[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 173 (Thursday, September 7, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 46531-46533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-22128]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 3
RIN 2900-AG85
Evidence Requirements
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document adopts as a final rule, without change, an
interim rule that amends Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
adjudication regulations concerning the evidence required to establish
birth, death, marriage, or relationship. This amendment was necessary
to expedite the payment of benefits by allowing VA to accept
photocopies of documents necessary to establish birth, death, marriage,
or relationship. The intended effect of this amendment is to improve
the efficiency and timeliness of claims processing.
EFFECTIVE DATE: This document is effective September 7, 1995 (The
interim rule was effective September 8, 1994).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steven Thornberry, Consultant,
Regulations Staff, Compensation and Pension Service, Veterans Benefits
Administration, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420,
telephone (202) 273-7210.
[[Page 46532]]
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 8, 1994, VA published in the
Federal Register an interim rule with request for comments (59 FR
46337). The rule revised VA regulations concerning evidence
requirements to permit claimants to use uncertified photocopies of
documents to establish birth, death, marriage, and relationship.
Previous regulations required that a copy of a document be certified
over the signature and official seal of the custodian of the record. We
requested that comments to the interim rule be submitted on or before
November 7, 1994. We received 11 comments, most from officials of state
agencies charged with maintaining and issuing vital records.
The commenters were unanimous in their opinion that by accepting
photocopies VA increases the likelihood that it will erroneously award
benefits based on altered documents.
We currently have adequate safeguards against erroneously awarding
benefits on the basis of altered photocopies. Under 38 CFR 3.216, we
require all compensation, pension, or dependency and indemnity
compensation recipients or claimants to furnish VA the social security
numbers of all dependents on whose behalf benefits are claimed or
received. Under the authority of 38 U.S.C. 5317, VA may exchange data
with other federal agencies to verify information from VA beneficiaries
concerning family members and family income. As an additional
safeguard, we have retained in this rule the right to request a
certified copy of a document if we are not satisfied that the photocopy
submitted is genuine or unaltered. In light of these safeguards, we
can, in our judgment, accept uncertified copies without compromising
the integrity of our benefit programs.
Several commenters saw no need for VA to accept uncertified copies
as a measure to expedite claims processing. Six of these remarked that
it is generally not difficult to obtain certified copies, and 8 stated
that many states provide copies free of charge if they are to be used
to pursue a claim for VA benefits.
Our experience shows that VA's former requirement for certified
copies did delay claims processing. Claimants spent additional time
trying to satisfy that requirement, partly because many did not
understand what VA meant by a certified copy or how to obtain one,
especially from a state other than where they live. We realize that
some states do provide VA claimants certified copies at no cost.
However, if claimants are unaware that certified copies for VA claims
are free or fail to indicate that the copies are needed to obtain VA
benefits, they may be charged. VA claimants should not incur the delay,
expense, or inconvenience of obtaining certified copies of documents if
uncertified photocopies will satisfy VA's needs.
Four commenters remarked that, inasmuch as some states have laws
that prohibit copying certified copies of vital records, VA's
acceptance of uncertified copies could encourage claimants to violate
state laws.
This rule does not require that claimants submit photocopies of
vital records. It merely provides that option to simplify the proof of
claims. Responsibility for obeying state laws lies with the persons
subject to those laws. In any event, the fact that some states prohibit
copying certified copies is no reason to hold all claimants to higher
evidentiary standards.
One commenter suggested that VA request certified copies, photocopy
them for the claimants' records, and return them to the claimants,
since claimants must have a certified copy to photocopy in the first
place.
Many claimants submit original documents in conjunction with
benefit claims, which we routinely return after making copies for our
records. If a claimant submits a certified copy and requests its return
after we have copied it for our records, we honor that request.
However, the claimant still has the responsibility of submitting an
original document or a certified copy, and, consequently, the procedure
does nothing to expedite claims processing. Furthermore, under this
procedure, the original document or the certified copy might be lost in
the mail and have to be replaced. Under this new rule, the claimant
could keep the original or certified copy and submit a photocopy to VA.
One commenter suggested that, if VA's main concern is improving
public service without regard to cost, VA eliminate the requirement for
any form of documentation other than a signature on a claims form.
In fact, section 301(a) of the ``Veterans' Benefits Improvements
Act of 1994,'' Public Law 103-446, approved November 2, 1994,
authorizes VA to accept the written statement of a claimant as proof of
marriage, dissolution of a marriage, birth of a child, and death of any
family member. The statute further provides that VA may require
documentation in certain situations. This law was enacted after
publication of our interim rule on evidence requirements. Whether VA
should accept claimants' statements as proof of relationships is a
separate issue that we may address in future rulemaking.
Three commenters expressed concerns that the members of the Blue
Ribbon Panel on Claims Processing (the Panel), which made the
recommendation implemented by this rulemaking, had little operational
experience dealing with vital records. The commenters felt that the
Panel would have benefited from the advice and recommendations of other
federal agencies that use vital records or of members of the
Association for Vital Records and Health Statistics (AVRHS), who are
the primary keepers of vital records.
The mandate of the Panel was to develop recommendations to shorten
the time it takes VA to make decisions on disability claims and reduce
the backlog of claims, which had reached critical levels at many
regional offices. Accordingly, the Panel's membership comprised VA
officials and representatives from veterans' service organizations with
extensive knowledge of VA claims adjudication. The Panel made 43
recommendations covering a broad spectrum of claims-processing
procedures, including measures to expedite development of evidence
needed for the adjudication of pending claims. The Panel neither
included anyone with expertise in vital records nor sought the advice
of such experts, but we are unaware of how such expertise would have
helped the Panel to develop recommendations to shorten VA's claims
processing time and to reduce the claims backlog. Furthermore, although
the Panel did not seek advice from vital-records experts, the comment
period provided by the interim rule that implemented the Panel's
recommendation gave the opportunity for such input.
One commenter stated that many state and county Vital Records
offices rely on the revenue obtained from issuing certified copies.
Wide-spread acceptance of uncertified photocopies would decrease this
revenue and possibly force some of these self-supporting offices to
increase the price of certified copies.
Although we understand the commenter's concerns, the purpose of
this rule is to improve the efficiency and timeliness of processing
claims for VA benefits. We find that the possible decrease in vital
records offices' revenue does not warrant imposing on claimants more
stringent evidence requirements than are necessary, in our judgment, to
establish entitlement.
VA appreciates the interest of the commenters and thanks them for
their thoughtful remarks. We are here
[[Page 46533]]
affirming as a final rule, without change, the interim rule published
at 59 FR 46337.
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 would not directly affect small entities. Only VA
beneficiaries could be directly affected. Therefore, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 605 (b), this final rule is exempt from the initial and final
regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of Secs. 603 and 604.
(The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance program numbers are
64.104, 64.105, 64.109, and 64.110).
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 3
Administrative practice and procedure, Claims, Health care,
Individuals with disabilities, Pensions, Veterans.
The interim rule published September 8, 1994, in the Federal
Register (59 FR 46337) amending 38 CFR part 3 is adopted as final
without change.
Approved: August 28, 1995.
Jesse Brown,
Secretary of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 95-22128 Filed 9-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P