Comment from Latricia Powell on VA-2026-VBA-0133-0001

To Whom It May Concern, I submit the following comment regarding the Department of Veterans Affairs’ proposed rule amending 38 CFR Part 21 to eliminate the Vocational Rehabilitation Panel (VRP) in the Veteran Readiness and Employment (VR&E) program administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs. General Position I support the proposed elimination of the VRP structure insofar as it reduces administrative delay, removes non-essential procedural layers, and modernizes decision-making by prioritizing current treating providers and VR&E counselors (VRCs) who are directly engaged with the veteran or dependent. However, I recommend targeted safeguards be incorporated to ensure consistency, equity, and procedural transparency across regional implementation. ⸻ 1. Support for Removal of the VRP Structure The proposed rule correctly identifies a structural inefficiency: the VRP frequently includes professionals who have not directly treated the veteran or dependent and therefore operate with limited case-specific insight. Replacing this panel with direct consultation of: * current medical providers * educational professionals (where applicable) * Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) * existing treatment records * and VR&E counseling professionals represents a meaningful modernization of the VR&E adjudication workflow. This change appropriately aligns decision-making authority with highest-fidelity information sources, reducing latency in rehabilitation planning and service delivery. ⸻ 2. Anticipated Operational Benefits If implemented as proposed, this rule is expected to: * Reduce administrative bottlenecks associated with panel assembly * Improve timeliness of individualized rehabilitation plan development * Increase relevance and accuracy of vocational feasibility determinations * Enhance responsiveness for dependents requiring early intervention services * Streamline coordination between VR&E and external providers These outcomes are consistent with improved service delivery efficiency and better alignment between decision-makers and care ecosystems. ⸻ 3. Identified Risks and Implementation Concerns While the proposed change improves efficiency, it also introduces several structural risks that warrant mitigation: A. Variability in Decision-Making Removing a multi-member review panel may increase variability across regions, as determinations become more dependent on individual VR&E counselor judgment. Recommendation: Implement standardized decision frameworks or decision-support guidelines to ensure consistency in vocational feasibility determinations. ⸻ B. Reduced Peer Review Function The VRP currently serves a secondary function as a peer-consultation safeguard. Recommendation: Establish a post-decision quality review mechanism or periodic audit process to ensure uniform application of standards across VR&E offices. ⸻ C. Equity in Access to Documentation Reliance on current treating providers may disadvantage veterans or dependents with limited access to consistent care or documentation. Recommendation: Explicitly authorize VR&E counselors to use alternative evidence pathways (community health records, school documentation, prior VA records) when current provider access is limited. ⸻ D. Appeals and Reconsideration Load Increased discretion at the counselor level may result in higher rates of disagreement and appeals if interpretive standards are not consistently applied. Recommendation: Provide enhanced training and standardized adjudication templates for VR&E counselors. ⸻ 4. Implementation Clarity The proposed regulatory text appropriately removes references to the VRP across multiple sections. To ensure operational clarity, VA may wish to further define: * The minimum evidentiary threshold for vocational feasibility determinations * The hierarchy of evidence when treating provider opinions conflict with VR&E counselor assessment * Documentation standards for rehabilitation plan justification ⸻ 5. Conclusion This proposed rule represents a meaningful modernization of the VR&E program’s decision architecture. By removing the Vocational Rehabilitation Panel, the Department of Veterans Affairs correctly shifts toward a data-proximate, provider-informed model of rehabilitation planning. With the addition of targeted safeguards addressing consistency, equity, and oversight, this rule has the potential to significantly improve both the speed and quality of VR&E service delivery.