42614 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 162 / Monday, August 24, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

result in such an expenditure, we do 

discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not effect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. A preliminary 

environmental analysis checklist 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket where indicated 

under ADDRESSES. We seek any 

comments or information that may lead 

to the discovery of a significant 

environmental impact from this 

proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 147 

Continental shelf, Marine safety, 

Navigation (water). 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 147 as follows: 

PART 147—SAFETY ZONES 

1. The authority citation for part 147 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 14 U.S.C. 85; 43 U.S.C. 1333; 

Department of Homeland Security Delegation 

No. 0170.1. 

2. Add § 147.847 to read as follows: 

§ 147.847 BW PIONEER Floating 

Production, Storage, and Offloading System 

Safety Zone. 

(a) Description. The BW PIONEER, a 

Floating Production, Storage and 

Offloading (FPSO) system, is in the 

deepwater area of the Gulf of Mexico at 

Walker Ridge 249. The FPSO can swing 

in a 360 degree arc around the center 

point of the turret buoy’s swing circle at 

26°41′46.25′′ N and 090°30′30.16′′ W. 

The area within 500 meters (1,640.4 

feet) around the stern of the FPSO when 

it is moored to the turret buoy is a safety 

zone. If the FPSO detaches from the 

turret buoy, the area within 500 meters 

around the center point at 26°41′46.25′′ 

N and 090°30′30.16′′ W will be a safety 

zone. 

(b) Regulation. No vessel may enter or 

remain in this safety zone except the 

following: 

(1) An attending vessel; 

(2) A vessel under 100 feet in length 

overall not engaged in towing; or 

(3) A vessel authorized by the 

Commander, Eighth Coast Guard 

District. 

Dated: July 31, 2009. 

Mary E. Landry, 

Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, 

Eighth Coast Guard District. 

[FR Doc. E9–20246 Filed 8–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

33 CFR Part 165 

[Docket No. USCG–2009–0725] 

RIN 1625–AA00 

Safety Zone; Private Fireworks Show, 

Chesapeake Bay, Virginia Beach, VA 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard proposes 

establishing a safety zone on 

Chesapeake Bay in the vicinity of the 

Virginia Beach Resort and Conference 

Center in Virginia Beach, VA in support 

of a private fireworks show. This action 

is intended to restrict access to the 

specified portion of Chesapeake Bay to 

protect the public from the hazards 

associated with fireworks displays. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before September 14, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2009–0725 using any one of the 

following methods: 

(1) Federal eRulemaking Portal: 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

(2) Fax: 202–493–2251. 

(3) Mail: Docket Management Facility 

(M–30), U.S. Department of 

Transportation, West Building Ground 

Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590– 

0001. 

(4) Hand delivery: Same as mail 

address above, between 9 a.m. and 5 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 162 / Monday, August 24, 2009 / Proposed Rules 42615 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. The telephone number 

is 202–366–9329. 

To avoid duplication, please use only 

one of these four methods. See the 

‘‘Public Participation and Request for 

Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section 

below for instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have questions on this proposed 

rule, call or e-mail LT Tiffany Duffy, 

United States Coast Guard Sector 

Hampton Roads Waterways 

Management Division; telephone 

757–668–5580, e-mail 

Tiffany.A.Duffy@uscg.mil. If you have 

questions on viewing or submitting 

material to the docket, call Renee V. 

Wright, Program Manager, Docket 

Operations, telephone 202–366–9826. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

We encourage you to participate in 

this rulemaking by submitting 

comments and related materials. All 

comments received will be posted 

without change to http:// 

www.regulations.gov and will include 

any personal information you have 

provided. 

Submitting Comments 

If you submit a comment, please 

include the docket number for this 

rulemaking (USCG–2009–0725), 

indicate the specific section of this 

document to which each comment 

applies, and provide a reason for each 

suggestion or recommendation. You 

may submit your comments and 

material online or by fax, mail, or hand 

delivery, but please use only one of 

these means. If you submit a comment 

online via http://www.regulations.gov, it 

will be considered received by the Coast 

Guard when you successfully transmit 

the comment. If you fax, hand deliver, 

or mail your comment, it will be 

considered as having been received by 

the Coast Guard when it is received at 

the Docket Management Facility. We 

recommend that you include your name 

and a mailing address, an e-mail 

address, or a phone number in the body 

of your document so that we can contact 

you if we have questions regarding your 

submission. 

To submit your comment online, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘submit a comment’’ box, which will 

then become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Document Type’’ drop down menu, 

select ‘‘Proposed Rule’’ and insert 

‘‘USCG–2009–0725’’ in the ’’Keyword’’ 

box. Click ‘‘Search,’’ and then click on 

the balloon shape in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. If you submit your comments 

by mail or hand delivery, submit them 

in an unbound format, no larger than 

81⁄2 by 11 inches, suitable for copying 

and electronic filing. If you submit 

comments by mail and would like to 

know that they reached the Facility, 

please enclose a stamped, self-addressed 

postcard or envelope. We will consider 

all comments and material received 

during the comment period and may 

change this proposed rule based on your 

comments. 

Viewing Comments and Documents 

To view comments, as well as 

documents mentioned in this preamble 

as being available in the docket, go to 

http://www.regulations.gov, click on the 

‘‘read comments’’ box, which will then 

become highlighted in blue. In the 

‘‘Keyword’’ box, insert USCG–2009– 

0725 and click ‘‘Search.’’ Click the 

‘‘Open Docket Folder’’ in the ‘‘Actions’’ 

column. You may also visit the Docket 

Management Facility in Room W12–140 

on the ground floor of the Department 

of Transportation West Building, 1200 

New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, 

DC 20590, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., 

Monday through Friday, except Federal 

holidays. We have an agreement with 

the Department of Transportation to use 

the Docket Management Facility. 

Privacy Act 

Anyone can search the electronic 

form of comments received into any of 

our dockets by the name of the 

individual submitting the comment (or 

signing the comment, if submitted on 

behalf of an association, business, labor 

union, etc.). You may review a Privacy 

Act notice regarding our public dockets 

in the January 17, 2008, issue of the 

Federal Register (73 FR 3316). 

Public meeting 

We do not now plan to hold a public 

meeting. But you may submit a request 

for one to the docket using one of the 

four methods specified under 

ADDRESSES. Please explain why you 

believe a public meeting would be 

beneficial. If we determine that one 

would aid this rulemaking, we will hold 

one at a time and place announced by 

a later notice in the Federal Register. 

Background and Purpose 

On September 26, 2009, Dominion 

Fireworks will sponsor a private 

fireworks display on the Chesapeake 

Bay shoreline centered on position 

36°55′17′′ N/076°04′14′′ W (NAD 1983). 

Due to the need to protect mariners and 

spectators from the hazards associated 

with the fireworks display, the United 

States Coast Guard proposes restricting 

access within 420 feet of the fireworks 

launch site. 

Discussion of Proposed Rule 

The Coast Guard proposes 

establishing a safety zone on the 

navigable waters of the Chesapeake Bay 

within 420 feet of a fireworks barge in 

position 36°55′17′′ N/076°04′14′′ W 

(NAD 1983). This safety zone would be 

established in the vicinity of the 

Virginia Beach Resort & Conference 

Center, Virginia Beach, VA on 

September 26, 2009. In the interest of 

public safety, access to the safety zone 

would be restricted from 9 p.m. to 9:30 

p.m. on September 26, 2009. Except for 

participants and vessels authorized by 

the Coast Guard Captain of the Port or 

his representative, no person or vessel 

would be authorized to enter or remain 

in the regulated area. 

Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

executive orders related to rulemaking. 

Below we summarize our analyses 

based on 13 of these statutes or 

executive orders. 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

This proposed rule is not a significant 

regulatory action under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory 

Planning and Review, and does not 

require an assessment of potential costs 

and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of that 

Order. The Office of Management and 

Budget has not reviewed it under that 

Order. Although this regulation restricts 

access to the safety zone, the effect of 

this rule would not be significant 

because: (i) The safety zone will be in 

effect for a limited duration; (ii) the 

zone would be of limited size; and (iii) 

the Coast Guard would make 

notifications via maritime advisories so 

mariners can adjust their plans 

accordingly. 

Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601–612), we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The Coast Guard certifies under 5 

U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed rule 

would not have a significant economic 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
42616 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 162 / Monday, August 24, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities for the following reasons. This 

safety zone would be activated, and thus 

subject to enforcement, for only 30 

minutes. Vessel traffic could pass safely 

around the safety zone. 

If you think that your business, 

organization, or governmental 

jurisdiction qualifies as a small entity 

and that this rule would have a 

significant economic impact on it, 

please submit a comment to the Docket 

Management Facility at the address 

under ADDRESSES. In your comment, 

explain why you think it qualifies and 

how and to what degree this rule would 

economically affect it. 

Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104–121), 

we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the proposed rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance, please consult 

LT Tiffany Duffy, as indicated in the 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section. The Coast Guard will not 

retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this rule or 

any policy or action of the Coast Guard. 

Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for no 

new collection of information under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501–3520). 

Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism, if it has a substantial direct 

effect on State or local governments and 

would either preempt State law or 

impose a substantial direct cost of 

compliance on them. We have analyzed 

this proposed rule under that Order and 

have determined that it does not have 

implications for federalism. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531–1538) requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100,000,000 or more in any one year. 

Though this proposed rule would not 

result in such an expenditure, we do 

discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not effect a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630, Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights. 

Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice 

Reform, to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045, 

Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks. This rule is not an economically 

significant rule and would not create an 

environmental risk to health or risk to 

safety that might disproportionately 

affect children. 

Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175, Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments, because it would not have 

a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use. We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. The Administrator of the Office 

of Information and Regulatory Affairs 

has not designated it as a significant 

energy action. Therefore, it does not 

require a Statement of Energy Effects 

under Executive Order 13211. 

Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act (NTTAA) (15 

U.S.C. 272 note) directs agencies to use 

voluntary consensus standards in their 

regulatory activities unless the agency 

provides Congress, through the Office of 

Management and Budget, with an 

explanation of why using these 

standards would be inconsistent with 

applicable law or otherwise impractical. 

Voluntary consensus standards are 

technical standards (e.g., specifications 

of materials, performance, design, or 

operation; test methods; sampling 

procedures; and related management 

systems practices) that are developed or 

adopted by voluntary consensus 

standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01 

and Commandant Instruction 

M16475.lD, which guide the Coast 

Guard in complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and 

have made a preliminary determination 

that this action is one of a category of 

actions which do not individually or 

cumulatively have a significant effect on 

the human environment. This proposed 

rule involves establishing a safety zone 

around a fireworks display. The 

fireworks will be launched from a barge; 

however, some fallout may enter the 

water within a 420-foot radius of the 

launching site. This zone is designed to 

protect mariners from the hazards 

associated with fireworks displays. We 

seek any comments or information that 

may lead to the discovery of a 

significant environmental impact from 

this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165 

Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation 

(water), Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Security measures, 

Waterways. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard proposes to 

amend 33 CFR part 165 as follows: 

PART 165—REGULATED NAVIGATION 

AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS 

1. The authority citation for part 165 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 33 U.S.C. 1226, 1231; 46 U.S.C. 

Chapters 701, 3306, 3703; 50 U.S.C. 191, 195; 

33 CFR 1.05–1(g), 6.04–1, 6.04–6 and 160.5; 

Pub. L. 107–295, 116 Stat. 2064; Department 

of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1. 

2. Add temporary § 165.T05–0725, to 

read as follows: 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 162 / Monday, August 24, 2009 / Proposed Rules 42617 

§ 165.T05–0725 Safety Zone; Private 

Fireworks Show, Chesapeake Bay, Virginia 

Beach, VA. 

(a) Regulated Area. The following area 

is a safety zone: All navigable waters 

within 420 feet of position 36°55′17′′ N/ 

076°04′14′′ W (NAD 1983), in the 

vicinity of the Virginia Beach Resort & 

Conference Center, Virginia Beach, VA. 

(b) Definitions. As used in this 

section, Captain of the Port 

representative means any U.S. Coast 

Guard commissioned, warrant or petty 

officer who has been authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads, 

Virginia to act on his behalf. 

(c) Regulations. (1) In accordance with 

the general regulations in § 165.23 of 

this part, entry into this zone is 

prohibited unless authorized by the 

Captain of the Port, Hampton Roads or 

his designated representatives. 

(2) The operator of any vessel in the 

immediate vicinity of this safety zone 

shall: 

(i) Stop the vessel immediately upon 

being directed to do so by any 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

on shore or on board a vessel that is 

displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. 

(ii) Proceed as directed by any 

commissioned, warrant or petty officer 

on shore or on board a vessel that is 

displaying a U.S. Coast Guard Ensign. 

(3) The Captain of the Port, Hampton 

Roads and the Sector Duty Officer at 

Sector Hampton Roads in Portsmouth, 

Virginia can be contacted at telephone 

number 757–668–5555. 

(4) The Captain of the Port 

Representative enforcing the safety zone 

can be contacted on VHF–FM marine 

band radio, channel 13 (156.65 Mhz) 

and channel 16 (156.8 Mhz). 

(d) Enforcement. The U.S. Coast 

Guard may be assisted in the patrol and 

enforcement of the zone by Federal, 

State, and local agencies. 

(e) Enforcement Period. This rule is 

effective and will be enforced on 

September 26, 2009, from 9 p.m. to 9:30 

p.m. 

Dated: August 11, 2009. 

M.S. Ogle, 

Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the 

Port Hampton. 

[FR Doc. E9–20245 Filed 8–21–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 3 

RIN 2900–AN32 

Stressor Determinations for 

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder 

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its 

adjudication regulations governing 

service connection for posttraumatic 

stress disorder (PTSD) by liberalizing in 

some cases the evidentiary standard for 

establishing the required in-service 

stressor. This amendment would 

eliminate the requirement for 

corroborating that the claimed in-service 

stressor occurred if a stressor claimed by 

a veteran is related to the veteran’s fear 

of hostile military or terrorist activity 

and a VA psychiatrist or psychologist 

confirms that the claimed stressor is 

adequate to support a diagnosis of 

PTSD, provided that the claimed 

stressor is consistent with the places, 

types, and circumstances of the 

veteran’s service and that the veteran’s 

symptoms are related to the claimed 

stressor. 

This amendment takes into 

consideration the current scientific 

research studies relating PTSD to 

exposure to hostile military and terrorist 

actions. It is intended to acknowledge 

the inherently stressful nature of the 

places, types, and circumstances of 

service in which fear of hostile military 

or terrorist activities is ongoing. With 

this amendment, the evidentiary 

standard of establishing an in-service 

stressor would be reduced in these 

cases. This amendment is additionally 

intended to facilitate the timely VA 

processing of PTSD claims by 

simplifying the development and 

research procedures that apply to these 

claims. 

DATES: Comments must be received by 

VA on or before October 23, 2009. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments may be 

submitted through http:// 

www.Regulations.gov; by mail or handdelivery to Director, Regulations 

Management (02REG), Department of 

Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Ave., 

NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 

20420; or by fax to (202) 273–9026. 

(This is not a toll free number). 

Comments should indicate that they are 

submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900– 

AN32—Stressor Determinations for 

Posttraumatic Stress Disorder.’’ Copies 

of comments received will be available 

for public inspection in the Office of 

Regulation Policy and Management, 

Room 1063B, between the hours of 8 

a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday (except holidays). Please call 

(202) 461–4902 for an appointment. 

(This is not a toll free number). In 

addition, during the comment period, 

comments may be viewed online 

through the Federal Docket Management 

System (FDMS) at http:// 

www.Regulations.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Thomas J. Kniffen, Chief, Regulations 

Staff (211D), Compensation and Pension 

Service, Veterans Benefits 

Administration, Department of Veterans 

Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue, NW., 

Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461–9725. 

(This is not a toll-free number.) 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 

Secretary of Veterans Affairs has 

authority under 38 U.S.C. 501(a)(1) to 

prescribe regulations governing the 

nature and extent of proof and evidence 

required to establish entitlement to 

benefits. In addition, under 38 U.S.C. 

1154(a), the Secretary is required to 

‘‘include in the regulations pertaining to 

service-connection of disabilities’’ 

provisions requiring ‘‘due 

consideration’’ of the places, types, and 

circumstances of a veteran’s service. 

These statutes provide authority for this 

proposed amendment of PTSD 

regulations. 

Current regulations governing service 

connection of PTSD are provided at 38 

CFR 3.304(f). Under this provision, 

service connection for PTSD generally 

requires: (1) Medical evidence 

diagnosing PTSD; (2) medical evidence 

establishing a link between a veteran’s 

current symptoms and an in-service 

stressor; and (3) credible supporting 

evidence that the claimed in-service 

stressor occurred. 

In some cases, the requirement to 

establish the occurrence of the claimed 

in-service stressor can be met based on 

the veteran’s lay testimony alone, 

provided that there is an absence of 

clear and convincing evidence to the 

contrary and that the claimed stressor is 

consistent with the circumstances, 

conditions, or hardships of the veteran’s 

service. Such cases are those described 

under § 3.304(f)(1), when the evidence 

establishes a diagnosis of PTSD during 

service and the claimed stressor is 

related to that service; under 

§ 3.304(f)(2), when the evidence 

establishes that the veteran engaged in 

combat with the enemy and the claimed 

stressor is related to that combat; and 

under current § 3.304(f)(3), when the 

evidence establishes that the veteran 

was a prisoner-of-war and the claimed 


erowe on DSK5CLS3C1PROD with PROPOSALS-1