RFI Browser

Back  RFI # 1572: N3/N4 pairing

Formal vs. Informal Help Informal Formal

Submitter

Donald Graves

Description

Provider submitted Loop 2330A with a N3 segment and no N4 segment. This strikes me as rather absurd and yet perfectly compliant as far as I can tell from the TR3's and addenda. RFI's 777, 778 and 779 suggest that there is a pairing of the street address with the city, state and zip code, but there is nothing explicit in the original TR3's or the addenda that state this. Is it the intent of the workgroup that there should be such a pairing, i.e, "The N4 is required If the preceding N3 segment in this loop is sent."??? Has this been explicitely addressed in the next TR3 version? As in the aforementioned RFI's, this question pertains to all occurrences of N3/N4 in various loops throughout the transaction set.

Submitter Assigned Keywords

CSZ N4 N3 address

Response

It is the intent of the workgroup that a complete address be provided for all loops that contain the N3 and N4 segments.

However, there are situations where a submitter does not have access to the complete address, and cannot build both the N3 and the N4 segments. In these cases, it is possible to send either the N3 or the N4 segment alone, without violating the situational rules for N3 and N4 segments.

In developing the next version of the TR3, the workgroup will consider altering the situational rules for N3 and N4 segments.

Recommendation

It is noted by the workgroup that sending a partial address, while technically compliant, could prevent the claim from being completely processed.
Submission 4/24/2012
Status Date 6/29/2012
Status F - Final
Primary References
Document 005010X223
SectionTable 2
Page381
Set ID837
Table2