Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules 28543 

(k) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Wichita Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), FAA, has the 

authority to approve AMOCs for this AD, if 

requested using the procedures found in 14 

CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, 

send your request to your principal inspector 

or local Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in the 

Related Information section of this AD. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/ 

certificate holding district office. 

(l) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact T. N. Baktha, Senior Aerospace 

Engineer, FAA, Wichita ACO, 1801 Airport 

Road, Room 100, Wichita, Kansas 67209; 

telephone: (316) 946–4155; fax: (316) 946– 

4107; email: t.n.baktha@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Hawker Beechcraft 

Corporation, B091–A04, 10511 E. Central 

Ave., Wichita, Kansas 67206; telephone: 1 

(800) 429–5372 or (316) 676–3140; fax: (316) 

676–8027; email: 

tmdc@hawkerbeechcraft.com; or Internet: 

http://www.hawkerbeechcraft.com/ 

customer_support/ 

technical_and_field_support/. You may 

review copies of the referenced service 

information at the FAA, Small Airplane 

Directorate, 901 Locust, Kansas City, 

Missouri 64106. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

(816) 329–4148. 

Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on May 8, 

2013. 

Earl Lawrence, 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2013–11535 Filed 5–14–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 

34 CFR Chapter III 

[CFDA Number: 84.133B–11] 

Proposed Priority—National Institute 

on Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research—Rehabilitation Research 

and Training Centers 

AGENCY: Office of Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, Department of 

Education. 

ACTION: Proposed priority. 

SUMMARY: The Assistant Secretary for 

Special Education and Rehabilitative 

Services proposes a priority under the 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Center (RRTC) Program administered by 

the National Institute on Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). 

Specifically, this notice proposes a 

priority for an RRTC on Community 

Living Policy. We take this action to 

focus research attention on areas of 

national need. We intend the priority to 

contribute to improved outcomes in this 

area for individuals with disabilities. 

DATES: We must receive your comments 

on or before June 14, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Address all comments about 

this notice to Marlene Spencer, U.S. 

Department of Education, 400 Maryland 

Avenue SW., room 5133, Potomac 

Center Plaza (PCP), Washington, DC 

20202–2700. 

If you prefer to send your comments 

by email, use the following address: 

marlene.spencer@ed.gov. You must 

include the phrase ‘‘Proposed Priority 

for an RRTC on Community Living 

Policy’’ in the subject line of your 

electronic message. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Marlene Spencer. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7532 or by email: 

marlene.spencer@ed.gov. 

If you use a telecommunications 

device for the deaf (TDD) or a text 

telephone (TTY), call the Federal Relay 

Service (FRS), toll free, at 1–800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This 

proposed priority is in concert with 

NIDRR’s Long-Range Plan for Fiscal 

Years 2013–2017 (Plan). The Plan, 

which was published in the Federal 

Register on April 4, 2013 (78 FR 20299), 

can be accessed on the Internet at the 

following site: www.ed.gov/about/ 

offices/list/osers/nidrr/policy.html. 

Through the implementation of the 

Plan, NIDRR seeks to improve outcomes 

for individuals with disabilities in the 

domains of health and function, 

employment, and community living and 

participation through comprehensive 

programs of research, engineering, 

training, technical assistance, and 

knowledge translation and 

dissemination. The Plan reflects 

NIDRR’s commitment to quality, 

relevance, and balance in its programs 

to ensure appropriate attention to all 

aspects of well-being of individuals 

with disabilities and to all types and 

degrees of disability, including lowincidence and severe disabilities. 

This notice proposes a priority that 

NIDRR intends to use for one or more 

competitions in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 

and possibly later years. However, 

nothing precludes NIDRR from 

publishing additional priorities, if 

needed. Furthermore, NIDRR is under 

no obligation to make an award using 

this priority. The decision to make an 

award will be based on the quality of 

applications received and available 

funding. 

Invitation to Comment: We invite you 

to submit comments regarding this 

priority. To ensure that your comments 

have maximum effect in developing the 

final priority, we urge you to identify 

clearly the specific topic that each 

comment addresses. 

We invite you to assist us in 

complying with the specific 

requirements of Executive Orders 12866 

and 13563 and their overall requirement 

of reducing regulatory burden that 

might result from this proposed priority. 

Please let us know of any further ways 

we could reduce potential costs or 

increase potential benefits while 

preserving the effective and efficient 

administration of the program. 

During and after the comment period, 

you may inspect all public comments 

about this proposed priority in room 

5133, 550 12th Street SW., PCP, 

Washington, DC, between the hours of 

8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., Washington, 

DC time, Monday through Friday of 

each week except Federal holidays. 

Assistance to Individuals with 

Disabilities in Reviewing the 

Rulemaking Record: On request we will 

provide an appropriate accommodation 

or auxiliary aid to an individual with a 

disability who needs assistance to 

review the comments or other 

documents in the public rulemaking 

record for this notice. If you want to 

schedule an appointment for this type of 

accommodation or auxiliary aid, please 

contact the person listed under FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. 

Purpose of Program: The purpose of 

the Disability and Rehabilitation 

Research Projects and Centers Program 

is to plan and conduct research, 

demonstration projects, training, and 

related activities, including 

international activities, to develop 

methods, procedures, and rehabilitation 

technology that maximize the full 

inclusion and integration into society, 

employment, independent living, family 

support, and economic and social selfsufficiency of individuals with 

disabilities, especially individuals with 

the most severe disabilities, and to 

improve the effectiveness of services 

authorized under the Rehabilitation Act 

of 1973, as amended (Rehabilitation 

Act). 

Rehabilitation Research and Training 

Centers 

The purpose of the RRTCs, which are 

funded through the Disability and 

Rehabilitation Research Projects and 

Centers Program, is to achieve the goals 

of, and improve the effectiveness of, 

services authorized under the 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
28544 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

Rehabilitation Act through advanced 

research, training, technical assistance, 

and dissemination activities in general 

problem areas, as specified by NIDRR. 

These activities are designed to benefit 

rehabilitation service providers, 

individuals with disabilities, and the 

family members or other authorized 

representatives of individuals with 

disabilities. Additional information on 

the RRTC program can be found at: 

www.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/resprogram.html#RRTC. 

Program Authority: 29 U.S.C. 762(g) and 

764(b)(2). 

Applicable Program Regulations: 34 

CFR part 350. 

Proposed Priority 

This notice contains one proposed 

priority. 

RRTC on Community Living Policy 

Background: It is estimated that there 

are 51.5 million adults with disabilities 

in the United States (Brault, 2012). This 

number is expected to increase by at 

least 20 percent in the next 25 to 30 

years, primarily as a result of the aging 

of the baby boom generation and the 

associated increased risk of disability 

(IOM, 2007). 

The Americans with Disabilities Act 

(1990) (ADA), as reaffirmed by the 

Supreme Court in Olmstead et al. v. L.C. 

et al., 527 U.S. 581 (1999), established 

that the segregation of individuals with 

disabilities is discrimination, except in 

special and uncommon circumstances. 

Since the Olmstead decision, the 

Federal Government has enforced the 

ADA through litigation (e.g., United 

States v. Commonwealth of Virginia 

2012) and through programs that 

provide enhanced opportunities and 

incentives for the use of community 

settings other than segregated nursing 

and other institutional care settings 

(Centers for Medicare and Medicaid 

Services, 2012). 

Progress in fulfilling the mandates 

and promises of the ADA and the 

Olmstead decision has been steady. 

Between FY 2002 and FY 2009, 77 

percent of the increase in Medicaid 

long-term service and support (LTSS) 

expenditures went to home and 

community-based services (National 

Council on Disability, 2011). However, 

Medicaid expenditures for institutional 

care continue to exceed those for home 

and community-based services. 

Furthermore, great disparities exist in 

access to home and community-based 

services across the States and among 

people with different disability 

characteristics (Eiken, Sredl, Burwell & 

Gold, 2010). A number of factors 

associated with such variations have 

been identified, including differences in 

the influence of condition-specific 

advocacy groups, support of service 

provider trade associations and service 

employee unions, strength of political 

leadership and the capacity of States to 

advance reforms on multiple fronts, and 

the expectations and demands of 

individuals with disabilities and their 

families (Parish, 2002). 

In March 2013, the U.S. Department 

of Health and Human services (HHS) 

launched a new Community Living 

Council in support of the ‘‘Secretary’s 

Strategic Initiative to Promote 

Community Living for Older Adults and 

People with Disabilities’’ (Initiative) 

(U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services, 2013). The Initiative is an 

effort to increase opportunities for 

individuals with disabilities to be 

maximally integrated, productive, and 

independent in the communities in 

which they choose to live. To this end 

the Initiative engages multiple HHS 

agencies and partners from other 

Departments to assist States in making 

their systems of LTSS more communitybased, consumer-directed, and outcomefocused and better integrated with the 

transformations occurring in health 

care. 

The Initiative includes major efforts to 

provide factual, accessible, and easily 

understood information to individuals 

with disabilities and their families about 

LTSS options and the outcomes 

associated with them. The Initiative also 

includes efforts to inform and empower 

consumers and their family caregivers 

with the best data and information 

available so that they can participate 

actively in designing, implementing, 

and improving State systems of services 

and supports, including emerging 

models of integrated health care and 

LTSS. 

The intent of the Initiative 

corresponds directly with NIDRR’s 

mission to generate new knowledge and 

promote its effective use to improve the 

abilities of people with disabilities to 

perform activities of their choice in the 

community and to expand society’s 

capacity to provide full opportunities 

and accommodations for its citizens 

with disabilities. To further the central 

goals of the Initiative, NIDRR is 

partnering with the Administration for 

Community Living, a part of HHS, to 

create a national RRTC on Community 

Living Policy. The purpose of this RRTC 

will be to engage in research, data 

analysis and modeling, knowledge 

translation, and development of 

informational products to support 

improvements in community living 

services and supports for individuals 

with disabilities. 

References 

Brault, M.W. (2012). Americans with 

disabilities: 2010, Current population 

reports, pp. 70–131. Washington, DC: 

U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of 

Commerce. Available from: 

www.census.gov/prod/2012pubs/p70- 

131.pdf. 

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services 

(2012). Money follows the person. 

Available from: www.medicaid.gov/ 

Medicaid-CHIP-Program-Information/ByTopics/Long-Term-Services-andSupport/Balancing/Money-Follows-thePerson.html. 

Eiken, S., Sredl, K., Burwell, B., & Gold, L. 

(2010). Medicaid long-term care 

expenditures in FY 2009. Cambridge, 

MA: Thomson Reuters. 

Institute of Medicine (IOM) (2007). The 

future of disability in America. 

Washington, DC: The National 

Academies Press. 

National Council on Disability (2011). 

National disability policy: A progress 

report. Washington, DC: Author. 

Parish, S. (2002). Forces shaping 

developmental disabilities services in 

the States: A comparative study. In D. 

Braddock (Ed.), Disability at the dawn of 

the 21st century, pp. 353–475. 

Washington, DC: American Association 

on Intellectual and Developmental 

Disability. 

United States v. Commonwealth of Virginia, 

No. 3:12cv59–JAG (E.D. VA. 2012). 

Consent Decree available from: 

www.ada.gov/olmstead/documents/

virginia_consent_order.pdf. 

U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services (2013). Community Living 

Initiative. Available from: www.hhs.gov/ 

od/community/index.html. 

Proposed Priority: The Assistant 

Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services, in collaboration 

with the Administration on Community 

Living (ACL), proposes a priority for an 

RRTC on Community Living Policy. The 

RRTC will engage in research, statistical 

analyses and modeling, knowledge 

translation, development of 

informational products, and 

dissemination to contribute to increased 

access to, and improved quality of, longterm services and supports for 

individuals with disabilities. The 

RRTC’s work is intended to inform the 

design, implementation, and continuous 

improvement of Federal and State 

policies and programs related to longterm services and supports (LTSS) for 

individuals with disabilities. The RRTC 

will identify and develop information 

for individuals with disabilities and 

their family members to guide their 

informed choice of community service 

and support options that best meet their 

needs. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules 28545 

The RRTC must be designed to 

contribute to improved community 

living and participation outcomes of 

individuals with disabilities. The RRTC 

must contribute to these outcomes by: 

(a) Establishing a long-term research 

plan related to community living policy. 

This plan, once implemented, must 

contribute relevant and high-quality 

data and information that will serve as 

an empirical foundation for improving 

community living policies and programs 

for individuals with disabilities. This 

task includes: 

(i) Developing and prioritizing a list of 

research questions and evaluation topics 

that, when addressed, will lead to 

research-based information that can be 

used to improve community living 

policies, programs, and outcomes; 

(ii) Working with NIDRR and ACL to 

identify relevant data sets and 

informational resources that can be 

analyzed to address the questions and 

topics in the research plan. 

(b) Conducting research and research 

syntheses to identify and evaluate 

promising practices that States have 

used and could adopt as part of their 

State systems for the provision of LTSS. 

This task includes: 

(i) Identifying components of national 

or State standards for ‘‘model’’ LTSS 

State systems; and 

(ii) Identifying and assessing methods 

for monitoring, tracking, and evaluating 

States’ LTSS systems. 

(c) Identifying and involving key 

stakeholders in the research and 

research planning activities conducted 

under paragraphs (a) and (b) to 

maximize the relevance and usefulness 

of the research products being 

developed. Stakeholders must include, 

but are not limited to, individuals with 

disabilities and their families, national, 

State, and local-level policymakers, 

service providers, and relevant 

researchers in the field of disability and 

rehabilitation research. 

(d) Identifying, evaluating, and 

disseminating accessible information at 

the national, State, and provider levels 

on topics of importance to the 

development and implementation of 

high-quality community living policies 

and programs. These topics include, but 

are not limited to: Transitions from feefor-service to integrated/managed LTSS 

systems and associated outcomes and 

costs; transitions from agency-directed 

to consumer-directed services and 

associated outcomes and costs; costs 

and benefits of various supports for 

individuals and families, such as care 

coordination, respite care, and remote 

monitoring; and other topics to be 

determined in collaboration with key 

stakeholders and NIDRR and ACL 

representatives. 

(e) Establishing a network of technical 

assistance providers and advocacy 

entities to assist in synthesizing and 

disseminating information related to 

implementing high-quality community 

living policies, programs, and practices 

for individuals with disabilities. 

Network members may include, but are 

not limited to: The Americans with 

Disabilities Act National Network 

Regional Centers, the Aging and 

Disability Resource Centers, the 

Governor’s Planning Councils on 

Developmental Disabilities, the Money 

Follows the Person Technical 

Assistance Center, Client Assistance 

Programs, and Protection and Advocacy 

Programs. 

(f) Serving as a national resource 

center related to community living 

policy by: 

(i) Providing information and 

technical assistance to service 

providers, individuals with disabilities 

and their representatives, and other key 

stakeholders; and 

(ii) Providing training, including 

graduate, pre-service, and in-service 

training, to rehabilitation providers, 

rehabilitation research personnel, and 

other disability service providers, to 

facilitate more effective delivery of 

services to individuals aging with longterm physical disabilities. This training 

may be provided through conferences, 

workshops, public education programs, 

in-service training programs, and 

similar activities. 

Types of Priorities: When inviting 

applications for a competition using one 

or more priorities, we designate the type 

of each priority as absolute, competitive 

preference, or invitational through a 

notice in the Federal Register. The 

effect of each type of priority follows: 

Absolute priority: Under an absolute 

priority, we consider only applications 

that meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(3)). 

Competitive preference priority: 

Under a competitive preference priority, 

we give competitive preference to an 

application by (1) awarding additional 

points, depending on the extent to 

which the application meets the priority 

(34 CFR 75.105(c)(2)(i)); or (2) selecting 

an application that meets the priority 

over an application of comparable merit 

that does not meet the priority (34 CFR 

75.105(c)(2)(ii)). 

Invitational priority: Under an 

invitational priority, we are particularly 

interested in applications that meet the 

priority. However, we do not give an 

application that meets the priority a 

preference over other applications (34 

CFR 75.105(c)(1)). 

Final Priority: We will announce the 

final priority in the Federal Register. 

We will determine the final priority 

after considering responses to this 

notice and other information available 

to the Department. This notice does not 

preclude us from proposing additional 

priorities, requirements, definitions, or 

selection criteria, subject to meeting 

applicable rulemaking requirements. 

Note: This notice does not solicit 

applications. In any year in which we choose 

to use this priority, we invite applications 

through a notice in the Federal Register. 

Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 

Regulatory Impact Analysis 

Under Executive Order 12866, the 

Secretary must determine whether this 

regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ and, 

therefore, subject to the requirements of 

the Executive order and subject to 

review by the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866 defines a ‘‘significant 

regulatory action’’ as an action likely to 

result in a rule that may— 

(1) Have an annual effect on the 

economy of $100 million or more, or 

adversely affect a sector of the economy, 

productivity, competition, jobs, the 

environment, public health or safety, or 

State, local, or tribal governments or 

communities in a material way (also 

referred to as an ‘‘economically 

significant’’ rule); 

(2) Create serious inconsistency or 

otherwise interfere with an action taken 

or planned by another agency; 

(3) Materially alter the budgetary 

impacts of entitlement 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 

stated in the Executive order. 

This proposed regulatory action is not 

a significant regulatory action subject to 

review by OMB under section 3(f) of 

Executive Order 12866. 

We have also reviewed this regulatory 

action under Executive Order 13563, 

which supplements and explicitly 

reaffirms the principles, structures, and 

definitions governing regulatory review 

established in Executive Order 12866. 

To the extent permitted by law, 

Executive Order 13563 requires that an 

agency— 

(1) Propose or adopt regulations only 

upon a reasoned determination that 

their benefits justify their costs 

(recognizing that some benefits and 

costs are difficult to quantify); 

(2) Tailor its regulations to impose the 

least burden on society, consistent with 

obtaining regulatory objectives and 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
28546 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 94 / Wednesday, May 15, 2013 / Proposed Rules 

taking into account—among other things 

and to the extent practicable—the costs 

of cumulative regulations; 

(3) In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, select those 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety, 

and other advantages; distributive 

impacts; and equity); 

(4) To the extent feasible, specify 

performance objectives, rather than the 

behavior or manner of compliance a 

regulated entity must adopt; and 

(5) Identify and assess available 

alternatives to direct regulation, 

including economic incentives—such as 

user fees or marketable permits—to 

encourage the desired behavior, or 

provide information that enables the 

public to make choices. 

Executive Order 13563 also requires 

an agency ‘‘to use the best available 

techniques to quantify anticipated 

present and future benefits and costs as 

accurately as possible.’’ The Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs of 

OMB has emphasized that these 

techniques may include ‘‘identifying 

changing future compliance costs that 

might result from technological 

innovation or anticipated behavioral 

changes.’’ 

We are issuing this proposed priority 

only upon a reasoned determination 

that its benefits would justify its costs. 

In choosing among alternative 

regulatory approaches, we selected 

those approaches that would maximize 

net benefits. Based on the analysis that 

follows, the Department believes that 

this proposed priority is consistent with 

the principles in Executive Order 13563. 

We also have determined that this 

regulatory action would not unduly 

interfere with State, local, and tribal 

governments in the exercise of their 

governmental functions. 

In accordance with both Executive 

orders, the Department has assessed the 

potential costs and benefits, both 

quantitative and qualitative, of this 

regulatory action. The potential costs 

are those resulting from statutory 

requirements and those we have 

determined as necessary for 

administering the Department’s 

programs and activities. 

The benefits of the RRTC Program 

have been well established over the 

years, as projects similar to the one 

envisioned by the proposed priority 

have been completed successfully. The 

new RRTC would generate, disseminate, 

and promote the use of new information 

that would improve outcomes for 

individuals with disabilities in the area 

of community living and participation. 

Intergovernmental Review: This 

program is not subject to 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) by 

contacting the Grants and Contracts 

Services Team, U.S. Department of 

Education, 400 Maryland Avenue SW., 

room 5075, PCP, Washington, DC 

20202–2550. Telephone: (202) 245– 

7363. If you use a TDD or TTY, call the 

FRS, toll free, at 1–800–877–8339. 

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: May 9, 2013. 

Michael K. Yudin, 

Delegated the authority to perform the 

functions and the duties of the Assistant 

Secretary for Special Education and 

Rehabilitative Services. 

[FR Doc. 2013–11430 Filed 5–14–13; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4000–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS 

AFFAIRS 

38 CFR Part 3 

RIN 2900–AN89 

Secondary Service Connection for 

Diagnosable Illnesses Associated With 

Traumatic Brain Injury 

Correction 

In proposed rule document 2012– 

29709 beginning on page 73366 in the 

issue of Monday, December 10, 2012 

make the following correction: 

§ 3.310 [Corrected] 

On page 73369, in § 3.310(d)(3)(i), the 

table should read as set forth below: 

Mild Moderate Severe 

Normal structural imaging ...................................................... Normal or abnormal structural imaging Normal or abnormal structural imaging. 

LOC = 0–30 min ..................................................................... LOC >30 min and <24 hours ................. LOC >24 hrs. 

AOC = a moment up to 24 hrs .............................................. AOC >24 hours. Severity based on other criteria. 

PTA = 0–1 day ....................................................................... PTA >1 and <7 days .............................. PTA > 7 days. 

GCS = 13–15 ......................................................................... GCS = 9–12 ........................................... GCS = 3–8. 

Note: The factors considered are: 

Structural imaging of the brain. 

LOC—Loss of consciousness. 

AOC—Alteration of consciousness/mental state. 

PTA—Post-traumatic amnesia. 

GCS—Glasgow Coma Scale. (For purposes of injury stratification, the Glasgow Coma Scale is measured at or after 24 hours.) 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS