Claim-Related Documents or Supporting Evidence Not of Record, 58232-58234 [E9-27077]
Download as PDF
58232
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 217 / Thursday, November 12, 2009 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 3
RIN 2900–AN33
Claim-Related Documents or
Supporting Evidence Not of Record
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
ACTION:
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) proposes to add a new
section to its adjudication regulations to
establish temporary VA procedures for
when claimants allege the submission of
claim-related documents or evidence in
support of a claim during the time
period of April 14, 2007, through
October 14, 2008, and such documents
or evidence are not of record in the
official VA file.
DATES: Comments must be received by
VA on or before January 11, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be
submitted through ‘‘https://
www.Regulations.gov;’’ by mail or handdelivery to Director, Regulation Policy
and Management (02REG), Department
of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave.,
NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC
20042; or by fax to (202) 273–9026.
Comments should indicate that they are
submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900–
AN33—Claim-Related Documents or
Supporting Evidence Not of Record.’’
Copies of comments received will be
available for public inspection in the
Office of Regulation Policy and
Management, Room 1063B, between the
hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday (except holidays). Please
call (202) 461–4923 for an appointment
(this is not a toll-free number). In
addition, during the comment period,
comments may be viewed online
through the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) at ‘‘https://
www.Regulations.gov.’’
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Thomas J. Kniffen, Chief, Regulations
Staff (211D), Compensation and Pension
Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration, Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461–9725
(This is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August
20, 2008, VA’s Office of Inspector
General (OIG) initiated an audit of select
Veterans Benefits Administration (VBA)
regional office (RO) mail processing
procedures. VBA receives and processes
approximately 25 million documents
each year. The OIG audit team
examined mail-handling activities and
the activity that places claims under
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:33 Nov 10, 2009
Jkt 220001
electronic control in four ROs. The audit
team found 36 pieces of active mail and
93 original support documents
improperly designated for destruction
by shredding. Documents identified as
designated for destruction included,
among other things, the following: VA
Form 21–526, Veteran’s Application for
Compensation and/or Pension; VA Form
21–686c, Declaration of Status of
Dependents; VA Form 21–674, Request
for Approval of School Attendance; and
documents constituting informal claims.
VA recognizes that the OIG’s findings
may have been indicative of a
document-handling or shredding
problem affecting numerous ROs at the
time of the OIG audit and that this
problem may have adversely impacted
some veterans. In response to these
findings, the Secretary suspended all
document-shredding activities and
provided new guidance and training to
all RO personnel regarding the handling
and shredding of claim-related
documents and evidence in support of
a claim. The Secretary also decided to
establish temporary claims-handling
procedures for veterans who allege that
they submitted claim-related documents
or evidence in support of a claim during
the time period of April 14, 2007,
through October 14, 2008, that are not
of record in official VA files. This rule
would codify the temporary claimshandling procedures, which include a
relaxed evidentiary standard for the
adjudication of claims involving alleged
submissions of documents or evidence
during this 18-month time period. These
temporary procedures would reflect
VA’s pro-veteran response to the OIG’s
findings of improper document
handling and control at the ROs.
October 14, 2008, is the date on which
the Secretary suspended all documentshredding activities following the OIG
audit. To ensure that claimants who
may have been affected by the former
document shredding activities have an
opportunity to make assertions
regarding missing documents, we
propose to establish an 18-month time
period from April 14, 2007, through
October 14, 2008, during which affected
claimants may receive the benefit of
certain liberalized procedures. As we
describe in greater detail below, the
proposed 18-month period is based
upon VA’s claims adjudication
experience. With regard to lost claims or
applications for benefits, based on our
experience, VA takes on average 6
months to process a claim. VA added an
additional 12 months to reflect a
reasonable amount of time for a
claimant to learn that a submitted claimrelated document may have been lost or
mishandled by the RO.
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
With regard to lost evidence in
support of a claim, the RO most likely
would have issued a decision or a
supplemental statement of the case
within 18 months from the date of the
alleged submission of evidence. Because
the RO is required to summarize the
evidence that it considered in denying
a claim for benefits (38 U.S.C.
5104(b)(2)), a decision would have
revealed that the RO had not considered
the alleged submitted evidence. Also,
the RO is required to address in a
supplemental statement of the case new
evidence submitted subsequent to the
filing of a statement of the case (38 CFR
19.31(b)).
With regard to lost notices of
disagreement, the RO is required to
issue a statement of the case (38 U.S.C.
7105(d)) and usually does so within a
year after receiving a notice of
disagreement. With regard to lost
substantive appeals, the Board, as a
matter of practice soon after the
processing of a formal appeal, will
notify a claimant that an appeal has
been certified to the Board for appellate
review and that the appellate record has
been transferred to the Board (38 CFR
20.1304(a)).
Thus, we believe that, if a veteran
contends that he or she submitted a
claim-related document or evidence in
support of a claim before April 14, 2007,
the veteran reasonably would have
inquired about the document
submission or would have been
informed of its misplacement or
destruction within 18 months from the
asserted date of submission, or prior to
October 14, 2008.
We are particularly interested in
comments regarding the proposed
establishment of the 18-month period of
April 14, 2007, through October 14,
2008, for an alleged submission of a
claim-related document or evidence that
is missing from official VA files for
which VA will consider the asserted
date of submission as the actual date of
submission.
This rule would require a claimant to
notify the RO within one year of the
effective date of the final rule
implementing the temporary claims
handling procedures of an alleged
submission during the 18-month period
of April 14, 2007, through October 14,
2008. The one-year deadline reasonably
gives claimants time to inform ROs of
alleged submissions during the 18month period and would be consistent
with the 12-month time period given to
claimants to file a Notice of
Disagreement. After the expiration of
this one-year period, VA would amend
its regulations to remove the obsolete
provisions in proposed § 3.218.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 217 / Thursday, November 12, 2009 / Proposed Rules
For claims allegedly submitted
between April 14, 2007, and October 14,
2008, the effective date would be
established in accordance with the date
asserted by the claimant as the date on
which the Secretary received the claim.
In general practice, when a claimant
asserts the submission of a claim-related
document or evidence in support of a
claim that was not of record in the
official VA file, VA requests the
claimant to submit any available
secondary evidence that would support
the alleged previous submission. For
example, VA would ask a claimant to
submit a copy of the claim-related
document or evidence date stamped by
VA or the claimant’s representative, or
a dated transmittal or cover sheet from
the claimant or claimant’s
representative relating to the pertinent
document, together with copies of any
documents that were included with the
alleged previous submission.
Accordingly, if a claimant asserts that a
document was originally filed before
April 14, 2007, or after October 14, 2008
(or if a claimant asserts after the oneyear period following the effective date
of the final rule that a document was
originally filed during the time period of
April 14, 2007, through October 14,
2008) and such document is not of
record in official VA files, VA would
ask the claimant to submit similar
secondary evidence to support the
alleged previous submission, consistent
with VA’s general practice. If
entitlement to benefits is established
under this scenario, VA would assign an
effective date in accordance with the
facts found based on credible
corroborating evidence submitted by the
claimant and applicable laws and
regulations.
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
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 an
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
given year. This rule would have no
such effect on State, local, and tribal
governments, or on the private sector.
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;
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:33 Nov 10, 2009
Jkt 220001
distributive impacts; and equity). The
Executive Order classifies a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ requiring review by
the Office of Management and Budget,
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
a serious inconsistency or 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 entitlement
recipients; 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.
VA has examined the economic,
interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this proposed rule and
has concluded that it is a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866 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.
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 proposed rule would 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. The
rule could affect only VA beneficiaries
and would not directly affect small
entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b), this rule would be exempt from
the initial and final regulatory flexibility
analyses requirements of sections 603
and 604.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance program numbers and titles
for this rule are as follows: 64.104,
Pension for Non-Service-Connected
Disability for Veterans; 64.105, Pension
to Veterans, Surviving Spouses, and
Children; 64.109, Veterans
Compensation for Service-Connected
Disability; and 64.110, Veterans
Dependency and Indemnity
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
58233
Compensation for Service-Connected
Death.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR part 3
Administrative practice and
procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Health care, Pensions, Radioactive
materials, Veterans, Vietnam.
Approved: August 11, 2009.
John R. Gingrich,
Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part
3 as follows:
PART 3—ADJUDICATION
Subpart A—Pension, Compensation,
and Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation
1. The authority citation for part 3,
subpart A continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless
otherwise noted.
2. Add § 3.218 to read as follows:
§ 3.218 Claim-Related Documents or
Supporting Evidence Not of Record.
(a) Submissions during the time
period of April 14, 2007, through
October 14, 2008. If a claimant or
claimant’s representative asserts that a
claim-related document or evidence in
support of a claim was originally filed
with VA during the time period of April
14, 2007, through October 14, 2008, and
such document or evidence is missing
from official VA files, VA will consider
the asserted date of submission as the
actual date of submission. VA will
apply procedures under this section
only for assertions made before the end
of the 1-year period following
[EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE].
(b) Additional requirements and
procedures for alleged submissions
under paragraph (a). (1) If the
claimant’s assertion refers to an original
claim, a claim for increased benefits, or
a claim for reopening, the claimant must
submit either a copy of the previously
submitted claim form or a new claim
form. VA will provide the claimant with
assistance and notification of the
required evidence and information upon
receipt of a substantially complete
application, as necessary under § 3.159
of this part, and will develop the claim
pursuant to existing procedures.
(2) If the claimant’s assertion refers to
evidence in support of a claim, the
claimant must identify the claim to
which the evidence pertains and submit
a copy of the evidence, or, if the
evidence is no longer available, a
description of such evidence or a
completed VA Form 21–4142.
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
58234
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 217 / Thursday, November 12, 2009 / Proposed Rules
(3) If the claimant’s assertion refers to
a document relating to the appeal of an
administrative decision, such as a notice
of disagreement or substantive appeal,
VA will follow proper appeal
procedures based on date of receipt of
the document, as determined under this
section.
(4) If the only issue raised by the
claimant’s assertion concerns the
effective date of an award for benefits
for a claim already decided, VA will
establish the proper effective date
without additional development.
(c) Effective dates. For claims
allegedly submitted between April 14,
2007, and October 14, 2008, the
effective date will be established in
accordance with the date asserted by the
claimant as the date on which the
Secretary received the claim.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a)(1))
[FR Doc. E9–27077 Filed 11–10–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 0907301206–91208–01]
RIN 0648–AY13
Fisheries of the Northeastern United
States; Atlantic Mackerel, Squid, and
Butterfish Fisheries; Specifications
and Management Measures
WReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes 2010
specifications and management
measures for Atlantic mackerel, squid,
and butterfish (MSB). This action
proposes to maintain quotas for Atlantic
mackerel (mackerel), Illex squid (Illex),
Loligo squid (Loligo), and butterfish at
the same levels as 2009. This action also
proposes to modify accounting
procedures for underages of Trimester 1
quotas in the Loligo fishery so that
Trimester 1 quota underages that are
greater than 25% of the Trimester 1
quota would be allocated equally to
Trimesters 2 and 3, and underages that
are less than 25% of the Trimester 1
quota would be allocated to Trimester 3.
Additionally, this action proposes to
increase the minimum mesh size
requirement for codend covers in the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
12:33 Nov 10, 2009
Jkt 220001
Loligo fishery from 4.5 inches to 5
inches. These proposed specifications
and management measures promote the
utilization and conservation of the MSB
resource.
DATES: Public comments must be
received no later than 5 p.m., eastern
standard time, on December 14, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Copies of supporting
documents used by the Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council (Council),
including the Environmental
Assessment (EA) and Regulatory Impact
Review (RIR)/Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), are
available from: Daniel Furlong,
Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic
Fishery Management Council, Room
2115, Federal Building, 300 South New
Street, Dover, DE 19904–6790. The EA/
RIR/IRFA is accessible via the Internet
at https://www.nero.noaa.gov.
You may submit comments, identified
by 0648–AY13, by any one of the
following methods:
• Electronic Submissions: Submit all
electronic public comments via the
Federal e-Rulemaking portal https://
www.regulations.gov;
• Fax: (978) 281–9135, Attn: Carrie
Nordeen;
• Mail to NMFS, Northeast Regional
Office, 55 Great Republic Dr, Gloucester,
MA 01930. Mark the outside of the
envelope ‘‘Comments on 2010 MSB
Specifications.’’
Instructions: All comments received
are a part of the public record and will
generally be posted to https://
www.regulations.gov without change.
All Personal Identifying Information
(e.g., name, address) voluntarily
submitted by the commenter may be
publicly accessible. Do not submit
Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or protected
information. NMFS will accept
anonymous comments. Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in
Microsoft Word, Excel, WordPerfect, or
Adobe PDF formats only.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Carrie Nordeen, Fishery Policy Analyst,
978–281–9272, fax 978–281–9135.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Regulations implementing the Fishery
Management Plan for the Atlantic
Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish
Fisheries (FMP) appear at 50 CFR part
648, subpart B. Regulations governing
foreign fishing appear at 50 CFR part
600, subpart F. These regulations at
§ 648.21 and 600.516(c), require that
NMFS, based on the maximum
optimum yield (Max OY) of each fishery
as established by the regulations,
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
annually publish a proposed rule
specifying the amounts of the initial
optimum yield (IOY), allowable
biological catch (ABC), domestic annual
harvest (DAH), and domestic annual
processing (DAP), as well as, where
applicable, the amounts for total
allowable level of foreign fishing
(TALFF) and joint venture processing
(JVP) for the affected species managed
under the FMP. In addition, these
regulations allow specifications to be
specified for up to 3 years, subject to
annual review. The regulations found in
§ 648.21 also specify that IOY for squid
is equal to the combination of research
quota (RQ) and DAH, with no TALFF
specified for squid. For butterfish, the
regulations specify that a butterfish
bycatch TALFF will be specified only if
TALFF is specified for mackerel.
At its June 9–11, 2009, meeting in
New York, NY, the Mid-Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (Council)
recommended 2010 MSB specifications.
The recommended specifications for
mackerel, Illex, Loligo, and butterfish
are the same as those implemented in
2009. For Loligo, the Council
recommended a modification in
accounting Trimester 1 quota underages.
The Council also recommended
increasing the minimum mesh size
requirement for codend covers in the
Loligo fishery. The Council submitted
these recommendations, along with the
required analyses, for agency review on
August 10, 2009.
Research Quota
Framework Adjustment 1 to the FMP
established the Mid-Atlantic Research
Set-Aside (RSA) Program, which allows
research projects to be funded through
the sale of fish that has been set aside
from the total annual quota. The RQ
may vary between 0 and 3 percent of the
overall quota for each species. The
Council has recommended that 3
percent of the 2010 Loligo, Illex,
butterfish, and mackerel quotas be set
aside to fund projects selected under the
2010 Mid-Atlantic RSA Program.
NMFS solicited research proposals
under the 2010 Mid-Atlantic RSA
Program through the Federal Register
(74 FR 75, January 2, 2009). The
deadline for submission was March 3,
2009. The project selection and award
process for the 2010 Mid-Atlantic RSA
Program has not concluded and
therefore, the research quota awards are
not known at this time. When the
selection process has concluded,
projects requesting RQ will be
forwarded to the NOAA Grants Office
for award. If any portion of the RQ is not
awarded, NMFS will return any unawarded RQ to the commercial fishery
E:\FR\FM\12NOP1.SGM
12NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 217 (Thursday, November 12, 2009)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 58232-58234]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-27077]
[[Page 58232]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 3
RIN 2900-AN33
Claim-Related Documents or Supporting Evidence Not of Record
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to add a new
section to its adjudication regulations to establish temporary VA
procedures for when claimants allege the submission of claim-related
documents or evidence in support of a claim during the time period of
April 14, 2007, through October 14, 2008, and such documents or
evidence are not of record in the official VA file.
DATES: Comments must be received by VA on or before January 11, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through ``https://www.Regulations.gov;'' by mail or hand-delivery to Director, Regulation
Policy and Management (02REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Ave., NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20042; or by fax to (202)
273-9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response
to ``RIN 2900-AN33--Claim-Related Documents or Supporting Evidence Not
of Record.'' Copies of comments received will be available for public
inspection in the Office of Regulation Policy and Management, Room
1063B, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday
(except holidays). Please call (202) 461-4923 for an appointment (this
is not a toll-free number). In addition, during the comment period,
comments may be viewed online through the Federal Docket Management
System (FDMS) at ``https://www.Regulations.gov.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Kniffen, Chief, Regulations
Staff (211D), Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-9725 (This is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On August 20, 2008, VA's Office of Inspector
General (OIG) initiated an audit of select Veterans Benefits
Administration (VBA) regional office (RO) mail processing procedures.
VBA receives and processes approximately 25 million documents each
year. The OIG audit team examined mail-handling activities and the
activity that places claims under electronic control in four ROs. The
audit team found 36 pieces of active mail and 93 original support
documents improperly designated for destruction by shredding. Documents
identified as designated for destruction included, among other things,
the following: VA Form 21-526, Veteran's Application for Compensation
and/or Pension; VA Form 21-686c, Declaration of Status of Dependents;
VA Form 21-674, Request for Approval of School Attendance; and
documents constituting informal claims.
VA recognizes that the OIG's findings may have been indicative of a
document-handling or shredding problem affecting numerous ROs at the
time of the OIG audit and that this problem may have adversely impacted
some veterans. In response to these findings, the Secretary suspended
all document-shredding activities and provided new guidance and
training to all RO personnel regarding the handling and shredding of
claim-related documents and evidence in support of a claim. The
Secretary also decided to establish temporary claims-handling
procedures for veterans who allege that they submitted claim-related
documents or evidence in support of a claim during the time period of
April 14, 2007, through October 14, 2008, that are not of record in
official VA files. This rule would codify the temporary claims-handling
procedures, which include a relaxed evidentiary standard for the
adjudication of claims involving alleged submissions of documents or
evidence during this 18-month time period. These temporary procedures
would reflect VA's pro-veteran response to the OIG's findings of
improper document handling and control at the ROs.
October 14, 2008, is the date on which the Secretary suspended all
document-shredding activities following the OIG audit. To ensure that
claimants who may have been affected by the former document shredding
activities have an opportunity to make assertions regarding missing
documents, we propose to establish an 18-month time period from April
14, 2007, through October 14, 2008, during which affected claimants may
receive the benefit of certain liberalized procedures. As we describe
in greater detail below, the proposed 18-month period is based upon
VA's claims adjudication experience. With regard to lost claims or
applications for benefits, based on our experience, VA takes on average
6 months to process a claim. VA added an additional 12 months to
reflect a reasonable amount of time for a claimant to learn that a
submitted claim-related document may have been lost or mishandled by
the RO.
With regard to lost evidence in support of a claim, the RO most
likely would have issued a decision or a supplemental statement of the
case within 18 months from the date of the alleged submission of
evidence. Because the RO is required to summarize the evidence that it
considered in denying a claim for benefits (38 U.S.C. 5104(b)(2)), a
decision would have revealed that the RO had not considered the alleged
submitted evidence. Also, the RO is required to address in a
supplemental statement of the case new evidence submitted subsequent to
the filing of a statement of the case (38 CFR 19.31(b)).
With regard to lost notices of disagreement, the RO is required to
issue a statement of the case (38 U.S.C. 7105(d)) and usually does so
within a year after receiving a notice of disagreement. With regard to
lost substantive appeals, the Board, as a matter of practice soon after
the processing of a formal appeal, will notify a claimant that an
appeal has been certified to the Board for appellate review and that
the appellate record has been transferred to the Board (38 CFR
20.1304(a)).
Thus, we believe that, if a veteran contends that he or she
submitted a claim-related document or evidence in support of a claim
before April 14, 2007, the veteran reasonably would have inquired about
the document submission or would have been informed of its misplacement
or destruction within 18 months from the asserted date of submission,
or prior to October 14, 2008.
We are particularly interested in comments regarding the proposed
establishment of the 18-month period of April 14, 2007, through October
14, 2008, for an alleged submission of a claim-related document or
evidence that is missing from official VA files for which VA will
consider the asserted date of submission as the actual date of
submission.
This rule would require a claimant to notify the RO within one year
of the effective date of the final rule implementing the temporary
claims handling procedures of an alleged submission during the 18-month
period of April 14, 2007, through October 14, 2008. The one-year
deadline reasonably gives claimants time to inform ROs of alleged
submissions during the 18-month period and would be consistent with the
12-month time period given to claimants to file a Notice of
Disagreement. After the expiration of this one-year period, VA would
amend its regulations to remove the obsolete provisions in proposed
Sec. 3.218.
[[Page 58233]]
For claims allegedly submitted between April 14, 2007, and October
14, 2008, the effective date would be established in accordance with
the date asserted by the claimant as the date on which the Secretary
received the claim.
In general practice, when a claimant asserts the submission of a
claim-related document or evidence in support of a claim that was not
of record in the official VA file, VA requests the claimant to submit
any available secondary evidence that would support the alleged
previous submission. For example, VA would ask a claimant to submit a
copy of the claim-related document or evidence date stamped by VA or
the claimant's representative, or a dated transmittal or cover sheet
from the claimant or claimant's representative relating to the
pertinent document, together with copies of any documents that were
included with the alleged previous submission. Accordingly, if a
claimant asserts that a document was originally filed before April 14,
2007, or after October 14, 2008 (or if a claimant asserts after the
one-year period following the effective date of the final rule that a
document was originally filed during the time period of April 14, 2007,
through October 14, 2008) and such document is not of record in
official VA files, VA would ask the claimant to submit similar
secondary evidence to support the alleged previous submission,
consistent with VA's general practice. If entitlement to benefits is
established under this scenario, VA would assign an effective date in
accordance with the facts found based on credible corroborating
evidence submitted by the claimant and applicable laws and regulations.
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 an 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 given year. This rule would have no such effect on
State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private sector.
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, 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 a serious inconsistency
or 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 entitlement
recipients; 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.
VA has examined the economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and
policy implications of this proposed rule and has concluded that it is
a significant regulatory action under Executive Order 12866 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.
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 proposed rule would 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. The rule could affect only VA beneficiaries and would
not directly affect small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
605(b), this rule would be exempt from the initial and final regulatory
flexibility analyses requirements of sections 603 and 604.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers and
titles for this rule are as follows: 64.104, Pension for Non-Service-
Connected Disability for Veterans; 64.105, Pension to Veterans,
Surviving Spouses, and Children; 64.109, Veterans Compensation for
Service-Connected Disability; and 64.110, Veterans Dependency and
Indemnity Compensation for Service-Connected Death.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR part 3
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Disability benefits,
Health care, Pensions, Radioactive materials, Veterans, Vietnam.
Approved: August 11, 2009.
John R. Gingrich,
Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of
Veterans Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part 3 as follows:
PART 3--ADJUDICATION
Subpart A--Pension, Compensation, and Dependency and Indemnity
Compensation
1. The authority citation for part 3, subpart A continues to read
as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a), unless otherwise noted.
2. Add Sec. 3.218 to read as follows:
Sec. 3.218 Claim-Related Documents or Supporting Evidence Not of
Record.
(a) Submissions during the time period of April 14, 2007, through
October 14, 2008. If a claimant or claimant's representative asserts
that a claim-related document or evidence in support of a claim was
originally filed with VA during the time period of April 14, 2007,
through October 14, 2008, and such document or evidence is missing from
official VA files, VA will consider the asserted date of submission as
the actual date of submission. VA will apply procedures under this
section only for assertions made before the end of the 1-year period
following [EFFECTIVE DATE OF FINAL RULE].
(b) Additional requirements and procedures for alleged submissions
under paragraph (a). (1) If the claimant's assertion refers to an
original claim, a claim for increased benefits, or a claim for
reopening, the claimant must submit either a copy of the previously
submitted claim form or a new claim form. VA will provide the claimant
with assistance and notification of the required evidence and
information upon receipt of a substantially complete application, as
necessary under Sec. 3.159 of this part, and will develop the claim
pursuant to existing procedures.
(2) If the claimant's assertion refers to evidence in support of a
claim, the claimant must identify the claim to which the evidence
pertains and submit a copy of the evidence, or, if the evidence is no
longer available, a description of such evidence or a completed VA Form
21-4142.
[[Page 58234]]
(3) If the claimant's assertion refers to a document relating to
the appeal of an administrative decision, such as a notice of
disagreement or substantive appeal, VA will follow proper appeal
procedures based on date of receipt of the document, as determined
under this section.
(4) If the only issue raised by the claimant's assertion concerns
the effective date of an award for benefits for a claim already
decided, VA will establish the proper effective date without additional
development.
(c) Effective dates. For claims allegedly submitted between April
14, 2007, and October 14, 2008, the effective date will be established
in accordance with the date asserted by the claimant as the date on
which the Secretary received the claim.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501(a)(1))
[FR Doc. E9-27077 Filed 11-10-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P