Comment on AN32-Proposed Rule-John Joseph Lombardo

Considering this rule change and it's objectives I suggest provisions be made to allow reciept of immanant danger or hostile fire pay to be sufficient evidence to allow presumption of PTSD. This pay is recieved in any month in which a service member was entitled to basic pay and in which he/she was: Subject to hostile fire or explosion of hostile mines; On duty in an area in which he was in imminent danger of being exposed to hostile fire or explosion of hostile mines and in which, during the period he was on duty in that area, other members of the uniformed services were subject to hostile fire or explosion of hostile mines; Killed, injured, or wounded by hostile fire, explosion of a hostile mine, or any other hostile action; or On duty in a foreign area in which he was subject to the threat of physical harm or imminent danger on the basis of civil insurrection, civil war, terrorism, or wartime conditions.