RFI Browser

Back  RFI # 49: ACKNOWLEDGING X12 SEMANTIC NOTE VIOLATIONS

Formal vs. Informal Help Informal Formal

Submitter

Todd Cochrane

Description

Is there a consistent code value for use in transaction sets 997 and 999 for reporting violations of X12 standard Notes? Some examples of 'semantic' X12 standard Notes I've recently noticed that could generate violations are: transaction set 275 Note 2/0200 "The NM1 segment in loop LX identifies an individual provider within a responder group" transaction set 834 Note 2/550 "The FSA loop may only appear for the Subscriber" transaction set 837 Note 2/540 "SVD01 identifies the payer which adjudicated the corresponding service line and must match DE 67 in the NM109 position 325 for the payer". There are probably more. I can see several possible code values from code lists for data elements 618, 620, 621, 716, 718, 720, and 723 that could be used in various / differing circumstances, but am looking for a single mechanism that consistently states "a Note has been violated" and, ideally, could identify that Note by number.

Response

There is no method within the 997 or 999 to report violations of ASC X12 standard semantic notes.

Recommendation

The official response to a formal RFI is a letter from the current ASC X12 chair. This website often displays a summary of the RFI. Click here to view a PDF of the letter for this RFI.

Further Discussion: These errors should be reported in an application acknowledgment transactions such as Transactions Sets 151 (Electronic Filing of Tax Return Data Acknowledgment) , 131 (Student Educational Record Transcript Acknowledgement), 855 (Purchase Order Acknowledgement), 865 (Purchase Order Acknowledgement/Request - Seller Initiated), and 824 (Application Advice).
Submission 1/1/2010
Status Date 1/1/2010
Status F - Final
Primary References
Document 5010