)(3).
Experience implementing section
5103(a) disclosed a potential ambiguity
in the regulations, which this
rulemaking removes. That ambiguity is
whether VA’s receipt of a notice of
disagreement (NOD) also triggers VA’s
duty to give section 5103(a) notice
because the NOD can be viewed as
satisfying the definition of
‘‘application’’ in 38 CFR 3.1(p). We
proposed to clarify that it does not.
An NOD is the means by which a
claimant initiates an appeal of a
decision on a claim to the Board of
Veterans’ Appeals (Board). 38 U.S.C.
7105(a); 38 CFR 20.200. ‘‘A written
communication from a claimant or his
or her representative expressing
dissatisfaction or disagreement with an
adjudicative determination by the
agency of original jurisdiction and a
desire to contest the result will
constitute [an NOD].’’ 38 CFR 20.201.
We stated that, because the definition
of ‘‘application’’ in § 3.1(p) is a holdover
from before the Veterans Claims
Assistance Act of 2000 (VCAA), Public
Law 106–475, 114 Stat. 2096, and was
not intended to govern when VA must
give section 5103(a) notice, VA does not
view it as dispositive of the question.
Furthermore, section 5103(a) does not
E:\FR\FM\30APR1.SGM
30APR1
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
23354
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
specify whether VA must issue section
5103(a) notice upon receipt of an NOD.
VA believes that Congress did not
intend to require section 5103(a) notice
upon VA’s receipt of an NOD, for the
following reasons: Congress intended
VA to give section 5103(a) notice at the
beginning of the claim process, but an
NOD is filed after VA has decided a
claim; Congress requires VA to issue a
statement of the case in response to an
NOD, so additional section 5103(a)
notice would be redundant; giving
section 5103(a) notice at the appeal
stage of the claim process results in
logical inconsistencies in the claim
process; and not requiring section
5103(a) notice upon VA’s receipt of an
NOD would be consistent with case law
governing such notice. Therefore, we
proposed to state in § 3.159(b)(3)(i) that
VA does not have a duty to provide
section 5103(a) notice upon receipt of
an NOD.
To avoid any confusion, however, we
note that VA may continue to have an
obligation to provide adequate section
5103(a) notice despite receipt of an
NOD, if compliant notice was not
previously provided and if the claim
was denied. In such instances, VA’s
duty to provide adequate section
5103(a) notice is still triggered upon
receipt of a substantially complete
application for benefits, not upon
receipt of an NOD. Courts have
specifically held that, although VA is
required to provide section 5103(a)
notice prior to the initial adjudication of
a claim, if VA does not provide timely
notice and a claim remains
unsubstantiated, this defect can be
cured by the subsequent provision of
section 5103(a) notice followed by
readjudication of the claim. See
Mayfield v. Nicholson, 444 F.3d 1328,
1333–34 (Fed. Cir. 2006); Paralyzed
Veterans of Am. v. Sec’y of Veterans
Affairs, 345 F.3d 1334, 1345–46 (Fed.
Cir. 2003); Overton v. Nicholson, 20 Vet.
App. 427, 437 (2006); Dingess v.
Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473, 491 (2006).
After further consideration, we have
revised § 3.159(b)(3)(i) to clarify that no
duty to provide section 5103(a) notice
arises upon VA’s receipt of an NOD.
Additionally, we proposed to state at
§ 3.159(b)(3)(ii) that the section 5103(a)
notice duty does not arise when the
claimant is not entitled to the claimed
benefit as a matter of law. In such
circumstances, there is no additional
information or evidence the claimant
could provide or VA could obtain that
could substantiate the claim. This
regulation would be consistent with the
intent of Congress expressed in 38
U.S.C. 5103A(a)(2), which provides that
‘‘[t]he Secretary is not required to
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Apr 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
provide assistance to a claimant under
this section if no reasonable possibility
exists that such assistance would aid in
substantiating the claim.’’ The
legislative history of sections 5103(a)
and 5103A(a) supports the conclusion
that, if the claim is barred as a matter
of law, VA’s duty to notify does not
apply because there is no relevant
information or evidence to obtain.
Proposed § 3.159(b)(3)(ii) provided
some examples of when a claimant
would not be entitled to the claimed
benefit as a matter of law, such as when
the claimant lacks qualifying service or
veteran status. However, because a
determination that a claimant is not
entitled to a benefit as a matter of law
often requires fact-specific analysis, VA
may be required to furnish section
5103(a) notice in the specific examples
provided in the proposed rule. See, e.g.,
Palor v. Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 202,
209 (2007) (concluding that VA’s
section 5103(a) notice should have
informed the veteran in that case of the
types of evidence he could have
submitted to establish veteran status
and qualifying service); Dingess v.
Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473, 485 (2006)
(concluding that section 5103(a) notice
should address evidence required to
establish veteran status when
appropriate). After further
consideration, we have decided not to
include specific examples in
§ 3.159(b)(3)(ii) because they may not
always determine whether section
5103(a) notice is required in a given
case.
38 CFR 3.159(b)(1)
We additionally proposed to amend
38 CFR 3.159(b)(1). First, we proposed
to remove the third sentence of current
§ 3.159(b)(1), which states that VA will
request the claimant to provide any
evidence in the claimant’s possession
that pertains to the claim. Section
3.159(b)(1) generally implements the
notice requirements of section 5103(a).
The three notice requirements in section
5103(a) are currently prescribed in
§ 3.159(b)(1) as follows: VA will notify
the claimant (1) of the information and
medical or lay evidence required to
substantiate the claim, (2) of which
information and evidence, if any, that
the claimant is to provide to VA, and (3)
of which information and evidence, if
any, VA will attempt to obtain on behalf
of the claimant. However, the third
sentence of current § 3.159(b)(1) is not
required by statute and is redundant of
the three statutory requirements from
the perspective of what the claimant
needs to submit to support the claim. As
such, it is unnecessary as part of the
regulation. A claimant who receives a
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
section 5103(a) notice containing the
three statutory elements will have
received the same information regarding
what the claimant needs to submit to
support the claim as the claimant would
have received had the claimant received
a letter containing the three statutory
elements and an additional request that
the claimant provide any evidence in
the claimant’s possession that pertains
to the claim.
To avoid the possibility of
misunderstandings regarding the nature
of this provision and to ensure
consistency between the manual and
regulatory provisions, we further
proposed to rescind the provision of
paragraph I.1.B.3.b of the Veterans
Benefits Administration Adjudication
Procedures Manual M21–1MR (VBA
Manual M21–1MR) that currently
requires regional offices (ROs) to send to
the claimant in response to a
substantially complete application a
letter that ‘‘asks the claimant to submit
any evidence in his/her possession that
pertains to the claim.’’
Second, for ease of use, we proposed
to add at the end of the first sentence
of current § 3.159(b)(1) the term
‘‘notice’’ in parentheses, to use as a term
of art within § 3.159(b)(1).
Third, we proposed to remove the
fourth sentence of current § 3.159(b)(1).
This sentence states: ‘‘If VA does not
receive the necessary information and
evidence requested from the claimant
within one year of the date of the notice,
VA cannot pay or provide any benefits
based on that application.’’ This
provision implemented language from
section 5103 that was repealed by the
Veterans Benefits Act of 2003, Public
Law 108–183, section 701(b), 117 Stat.
2670. To ensure consistency with
current law and the intent of Congress,
we proposed to replace this sentence
with the following: ‘‘The information
and evidence that the claimant is
informed that the claimant is to provide
must be provided within one year of the
date of the notice.’’
38 CFR 3.159(g)
We proposed to add to § 3.159 a new
paragraph (g), which states that the
authority recognized in subsection (g) of
38 U.S.C. 5103A is reserved to the sole
discretion of the Secretary and will be
implemented, when deemed
appropriate by the Secretary, through
the promulgation of regulations, in
accordance with VA’s intention to issue
regulations when the Secretary deems it
appropriate to provide any additional
assistance in substantiating a claim, as
contemplated in section 5103A(g). In
accordance with section 5103A(g), VA
promulgated the second sentence of
E:\FR\FM\30APR1.SGM
30APR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
§ 3.159(c), obligating itself to give the
assistance described in paragraphs
(c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of § 3.159,
relating to assistance with obtaining
records, to an individual attempting to
reopen a finally decided claim. See Duty
to Assist, 66 FR 45,620, 45,628 (Aug. 29,
2001). The main purpose of this new
provision is to avoid the potential
disparate treatment of similarly situated
claimants that could arise from
inconsistent use in various parts of the
agency of open-ended authority to
provide ‘‘extra’’ development assistance.
Also, this provision is consistent with
the Secretary’s determination, in the
prior rulemaking for § 3.159, of the
appropriate level of assistance to be
provided individuals based on VA’s
finite resources and the need to process
claims in an efficient manner for the
benefit of all veterans.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
38 CFR 3.159(c)(4)(i)
We proposed to add the following
sentence after the first sentence in
§ 3.159(c)(4)(i): ‘‘A medical examination
or medical opinion is not necessary to
show a link between a veteran’s current
disability or death and some disease or
symptoms during service when the
evidence of record already satisfies the
chronicity or continuity requirements in
§ 3.303(b).’’ After further consideration,
we have decided not to effectuate this
proposed revision for policy reasons.
We will reconsider this proposed
revision at a later date if necessary.
Response to Comments
One commenter stated that VA
information was withheld from him and
that he had not been offered assistance
by VA. He felt that VA was interested
in denying veterans benefits. He
additionally stated that he felt that any
claim for benefits should be considered
a claim for any benefits for any reason.
This commenter’s comments concern
the development of the commenter’s
specific claim and are irrelevant to the
amendments contained in the proposed
rule. Therefore, we make no changes to
this final rule based on these comments.
The other commenter stated that he
did not like the proposed amendment to
§ 3.159(b)(1) to add the following
sentence: ‘‘The information and
evidence that the claimant is informed
that the claimant is to provide must be
provided within one year of the date of
the notice.’’ The commenter stated that
it could take more than one year to
obtain some information and evidence.
To ensure consistency with 38 U.S.C.
5103(b)(1) and the intent of Congress,
we proposed to remove the fourth
sentence of current § 3.159(b)(1) and
replace it with the following sentence:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Apr 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
‘‘The information and evidence that the
claimant is informed that the claimant
is to provide must be provided within
one year of the date of the notice.’’ The
statute requires that, ‘‘[i]n the case of
information or evidence that the
claimant is notified under subsection (a)
is to be provided by the claimant, such
information or evidence must be
received by the Secretary within one
year from the date such notice is sent.’’
38 U.S.C. 5103(b)(1). Because we are
implementing a statutory requirement
with this amendment, we make no
changes based on this comment.
Further, VA will make reasonable
efforts to assist claimants. It is VA’s
intent that adequate information
regarding evidence to support the claim
should be received from the claimant
within the one-year time period, not
that all evidence, including examination
reports, must be obtained by VA within
the one-year period. Therefore, we make
no changes based on this comment.
Additional Change
In the proposed rulemaking, we
proposed to amend the fifth sentence of
current § 3.159(b)(1), which states that
VA may decide the claim if the claimant
has not responded to the section 5103(a)
notice within 30 days. We proposed to
provide 45 days as a more reasonable
period after which VA may decide a
claim if no response to the section
5103(a) notice has been received. Based
on administrative concerns and matters
of consistency, we have reconsidered
this proposal and decided to maintain
the current 30-day period after which
VA may decide a claim if a claimant has
not responded to the section 5103(a)
notice. By statute, VA may make a
decision on a claim before the
expiration of the one-year period, 38
U.S.C. 5103(b), and this 30-day period
merely sets forth a time frame for VA to
wait for a response from the claimant
before deciding the claim. The claimant
will continue to have one year from the
date of the section 5103(a) notice to
provide the information and evidence
requested. Furthermore, if VA decides
the claim after 30 days and
subsequently receives the information
or evidence requested from the claimant
within one year of VA giving the notice,
VA must readjudicate the claim.
We additionally proposed to rescind
the provision of paragraph I.1.B.3.c of
the VBA Manual M21–1MR that
currently advises ROs to ‘‘inform the
claimant that if he/she does not respond
to the request for information within 60
days, VA may decide the claim based on
all the information and evidence in the
file.’’ We did not receive any comments
on this manual rescission. To ensure
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23355
consistency between the manual and
current regulatory provisions, we will
rescind that manual provision and
replace it with a new provision that will
provide for a 30-day period, as set forth
in the regulation.
VA appreciates the comments
submitted in response to the proposed
rule. Based on the rationale stated in the
proposed rule and in this document, the
proposed rule is adopted with the
changes noted.
Technical Correction
Section 5(a) of Public Law 102–83, the
Department of Veterans Affairs
Codification Act, redesignated 38 U.S.C.
410, 416, and 417 as 38 U.S.C. 1310,
1316, and 1317, respectively. We are
updating the parenthetical following the
last sentence in 38 CFR 3.5(b)(3) to
reflect current statutory designations.
We are making no substantive changes
to the regulation.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This document contains no provisions
constituting a new collection of
information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3521).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this regulatory amendment will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities as
they are defined in the Regulatory
Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601–612. Only
VA beneficiaries could be directly
affected. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b), this final rule is exempt from the
initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of sections 603
and 604.
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 directs
agencies to assess all costs and benefits
of available regulatory alternatives and,
when regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health
and safety, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity). The
Executive Order classifies a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ requiring review by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) unless OMB waives such review,
as any regulatory action that is likely to
result in a rule that may: (1) Have an
annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a
material way the economy, a sector of
the economy, productivity, competition,
jobs, the environment, public health or
safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) create
E:\FR\FM\30APR1.SGM
30APR1
23356
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 84 / Wednesday, April 30, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
a serious inconsistency or otherwise
interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3)
materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan
programs or the rights and obligations of
recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
The economic, interagency,
budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this final rule have been
examined and it has been determined to
be a significant regulatory action under
the Executive Order because it is likely
to result in a rule that may raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive
Order.
Born with Spina Bifida; and 64.128,
Vocational Training and Rehabilitation for
Vietnam Veterans’ Children with Spina
Bifida or Other Covered Birth Defects.
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in the
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
year. This final rule would have no such
effect on State, local, and tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with RULES
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Numbers
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance program numbers and titles are
64.100, Automobiles and Adaptive
Equipment for Certain Disabled Veterans and
Members of the Armed Forces; 64.101, Burial
Expenses Allowance for Veterans; 64.102,
Compensation for Service-Connected Deaths
for Veterans’ Dependents; 64.103, Life
Insurance for Veterans; 64.104, Pension for
Non-Service-Connected Disability for
Veterans; 64.105, Pension to Veterans
Surviving Spouses, and Children; 64.106,
Specially Adapted Housing for Disabled
Veterans; 64.109, Veterans Compensation for
Service-Connected Disability; 64.110,
Veterans Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation for Service-Connected Death;
64.114, Veterans Housing—Guaranteed and
Insured Loans; 64.115, Veterans Information
and Assistance; 64.116, Vocational
Rehabilitation for Disabled Veterans; 64.117,
Survivors and Dependents Educational
Assistance; 64.118, Veterans Housing—Direct
Loans for Certain Disabled Veterans; 64.119,
Veterans Housing-Manufactured Home
Loans; 64.120, Post-Vietnam Era Veterans’
Educational Assistance; 64.124, AllVolunteer Force Educational Assistance;
64.125, Vocational and Educational
Counseling for Servicemembers and
Veterans; 64.126, Native American Veteran
Direct Loan Program; 64.127, Monthly
Allowance for Children of Vietnam Veterans
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:50 Apr 29, 2008
Jkt 214001
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Health care, Pensions, Radioactive
materials, Veterans, Vietnam.
Approved: January 17, 2008.
Gordon H. Mansfield,
Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble, 38 CFR part 3 is amended as
follows:
I
(ii) When, as a matter of law,
entitlement to the benefit claimed
cannot be established.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5103(a), 5103A(a)(2))
*
*
*
*
*
(g) The authority recognized in
subsection (g) of 38 U.S.C. 5103A is
reserved to the sole discretion of the
Secretary and will be implemented,
when deemed appropriate by the
Secretary, through the promulgation of
regulations.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5103A(g))
[FR Doc. E8–9454 Filed 4–29–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
PART 3—ADJUDICATION
Subpart A—Pension, Compensation,
and Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
I
1. The authority citation for part 3,
subpart A continues to read as follows:
[EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1177; FRL–8559–7]
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless
otherwise noted.
Approval and Promulgation of Air
Quality Implementation Plans; Indiana;
Revisions to Particulate Matter Rules
§ 3.5
[Amended]
2. Amend § 3.5(b)(3) by removing ‘‘(38
U.S.C. 410, 416, 417, Public Law 92–
197, 85 Stat. 660)’’ and adding, in its
place, ‘‘(38 U.S.C. 1310, 1316, 1317,
Public Law 92–197, 85 Stat. 660)’’.
I 3. Amend § 3.159 as follows:
I a. In paragraph (b)(1), at the end of the
first sentence after the word ‘‘claim’’,
add the following parenthetical
‘‘(hereafter in this paragraph referred to
as the ‘‘notice’’)’’.
I b. In paragraph (b)(1), at the beginning
of the second sentence, add ‘‘In the
notice,’’.
I c. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the
third sentence.
I d. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the
fourth sentence and add a new sentence
in its place as set forth below.
I e. In paragraph (b)(1), remove
‘‘request’’ each place it appears and add,
in its place, ‘‘notice’’.
I f. Add paragraphs (b)(3), and (g).
The revisions read as follows:
I
§ 3.159 Department of Veterans Affairs
assistance in developing claims.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * * The information and
evidence that the claimant is informed
that the claimant is to provide must be
provided within one year of the date of
the notice.* * *
*
*
*
*
*
(3) No duty to provide the notice
described in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section arises:
(i) Upon receipt of a Notice of
Disagreement; or
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
40 CFR Part 52
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: On March 14, 2008, EPA
proposed to approve Indiana’s February
21, 2008, request to revise its particulate
matter State Implementation Plan (SIP)
for sources in Clark, Dearborn, Dubois,
Howard, Lake, Marion, St. Joseph,
Vanderburgh, Vigo, and Wayne
Counties. This SIP revision updated
facility names, revised formatting,
removed sources no longer in operation,
and revised some emission limits. The
State submitted air quality modeling
analyses that demonstrated that air
quality will continue to be protected in
the five counties where some emission
limits increased. EPA received one letter
containing several comments on the
proposal. After review of these
comments and for the reasons discussed
below, EPA is approving this SIP
revision request.
DATES: This final rule is effective on
May 30, 2008.
ADDRESSES: EPA has established a
docket for this action under Docket ID
No. EPA–R05–OAR–2007–1177. All
documents in the docket are listed on
the www.regulations.gov Web site.
Although listed in the index, some
information is not publicly available,
i.e., Confidential Business Information
(CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute.
Certain other material, such as
copyrighted material, is not placed on
the Internet and will be publicly
E:\FR\FM\30APR1.SGM
30APR1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 84 (Wednesday, April 30, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23353-23356]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-9454]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 3
RIN 2900-AM17
Notice and Assistance Requirements and Technical Correction
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is amending its
regulation governing VA's duty to provide a claimant with notice of the
information and evidence necessary to substantiate a claim and VA's
duty to assist a claimant in obtaining the evidence necessary to
substantiate the claim. The purpose of these changes is to clarify when
VA has no duty to notify a claimant of how to substantiate a claim for
benefits, to make the regulation comply with statutory changes, and to
streamline the development of claims. Additionally, we are making a
non-substantive, technical correction to the statutory references in a
separate part 3 regulation.
DATES: Effective Date: This amendment is effective May 30, 2008.
Applicability Date: The amendments to 38 CFR 3.159 apply to
applications for benefits pending before VA on or filed after the
effective date of this rule.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maya Ferrandino, Consultant,
Regulations Staff (211D), Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans
Benefits Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, (727) 319-5847.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On October 31, 2006, VA published in the
Federal Register (71 FR 63732) a proposal to revise VA's regulation
regarding VA assistance in developing claims, 38 CFR 3.159. Interested
persons were invited to submit written comments on or before January 2,
2007. We received two comments from members of the public.
Proposed Rule
38 CFR 3.159(b)(3)
Under 38 U.S.C. 5103(a), upon receipt of a substantially complete
application for benefits, VA must ``notify the claimant and the
claimant's representative, if any, of any information, and any medical
or lay evidence, not previously provided to the Secretary that is
necessary to substantiate the claim'' (section 5103(a) notice). VA
implemented section 5103(a) in 38 CFR 3.159, which reflects section
5103(a)'s requirement that VA give the notice upon receipt of a
substantially complete application. See 38 CFR 3.159(b)(1). In
addition, VA defined ``substantially complete application'' for
purposes of section 5103(a) notice. See 38 CFR 3.159(a)(3).
Experience implementing section 5103(a) disclosed a potential
ambiguity in the regulations, which this rulemaking removes. That
ambiguity is whether VA's receipt of a notice of disagreement (NOD)
also triggers VA's duty to give section 5103(a) notice because the NOD
can be viewed as satisfying the definition of ``application'' in 38 CFR
3.1(p). We proposed to clarify that it does not.
An NOD is the means by which a claimant initiates an appeal of a
decision on a claim to the Board of Veterans' Appeals (Board). 38
U.S.C. 7105(a); 38 CFR 20.200. ``A written communication from a
claimant or his or her representative expressing dissatisfaction or
disagreement with an adjudicative determination by the agency of
original jurisdiction and a desire to contest the result will
constitute [an NOD].'' 38 CFR 20.201.
We stated that, because the definition of ``application'' in Sec.
3.1(p) is a holdover from before the Veterans Claims Assistance Act of
2000 (VCAA), Public Law 106-475, 114 Stat. 2096, and was not intended
to govern when VA must give section 5103(a) notice, VA does not view it
as dispositive of the question. Furthermore, section 5103(a) does not
[[Page 23354]]
specify whether VA must issue section 5103(a) notice upon receipt of an
NOD. VA believes that Congress did not intend to require section
5103(a) notice upon VA's receipt of an NOD, for the following reasons:
Congress intended VA to give section 5103(a) notice at the beginning of
the claim process, but an NOD is filed after VA has decided a claim;
Congress requires VA to issue a statement of the case in response to an
NOD, so additional section 5103(a) notice would be redundant; giving
section 5103(a) notice at the appeal stage of the claim process results
in logical inconsistencies in the claim process; and not requiring
section 5103(a) notice upon VA's receipt of an NOD would be consistent
with case law governing such notice. Therefore, we proposed to state in
Sec. 3.159(b)(3)(i) that VA does not have a duty to provide section
5103(a) notice upon receipt of an NOD.
To avoid any confusion, however, we note that VA may continue to
have an obligation to provide adequate section 5103(a) notice despite
receipt of an NOD, if compliant notice was not previously provided and
if the claim was denied. In such instances, VA's duty to provide
adequate section 5103(a) notice is still triggered upon receipt of a
substantially complete application for benefits, not upon receipt of an
NOD. Courts have specifically held that, although VA is required to
provide section 5103(a) notice prior to the initial adjudication of a
claim, if VA does not provide timely notice and a claim remains
unsubstantiated, this defect can be cured by the subsequent provision
of section 5103(a) notice followed by readjudication of the claim. See
Mayfield v. Nicholson, 444 F.3d 1328, 1333-34 (Fed. Cir. 2006);
Paralyzed Veterans of Am. v. Sec'y of Veterans Affairs, 345 F.3d 1334,
1345-46 (Fed. Cir. 2003); Overton v. Nicholson, 20 Vet. App. 427, 437
(2006); Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473, 491 (2006). After
further consideration, we have revised Sec. 3.159(b)(3)(i) to clarify
that no duty to provide section 5103(a) notice arises upon VA's receipt
of an NOD.
Additionally, we proposed to state at Sec. 3.159(b)(3)(ii) that
the section 5103(a) notice duty does not arise when the claimant is not
entitled to the claimed benefit as a matter of law. In such
circumstances, there is no additional information or evidence the
claimant could provide or VA could obtain that could substantiate the
claim. This regulation would be consistent with the intent of Congress
expressed in 38 U.S.C. 5103A(a)(2), which provides that ``[t]he
Secretary is not required to provide assistance to a claimant under
this section if no reasonable possibility exists that such assistance
would aid in substantiating the claim.'' The legislative history of
sections 5103(a) and 5103A(a) supports the conclusion that, if the
claim is barred as a matter of law, VA's duty to notify does not apply
because there is no relevant information or evidence to obtain.
Proposed Sec. 3.159(b)(3)(ii) provided some examples of when a
claimant would not be entitled to the claimed benefit as a matter of
law, such as when the claimant lacks qualifying service or veteran
status. However, because a determination that a claimant is not
entitled to a benefit as a matter of law often requires fact-specific
analysis, VA may be required to furnish section 5103(a) notice in the
specific examples provided in the proposed rule. See, e.g., Palor v.
Nicholson, 21 Vet. App. 202, 209 (2007) (concluding that VA's section
5103(a) notice should have informed the veteran in that case of the
types of evidence he could have submitted to establish veteran status
and qualifying service); Dingess v. Nicholson, 19 Vet. App. 473, 485
(2006) (concluding that section 5103(a) notice should address evidence
required to establish veteran status when appropriate). After further
consideration, we have decided not to include specific examples in
Sec. 3.159(b)(3)(ii) because they may not always determine whether
section 5103(a) notice is required in a given case.
38 CFR 3.159(b)(1)
We additionally proposed to amend 38 CFR 3.159(b)(1). First, we
proposed to remove the third sentence of current Sec. 3.159(b)(1),
which states that VA will request the claimant to provide any evidence
in the claimant's possession that pertains to the claim. Section
3.159(b)(1) generally implements the notice requirements of section
5103(a). The three notice requirements in section 5103(a) are currently
prescribed in Sec. 3.159(b)(1) as follows: VA will notify the claimant
(1) of the information and medical or lay evidence required to
substantiate the claim, (2) of which information and evidence, if any,
that the claimant is to provide to VA, and (3) of which information and
evidence, if any, VA will attempt to obtain on behalf of the claimant.
However, the third sentence of current Sec. 3.159(b)(1) is not
required by statute and is redundant of the three statutory
requirements from the perspective of what the claimant needs to submit
to support the claim. As such, it is unnecessary as part of the
regulation. A claimant who receives a section 5103(a) notice containing
the three statutory elements will have received the same information
regarding what the claimant needs to submit to support the claim as the
claimant would have received had the claimant received a letter
containing the three statutory elements and an additional request that
the claimant provide any evidence in the claimant's possession that
pertains to the claim.
To avoid the possibility of misunderstandings regarding the nature
of this provision and to ensure consistency between the manual and
regulatory provisions, we further proposed to rescind the provision of
paragraph I.1.B.3.b of the Veterans Benefits Administration
Adjudication Procedures Manual M21-1MR (VBA Manual M21-1MR) that
currently requires regional offices (ROs) to send to the claimant in
response to a substantially complete application a letter that ``asks
the claimant to submit any evidence in his/her possession that pertains
to the claim.''
Second, for ease of use, we proposed to add at the end of the first
sentence of current Sec. 3.159(b)(1) the term ``notice'' in
parentheses, to use as a term of art within Sec. 3.159(b)(1).
Third, we proposed to remove the fourth sentence of current Sec.
3.159(b)(1). This sentence states: ``If VA does not receive the
necessary information and evidence requested from the claimant within
one year of the date of the notice, VA cannot pay or provide any
benefits based on that application.'' This provision implemented
language from section 5103 that was repealed by the Veterans Benefits
Act of 2003, Public Law 108-183, section 701(b), 117 Stat. 2670. To
ensure consistency with current law and the intent of Congress, we
proposed to replace this sentence with the following: ``The information
and evidence that the claimant is informed that the claimant is to
provide must be provided within one year of the date of the notice.''
38 CFR 3.159(g)
We proposed to add to Sec. 3.159 a new paragraph (g), which states
that the authority recognized in subsection (g) of 38 U.S.C. 5103A is
reserved to the sole discretion of the Secretary and will be
implemented, when deemed appropriate by the Secretary, through the
promulgation of regulations, in accordance with VA's intention to issue
regulations when the Secretary deems it appropriate to provide any
additional assistance in substantiating a claim, as contemplated in
section 5103A(g). In accordance with section 5103A(g), VA promulgated
the second sentence of
[[Page 23355]]
Sec. 3.159(c), obligating itself to give the assistance described in
paragraphs (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3) of Sec. 3.159, relating to
assistance with obtaining records, to an individual attempting to
reopen a finally decided claim. See Duty to Assist, 66 FR 45,620,
45,628 (Aug. 29, 2001). The main purpose of this new provision is to
avoid the potential disparate treatment of similarly situated claimants
that could arise from inconsistent use in various parts of the agency
of open-ended authority to provide ``extra'' development assistance.
Also, this provision is consistent with the Secretary's determination,
in the prior rulemaking for Sec. 3.159, of the appropriate level of
assistance to be provided individuals based on VA's finite resources
and the need to process claims in an efficient manner for the benefit
of all veterans.
38 CFR 3.159(c)(4)(i)
We proposed to add the following sentence after the first sentence
in Sec. 3.159(c)(4)(i): ``A medical examination or medical opinion is
not necessary to show a link between a veteran's current disability or
death and some disease or symptoms during service when the evidence of
record already satisfies the chronicity or continuity requirements in
Sec. 3.303(b).'' After further consideration, we have decided not to
effectuate this proposed revision for policy reasons. We will
reconsider this proposed revision at a later date if necessary.
Response to Comments
One commenter stated that VA information was withheld from him and
that he had not been offered assistance by VA. He felt that VA was
interested in denying veterans benefits. He additionally stated that he
felt that any claim for benefits should be considered a claim for any
benefits for any reason. This commenter's comments concern the
development of the commenter's specific claim and are irrelevant to the
amendments contained in the proposed rule. Therefore, we make no
changes to this final rule based on these comments.
The other commenter stated that he did not like the proposed
amendment to Sec. 3.159(b)(1) to add the following sentence: ``The
information and evidence that the claimant is informed that the
claimant is to provide must be provided within one year of the date of
the notice.'' The commenter stated that it could take more than one
year to obtain some information and evidence.
To ensure consistency with 38 U.S.C. 5103(b)(1) and the intent of
Congress, we proposed to remove the fourth sentence of current Sec.
3.159(b)(1) and replace it with the following sentence: ``The
information and evidence that the claimant is informed that the
claimant is to provide must be provided within one year of the date of
the notice.'' The statute requires that, ``[i]n the case of information
or evidence that the claimant is notified under subsection (a) is to be
provided by the claimant, such information or evidence must be received
by the Secretary within one year from the date such notice is sent.''
38 U.S.C. 5103(b)(1). Because we are implementing a statutory
requirement with this amendment, we make no changes based on this
comment.
Further, VA will make reasonable efforts to assist claimants. It is
VA's intent that adequate information regarding evidence to support the
claim should be received from the claimant within the one-year time
period, not that all evidence, including examination reports, must be
obtained by VA within the one-year period. Therefore, we make no
changes based on this comment.
Additional Change
In the proposed rulemaking, we proposed to amend the fifth sentence
of current Sec. 3.159(b)(1), which states that VA may decide the claim
if the claimant has not responded to the section 5103(a) notice within
30 days. We proposed to provide 45 days as a more reasonable period
after which VA may decide a claim if no response to the section 5103(a)
notice has been received. Based on administrative concerns and matters
of consistency, we have reconsidered this proposal and decided to
maintain the current 30-day period after which VA may decide a claim if
a claimant has not responded to the section 5103(a) notice. By statute,
VA may make a decision on a claim before the expiration of the one-year
period, 38 U.S.C. 5103(b), and this 30-day period merely sets forth a
time frame for VA to wait for a response from the claimant before
deciding the claim. The claimant will continue to have one year from
the date of the section 5103(a) notice to provide the information and
evidence requested. Furthermore, if VA decides the claim after 30 days
and subsequently receives the information or evidence requested from
the claimant within one year of VA giving the notice, VA must
readjudicate the claim.
We additionally proposed to rescind the provision of paragraph
I.1.B.3.c of the VBA Manual M21-1MR that currently advises ROs to
``inform the claimant that if he/she does not respond to the request
for information within 60 days, VA may decide the claim based on all
the information and evidence in the file.'' We did not receive any
comments on this manual rescission. To ensure consistency between the
manual and current regulatory provisions, we will rescind that manual
provision and replace it with a new provision that will provide for a
30-day period, as set forth in the regulation.
VA appreciates the comments submitted in response to the proposed
rule. Based on the rationale stated in the proposed rule and in this
document, the proposed rule is adopted with the changes noted.
Technical Correction
Section 5(a) of Public Law 102-83, the Department of Veterans
Affairs Codification Act, redesignated 38 U.S.C. 410, 416, and 417 as
38 U.S.C. 1310, 1316, and 1317, respectively. We are updating the
parenthetical following the last sentence in 38 CFR 3.5(b)(3) to
reflect current statutory designations. We are making no substantive
changes to the regulation.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This document contains no provisions constituting a new collection
of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501-3521).
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this regulatory amendment will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities as they are defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5
U.S.C. 601-612. Only VA beneficiaries could be directly affected.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this final rule is exempt from
the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of
sections 603 and 604.
Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 directs agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive impacts; and equity). The Executive
Order classifies a ``significant regulatory action,'' requiring review
by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) unless OMB waives such
review, as any regulatory action that is likely to result in a rule
that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the
economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, public
health or safety, or State, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) create
[[Page 23356]]
a serious inconsistency or otherwise interfere with an action taken or
planned by another agency; (3) materially alter the budgetary impact of
entitlements, grants, user fees, or loan programs or the rights and
obligations of recipients thereof; or (4) raise novel legal or policy
issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or
the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this final rule have been examined and it has been
determined to be a significant regulatory action under the Executive
Order because it is likely to result in a rule that may raise novel
legal or policy issues arising out of legal mandates, the President's
priorities, or the principles set forth in the Executive Order.
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C.
1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits before issuing any rule that may result in the expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any year. This final rule would have no such effect on
State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers and
titles are 64.100, Automobiles and Adaptive Equipment for Certain
Disabled Veterans and Members of the Armed Forces; 64.101, Burial
Expenses Allowance for Veterans; 64.102, Compensation for Service-
Connected Deaths for Veterans' Dependents; 64.103, Life Insurance
for Veterans; 64.104, Pension for Non-Service-Connected Disability
for Veterans; 64.105, Pension to Veterans Surviving Spouses, and
Children; 64.106, Specially Adapted Housing for Disabled Veterans;
64.109, Veterans Compensation for Service-Connected Disability;
64.110, Veterans Dependency and Indemnity Compensation for Service-
Connected Death; 64.114, Veterans Housing--Guaranteed and Insured
Loans; 64.115, Veterans Information and Assistance; 64.116,
Vocational Rehabilitation for Disabled Veterans; 64.117, Survivors
and Dependents Educational Assistance; 64.118, Veterans Housing--
Direct Loans for Certain Disabled Veterans; 64.119, Veterans
Housing-Manufactured Home Loans; 64.120, Post-Vietnam Era Veterans'
Educational Assistance; 64.124, All-Volunteer Force Educational
Assistance; 64.125, Vocational and Educational Counseling for
Servicemembers and Veterans; 64.126, Native American Veteran Direct
Loan Program; 64.127, Monthly Allowance for Children of Vietnam
Veterans Born with Spina Bifida; and 64.128, Vocational Training and
Rehabilitation for Vietnam Veterans' Children with Spina Bifida or
Other Covered Birth Defects.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Health care, Pensions, Radioactive materials, Veterans, Vietnam.
Approved: January 17, 2008.
Gordon H. Mansfield,
Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
0
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 38 CFR part 3 is amended as
follows:
PART 3--ADJUDICATION
Subpart A--Pension, Compensation, and Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation
0
1. The authority citation for part 3, subpart A continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 3.5 [Amended]
0
2. Amend Sec. 3.5(b)(3) by removing ``(38 U.S.C. 410, 416, 417, Public
Law 92-197, 85 Stat. 660)'' and adding, in its place, ``(38 U.S.C.
1310, 1316, 1317, Public Law 92-197, 85 Stat. 660)''.
0
3. Amend Sec. 3.159 as follows:
0
a. In paragraph (b)(1), at the end of the first sentence after the word
``claim'', add the following parenthetical ``(hereafter in this
paragraph referred to as the ``notice'')''.
0
b. In paragraph (b)(1), at the beginning of the second sentence, add
``In the notice,''.
0
c. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the third sentence.
0
d. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the fourth sentence and add a new
sentence in its place as set forth below.
0
e. In paragraph (b)(1), remove ``request'' each place it appears and
add, in its place, ``notice''.
0
f. Add paragraphs (b)(3), and (g).
The revisions read as follows:
Sec. 3.159 Department of Veterans Affairs assistance in developing
claims.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * * The information and evidence that the claimant is
informed that the claimant is to provide must be provided within one
year of the date of the notice.* * *
* * * * *
(3) No duty to provide the notice described in paragraph (b)(1) of
this section arises:
(i) Upon receipt of a Notice of Disagreement; or
(ii) When, as a matter of law, entitlement to the benefit claimed
cannot be established.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5103(a), 5103A(a)(2))
* * * * *
(g) The authority recognized in subsection (g) of 38 U.S.C. 5103A
is reserved to the sole discretion of the Secretary and will be
implemented, when deemed appropriate by the Secretary, through the
promulgation of regulations.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 5103A(g))
[FR Doc. E8-9454 Filed 4-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P