We still go down the same channels. I'm going to consult my notes, because there are three specific criteria that we look at.
First of all, we're looking for an event—typically a significant event—that's clearly and precisely identifiable and wasn't cumulative, but was typically traumatic and outside the normal course of their duties. Again, we're looking for the DSM diagnosis, to make sure there is a diagnosis behind that.
If a worker has significant traumatic physical injuries, we often accept the related psychological component. It could be as the result of an explosion or whatever. It's all together. We will accept that as part of their entitlement, again using the DSM-III diagnosis as our requirement for permanent benefits on that.