Criteria for a Catastrophically Disabled Determination for Purposes of Enrollment, 12264-12266 [2013-04134]
Download as PDF
12264
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Proposed Rules
(7) Notwithstanding anything
contained in this section, the Rules of
the Road (33 CFR part 84—Subchapter
E, inland navigational rules) are still in
effect and must be strictly adhered to at
all times.
Dated: February 5, 2013.
D.B. Abel,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander,
First Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 2013–04030 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110–04–P
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS
AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900–AO21
Criteria for a Catastrophically Disabled
Determination for Purposes of
Enrollment
Department of Veterans Affairs.
Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
The Department of Veterans
Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
regulation concerning the manner in
which VA determines that a veteran is
catastrophically disabled for purposes of
enrollment in priority group 4 for VA
health care. The current regulation
relies on specific codes from the
International Classification of Diseases,
Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification
(ICD–9–CM) and Current Procedural
Terminology (CPT®). We propose to
state the descriptions that would
identify an individual as
catastrophically disabled, instead of
using the corresponding ICD–9–CM and
CPT® codes. The revisions would
ensure that our regulation is not out of
date when new versions of those codes
are published. The revisions would also
broaden some of the descriptions for a
finding of catastrophic disability.
Additionally, we would eliminate the
Folstein Mini Mental State Examination
(MMSE) as a criterion for determining
whether a veteran meets the definition
of catastrophically disabled, because we
have determined that the MMSE is no
longer a necessary clinical assessment
tool.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule
must be received by VA on or before
April 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be
submitted through https://
www.regulations.gov; by mail or handdelivery to the Director, Regulations
Management (02REG), Department of
Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue
NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC
20420; or by fax to (202) 273–9026.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
Comments should indicate that they are
submitted in response to ‘‘RIN 2900–
AO21, Criteria for a Catastrophically
Disabled Determination for Purposes of
Enrollment.’’ Copies of comments
received will be available for public
inspection in the Office of Regulation
Policy and Management, Room 1063B,
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30
p.m., Monday through Friday (except
holidays). Please call (202) 461–4902
(this is not a toll-free number) for an
appointment. In addition, during the
comment period, comments may be
viewed online through the Federal
Docket Management System (FDMS) at
https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Margaret C. Hammond, M.D., Acting
Chief Patient Care Services Officer
(10P4), Veterans Health Administration,
Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC
20420, (202) 461–7590 (this is not a tollfree number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant
to 38 U.S.C. 1705, VA established eight
enrollment categories (in order of
priority) for veterans eligible to enroll in
VA’s health care system. Under 38 CFR
17.36(b)(4), ‘‘veterans who are
determined to be catastrophically
disabled’’ are to be enrolled in
enrollment priority group 4. For the
purposes of enrollment, § 17.36(e)
defines ‘‘catastrophically disabled’’ as
having ‘‘a permanent severely disabling
injury, disorder, or disease that
compromises the ability to carry out the
activities of daily living to such a degree
that the individual requires personal or
mechanical assistance to leave home or
bed or requires constant supervision to
avoid physical harm to self or others.’’
The regulation states that the definition
is met if the veteran is found ‘‘to have
a permanent condition specified in [38
CFR 17.36(e)(1)]’’ or ‘‘to meet
permanently one of the conditions
specified in [38 CFR 17.36(e)(2)].’’
Current paragraph (e)(1) identifies the
covered conditions in part by
assignment of particular tabular
diagnosis codes from Volume 1 of the
ICD–9–CM, associated supplementary
codes (V Codes), tabular procedure
codes from Volume 3 of ICD–9–CM, and
procedure codes from the CPT®. (CPT is
a trademark of the American Medical
Association. CPT codes and
descriptions are copyrighted by the
American Medical Association. All
rights reserved.) This approach will
soon be outdated; the ICD–9–CM and
CPT will no longer be used for disease
and inpatient procedure coding after
October 1, 2014, when they will be
replaced by tabular diagnosis and
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
supplementary codes from the
International Classification of Diseases,
Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification
(ICD–10–CM) and by procedure codes
from the International Classification of
Diseases, Tenth Revision, Procedure
Coding System (ICD–10–PCS).
Fortunately, the current regulation
also lists the descriptions that classify
an individual as catastrophically
disabled under paragraph (e)(1). Those
descriptions are the actual basis for the
various assigned diagnosis codes in the
regulation. We believe those
descriptions listed under current
paragraph (e)(1) are sufficient to classify
an individual as catastrophically
disabled and that it is not necessary to
require the assignment of the particular
listed codes. The ICD–9–CM diagnostic
codes and the ICD–9–CM or CPT®
procedure codes are used to represent
an actual clinical finding. An examining
clinician, in practice, examines the
veteran and determines the veteran’s
level of disability based on medical
criteria or performs surgical procedures
that are not dependent on the
assignment of a particular code number.
Once the medical criteria are met, the
physician can match them to an
appropriate code. In other words, the
description of the veteran’s medical
condition—and not a particular code
number—forms the basis for a
determination of catastrophic disability.
It is fair to say that the new tabular
diagnosis and supplementary codes
from the ICD–10–CM and procedure
codes from ICD–10–PCS will continue
to be updated in future years to ensure
accuracy of the codes. As a result, VA
would need to update this regulation
solely to reflect changes in those
references. This is administratively
burdensome, particularly when
inclusion of such information is not
necessary as we explained above. We
therefore propose to eliminate the
references to the ICD–9–CM and to the
CPT® in current § 17.36(e)(1). Current
§ 17.36(e)(1) states that a veteran is
catastrophically disabled if she or he
has: ‘‘Quadriplegia and quadriparesis
(ICD–9–CM Code 344.0x: 344.00,
344.01, 344.02, 344.03, 344.04, 3.44.09),
paraplegia (ICD–9–CM Code 344.1),
blindness (ICD–9–CM Code 369.4),
persistent vegetative state (ICD–9–CM
Code 780.03), or a condition resulting
from two of the following procedures
(ICD–9–CM Code 84.x or associated V
Codes when available or Current
Procedural Terminology (CPT) Codes)
provided the two procedures were not
on the same limb.’’ As already
discussed, we would revise paragraph
(e)(1) to eliminate references to specific
codes. The descriptions of quadriplegia
E:\FR\FM\22FEP1.SGM
22FEP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Proposed Rules
and quadriparesis, paraplegia, and
persistent vegetative state would be
unchanged. For this same reason, we
would also eliminate the references to
the ICD–9–CM and to the CPT codes
from current § 17.36(e)(1)(i) through
(e)(1)(xviii).
In addition, we would replace the
word ‘‘blindness’’ with ‘‘legal blindness
defined as visual impairment of 20/200
or less visual acuity in the better seeing
eye with corrective lenses, or a visual
field restriction of 20 degrees or less in
the better seeing eye with corrective
lenses.’’ The term ‘‘blindness’’ in and of
itself is ambiguous. The regulation
associates ‘‘blindness’’ with ICD–9–CM
Code 369.4, which applies to ‘‘blindness
not otherwise specified according to
[United States] definition.’’ It also
‘‘excludes legal blindness with
specification of impairment level
(369.01–369.08, 369.11–369.14, 369.21–
369.22).’’ This is not an accurate
description of who we believe should be
considered catastrophically disabled for
purposes of enrollment. We believe that
the more specific criterion of legal
blindness in the proposed definition is
more consistent with most accepted
definitions of legal blindness, including
the definition used by the Social
Security Administration (SSA) for
determining whether an individual is
legally blind for purposes of SSA
benefits. See 20 CFR 416.981. We
believe that visual acuity greater than
20/200 or greater than 20 degrees in
visual field restriction does not
sufficiently compromise a veteran’s
‘‘ability to carry out the activities of
daily living.’’
Current § 17.36(e)(1)(i) lists one of the
relevant descriptions for a
determination of catastrophic disability
as: ‘‘Amputation through hand (ICD–9–
CM Code 84.03 or V Code V49.63 or
CPT® Code 25927).’’ We propose,
instead, to refer to: ‘‘Amputation,
detachment, or re-amputation of or
through the hand.’’ Similarly, current
§ 17.36(e)(1)(ii) lists one of the relevant
descriptions for a determination of
catastrophic disability as:
‘‘Disarticulation of wrist (ICD–9–CM
Code 84.04 or V Code V49.64 or CPT®
Code 25920).’’ We propose, instead, to
refer to: ‘‘Disarticulation, detachment, or
re-amputation of or through the wrist.’’
Again, these descriptions are listed
under the codes currently listed in the
regulation, and therefore there will be
no substantive change to coverage of
these descriptions under paragraph
(e)(1). We would add detachment and
re-amputation where appropriate in
§ 17.36(e)(1)(i) through (xvi) because we
believe that these descriptions have
similar clinical effects on a veteran’s
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:18 Feb 21, 2013
Jkt 229001
‘‘ability to carry out the activities of
daily living,’’ as required by the
definition of catastrophically disabled
in current paragraph (e). Again,
‘‘catastrophically disabled means to
have a permanent severely disabling
injury, disorder, or disease that
compromises the ability to carry out the
activities of daily living to such a degree
that the individual requires personal or
mechanical assistance to leave home or
bed or requires constant supervision to
avoid physical harm to self or others.’’
38 CFR 17.36(e). Detachment or reamputation of certain limbs or body
parts listed under paragraph (e)(1)
would likewise meet this definition of
catastrophically disabled and so should
be expressly included. It should also be
noted that the ICD–9–CM or CPT® codes
and the ICD–10–CM or ICD–10–PCS
codes have different descriptions for the
same medical condition. ICD–10–PCS
also introduces new terminology. For
example, the term ‘‘detachment’’ is not
used in the ICD–9–CM codes, however,
it is used in the ICD–10–PCS codes.
Likewise, the term ‘‘amputation’’ is used
in the ICD–9–CM codes, but it is not
used in the ICD–10–PCS codes. Where
applicable, we propose to use both
terms so that descriptions can be readily
identified regardless of what code
system is used.
Current § 17.36(e)(1)(iii) lists one of
the relevant descriptions for a
determination of catastrophic disability
as: ‘‘(iii) Amputation through forearm
(ICD–9–CM Code 84.05 or V Code
V49.65 or CPT® Codes 25900, 25905).’’
We propose, instead, to refer to: ‘‘(iii)
Amputation, detachment, or reamputation of the forearm at or through
the radius and ulna.’’ We would add
‘‘through the radius and ulna’’ because
this specificity is used in the CPT®
codes currently referenced in the
regulation and, more importantly,
removes any uncertainty about the
amputation procedure being referred to
in the proposed regulation. This
specificity is currently provided by
referencing the code number. Similarly,
we would add anatomical specificity to
proposed paragraphs (e)(1)(iv) through
(viii) and (xi) through (xvi) to eliminate
any confusion about the procedures
being referred to in the proposed
regulation once the code numbers are
removed.
Current § 17.36(e)(1)(iv) lists one of
the relevant descriptions for a
determination of catastrophic disability
as: ‘‘(iv) Disarticulation of forearm (ICD–
9–CM Code 84.05 or V Code V49.66 or
CPT® Codes 25900, 25905).’’ We would
remove this criterion because it is
redundant with paragraph (e)(1)(iii).
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
12265
We propose to remove current
paragraph (e)(2)(ii). Under current
paragraph (e)(2)(ii), an individual must
have a score of 10 or lower using the
MMSE. However, an individual with a
score of 10 or lower on the MMSE
would always be found permanently
dependent in at least 3 Activities of
Daily Living with a rating of 1 using the
Katz scale; or score 2 or lower on at least
4 of the 13 motor items using the
Functional Independence Measure; or
score 30 or lower using the Global
Assessment of Functioning, which are
covered by current paragraphs (e)(2)(i),
(e)(2)(iii), and (e)(2)(iv). Use of the
MMSE for purposes of paragraph (e)(2)
is therefore redundant.
Current § 17.36(e)(1)(xv) lists one of
the relevant descriptions for a
determination of catastrophic disability
as: ‘‘(xv) Disarticulation of knee (ICD–9–
CM Code 84.16 or V Code V49.76 or
CPT® Code 27598).’’ It should be noted
that ICD–9–CM Code 84.16 refers to
disarticulation of knee; V49.76 refers to
status of amputation above knee; CPT®
Code 27598 refers to disarticulation at
knee; ICD–10–PCS Codes 0Y6F0ZZ and
0Y6G0ZZ refer to detachment of knee.
We would combine these codes into one
description in proposed
§ 17.36(e)(1)(xiii), amputation or
detachment of the lower leg at or
through the knee. We would, therefore,
not list disarticulation of the knee as a
separate description.
Effect of Rulemaking
The Code of Federal Regulations, as
proposed to be revised by this proposed
rulemaking, would represent the
exclusive legal authority on this subject.
No contrary rules or procedures are
authorized. All VA guidance would be
read to conform with this proposed
rulemaking if possible or, if not
possible, such guidance would be
superseded by this rulemaking.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess the costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, and other advantages;
distributive impacts; and equity).
Executive Order 13563 (Improving
Regulation and Regulatory Review)
emphasizes the importance of
quantifying both costs and benefits,
reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and
promoting flexibility. Executive Order
12866 (Regulatory Planning and
Review) defines a ‘‘significant
E:\FR\FM\22FEP1.SGM
22FEP1
12266
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 36 / Friday, February 22, 2013 / Proposed Rules
regulatory action,’’ which requires
review by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), as ‘‘any regulatory action
that is likely to result in a rule that may:
(1) Have an annual effect on the
economy of $100 million or more or
adversely affect in a material way the
economy, a sector of the economy,
productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or
State, local, or tribal governments or
communities; (2) Create a serious
inconsistency or otherwise interfere
with an action taken or planned by
another agency; (3) Materially alter the
budgetary impact of entitlements,
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
set forth in this Executive Order.’’
The economic, interagency,
budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action
have been examined and it has been
determined not to be a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains no
provisions constituting a collection of
information under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3521).
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C. 1532, that
agencies prepare an assessment of
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule that may result in
expenditure by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more
(adjusted annually for inflation) in any
given year. This proposed rule would
have no such effect on State, local, and
tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Regulatory Flexibility Act
14:18 Feb 21, 2013
§ 17.36 Enrollment—provision of hospital
and outpatient care to veterans.
The Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance numbers and titles for the
programs affected by this document are
64.007, Blind Rehabilitation Centers;
64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care;
64.009, Veterans Medical Care Benefits;
64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care;
64.011, Veterans Dental Care; 64.012,
Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013,
Veterans Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014,
Veterans State Domiciliary Care; 64.015,
Veterans State Nursing Home Care;
64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources; 64.019, Veterans
Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug
Dependence; and 64.022, Veterans
Home Based Primary Care.
*
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or
designee, approved this document and
authorized the undersigned to sign and
submit the document to the Office of the
Federal Register for publication
electronically as an official document of
the Department of Veterans Affairs. John
R. Gingrich, Chief of Staff, Department
of Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on February 12, 2013, for
publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and
procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse,
Health care, Health facilities, Health
professions, Health records, Homeless,
Medical and dental schools, Medical
devices, Medical research, Mental
health programs, Nursing homes,
Veterans.
Dated: February 19, 2013.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Regulation Policy and Management,
Office of the General Counsel, Department
of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the
preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part
17 as follows:
PART 17—MEDICAL
The Secretary hereby certifies that
this proposed rule would 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
proposed rule would directly affect only
individuals and would not directly
affect any small entities. Therefore,
pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this
rulemaking is exempt from the initial
and final regulatory flexibility analysis
requirements of sections 603 and 604.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Numbers
Jkt 229001
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in
specific sections.
2. Amend § 17.36 as follows:
a. Revise paragraph (e)(1).
■ b. Remove paragraph (e)(2)(ii).
■ c. Redesignate paragraphs (e)(2)(iii)
and (iv) as new paragraphs (e)(2)(ii) and
(iii), respectively.
The revision reads as follows:
■
■
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
*
*
*
*
(e) * * *
(1) Quadriplegia and quadriparesis;
paraplegia; legal blindness defined as
visual impairment of 20/200 or less
visual acuity in the better seeing eye
with corrective lenses, or a visual field
restriction of 20 degrees or less in the
better seeing eye with corrective lenses;
persistent vegetative state; or a
condition resulting from two of the
following procedures, provided the two
procedures were not on the same limb:
(i) Amputation, detachment, or reamputation of or through the hand;
(ii) Disarticulation, detachment, or reamputation of or through the wrist;
(iii) Amputation, detachment, or reamputation of the forearm at or through
the radius and ulna;
(iv) Amputation, detachment, or
disarticulation of the forearm at or
through the elbow;
(v) Amputation, detachment, or reamputation of the arm at or through the
humerus;
(vi) Disarticulation or detachment of
the of the arm at or through the
shoulder;
(vii) Interthoracoscapular (forequarter)
amputation or detachment;
(viii) Amputation, detachment, or reamputation of the leg at or through the
tibia and fibula;
(ix) Amputation or detachment of or
through the great toe;
(x) Amputation or detachment of or
through the foot;
(xi) Disarticulation or detachment of
the foot at or through the ankle;
(xii) Amputation or detachment of the
foot at or through malleoli of the tibia
and fibula;
(xiii) Amputation or detachment of
the lower leg at or through the knee;
(xiv) Amputation, detachment, or reamputation of the leg at or through the
femur;
(xv) Disarticulation or detachment of
the leg at or through the hip; and
(xvi) Interpelviaabdominal
(hindquarter) amputation or
detachment.
*
*
*
*
*
[FR Doc. 2013–04134 Filed 2–21–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320–01–P
E:\FR\FM\22FEP1.SGM
22FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 36 (Friday, February 22, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12264-12266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-04134]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS
38 CFR Part 17
RIN 2900-AO21
Criteria for a Catastrophically Disabled Determination for
Purposes of Enrollment
AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) proposes to amend its
regulation concerning the manner in which VA determines that a veteran
is catastrophically disabled for purposes of enrollment in priority
group 4 for VA health care. The current regulation relies on specific
codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth
Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and Current Procedural
Terminology (CPT[supreg]). We propose to state the descriptions that
would identify an individual as catastrophically disabled, instead of
using the corresponding ICD-9-CM and CPT[supreg] codes. The revisions
would ensure that our regulation is not out of date when new versions
of those codes are published. The revisions would also broaden some of
the descriptions for a finding of catastrophic disability.
Additionally, we would eliminate the Folstein Mini Mental State
Examination (MMSE) as a criterion for determining whether a veteran
meets the definition of catastrophically disabled, because we have
determined that the MMSE is no longer a necessary clinical assessment
tool.
DATES: Comments on the proposed rule must be received by VA on or
before April 23, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Written comments may be submitted through https://www.regulations.gov; by mail or hand-delivery to the Director,
Regulations Management (02REG), Department of Veterans Affairs, 810
Vermont Avenue NW., Room 1068, Washington, DC 20420; or by fax to (202)
273-9026. Comments should indicate that they are submitted in response
to ``RIN 2900-AO21, Criteria for a Catastrophically Disabled
Determination for Purposes of Enrollment.'' Copies of comments received
will be available for public inspection in the Office of Regulation
Policy and Management, Room 1063B, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and
4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday (except holidays). Please call (202)
461-4902 (this is not a toll-free number) for an appointment. In
addition, during the comment period, comments may be viewed online
through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Margaret C. Hammond, M.D., Acting
Chief Patient Care Services Officer (10P4), Veterans Health
Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW.,
Washington, DC 20420, (202) 461-7590 (this is not a toll-free number).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 1705, VA established
eight enrollment categories (in order of priority) for veterans
eligible to enroll in VA's health care system. Under 38 CFR
17.36(b)(4), ``veterans who are determined to be catastrophically
disabled'' are to be enrolled in enrollment priority group 4. For the
purposes of enrollment, Sec. 17.36(e) defines ``catastrophically
disabled'' as having ``a permanent severely disabling injury, disorder,
or disease that compromises the ability to carry out the activities of
daily living to such a degree that the individual requires personal or
mechanical assistance to leave home or bed or requires constant
supervision to avoid physical harm to self or others.'' The regulation
states that the definition is met if the veteran is found ``to have a
permanent condition specified in [38 CFR 17.36(e)(1)]'' or ``to meet
permanently one of the conditions specified in [38 CFR 17.36(e)(2)].''
Current paragraph (e)(1) identifies the covered conditions in part by
assignment of particular tabular diagnosis codes from Volume 1 of the
ICD-9-CM, associated supplementary codes (V Codes), tabular procedure
codes from Volume 3 of ICD-9-CM, and procedure codes from the
CPT[supreg]. (CPT is a trademark of the American Medical Association.
CPT codes and descriptions are copyrighted by the American Medical
Association. All rights reserved.) This approach will soon be outdated;
the ICD-9-CM and CPT will no longer be used for disease and inpatient
procedure coding after October 1, 2014, when they will be replaced by
tabular diagnosis and supplementary codes from the International
Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-
10-CM) and by procedure codes from the International Classification of
Diseases, Tenth Revision, Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS).
Fortunately, the current regulation also lists the descriptions
that classify an individual as catastrophically disabled under
paragraph (e)(1). Those descriptions are the actual basis for the
various assigned diagnosis codes in the regulation. We believe those
descriptions listed under current paragraph (e)(1) are sufficient to
classify an individual as catastrophically disabled and that it is not
necessary to require the assignment of the particular listed codes. The
ICD-9-CM diagnostic codes and the ICD-9-CM or CPT[supreg] procedure
codes are used to represent an actual clinical finding. An examining
clinician, in practice, examines the veteran and determines the
veteran's level of disability based on medical criteria or performs
surgical procedures that are not dependent on the assignment of a
particular code number. Once the medical criteria are met, the
physician can match them to an appropriate code. In other words, the
description of the veteran's medical condition--and not a particular
code number--forms the basis for a determination of catastrophic
disability.
It is fair to say that the new tabular diagnosis and supplementary
codes from the ICD-10-CM and procedure codes from ICD-10-PCS will
continue to be updated in future years to ensure accuracy of the codes.
As a result, VA would need to update this regulation solely to reflect
changes in those references. This is administratively burdensome,
particularly when inclusion of such information is not necessary as we
explained above. We therefore propose to eliminate the references to
the ICD-9-CM and to the CPT[supreg] in current Sec. 17.36(e)(1).
Current Sec. 17.36(e)(1) states that a veteran is catastrophically
disabled if she or he has: ``Quadriplegia and quadriparesis (ICD-9-CM
Code 344.0x: 344.00, 344.01, 344.02, 344.03, 344.04, 3.44.09),
paraplegia (ICD-9-CM Code 344.1), blindness (ICD-9-CM Code 369.4),
persistent vegetative state (ICD-9-CM Code 780.03), or a condition
resulting from two of the following procedures (ICD-9-CM Code 84.x or
associated V Codes when available or Current Procedural Terminology
(CPT) Codes) provided the two procedures were not on the same limb.''
As already discussed, we would revise paragraph (e)(1) to eliminate
references to specific codes. The descriptions of quadriplegia
[[Page 12265]]
and quadriparesis, paraplegia, and persistent vegetative state would be
unchanged. For this same reason, we would also eliminate the references
to the ICD-9-CM and to the CPT codes from current Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(i)
through (e)(1)(xviii).
In addition, we would replace the word ``blindness'' with ``legal
blindness defined as visual impairment of 20/200 or less visual acuity
in the better seeing eye with corrective lenses, or a visual field
restriction of 20 degrees or less in the better seeing eye with
corrective lenses.'' The term ``blindness'' in and of itself is
ambiguous. The regulation associates ``blindness'' with ICD-9-CM Code
369.4, which applies to ``blindness not otherwise specified according
to [United States] definition.'' It also ``excludes legal blindness
with specification of impairment level (369.01-369.08, 369.11-369.14,
369.21-369.22).'' This is not an accurate description of who we believe
should be considered catastrophically disabled for purposes of
enrollment. We believe that the more specific criterion of legal
blindness in the proposed definition is more consistent with most
accepted definitions of legal blindness, including the definition used
by the Social Security Administration (SSA) for determining whether an
individual is legally blind for purposes of SSA benefits. See 20 CFR
416.981. We believe that visual acuity greater than 20/200 or greater
than 20 degrees in visual field restriction does not sufficiently
compromise a veteran's ``ability to carry out the activities of daily
living.''
Current Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(i) lists one of the relevant descriptions
for a determination of catastrophic disability as: ``Amputation through
hand (ICD-9-CM Code 84.03 or V Code V49.63 or CPT[supreg] Code
25927).'' We propose, instead, to refer to: ``Amputation, detachment,
or re-amputation of or through the hand.'' Similarly, current Sec.
17.36(e)(1)(ii) lists one of the relevant descriptions for a
determination of catastrophic disability as: ``Disarticulation of wrist
(ICD-9-CM Code 84.04 or V Code V49.64 or CPT[supreg] Code 25920).'' We
propose, instead, to refer to: ``Disarticulation, detachment, or re-
amputation of or through the wrist.'' Again, these descriptions are
listed under the codes currently listed in the regulation, and
therefore there will be no substantive change to coverage of these
descriptions under paragraph (e)(1). We would add detachment and re-
amputation where appropriate in Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(i) through (xvi)
because we believe that these descriptions have similar clinical
effects on a veteran's ``ability to carry out the activities of daily
living,'' as required by the definition of catastrophically disabled in
current paragraph (e). Again, ``catastrophically disabled means to have
a permanent severely disabling injury, disorder, or disease that
compromises the ability to carry out the activities of daily living to
such a degree that the individual requires personal or mechanical
assistance to leave home or bed or requires constant supervision to
avoid physical harm to self or others.'' 38 CFR 17.36(e). Detachment or
re-amputation of certain limbs or body parts listed under paragraph
(e)(1) would likewise meet this definition of catastrophically disabled
and so should be expressly included. It should also be noted that the
ICD-9-CM or CPT[supreg] codes and the ICD-10-CM or ICD-10-PCS codes
have different descriptions for the same medical condition. ICD-10-PCS
also introduces new terminology. For example, the term ``detachment''
is not used in the ICD-9-CM codes, however, it is used in the ICD-10-
PCS codes. Likewise, the term ``amputation'' is used in the ICD-9-CM
codes, but it is not used in the ICD-10-PCS codes. Where applicable, we
propose to use both terms so that descriptions can be readily
identified regardless of what code system is used.
Current Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(iii) lists one of the relevant
descriptions for a determination of catastrophic disability as: ``(iii)
Amputation through forearm (ICD-9-CM Code 84.05 or V Code V49.65 or
CPT[supreg] Codes 25900, 25905).'' We propose, instead, to refer to:
``(iii) Amputation, detachment, or re-amputation of the forearm at or
through the radius and ulna.'' We would add ``through the radius and
ulna'' because this specificity is used in the CPT[supreg] codes
currently referenced in the regulation and, more importantly, removes
any uncertainty about the amputation procedure being referred to in the
proposed regulation. This specificity is currently provided by
referencing the code number. Similarly, we would add anatomical
specificity to proposed paragraphs (e)(1)(iv) through (viii) and (xi)
through (xvi) to eliminate any confusion about the procedures being
referred to in the proposed regulation once the code numbers are
removed.
Current Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(iv) lists one of the relevant
descriptions for a determination of catastrophic disability as: ``(iv)
Disarticulation of forearm (ICD-9-CM Code 84.05 or V Code V49.66 or
CPT[supreg] Codes 25900, 25905).'' We would remove this criterion
because it is redundant with paragraph (e)(1)(iii).
We propose to remove current paragraph (e)(2)(ii). Under current
paragraph (e)(2)(ii), an individual must have a score of 10 or lower
using the MMSE. However, an individual with a score of 10 or lower on
the MMSE would always be found permanently dependent in at least 3
Activities of Daily Living with a rating of 1 using the Katz scale; or
score 2 or lower on at least 4 of the 13 motor items using the
Functional Independence Measure; or score 30 or lower using the Global
Assessment of Functioning, which are covered by current paragraphs
(e)(2)(i), (e)(2)(iii), and (e)(2)(iv). Use of the MMSE for purposes of
paragraph (e)(2) is therefore redundant.
Current Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(xv) lists one of the relevant
descriptions for a determination of catastrophic disability as: ``(xv)
Disarticulation of knee (ICD-9-CM Code 84.16 or V Code V49.76 or
CPT[supreg] Code 27598).'' It should be noted that ICD-9-CM Code 84.16
refers to disarticulation of knee; V49.76 refers to status of
amputation above knee; CPT[supreg] Code 27598 refers to disarticulation
at knee; ICD-10-PCS Codes 0Y6F0ZZ and 0Y6G0ZZ refer to detachment of
knee. We would combine these codes into one description in proposed
Sec. 17.36(e)(1)(xiii), amputation or detachment of the lower leg at
or through the knee. We would, therefore, not list disarticulation of
the knee as a separate description.
Effect of Rulemaking
The Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to be revised by this
proposed rulemaking, would represent the exclusive legal authority on
this subject. No contrary rules or procedures are authorized. All VA
guidance would be read to conform with this proposed rulemaking if
possible or, if not possible, such guidance would be superseded by this
rulemaking.
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, and other advantages; distributive impacts;
and equity). Executive Order 13563 (Improving Regulation and Regulatory
Review) emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and
benefits, reducing costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting flexibility.
Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) defines a
``significant
[[Page 12266]]
regulatory action,'' which requires review by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB), as ``any regulatory action that is likely to result
in a rule that may: (1) Have an annual effect on the economy of $100
million or more or adversely affect in a material way the economy, a
sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the
environment, public health or safety, or State, local, or tribal
governments or communities; (2) Create a serious inconsistency or
otherwise interfere with an action taken or planned by another agency;
(3) Materially alter the budgetary impact of entitlements, 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 set forth in
this Executive Order.''
The economic, interagency, budgetary, legal, and policy
implications of this regulatory action have been examined and it has
been determined not to be a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
Paperwork Reduction Act
This proposed rule contains no provisions constituting a collection
of information under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
3501-3521).
Unfunded Mandates
The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 requires, at 2 U.S.C.
1532, that agencies prepare an assessment of anticipated costs and
benefits before issuing any rule that may result in expenditure by
State, local, and tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $100 million or more (adjusted annually for
inflation) in any given year. This proposed rule would have no such
effect on State, local, and tribal governments, or on the private
sector.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Secretary hereby certifies that this proposed rule would 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 proposed rule would directly affect only
individuals and would not directly affect any small entities.
Therefore, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 605(b), this rulemaking is exempt from
the initial and final regulatory flexibility analysis requirements of
sections 603 and 604.
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers
The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance numbers and titles for
the programs affected by this document are 64.007, Blind Rehabilitation
Centers; 64.008, Veterans Domiciliary Care; 64.009, Veterans Medical
Care Benefits; 64.010, Veterans Nursing Home Care; 64.011, Veterans
Dental Care; 64.012, Veterans Prescription Service; 64.013, Veterans
Prosthetic Appliances; 64.014, Veterans State Domiciliary Care; 64.015,
Veterans State Nursing Home Care; 64.018, Sharing Specialized Medical
Resources; 64.019, Veterans Rehabilitation Alcohol and Drug Dependence;
and 64.022, Veterans Home Based Primary Care.
Signing Authority
The Secretary of Veterans Affairs, or designee, approved this
document and authorized the undersigned to sign and submit the document
to the Office of the Federal Register for publication electronically as
an official document of the Department of Veterans Affairs. John R.
Gingrich, Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs, approved this
document on February 12, 2013, for publication.
List of Subjects in 38 CFR Part 17
Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcoholism,
Day care, Dental health, Drug abuse, Health care, Health facilities,
Health professions, Health records, Homeless, Medical and dental
schools, Medical devices, Medical research, Mental health programs,
Nursing homes, Veterans.
Dated: February 19, 2013.
Robert C. McFetridge,
Director, Regulation Policy and Management, Office of the General
Counsel, Department of Veterans Affairs.
For the reasons stated in the preamble, the Department of Veterans
Affairs proposes to amend 38 CFR part 17 as follows:
PART 17--MEDICAL
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 38 U.S.C. 501, and as noted in specific sections.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.36 as follows:
0
a. Revise paragraph (e)(1).
0
b. Remove paragraph (e)(2)(ii).
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (e)(2)(iii) and (iv) as new paragraphs
(e)(2)(ii) and (iii), respectively.
The revision reads as follows:
Sec. 17.36 Enrollment--provision of hospital and outpatient care to
veterans.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(1) Quadriplegia and quadriparesis; paraplegia; legal blindness
defined as visual impairment of 20/200 or less visual acuity in the
better seeing eye with corrective lenses, or a visual field restriction
of 20 degrees or less in the better seeing eye with corrective lenses;
persistent vegetative state; or a condition resulting from two of the
following procedures, provided the two procedures were not on the same
limb:
(i) Amputation, detachment, or re-amputation of or through the
hand;
(ii) Disarticulation, detachment, or re-amputation of or through
the wrist;
(iii) Amputation, detachment, or re-amputation of the forearm at or
through the radius and ulna;
(iv) Amputation, detachment, or disarticulation of the forearm at
or through the elbow;
(v) Amputation, detachment, or re-amputation of the arm at or
through the humerus;
(vi) Disarticulation or detachment of the of the arm at or through
the shoulder;
(vii) Interthoracoscapular (forequarter) amputation or detachment;
(viii) Amputation, detachment, or re-amputation of the leg at or
through the tibia and fibula;
(ix) Amputation or detachment of or through the great toe;
(x) Amputation or detachment of or through the foot;
(xi) Disarticulation or detachment of the foot at or through the
ankle;
(xii) Amputation or detachment of the foot at or through malleoli
of the tibia and fibula;
(xiii) Amputation or detachment of the lower leg at or through the
knee;
(xiv) Amputation, detachment, or re-amputation of the leg at or
through the femur;
(xv) Disarticulation or detachment of the leg at or through the
hip; and
(xvi) Interpelviaabdominal (hindquarter) amputation or detachment.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2013-04134 Filed 2-21-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8320-01-P