Vet Center Services, 57067-57073 [2013-22607]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Comment: The same commenter
raised a concern about whether there
would be adequate funds available to
grant awards to continuing AIVRS
programs and other eligible tribal
entities should RSA hold a section 121
grant competition in FY 2014.
Discussion: The AIVRS program is
funded through a set-aside of the funds
appropriated for the Vocational
Rehabilitation (VR) State Grants
program. Pending Congress’s approval
of a new budget, the Department
anticipates that sufficient funds should
be available to hold a grant competition
in FY 2014 that would fund a minimum
of 48 grants with project periods that
would begin in FY 2015. This is the
same estimated total number of new
grants the Department would have
awarded if it had conducted separate
competitions in FY 2012, 2013, and
2014.
Changes: None.
Comment: The same commenter also
expressed the need to provide technical
assistance and training to existing
AIVRS programs and interested eligible
tribes in the development of AIVRS
grant proposals and grant management.
This commenter was particularly
concerned, given the fact that RSA’s
current capacity-building projects that
provides technical assistance to AIVRS
projects and applicants ends on
September 30, 2013.
Discussion: On November 8, 2012 (77
FR 66959), RSA published a request for
information related to its Rehabilitation
Long-Term Training program, Technical
Assistance and Continuing Education,
the National Clearinghouse, and
Capacity Building efforts. RSA is
continuing to analyze the comments we
received from that notice. Funding
priorities to address the need for
technical assistance, including the
technical assistance needs of AIVRS
projects, will be published at a later
time.
Changes: None.
Waivers and Extensions
The project periods for the current 32
AIVRS grantees, selected through the
grant competitions held in FY 2007 and
2008 are scheduled to end September
30, 2013. However, section 121(b)(3) of
the Act provides that the Department
has the authority to make an AIVRS
grant effective for more than 60 months,
pursuant to prescribed regulations.
Therefore, for these 32 AIVRS grantees,
the Secretary waives the requirements of
34 CFR 75.250 and 34 CFR 75.261(c)(2),
which limit project periods to 60
months and restrict project period
extensions that involve the obligation of
additional Federal funds. The Secretary
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
also extends the current project period
for the 32 AIVRS grantees funded in FY
2007 and 2008 through September 30,
2014. Finally, the Department will not
announce a new AIVRS competition in
FY 2013 or make new awards in FY
2013.
This action allows the 32 AIVRS
grantees to request continuation funding
in FY 2013. Decisions regarding annual
continuation awards will be based on
the program narratives, budgets, budget
narratives, and program performance
reports submitted by these 32 AIVRS
grantees and on the requirements of 34
CFR 75.253. Any activities to be carried
out during the year of continuation
awards must be consistent with, or be a
logical extension of, the scope, goals,
and objectives of each grantee’s
application as approved following the
FY 2007 and 2008 AIVRS competitions.
The FY 2007 and 2008 AIVRS NIAs will
continue to govern the grantees’ projects
during the extension year. These current
AIVRS grantees may request
continuation awards in FY 2013 for
project periods ending September 30,
2014.
Waiver of Delayed Effective Date
The Administrative Procedure Act
(APA) requires that a substantive rule
must be published at least 30 days
before its effective date, except as
otherwise provided for good cause (5
U.S.C. 553(d)(3)). The Secretary has
determined that a delayed effective date
is unnecessary and contrary to the
public interest. It is unnecessary
because we received only three public
comments on this action, all of which
supported our proposal and we have not
made any substantive changes to the
proposal. It is contrary to public interest
because we would not be able to make
timely continuation grants to the 32
affected entities with the delay.
Therefore, the Secretary waives the
APA’s delayed effective date provision
for good cause.
57067
Intergovernmental Review
This program is not subject to the
requirements of Executive Order 12372
and the regulations in 34 CFR Part 79.
Accessible Format: Individuals with
disabilities can obtain this document in
an accessible format (e.g., braille, large
print, audiotape, or compact disc) on
request to the contact person listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Electronic Access to This Document:
The official version of this document is
the document published in the Federal
Register. Free Internet access to the
official edition of the Federal Register
and the Code of Federal Regulations is
available via the Federal Digital System
at: www.gpo.gov/fdsys. At this site you
can view this document, as well as all
other documents of this Department
published in the Federal Register, in
text or Adobe Portable Document
Format (PDF). To use PDF you must
have Adobe Acrobat Reader, which is
available free at the site.
You may also access documents of the
Department published in the Federal
Register by using the article search
feature at: www.federalregister.gov.
Specifically, through the advanced
search feature at this site, you can limit
your search to documents published by
the Department.
Dated: September 12, 2013.
Sue Swenson,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services,
delegated the authority to perform the
functions and duties of the Assistant
Secretary for Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services.
[FR Doc. 2013–22626 Filed 9–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification
RIN 2900–AN92
The Secretary certifies that this final
extension of the project period and
waiver will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. The only
entities that will be affected are the
current grantees and any other potential
applicants.
Vet Center Services
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The final waivers and extensions of
project periods do not contain any
information collection requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Department of Defense and
Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) is establishing in regulation
the readjustment counseling currently
provided in VA’s Vet Centers to certain
veterans of the Armed Forces and
members of their families, and
implementing provisions of the
Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57068
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
Health Services Act of 2010 regarding
readjustment counseling.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is
effective October 17, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gregory Harms, Readjustment
Counseling Service (10P8), Veterans
Health Administration, Department of
Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue
NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461–
6525. (This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final
rule articulates in regulation our
authority to establish Vet Centers to
furnish counseling to certain veterans
upon request, as set forth in 38 U.S.C.
1712A. It also meets a rulemaking
requirement prescribed by Congress in
section 401 of the Caregivers and
Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act
of 2010, Public Law 111–163 (the 2010
Act), and implements sections 304 and
401 of the 2010 Act, by authorizing Vet
Centers to provide readjustment
counseling to certain veterans described
in section 304, their families, and
certain members of the Armed Forces
set forth in section 401. Finally, this
rulemaking implements section 402 of
the 2010 Act by authorizing Vet Centers
to provide certain referral services.
Although VA has provided readjustment
counseling under 38 U.S.C. 1712A
without a regulation in the past, in the
interests of clarity and completeness,
this final rule covers the provision of
benefits to veterans under section
1712A as well as benefits provided
under the 2010 Act.
In a document published in the
Federal Register on March 13, 2012 (77
FR 14707), VA proposed to amend part
17 of 38 CFR by adding a new § 17.2000,
which would contain the provisions
described above. We provided a 60-day
comment period, which ended on May
14, 2012. We received 15 comments
from members of the general public.
Several commenters agreed with all or
part of the proposed rulemaking and
expressed support for the regulation. We
did not make any changes based on
these comments.
Another commenter supported the
provision of readjustment counseling
but was concerned because ‘‘it has been
argued by many veterans that they were
denied these services for many
reasons.’’ We cannot respond to the
commenter’s concerns about denials of
treatment because the comment did not
recommend any changes to the
proposed rule, nor did it include any
specific circumstances under which a
veteran was denied readjustment
counseling. Moreover, addressing any
such circumstance is beyond the scope
of this rulemaking. Also, we are not
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
aware of an ongoing problem of Vet
Centers denying readjustment
counseling to eligible veterans. In the
proposed rulemaking, we stated that VA
has implemented the statutory authority
under 38 U.S.C. 1712A to ‘‘establish Vet
Centers that must furnish counseling to
certain veterans upon request’’ without
regulations. We would expect to
eliminate or significantly reduce the
problem described by the commenter, if
any such problem exists, through this
rulemaking.
The commenter also stated that ‘‘the
majority of the population does not
know a lot about’’ the services provided
at Vet Centers. VA is not aware of this
problem, i.e., that a significant
proportion of the eligible veteran
population does not know about VA’s
Vet Center program. We provide face-toface outreach, education, and referral to
veterans and their families. However, if
such a problem exists, this regulation
will facilitate the implementation of the
readjustment counseling program in the
Vet Centers and clearly and publicly
indicate the various services that are
included in the definition of
readjustment counseling. VA hopes that
this rulemaking, in addition to other
outreach programs, will alert veterans to
the readjustment services provided in
the Vet Centers. We did not make any
changes based on this comment.
A commenter stated that VA should
require screening for problems related to
readjustment issues to better assist those
veterans who are in need of treatment
but who may believe they will ‘‘not
have trouble readjusting or are too
stubborn to seek such counseling’’ or
whose ‘‘problems manifest themselves
when they are already thrown in the
jungle of everyday life and their lives
become too busy to seek such
counseling.’’ The commenter also
indicated support for the proposed rule
because it provided readjustment
counseling for the whole family, which
assists the transition into the
community.
The commenter makes a valid point
in that part of successful readjustment
counseling is knowing when a veteran
is in need of assistance. VA has
addressed this issue by providing
outreach programs that are available to
veterans and servicemembers in Vet
Centers and other VA facilities. Some of
the outreach programs include the Vet
Center Combat Call Center (877–WAR–
VETS), which is an around-the-clock
confidential call center where combat
veterans and their families can call to
talk about their military experience or
any other issue they are facing in their
readjustment to civilian life, as well as
the Veterans Crisis Line, which
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
connects veterans in crisis and their
family and friends with 24-hour online
chat or text messaging. There are mobile
applications, such as the Post-Traumatic
Stress Disorder (PTSD) Coach, that
assist veterans in managing their PTSD.
Outreach is also part of the veteran’s
primary VA care. But no matter how
extensive our outreach and how
convenient our services may be, VA
cannot require a veteran to come to a
Vet Center, nor can we intervene in the
‘‘every day’’ lives of veterans who do
not seek assistance. Therefore, although
we agree with the commenter’s
sentiments, we did not make any
changes based on this comment.
Another commenter indicated strong
disagreement with the 2010 Act, stating
that all veterans ‘‘deserve counseling
when they return home.’’ The
commenter further stated that if
veterans are not able to ‘‘turn to the VA
for counseling, then I believe they have
no one to turn [to].’’ We assure this
commenter that neither the 2010 Act
nor this rulemaking restrict veteran
eligibility for readjustment counseling.
On the contrary, this rulemaking
expands the services provided by Vet
Centers and makes the services available
to a broader pool of qualified
individuals. VA may now provide
readjustment counseling to
servicemembers as well as veterans who
served on active duty in Operation
Enduring Freedom (OEF) or Operation
Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and to the families
of these servicemembers and veterans.
We can also provide certain referral
services to those individuals who are
not otherwise eligible for Vet Center
services. By broadening the pool of
qualified candidates who can receive
readjustment counseling, VA is
maintaining its commitment to improve
the mental health of veterans and help
these veterans, their families, and
servicemembers to successfully
integrate back to civilian life. We did
not make any changes based on this
comment.
Commenters questioned the 3-year
time limit set forth in section 304 of the
2010 Act, and appeared to be confused
as to whether VA would enforce that
time limit. In the proposed rulemaking
we stated that section 304 of the 2010
Act authorizes readjustment counseling
for the immediate family of Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi
Freedom veterans for a period of 3 years
after such veterans return from
deployment. 77 FR 14709. However, we
further explained that we have authority
to provide readjustment counseling
under 38 U.S.C. 1712A, 1782, and 1783,
and that authority is actually broader
because it does not have the 3-year
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
limitation found in section 304 of the
2010 Act and is not limited to OEF/OIF
veterans. For this reason, we proposed
in § 17.2000(a)(5) that VA would
provide readjustment counseling to
family members of the veteran or
servicemember, without setting a time
limit to the provision of such
readjustment counseling. We hope that
this explanation further clarifies this
issue for the commenters, and we did
not make any changes based on this
comment.
Some commenters asked for a clear
definition of ‘‘immediate family
member.’’ One commenter stated that
this rulemaking would restrict ‘‘some
family members from accessing
appropriate counseling’’ because
‘‘[t]here is no statutory or regulatory
definition of ‘immediate family’ for
purposes of readjustment counseling.’’
The commenter further stated that in
most states ‘‘same-sex parents cannot
both create legal relationships with their
children.’’ According to the commenter,
such lack of legal recognition would
prevent same-sex couples and their
families from obtaining readjustment
counseling. The commenter suggested
that VA define the term ‘‘immediate
family’’ to include ‘‘all spouses,
domestic partners, children (including
those for whom the veteran stood in
loco parentis), and parents (including
those who stood in loco parentis to the
veteran), regardless of their legally
recognized relationship to the veteran.’’
The commenter added that this
definition would apply for
determinations of eligibility for all
counseling services provided by Vet
Centers, to include readjustment
counseling and bereavement counseling
under 38 U.S.C. 1782 and 1783.
We are making several changes to the
final rule based on this comment. First,
the commenter correctly points out that
there is a need to define ‘‘immediate
family;’’ however, in so doing, the
commenter underscores a weakness in
the proposed rule. In the proposed
rulemaking, we explained that our
authority to provide Vet Center services
to veterans’ family members originates
in 38 U.S.C. 1712A, 1782, and 1783, not
in section 304(a)(2) of the 2010 Act. 77
FR 14709. Section 304 of the 2010 Act
reaffirmed VA’s Vet Center practices in
this regard, but it is not the legal
foundation for them.
Section 304 of the 2010 Act used the
term ‘‘immediate family;’’ however, in
light of our interpretation of sections
1712A, 1782, and 1783 as providing the
foundation for this rule, we now believe
that the final rule should use the term
‘‘family member’’ and not ‘‘immediate
family member.’’ As raised by the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
commenter, the word ‘‘immediate’’ does
not accurately describe the broad cohort
of persons to whom Vet Centers extend
readjustment counseling in order to
support a veteran’s readjustment to
civilian life and is not required based on
the expansive authority for Vet Centers.
First, 38 U.S.C. 1712A authorizes VA to
provide counseling to assist veterans in
adjusting to civilian life, which we
interpreted broadly to include family
and marriage counseling that would
support the veteran during the
adjustment period. 77 FR 14709.
Second, 38 U.S.C. 1782 specifically
authorizes VA to provide counseling,
training, and mental health services for
members of a veteran’s ‘‘immediate
family,’’ but also to the legal guardian of
a veteran, a family caregiver, and the
individual in whose household the
veteran intends to live. Third, 38 U.S.C.
1783 authorizes VA to provide
bereavement counseling to a broad
cohort including individuals who were
treated under 38 U.S.C. 1782, immediate
family members, and the veteran’s
parents. Moreover, Congress has not
established clear limitations on the
authority for VA to provide Vet Center
services to family members in any of
these authorities. It is not clear why
Congress used the phrase ‘‘immediate
family member’’ in section 304(a)(2);
however, section 304 is also somewhat
internally inconsistent as it also requires
VA to provide assistance in ‘‘the
readjustment of the family’’ in
subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(2). In
order to assist in the readjustment of
‘‘the family,’’ Vet Center services must
in some situations be provided to
individuals who might not be in the
veteran’s ‘‘immediate’’ family if we were
to interpret that term narrowly.
Striking the word ‘‘immediate’’ from
proposed § 17.2000(a)(5) does not
resolve all of the commenters’ concerns.
There is still a need to define which
members of a veteran’s family can be
serviced by Vet Centers, and whether
such members may include same-sex
partners and/or members of a same-sex
couple’s family. There is little statutory
guidance on this matter. First, we turn
to the 2010 Act itself, which, in title I
(which established VA’s Program of
Comprehensive Assistance for Family
Caregivers (Caregivers Program)),
broadly defined a veteran’s family to
include a parent, spouse, child, stepfamily member, extended family
member, and anyone who lives with the
veteran. The purposes of these programs
are also similar. The purpose of the
Caregivers Program is to assist certain
disabled active duty servicemembers
and veterans by supporting family
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57069
members who help these disabled
individuals live in the community,
including during the time that such
individuals are transitioning to civilian
life. The purpose of Vet Centers
includes assisting veterans by helping
their families with readjustment issues
common among veterans.
Moreover, section 103 of the 2010 Act
specifically amended 38 U.S.C. 1782,
one of the foundational authorities for
Vet Centers, to require VA to provide
section 1782 counseling to family
caregivers. Therefore, at least to the
extent that Vet Center services are
authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1782, we must
provide them to the same family
members of the veteran who are
included as family members under the
Caregivers Program.
Based on the connections between the
Caregivers Program and the services
provided in Vet Centers, as well as the
various authorities described above that
authorize Vet Centers to provide service
to family members, we believe that it is
appropriate to use a definition of
‘‘family member’’ for purposes of the
Vet Center program that is similar to the
definition set forth in the statute and
regulations relating to the Caregivers
Program. As noted above, a ‘‘family
member’’ is defined by 38 U.S.C.
1720G(d)(3) as a member of the family
of the veteran, including the veteran’s
parent, spouse, child, step-family
member, and extended family member,
or someone who lives with the veteran
but is not a member of the family of the
veteran. Under 38 CFR 71.25(b), we
similarly established in regulation that
these are the family members who may
participate as Primary or Secondary
Family Caregivers. Therefore, we
include these same individuals as
family members for purposes of Vet
Center benefits in paragraph (a)(5) of
§ 17.2000.
Adopting this definition will resolve
the commenters’ concerns. Although we
do not adopt the commenters’ specific
wording, our definition would
encompass domestic partners, spouses,
children, and parents. It would also
include individuals whose relationship
to the veteran is ‘‘in loco parentis,’’
which the commenter defines as
persons who have day-to-day care
duties over the veteran or over whom
the veteran has day-to-day care duties,
so long as these individuals live with
the veteran. It would also include
transgendered individuals, again, so
long as they meet one of the criteria of
the regulation, which includes
individuals who live with the veteran.
It is important to remember that, as
discussed extensively in the proposed
rule, the purpose of Vet Center
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
57070
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
counseling is to assist the veteran or
servicemember in readjusting to civilian
life. The broad definition suggested by
the commenter and adopted in this final
rule serves that broad purpose.
The above analysis and justification
for the use of the Caregivers Program’s
definition of family member clearly
applies to those whose eligibility is
predicated on a veteran’s (or veteran’s
family member’s) eligibility for services
under 38 U.S.C. 1712A, 1782, and 1783.
However, these authorities do not
authorize VA to provide readjustment
counseling to servicemembers. Our
authority to provide readjustment
counseling to servicemembers comes
from section 401 of the 2010 Act.
Nevertheless, in the proposed rule, we
stated that we did not believe Congress
intended to authorize Vet Centers to
provide lesser readjustment counseling
services to servicemembers than those
that we provide to veterans. Moreover,
section 401 specifically authorizes the
provision of services under 38 U.S.C.
1712A, which, again, we believe
authorizes the provision of readjustment
counseling to family members when to
do so would benefit the veteran.
Therefore, we believe that the same
definition of family members should
apply whether we are providing
readjustment services to veterans or
servicemembers.
A commenter stated that the proposed
rule did not include veterans who had
non-combat injuries or illnesses. The
commenter stated that non-combat
veterans should ‘‘qualify because an
injury or illness that is serviceconnected, regardless if it occurred in a
combat or non-combat situation, will
still have a devastating impact to the
service member and veteran along with
their family members.’’ The commenter
recommended that eligibility for
readjustment counseling should be
linked to the veteran’s serviceconnected condition, regardless of
whether such condition was incurred in
combat.
Under 38 U.S.C. 1712A(a)(1)(B)
readjustment counseling may be
provided by VA to servicemembers or
veterans who served on active duty in
a theater of combat operations during a
period of war or to servicemembers or
veterans who served on active duty in
an area where hostilities occurred or in
combat against a hostile force during a
period of hostilities. Although VA is
able to provide mental health care to
non-combat servicemembers and
veterans as part of the medical benefits
package, section 1712A does not
support providing readjustment
counseling to non-combat
servicemembers or veterans. VA cannot
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
amend this statutory authority through
regulation. We did not make any
changes based on this comment.
The commenter was also concerned
that the term ‘‘Armed Forces’’ does not
include the Commissioned Corps of the
Public Health Service (PHS) or the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA). The
commenter recommended the use of the
term ‘‘Uniformed Services’’ instead of
‘‘Armed Forces.’’ Section 17.2000(a)(4)
states that VA will provide readjustment
counseling to any member of the Armed
Forces, including a member of the
National Guard or reserve, who served
on active duty in the Armed Forces in
Operation Enduring Freedom or
Operation Iraqi Freedom. Although the
term ‘‘Armed Forces’’ is not defined in
the regulation, under 38 U.S.C. 101(10),
the term ‘‘Armed Forces’’ means ‘‘the
United States Army, Navy, Marine
Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard,
including the reserve components
thereof.’’ In establishing our authority to
provide Vet Center services to active
duty servicemembers, we believe that
Congress clearly meant that we limit
eligibility to members of the Armed
Forces who served on active duty.
Members of the Armed Forces do not
include individuals in PHS or NOAA,
even if those individuals served on
active duty. Our interpretation is
supported by the fact that Congress
specifically included members of the
National Guard under section 401(a) of
the 2010 Act but did not extend
eligibility to PHS or NOAA. We note
that we are constrained from making a
broader interpretation in this case
because, unlike the definition of ‘‘family
member’’ discussed above, the
eligibility for active duty
servicemembers is clearly established by
section 401 of the 2010 Act and is not
part of the foundational authority for
Vet Centers set forth in 38 U.S.C. 1712A,
1782, and 1783. We believe that
extending our authority in such a
manner would contravene the statute
and, therefore, we did not make the
change requested by the commenter.
The commenter further indicated that
the rulemaking should define the types
of readjustment counseling services that
the family members of the
servicemember and veteran are eligible
to receive. The commenter questioned
whether the family members qualify for
the readjustment counseling benefits as
defined in proposed paragraph (d) or if
the family members are only eligible to
receive certain benefits.
The commenter presents a valid
point. Readjustment counseling services
provided to servicemembers and
veterans are not the same as the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
readjustment counseling services
provided to the family members of
servicemembers and veterans. Under 38
U.S.C. 1712A, we provide Vet Center
services only if to do so would assist the
veteran in adjusting to civilian life.
Under 38 U.S.C. 1782, we are
authorized to provide certain
consultations, marriage, and family
counseling to family members of
veterans ‘‘as necessary in connection
with’’ VA’s treatment of the veteran, and
some of these types of counseling are
provided through our Vet Centers.
Under section 304 of the 2010 Act, we
are authorized to provide education,
support, counseling, and mental health
services to family members of
servicemembers and veterans of
Operation Enduring Freedom and
Operation Iraqi Freedom to assist in the
readjustment of the servicemember or
veteran, the recovery of the individual
from an injury or illness, or the
readjustment of the family following the
return of the individual to family life. In
short, all services provided through Vet
Centers to family members are premised
on whether the provision of the services
will aid in the readjustment of the
servicemember or veteran. In response
to the comment, we have clarified
§ 17.2000(d) to specify this limitation.
We do not believe that it is necessary
to further specify when the services
included in the definition of
readjustment counseling can be
provided to family members because
any of the listed services could be
provided under appropriate
circumstances. For example, it might be
necessary to involve family members
when providing individual counseling,
group counseling, and marital and
family counseling for military-related
readjustment issues. An assessment of
whether the family member needs
substance abuse treatment might be
appropriate as well, particularly for
those veterans who themselves need to
live in a ‘‘drug free’’ environment. When
employment issues present a challenge
to the veteran’s readjustment, a familybased approach might be necessary.
Readjustment of a veteran who
experienced military sexual trauma
may, in some cases, involve support or
counseling for a family member. Even a
psychosocial assessment is defined as a
‘‘holistic’’ assessment under
§ 17.2000(d) and therefore, in some
cases, might involve a family member.
We note that Vet Center services are
provided by mental health professionals
(e.g., social workers, counselors,
psychologists) and are not provided by
a medical professional. Therefore, to the
extent that family members require
medical intervention, it would not be
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
provided at a Vet Center—just as
medical intervention would not be
provided for a veteran at a Vet Center.
For the scope of medical benefits
provided to family members under 38
U.S.C. 1782, please see 38 CFR 71.50.
The commenter also stated that the
rule does not specify the circumstances
under which a family member would
qualify for individual counseling. The
commenter queried whether the
eligibility was tied to the veteran’s
health or if the family member was
‘‘eligible for individual counseling as
long as the veteran/service member
meets one of the four eligibility
criteria.’’ The commenter recommended
that VA clearly define eligibility for
individual counseling by family
members, and how such family
members can request readjustment
counseling.
If the veteran or servicemember meets
one of the criteria listed in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (a)(4) of § 17.2000, the
family member qualifies for
readjustment counseling. This is stated
in paragraph (a)(5). The introductory
sentence to paragraph (a) states that VA
will provide readjustment counseling
‘‘upon request’’ of any of the individuals
listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5).
Therefore, a family member of the
servicemember or veteran may request
readjustment counseling simply by
calling the Vet Center and requesting an
appointment. A formal application is
not needed. We do not believe that
further clarification is needed and did
not make any changes based on this
comment.
A commenter stated that the proposed
rule intended to include Operation New
Dawn (OND), however, OND was not
listed under the section governing
eligibility for readjustment counseling.
In the Supplementary Information
section of the proposed rulemaking we
stated that ‘‘after consultation with the
Department of Defense, VA considers
Operation New Dawn to be part of the
same contingency operation that was
formerly called Operation Iraqi
Freedom. Therefore, VA will consider
participants in Operation New Dawn to
be eligible for benefits under the legal
authorities pertaining to Operation Iraqi
Freedom.’’ As noted by the commenter,
we did not list Operation New Dawn in
proposed § 17.2000(a)(4). To avoid any
confusion that may arise in the future,
we have added Operation New Dawn to
paragraph (a)(4) as a qualifying theatre
of combat operations for
servicemembers and veterans to be
eligible to receive readjustment
counseling.
We received six comments expressing
concern that the Vet Centers would no
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
longer offer bereavement counseling to
the veteran’s families because the
definition of readjustment counseling in
proposed § 17.2000(d) had not
referenced bereavement counseling. We
agree with these six commenters
regarding the value of bereavement
counseling and wish to clarify that
bereavement counseling continues to be
one of the services provided by the Vet
Centers. We note that the
Supplementary Information section of
the proposed rule discussed the
availability of bereavement counseling
and cited the authority for it (38 U.S.C.
1783), but we inadvertently failed to list
it as part of the readjustment counseling
services provided under the rule. We
have amended paragraph (d)
accordingly, and have amended the
listed statutory authority to also include
section 1783. Also, in keeping with the
discussions above, we have added 38
U.S.C. 1782 to the statutory authority, as
well as sections 304 and 402 of the 2010
Act.
A commenter requested that VA
expedite the implementation of sections
401 and 402 of the 2010 Act because it
has been two years since the authorizing
statute was passed. VA’s section 402
authority to provide referrals is
established in statute and is already
being implemented by our Vet Centers.
However, our authority to provide
readjustment counseling to members of
the Armed Forces is predicated
explicitly on the promulgation of
regulations under subsection (c) of
section 401 of the 2010 Act. VA may not
implement this final rulemaking until
after it is published in the Federal
Register. This rulemaking will be
effective 30 days after its publication.
We did not make any changes based on
this comment.
This commenter also requested that
VA provide a strong outreach effort to
servicemembers and veterans in order to
make them aware of the benefits of
readjustment counseling. The
commenter urged that outreach efforts
to servicemembers should emphasize
that treatment in the Vet Centers is
‘‘confidential and un-reportable to their
military line commanders or armories,
or even to VA medical and mental
health authorities (unless severe
psychiatric emergencies were apparent
to Vet Center personnel, in which case
they should be referred for immediate
medical and psychiatric assistance,
either within [Department of Defense
(D[o]D)] or VA facilities).’’
A commenter was concerned with the
confidentiality of Vet Center records.
Specifically, proposed paragraph (b)(4)
had permitted VA to independently
coordinate with DoD in order to verify
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57071
a servicemember’s or veteran’s service
in a theatre of combat operations or in
an area during a period of hostilities in
that area. The commenter stated that ‘‘if
VA were to attempt to verify that
individual through D[o]D systems, a line
commander and/or D[o]D medical
authorities could obtain that
individualized information related to
the query. Given the well-recognized
mental health stigma associated with
the military, we believe this planned
approach by VA would be unwise and
might well serve as a dampener on these
individuals’ interest in participating in
readjustment counseling through VA.’’
The commenter did not believe it was
Congress’ intent that DoD officials learn
the identity of individuals who may
seek readjustment counseling.
We agree with the commenter, which
is why in paragraph (e), we state that
records of the benefits furnished by the
Vet Centers will be maintained with
confidentiality and independent of
other VA or DoD medical records. VA
will not disclose the readjustment
counseling records without the
servicemember’s or veteran’s voluntary
signed authorization. However, the
commenter was correct in that we did
not recognize the potential inadvertent
disclosure of a veteran or
servicemember’s identity through the
independent verification authorized by
proposed paragraph (b)(4). Therefore,
we have removed that paragraph from
the final rule.
In the Supplementary Information
section of the proposed rulemaking we
explained that proposed paragraph
(b)(4) was intended to authorize VA to
support a veteran in obtaining the proof
required to establish eligibility. Rather
than do so through explicit independent
coordination with DoD, we amended
paragraph (b) to include a provision that
would allow for VA assistance in
obtaining proof of eligibility at the
individual’s request. This will allow
persons who believe that their
anonymity may be jeopardized by
involving VA in obtaining a copy of
their Report of Separation or DD Form
214 to attempt to establish their
eligibility through other means.
A commenter urged VA to maintain
adequate staffing in the Vet Centers and
that Congress approve funding for the
Vet Centers through appropriations. The
commenter also urged VA to negotiate
with DoD ‘‘a cost-sharing agreement, as
envisioned in Public Law 97–174, to
cover the VA’s costs of service members’
care based on date verifying the number
of service members who access such
counseling under this new authority, or
that Congress authorize VA additional
appropriations specifically for this care
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
57072
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
of the active force, as well as the cost
of the additional staff needed to provide
the new services.’’
VA agrees with the commenter in that
we anticipate an increase in the number
of servicemembers, veterans, and family
members requesting readjustment
counseling. To accommodate this
increase, VA anticipates hiring 62 new
full time equivalent employees over the
next 3 years. VA has allotted this
increase in expenditure in the Vet
Center’s budget. Although this
rulemaking is in conjunction with DoD,
the allocation of funds does not fall
within DoD’s budget, as recommended
by the commenter. VA has the sole
responsibility for the funding of the Vet
Centers. None of these matters relate to
the text of the regulation, and we did
not make any changes based on this
comment.
In the proposed rule, under paragraph
(b)(1), we had stated that the title of DD
Form 214 was Certificate of Release or
Discharge from Active Service. We are
amending paragraph (b)(1) to correct the
title of DD Form 214 to Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
Although not directly related to any of
the commenter’s concerns, we are
clarifying the language of proposed
paragraph (c). The intent of proposed
paragraph (c) was to provide referral
services to individuals who were on
active duty in theaters of combat, in
areas of hostilities, or as otherwise
stated in proposed paragraph (a), but
whose discharge from service was under
dishonorable conditions, and to their
family members. Such referral services
include obtaining mental health care
and services outside of VA. We believe
that the intent of this paragraph was not
clearly stated as proposed and we have
revised the introductory paragraph to
now state: ‘‘Upon request, VA will
provide an individual who does not
meet the eligibility requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section, solely
because the individual was discharged
under dishonorable conditions from
active military, naval, or air service, the
following.’’ We have also revised the
wording of proposed paragraph (c)(2) for
clarity.
Based on the rationale set forth in the
Supplementary Information to the
proposed rule and in this final rule, VA
is adopting the proposed rule as a final
rule with the changes mentioned above.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as revised by this final
rulemaking, represents VA’s
implementation of its legal authority on
this subject. Other than future
amendments to this regulation or
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
governing statutes, no contrary guidance
or procedures are authorized. All
existing or subsequent VA guidance
must be read to conform with this
rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance is superseded
by this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(at 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that VA
consider the impact of paperwork and
other information collection burdens
imposed on the public. Under 5 CFR
1320.8(b)(2)(vi), an agency may not
collect or sponsor the collection of
information, nor may it impose an
information collection requirement
unless it displays a currently valid
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) control number.
This final rule will impose the
following new information collection
requirements. Section 17.2000(b) allows
a veteran to submit a copy of a DD Form
214 or other appropriate documentation
as evidence that the veteran served in a
theater of combat operations or in an
area during a period of hostilities in that
area that would serve as the basis for
establishing his or her eligibility to
receive readjustment counseling. For
example, receipt of one of the listed
medals will be accepted as evidence to
establish eligibility for readjustment
counseling. As required by the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, VA
submitted the information collection
requirement to OMB for its review.
OMB approved this new information
collection requirement associated with
the final rule and assigned OMB control
number 2900–0787.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this final rule 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. This final rule
will directly affect only individuals and
will not directly affect small entities.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
this rulemaking is exempt from the
initial and final regulatory flexibility
analysis requirements of sections 603
and 604.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the 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
effects, and other advantages;
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. Executive Order
12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review) defines a ‘‘significant
regulatory action,’’ which requires
review by 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 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 this Executive Order.’’
The economic, interagency,
budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action
has been examined, and it has been
determined to be a significant regulatory
action under Executive Order 12866
because it may raise novel legal or
policy issues arising out of legal
mandates, the President’s priorities, or
the principles set forth in Executive
Order 12866.
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
given year. This final rule will 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
for this final rule are as follows: 64.005,
Grants to States for Construction of State
Home Facilities; 64.007, Blind
Rehabilitation Centers; 64.008, Veterans
Domiciliary Care; 64.009, Veterans
Medical Care Benefits; 64.010, Veterans
Nursing Home Care; 64.014, Veterans
State Domiciliary Care; 64.015, Veterans
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 180 / Tuesday, September 17, 2013 / Rules and Regulations
State Nursing Home Care; 64.018,
Sharing Specialized Medical Resources;
64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol
and Drug Dependence; 64.022, Veterans
Home Based Primary Care; and 64.024,
VA Homeless Providers Grant and Per
Diem Program.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug
abuse, Foreign relations, Government
contracts, Grant programs—health,
Government programs—veterans, Health
care, Health facilities, Health
professions, Health records, Homeless,
Medical and dental schools, Medical
devices, Medical research, Mental
health programs, Nursing homes,
Veterans.
Approved: January 8, 2013.
John R. Gingrich,
Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Approved: June 5, 2013.
Jessica L. Wright,
Acting Under Secretary of Defense for
Personnel & Readiness, Department of
Defense.
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs amends 38 CFR part 17 as
follows:
PART 17—MEDICAL
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in
specific sections.
2. Add an undesignated center
heading and § 17.2000 to read as
follows:
■
Vet Centers
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 17.2000
Vet Center services.
(a) Eligibility for readjustment
counseling. Upon request, VA will
provide readjustment counseling to the
following individuals:
(1) A veteran who served on active
duty in a theater of combat operations
during a period of war.
(2) A veteran who served on active
duty in an area in which hostilities
occurred, or in combat against a hostile
force during a period of hostilities.
(3) A veteran who served on active
duty during the Vietnam era who sought
or was provided counseling under 38
U.S.C. 1712A before January 1, 2004.
(4) Any member of the Armed Forces,
including a member of the National
Guard or reserve, who served on active
duty in the Armed Forces in Operation
Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi
Freedom or Operation New Dawn.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:48 Sep 16, 2013
Jkt 229001
(5) A family member of a veteran or
servicemember who is eligible for
readjustment counseling under
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of this
section. For purposes of this section,
family member includes, but is not
limited to, the spouse, parent, child,
step-family member, extended family
member, and any individual who lives
with the veteran or servicemember but
is not a member of the family of the
veteran or servicemember.
(b) Proof of eligibility. With the
veteran’s or servicemember’s consent,
VA will assist in obtaining proof of
eligibility. For the purposes of this
section, proof of service in a theater of
combat operations or in an area during
a period of hostilities in that area will
be established by:
(1) A DD Form 214 (Certificate of
Release or Discharge from Active Duty)
containing notations of service in a
designated theater of combat operations;
or
(2) Receipt of one of the following
medals: The Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal, Service Specific
Expeditionary Medal (e.g., Navy
Expeditionary Medal), Combat Era
Specific Expeditionary Medal (e.g., the
Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary
Medal), Campaign Specific Medal (e.g.,
Vietnam Service Medal or Iraq
Campaign Medal), or other combat
theater awards established by public
law or executive order; or
(3) Proof of receipt of Hostile Fire or
Imminent Danger Pay (commonly
referred to as ‘‘combat pay’’) or combat
tax exemption after November 11, 1998.
(c) Referral and advice. Upon request,
VA will provide an individual who does
not meet the eligibility requirements of
paragraph (a) of this section, solely
because the individual was discharged
under dishonorable conditions from
active military, naval, or air service, the
following:
(1) Referral services to assist such
individual, to the maximum extent
practicable, in obtaining mental health
care and services from sources outside
VA; and
(2) If pertinent, advice to such
individual concerning such individual’s
rights to apply to:
(i) The appropriate military, naval or
air service for review of such
individual’s discharge or release from
such service; and
(ii) VA for a VA benefits eligibility
determination under 38 CFR 3.12.
(d) Readjustment counseling defined.
For the purposes of this section,
readjustment counseling includes, but is
not limited to: psychosocial assessment,
individual counseling, group
counseling, marital and family
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
57073
counseling for military-related
readjustment issues, substance abuse
assessments, medical referrals, referral
for additional VA benefits, employment
assessment and referral, military sexual
trauma counseling and referral,
bereavement counseling, and outreach.
A ‘‘psychosocial assessment’’ under this
paragraph means the holistic assessing
of an individual’s psychological, social,
and functional capacities as it relates to
their readjustment from combat theaters.
Readjustment counseling is provided to
individuals listed in paragraphs (a)(1)
through (a)(4) of this section, and to
family members under paragraph (a)(5)
of this section, when it would aid in the
readjustment of a veteran or
servicemember.
(e) Confidentiality. Benefits under this
section are furnished solely by VA Vet
Centers, which maintain confidential
records independent from any other VA
or Department of Defense medical
records and which will not disclose
such records without either the veteran
or servicemember’s voluntary, signed
authorization, or a specific exception
permitting their release. For more
information, see 5 U.S.C. 552a, 38
U.S.C. 5701 and 7332, 45 CFR parts 160
and 164, and VA’s System of Records
64VA15, ‘‘Readjustment Counseling
Service Vet Center Program.’’
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1712A, 1782, and
1783; Pub. L. 111–163, sec. 304, 401, and
402)
(The Office of Management and Budget has
approved the information collection
requirement in this section under control
number 2900–0787.)
[FR Doc. 2013–22607 Filed 9–16–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52
[EPA–R10–OAR–2013–0174: FRL–9900–03Region10]
Approval and Promulgation of
Implementation Plans; Washington:
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency
Regulatory Updates
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
The EPA is taking final action
to approve revisions to Washington’s
State Implementation Plan (SIP)
submitted by the Washington State
Department of Ecology on February 4,
2005 and August 2, 2006. The
submissions contain revisions to the
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\17SER1.SGM
17SER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 180 (Tuesday, September 17, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 57067-57073]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-22607]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AN92
Vet Center Services
AGENCY: Department of Defense and Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is establishing in
regulation the readjustment counseling currently provided in VA's Vet
Centers to certain veterans of the Armed Forces and members of their
families, and implementing provisions of the Caregivers and Veterans
Omnibus
[[Page 57068]]
Health Services Act of 2010 regarding readjustment counseling.
DATES: Effective Date: This final rule is effective October 17, 2013.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gregory Harms, Readjustment Counseling
Service (10P8), Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-6525.
(This is not a toll-free number.)
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule articulates in regulation
our authority to establish Vet Centers to furnish counseling to certain
veterans upon request, as set forth in 38 U.S.C. 1712A. It also meets a
rulemaking requirement prescribed by Congress in section 401 of the
Caregivers and Veterans Omnibus Health Services Act of 2010, Public Law
111-163 (the 2010 Act), and implements sections 304 and 401 of the 2010
Act, by authorizing Vet Centers to provide readjustment counseling to
certain veterans described in section 304, their families, and certain
members of the Armed Forces set forth in section 401. Finally, this
rulemaking implements section 402 of the 2010 Act by authorizing Vet
Centers to provide certain referral services. Although VA has provided
readjustment counseling under 38 U.S.C. 1712A without a regulation in
the past, in the interests of clarity and completeness, this final rule
covers the provision of benefits to veterans under section 1712A as
well as benefits provided under the 2010 Act.
In a document published in the Federal Register on March 13, 2012
(77 FR 14707), VA proposed to amend part 17 of 38 CFR by adding a new
Sec. 17.2000, which would contain the provisions described above. We
provided a 60-day comment period, which ended on May 14, 2012. We
received 15 comments from members of the general public.
Several commenters agreed with all or part of the proposed
rulemaking and expressed support for the regulation. We did not make
any changes based on these comments.
Another commenter supported the provision of readjustment
counseling but was concerned because ``it has been argued by many
veterans that they were denied these services for many reasons.'' We
cannot respond to the commenter's concerns about denials of treatment
because the comment did not recommend any changes to the proposed rule,
nor did it include any specific circumstances under which a veteran was
denied readjustment counseling. Moreover, addressing any such
circumstance is beyond the scope of this rulemaking. Also, we are not
aware of an ongoing problem of Vet Centers denying readjustment
counseling to eligible veterans. In the proposed rulemaking, we stated
that VA has implemented the statutory authority under 38 U.S.C. 1712A
to ``establish Vet Centers that must furnish counseling to certain
veterans upon request'' without regulations. We would expect to
eliminate or significantly reduce the problem described by the
commenter, if any such problem exists, through this rulemaking.
The commenter also stated that ``the majority of the population
does not know a lot about'' the services provided at Vet Centers. VA is
not aware of this problem, i.e., that a significant proportion of the
eligible veteran population does not know about VA's Vet Center
program. We provide face-to-face outreach, education, and referral to
veterans and their families. However, if such a problem exists, this
regulation will facilitate the implementation of the readjustment
counseling program in the Vet Centers and clearly and publicly indicate
the various services that are included in the definition of
readjustment counseling. VA hopes that this rulemaking, in addition to
other outreach programs, will alert veterans to the readjustment
services provided in the Vet Centers. We did not make any changes based
on this comment.
A commenter stated that VA should require screening for problems
related to readjustment issues to better assist those veterans who are
in need of treatment but who may believe they will ``not have trouble
readjusting or are too stubborn to seek such counseling'' or whose
``problems manifest themselves when they are already thrown in the
jungle of everyday life and their lives become too busy to seek such
counseling.'' The commenter also indicated support for the proposed
rule because it provided readjustment counseling for the whole family,
which assists the transition into the community.
The commenter makes a valid point in that part of successful
readjustment counseling is knowing when a veteran is in need of
assistance. VA has addressed this issue by providing outreach programs
that are available to veterans and servicemembers in Vet Centers and
other VA facilities. Some of the outreach programs include the Vet
Center Combat Call Center (877-WAR-VETS), which is an around-the-clock
confidential call center where combat veterans and their families can
call to talk about their military experience or any other issue they
are facing in their readjustment to civilian life, as well as the
Veterans Crisis Line, which connects veterans in crisis and their
family and friends with 24-hour online chat or text messaging. There
are mobile applications, such as the Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) Coach, that assist veterans in managing their PTSD. Outreach is
also part of the veteran's primary VA care. But no matter how extensive
our outreach and how convenient our services may be, VA cannot require
a veteran to come to a Vet Center, nor can we intervene in the ``every
day'' lives of veterans who do not seek assistance. Therefore, although
we agree with the commenter's sentiments, we did not make any changes
based on this comment.
Another commenter indicated strong disagreement with the 2010 Act,
stating that all veterans ``deserve counseling when they return home.''
The commenter further stated that if veterans are not able to ``turn to
the VA for counseling, then I believe they have no one to turn [to].''
We assure this commenter that neither the 2010 Act nor this rulemaking
restrict veteran eligibility for readjustment counseling. On the
contrary, this rulemaking expands the services provided by Vet Centers
and makes the services available to a broader pool of qualified
individuals. VA may now provide readjustment counseling to
servicemembers as well as veterans who served on active duty in
Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) or Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF), and
to the families of these servicemembers and veterans. We can also
provide certain referral services to those individuals who are not
otherwise eligible for Vet Center services. By broadening the pool of
qualified candidates who can receive readjustment counseling, VA is
maintaining its commitment to improve the mental health of veterans and
help these veterans, their families, and servicemembers to successfully
integrate back to civilian life. We did not make any changes based on
this comment.
Commenters questioned the 3-year time limit set forth in section
304 of the 2010 Act, and appeared to be confused as to whether VA would
enforce that time limit. In the proposed rulemaking we stated that
section 304 of the 2010 Act authorizes readjustment counseling for the
immediate family of Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi
Freedom veterans for a period of 3 years after such veterans return
from deployment. 77 FR 14709. However, we further explained that we
have authority to provide readjustment counseling under 38 U.S.C.
1712A, 1782, and 1783, and that authority is actually broader because
it does not have the 3-year
[[Page 57069]]
limitation found in section 304 of the 2010 Act and is not limited to
OEF/OIF veterans. For this reason, we proposed in Sec. 17.2000(a)(5)
that VA would provide readjustment counseling to family members of the
veteran or servicemember, without setting a time limit to the provision
of such readjustment counseling. We hope that this explanation further
clarifies this issue for the commenters, and we did not make any
changes based on this comment.
Some commenters asked for a clear definition of ``immediate family
member.'' One commenter stated that this rulemaking would restrict
``some family members from accessing appropriate counseling'' because
``[t]here is no statutory or regulatory definition of `immediate
family' for purposes of readjustment counseling.'' The commenter
further stated that in most states ``same-sex parents cannot both
create legal relationships with their children.'' According to the
commenter, such lack of legal recognition would prevent same-sex
couples and their families from obtaining readjustment counseling. The
commenter suggested that VA define the term ``immediate family'' to
include ``all spouses, domestic partners, children (including those for
whom the veteran stood in loco parentis), and parents (including those
who stood in loco parentis to the veteran), regardless of their legally
recognized relationship to the veteran.'' The commenter added that this
definition would apply for determinations of eligibility for all
counseling services provided by Vet Centers, to include readjustment
counseling and bereavement counseling under 38 U.S.C. 1782 and 1783.
We are making several changes to the final rule based on this
comment. First, the commenter correctly points out that there is a need
to define ``immediate family;'' however, in so doing, the commenter
underscores a weakness in the proposed rule. In the proposed
rulemaking, we explained that our authority to provide Vet Center
services to veterans' family members originates in 38 U.S.C. 1712A,
1782, and 1783, not in section 304(a)(2) of the 2010 Act. 77 FR 14709.
Section 304 of the 2010 Act reaffirmed VA's Vet Center practices in
this regard, but it is not the legal foundation for them.
Section 304 of the 2010 Act used the term ``immediate family;''
however, in light of our interpretation of sections 1712A, 1782, and
1783 as providing the foundation for this rule, we now believe that the
final rule should use the term ``family member'' and not ``immediate
family member.'' As raised by the commenter, the word ``immediate''
does not accurately describe the broad cohort of persons to whom Vet
Centers extend readjustment counseling in order to support a veteran's
readjustment to civilian life and is not required based on the
expansive authority for Vet Centers. First, 38 U.S.C. 1712A authorizes
VA to provide counseling to assist veterans in adjusting to civilian
life, which we interpreted broadly to include family and marriage
counseling that would support the veteran during the adjustment period.
77 FR 14709. Second, 38 U.S.C. 1782 specifically authorizes VA to
provide counseling, training, and mental health services for members of
a veteran's ``immediate family,'' but also to the legal guardian of a
veteran, a family caregiver, and the individual in whose household the
veteran intends to live. Third, 38 U.S.C. 1783 authorizes VA to provide
bereavement counseling to a broad cohort including individuals who were
treated under 38 U.S.C. 1782, immediate family members, and the
veteran's parents. Moreover, Congress has not established clear
limitations on the authority for VA to provide Vet Center services to
family members in any of these authorities. It is not clear why
Congress used the phrase ``immediate family member'' in section
304(a)(2); however, section 304 is also somewhat internally
inconsistent as it also requires VA to provide assistance in ``the
readjustment of the family'' in subparagraph (C) of subsection (a)(2).
In order to assist in the readjustment of ``the family,'' Vet Center
services must in some situations be provided to individuals who might
not be in the veteran's ``immediate'' family if we were to interpret
that term narrowly.
Striking the word ``immediate'' from proposed Sec. 17.2000(a)(5)
does not resolve all of the commenters' concerns. There is still a need
to define which members of a veteran's family can be serviced by Vet
Centers, and whether such members may include same-sex partners and/or
members of a same-sex couple's family. There is little statutory
guidance on this matter. First, we turn to the 2010 Act itself, which,
in title I (which established VA's Program of Comprehensive Assistance
for Family Caregivers (Caregivers Program)), broadly defined a
veteran's family to include a parent, spouse, child, step-family
member, extended family member, and anyone who lives with the veteran.
The purposes of these programs are also similar. The purpose of the
Caregivers Program is to assist certain disabled active duty
servicemembers and veterans by supporting family members who help these
disabled individuals live in the community, including during the time
that such individuals are transitioning to civilian life. The purpose
of Vet Centers includes assisting veterans by helping their families
with readjustment issues common among veterans.
Moreover, section 103 of the 2010 Act specifically amended 38
U.S.C. 1782, one of the foundational authorities for Vet Centers, to
require VA to provide section 1782 counseling to family caregivers.
Therefore, at least to the extent that Vet Center services are
authorized by 38 U.S.C. 1782, we must provide them to the same family
members of the veteran who are included as family members under the
Caregivers Program.
Based on the connections between the Caregivers Program and the
services provided in Vet Centers, as well as the various authorities
described above that authorize Vet Centers to provide service to family
members, we believe that it is appropriate to use a definition of
``family member'' for purposes of the Vet Center program that is
similar to the definition set forth in the statute and regulations
relating to the Caregivers Program. As noted above, a ``family member''
is defined by 38 U.S.C. 1720G(d)(3) as a member of the family of the
veteran, including the veteran's parent, spouse, child, step-family
member, and extended family member, or someone who lives with the
veteran but is not a member of the family of the veteran. Under 38 CFR
71.25(b), we similarly established in regulation that these are the
family members who may participate as Primary or Secondary Family
Caregivers. Therefore, we include these same individuals as family
members for purposes of Vet Center benefits in paragraph (a)(5) of
Sec. 17.2000.
Adopting this definition will resolve the commenters' concerns.
Although we do not adopt the commenters' specific wording, our
definition would encompass domestic partners, spouses, children, and
parents. It would also include individuals whose relationship to the
veteran is ``in loco parentis,'' which the commenter defines as persons
who have day-to-day care duties over the veteran or over whom the
veteran has day-to-day care duties, so long as these individuals live
with the veteran. It would also include transgendered individuals,
again, so long as they meet one of the criteria of the regulation,
which includes individuals who live with the veteran. It is important
to remember that, as discussed extensively in the proposed rule, the
purpose of Vet Center
[[Page 57070]]
counseling is to assist the veteran or servicemember in readjusting to
civilian life. The broad definition suggested by the commenter and
adopted in this final rule serves that broad purpose.
The above analysis and justification for the use of the Caregivers
Program's definition of family member clearly applies to those whose
eligibility is predicated on a veteran's (or veteran's family member's)
eligibility for services under 38 U.S.C. 1712A, 1782, and 1783.
However, these authorities do not authorize VA to provide readjustment
counseling to servicemembers. Our authority to provide readjustment
counseling to servicemembers comes from section 401 of the 2010 Act.
Nevertheless, in the proposed rule, we stated that we did not believe
Congress intended to authorize Vet Centers to provide lesser
readjustment counseling services to servicemembers than those that we
provide to veterans. Moreover, section 401 specifically authorizes the
provision of services under 38 U.S.C. 1712A, which, again, we believe
authorizes the provision of readjustment counseling to family members
when to do so would benefit the veteran. Therefore, we believe that the
same definition of family members should apply whether we are providing
readjustment services to veterans or servicemembers.
A commenter stated that the proposed rule did not include veterans
who had non-combat injuries or illnesses. The commenter stated that
non-combat veterans should ``qualify because an injury or illness that
is service-connected, regardless if it occurred in a combat or non-
combat situation, will still have a devastating impact to the service
member and veteran along with their family members.'' The commenter
recommended that eligibility for readjustment counseling should be
linked to the veteran's service-connected condition, regardless of
whether such condition was incurred in combat.
Under 38 U.S.C. 1712A(a)(1)(B) readjustment counseling may be
provided by VA to servicemembers or veterans who served on active duty
in a theater of combat operations during a period of war or to
servicemembers or veterans who served on active duty in an area where
hostilities occurred or in combat against a hostile force during a
period of hostilities. Although VA is able to provide mental health
care to non-combat servicemembers and veterans as part of the medical
benefits package, section 1712A does not support providing readjustment
counseling to non-combat servicemembers or veterans. VA cannot amend
this statutory authority through regulation. We did not make any
changes based on this comment.
The commenter was also concerned that the term ``Armed Forces''
does not include the Commissioned Corps of the Public Health Service
(PHS) or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
The commenter recommended the use of the term ``Uniformed Services''
instead of ``Armed Forces.'' Section 17.2000(a)(4) states that VA will
provide readjustment counseling to any member of the Armed Forces,
including a member of the National Guard or reserve, who served on
active duty in the Armed Forces in Operation Enduring Freedom or
Operation Iraqi Freedom. Although the term ``Armed Forces'' is not
defined in the regulation, under 38 U.S.C. 101(10), the term ``Armed
Forces'' means ``the United States Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force,
and Coast Guard, including the reserve components thereof.'' In
establishing our authority to provide Vet Center services to active
duty servicemembers, we believe that Congress clearly meant that we
limit eligibility to members of the Armed Forces who served on active
duty. Members of the Armed Forces do not include individuals in PHS or
NOAA, even if those individuals served on active duty. Our
interpretation is supported by the fact that Congress specifically
included members of the National Guard under section 401(a) of the 2010
Act but did not extend eligibility to PHS or NOAA. We note that we are
constrained from making a broader interpretation in this case because,
unlike the definition of ``family member'' discussed above, the
eligibility for active duty servicemembers is clearly established by
section 401 of the 2010 Act and is not part of the foundational
authority for Vet Centers set forth in 38 U.S.C. 1712A, 1782, and 1783.
We believe that extending our authority in such a manner would
contravene the statute and, therefore, we did not make the change
requested by the commenter.
The commenter further indicated that the rulemaking should define
the types of readjustment counseling services that the family members
of the servicemember and veteran are eligible to receive. The commenter
questioned whether the family members qualify for the readjustment
counseling benefits as defined in proposed paragraph (d) or if the
family members are only eligible to receive certain benefits.
The commenter presents a valid point. Readjustment counseling
services provided to servicemembers and veterans are not the same as
the readjustment counseling services provided to the family members of
servicemembers and veterans. Under 38 U.S.C. 1712A, we provide Vet
Center services only if to do so would assist the veteran in adjusting
to civilian life. Under 38 U.S.C. 1782, we are authorized to provide
certain consultations, marriage, and family counseling to family
members of veterans ``as necessary in connection with'' VA's treatment
of the veteran, and some of these types of counseling are provided
through our Vet Centers. Under section 304 of the 2010 Act, we are
authorized to provide education, support, counseling, and mental health
services to family members of servicemembers and veterans of Operation
Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom to assist in the
readjustment of the servicemember or veteran, the recovery of the
individual from an injury or illness, or the readjustment of the family
following the return of the individual to family life. In short, all
services provided through Vet Centers to family members are premised on
whether the provision of the services will aid in the readjustment of
the servicemember or veteran. In response to the comment, we have
clarified Sec. 17.2000(d) to specify this limitation.
We do not believe that it is necessary to further specify when the
services included in the definition of readjustment counseling can be
provided to family members because any of the listed services could be
provided under appropriate circumstances. For example, it might be
necessary to involve family members when providing individual
counseling, group counseling, and marital and family counseling for
military-related readjustment issues. An assessment of whether the
family member needs substance abuse treatment might be appropriate as
well, particularly for those veterans who themselves need to live in a
``drug free'' environment. When employment issues present a challenge
to the veteran's readjustment, a family-based approach might be
necessary. Readjustment of a veteran who experienced military sexual
trauma may, in some cases, involve support or counseling for a family
member. Even a psychosocial assessment is defined as a ``holistic''
assessment under Sec. 17.2000(d) and therefore, in some cases, might
involve a family member.
We note that Vet Center services are provided by mental health
professionals (e.g., social workers, counselors, psychologists) and are
not provided by a medical professional. Therefore, to the extent that
family members require medical intervention, it would not be
[[Page 57071]]
provided at a Vet Center--just as medical intervention would not be
provided for a veteran at a Vet Center. For the scope of medical
benefits provided to family members under 38 U.S.C. 1782, please see 38
CFR 71.50.
The commenter also stated that the rule does not specify the
circumstances under which a family member would qualify for individual
counseling. The commenter queried whether the eligibility was tied to
the veteran's health or if the family member was ``eligible for
individual counseling as long as the veteran/service member meets one
of the four eligibility criteria.'' The commenter recommended that VA
clearly define eligibility for individual counseling by family members,
and how such family members can request readjustment counseling.
If the veteran or servicemember meets one of the criteria listed in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of Sec. 17.2000, the family member
qualifies for readjustment counseling. This is stated in paragraph
(a)(5). The introductory sentence to paragraph (a) states that VA will
provide readjustment counseling ``upon request'' of any of the
individuals listed in paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(5). Therefore, a
family member of the servicemember or veteran may request readjustment
counseling simply by calling the Vet Center and requesting an
appointment. A formal application is not needed. We do not believe that
further clarification is needed and did not make any changes based on
this comment.
A commenter stated that the proposed rule intended to include
Operation New Dawn (OND), however, OND was not listed under the section
governing eligibility for readjustment counseling. In the Supplementary
Information section of the proposed rulemaking we stated that ``after
consultation with the Department of Defense, VA considers Operation New
Dawn to be part of the same contingency operation that was formerly
called Operation Iraqi Freedom. Therefore, VA will consider
participants in Operation New Dawn to be eligible for benefits under
the legal authorities pertaining to Operation Iraqi Freedom.'' As noted
by the commenter, we did not list Operation New Dawn in proposed Sec.
17.2000(a)(4). To avoid any confusion that may arise in the future, we
have added Operation New Dawn to paragraph (a)(4) as a qualifying
theatre of combat operations for servicemembers and veterans to be
eligible to receive readjustment counseling.
We received six comments expressing concern that the Vet Centers
would no longer offer bereavement counseling to the veteran's families
because the definition of readjustment counseling in proposed Sec.
17.2000(d) had not referenced bereavement counseling. We agree with
these six commenters regarding the value of bereavement counseling and
wish to clarify that bereavement counseling continues to be one of the
services provided by the Vet Centers. We note that the Supplementary
Information section of the proposed rule discussed the availability of
bereavement counseling and cited the authority for it (38 U.S.C. 1783),
but we inadvertently failed to list it as part of the readjustment
counseling services provided under the rule. We have amended paragraph
(d) accordingly, and have amended the listed statutory authority to
also include section 1783. Also, in keeping with the discussions above,
we have added 38 U.S.C. 1782 to the statutory authority, as well as
sections 304 and 402 of the 2010 Act.
A commenter requested that VA expedite the implementation of
sections 401 and 402 of the 2010 Act because it has been two years
since the authorizing statute was passed. VA's section 402 authority to
provide referrals is established in statute and is already being
implemented by our Vet Centers. However, our authority to provide
readjustment counseling to members of the Armed Forces is predicated
explicitly on the promulgation of regulations under subsection (c) of
section 401 of the 2010 Act. VA may not implement this final rulemaking
until after it is published in the Federal Register. This rulemaking
will be effective 30 days after its publication. We did not make any
changes based on this comment.
This commenter also requested that VA provide a strong outreach
effort to servicemembers and veterans in order to make them aware of
the benefits of readjustment counseling. The commenter urged that
outreach efforts to servicemembers should emphasize that treatment in
the Vet Centers is ``confidential and un-reportable to their military
line commanders or armories, or even to VA medical and mental health
authorities (unless severe psychiatric emergencies were apparent to Vet
Center personnel, in which case they should be referred for immediate
medical and psychiatric assistance, either within [Department of
Defense (D[o]D)] or VA facilities).''
A commenter was concerned with the confidentiality of Vet Center
records. Specifically, proposed paragraph (b)(4) had permitted VA to
independently coordinate with DoD in order to verify a servicemember's
or veteran's service in a theatre of combat operations or in an area
during a period of hostilities in that area. The commenter stated that
``if VA were to attempt to verify that individual through D[o]D
systems, a line commander and/or D[o]D medical authorities could obtain
that individualized information related to the query. Given the well-
recognized mental health stigma associated with the military, we
believe this planned approach by VA would be unwise and might well
serve as a dampener on these individuals' interest in participating in
readjustment counseling through VA.'' The commenter did not believe it
was Congress' intent that DoD officials learn the identity of
individuals who may seek readjustment counseling.
We agree with the commenter, which is why in paragraph (e), we
state that records of the benefits furnished by the Vet Centers will be
maintained with confidentiality and independent of other VA or DoD
medical records. VA will not disclose the readjustment counseling
records without the servicemember's or veteran's voluntary signed
authorization. However, the commenter was correct in that we did not
recognize the potential inadvertent disclosure of a veteran or
servicemember's identity through the independent verification
authorized by proposed paragraph (b)(4). Therefore, we have removed
that paragraph from the final rule.
In the Supplementary Information section of the proposed rulemaking
we explained that proposed paragraph (b)(4) was intended to authorize
VA to support a veteran in obtaining the proof required to establish
eligibility. Rather than do so through explicit independent
coordination with DoD, we amended paragraph (b) to include a provision
that would allow for VA assistance in obtaining proof of eligibility at
the individual's request. This will allow persons who believe that
their anonymity may be jeopardized by involving VA in obtaining a copy
of their Report of Separation or DD Form 214 to attempt to establish
their eligibility through other means.
A commenter urged VA to maintain adequate staffing in the Vet
Centers and that Congress approve funding for the Vet Centers through
appropriations. The commenter also urged VA to negotiate with DoD ``a
cost-sharing agreement, as envisioned in Public Law 97-174, to cover
the VA's costs of service members' care based on date verifying the
number of service members who access such counseling under this new
authority, or that Congress authorize VA additional appropriations
specifically for this care
[[Page 57072]]
of the active force, as well as the cost of the additional staff needed
to provide the new services.''
VA agrees with the commenter in that we anticipate an increase in
the number of servicemembers, veterans, and family members requesting
readjustment counseling. To accommodate this increase, VA anticipates
hiring 62 new full time equivalent employees over the next 3 years. VA
has allotted this increase in expenditure in the Vet Center's budget.
Although this rulemaking is in conjunction with DoD, the allocation of
funds does not fall within DoD's budget, as recommended by the
commenter. VA has the sole responsibility for the funding of the Vet
Centers. None of these matters relate to the text of the regulation,
and we did not make any changes based on this comment.
In the proposed rule, under paragraph (b)(1), we had stated that
the title of DD Form 214 was Certificate of Release or Discharge from
Active Service. We are amending paragraph (b)(1) to correct the title
of DD Form 214 to Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty.
Although not directly related to any of the commenter's concerns,
we are clarifying the language of proposed paragraph (c). The intent of
proposed paragraph (c) was to provide referral services to individuals
who were on active duty in theaters of combat, in areas of hostilities,
or as otherwise stated in proposed paragraph (a), but whose discharge
from service was under dishonorable conditions, and to their family
members. Such referral services include obtaining mental health care
and services outside of VA. We believe that the intent of this
paragraph was not clearly stated as proposed and we have revised the
introductory paragraph to now state: ``Upon request, VA will provide an
individual who does not meet the eligibility requirements of paragraph
(a) of this section, solely because the individual was discharged under
dishonorable conditions from active military, naval, or air service,
the following.'' We have also revised the wording of proposed paragraph
(c)(2) for clarity.
Based on the rationale set forth in the Supplementary Information
to the proposed rule and in this final rule, VA is adopting the
proposed rule as a final rule with the changes mentioned above.
Effect of Rulemaking
Title 38 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as revised by this
final rulemaking, represents VA's implementation of its legal authority
on this subject. Other than future amendments to this regulation or
governing statutes, no contrary guidance or procedures are authorized.
All existing or subsequent VA guidance must be read to conform with
this rulemaking if possible or, if not possible, such guidance is
superseded by this rulemaking.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (at 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that VA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. Under 5 CFR 1320.8(b)(2)(vi),
an agency may not collect or sponsor the collection of information, nor
may it impose an information collection requirement unless it displays
a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number.
This final rule will impose the following new information
collection requirements. Section 17.2000(b) allows a veteran to submit
a copy of a DD Form 214 or other appropriate documentation as evidence
that the veteran served in a theater of combat operations or in an area
during a period of hostilities in that area that would serve as the
basis for establishing his or her eligibility to receive readjustment
counseling. For example, receipt of one of the listed medals will be
accepted as evidence to establish eligibility for readjustment
counseling. As required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, VA
submitted the information collection requirement to OMB for its review.
OMB approved this new information collection requirement associated
with the final rule and assigned OMB control number 2900-0787.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this final rule 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. This final rule will directly affect only individuals and will not
directly affect small entities. Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b),
this rulemaking is exempt from the initial and final regulatory
flexibility analysis requirements of sections 603 and 604.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
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 effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) defines a
``significant regulatory action,'' which requires review by 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 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
this Executive Order.''
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action has been examined, and it has
been determined to be a significant regulatory action under Executive
Order 12866 because it may raise novel legal or policy issues arising
out of legal mandates, the President's priorities, or the principles
set forth in Executive Order 12866.
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 given year. This final rule will 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 for this final rule are as follows: 64.005, Grants to States for
Construction of State Home Facilities; 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation
Centers; 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care; 64.009, Veterans Medical
Care Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care; 64.014, Veterans
State Domiciliary Care; 64.015, Veterans
[[Page 57073]]
State Nursing Home Care; 64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical Resources;
64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug Dependence; 64.022,
Veterans Home Based Primary Care; and 64.024, VA Homeless Providers
Grant and Per Diem Program.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Claims, Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse, Foreign relations,
Government contracts, Grant programs--health, Government programs--
veterans, Health care, Health facilities, Health professions, Health
records, Homeless, Medical and dental schools, Medical devices, Medical
research, Mental health programs, Nursing homes, Veterans.
Approved: January 8, 2013.
John R. Gingrich,
Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs.
Approved: June 5, 2013.
Jessica L. Wright,
Acting Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel & Readiness, Department
of Defense.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, the Department of
Veterans Affairs amends 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
PART 17--MEDICAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.
0
2. Add an undesignated center heading and Sec. 17.2000 to read as
follows:
Vet Centers
Sec. 17.2000 Vet Center services.
(a) Eligibility for readjustment counseling. Upon request, VA will
provide readjustment counseling to the following individuals:
(1) A veteran who served on active duty in a theater of combat
operations during a period of war.
(2) A veteran who served on active duty in an area in which
hostilities occurred, or in combat against a hostile force during a
period of hostilities.
(3) A veteran who served on active duty during the Vietnam era who
sought or was provided counseling under 38 U.S.C. 1712A before January
1, 2004.
(4) Any member of the Armed Forces, including a member of the
National Guard or reserve, who served on active duty in the Armed
Forces in Operation Enduring Freedom, Operation Iraqi Freedom or
Operation New Dawn.
(5) A family member of a veteran or servicemember who is eligible
for readjustment counseling under paragraphs (a)(1) through (a)(4) of
this section. For purposes of this section, family member includes, but
is not limited to, the spouse, parent, child, step-family member,
extended family member, and any individual who lives with the veteran
or servicemember but is not a member of the family of the veteran or
servicemember.
(b) Proof of eligibility. With the veteran's or servicemember's
consent, VA will assist in obtaining proof of eligibility. For the
purposes of this section, proof of service in a theater of combat
operations or in an area during a period of hostilities in that area
will be established by:
(1) A DD Form 214 (Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active
Duty) containing notations of service in a designated theater of combat
operations; or
(2) Receipt of one of the following medals: The Armed Forces
Expeditionary Medal, Service Specific Expeditionary Medal (e.g., Navy
Expeditionary Medal), Combat Era Specific Expeditionary Medal (e.g.,
the Global War on Terrorism Expeditionary Medal), Campaign Specific
Medal (e.g., Vietnam Service Medal or Iraq Campaign Medal), or other
combat theater awards established by public law or executive order; or
(3) Proof of receipt of Hostile Fire or Imminent Danger Pay
(commonly referred to as ``combat pay'') or combat tax exemption after
November 11, 1998.
(c) Referral and advice. Upon request, VA will provide an
individual who does not meet the eligibility requirements of paragraph
(a) of this section, solely because the individual was discharged under
dishonorable conditions from active military, naval, or air service,
the following:
(1) Referral services to assist such individual, to the maximum
extent practicable, in obtaining mental health care and services from
sources outside VA; and
(2) If pertinent, advice to such individual concerning such
individual's rights to apply to:
(i) The appropriate military, naval or air service for review of
such individual's discharge or release from such service; and
(ii) VA for a VA benefits eligibility determination under 38 CFR
3.12.
(d) Readjustment counseling defined. For the purposes of this
section, readjustment counseling includes, but is not limited to:
psychosocial assessment, individual counseling, group counseling,
marital and family counseling for military-related readjustment issues,
substance abuse assessments, medical referrals, referral for additional
VA benefits, employment assessment and referral, military sexual trauma
counseling and referral, bereavement counseling, and outreach. A
``psychosocial assessment'' under this paragraph means the holistic
assessing of an individual's psychological, social, and functional
capacities as it relates to their readjustment from combat theaters.
Readjustment counseling is provided to individuals listed in paragraphs
(a)(1) through (a)(4) of this section, and to family members under
paragraph (a)(5) of this section, when it would aid in the readjustment
of a veteran or servicemember.
(e) Confidentiality. Benefits under this section are furnished
solely by VA Vet Centers, which maintain confidential records
independent from any other VA or Department of Defense medical records
and which will not disclose such records without either the veteran or
servicemember's voluntary, signed authorization, or a specific
exception permitting their release. For more information, see 5 U.S.C.
552a, 38 U.S.C. 5701 and 7332, 45 CFR parts 160 and 164, and VA's
System of Records 64VA15, ``Readjustment Counseling Service Vet Center
Program.''
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, 1712A, 1782, and 1783; Pub. L. 111-163,
sec. 304, 401, and 402)
(The Office of Management and Budget has approved the
information collection requirement in this section under control
number 2900-0787.)
[FR Doc. 2013-22607 Filed 9-16-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P