Voting for IRR CLM849 completed on Friday, June 9, 2017. The proposed resolution to add a new variable segment and 3 new data elements including a variable segment counter to identify changes was approved along with the implementation timeline.

A total of 27 responses were received consisting of 20 Yes votes, 2 No votes and 5 Abstentions. Per the requirements of the IRR process, a two-thirds majority is needed for an IRR to be considered approved. The outcome of this vote exceeded the two-thirds requirement with 91% in favor of the proposed resolution.

The voting period for this IRR has begun and will extend through 06/09/17. A ballot for this IRR was sent to the voting body via email on 05/19/17. The voting body is comprised of current IAIABC jurisdictional and EDI members in good standing. Each eligible organization is allowed one vote per IRR. It is the responsibility of the designated voter (or the alternate, if the designated voter is not available) to discuss the issue up for vote with all stakeholders within their organization and vote accordingly.

While I agree that the time frame for a particular IRR is a part of the voting, the implementation of Claims 3.1 is governed by the Release Management Process and Implementation Guidelines. That document states "no sooner than 360 days from the publication date, and a minimum of 180 days from the completion date of the jurisdiction's trading partner tables....". If for some reason people vote to make the "02" IRR a longer time frame longer you will in effect be voting to implement all the other Rel 3.1 elements and the "02" at different time frames. I believe a more prudent effort would be to discuss the concerns at the EDI Council and possibly extend the implementation of the Rel 3.1. I am not advocating that we delay the implementation of Rel 3.1 at all but wanted to bring to light a vote on the time frame of one IRR would have on the entire version implementation.

I was wondering how people feel about the timeline for implementing 3.1 including the 02 Change Process.  All combined there is a lot of "stuff" here.  Of course, everyone's system is different and how long it is expected to take will vary greatly.  Keep in mind other mandated changes (Claim Type Code updates, PA accepting new MTC's, Idaho and Oklahoma mandating and presumably Maine coming up on 3.1 on or shortly after 8/1 assuming this is approved and anything else that may come up) that will require coding, testing, training, etc.

It seems to me that even 14 months from approval date (when you know you need to move forward), may be awful tight for some.   If anyone's IT department hasn't been involved with all the 3.1 modifications, it would be beneficial to discuss with them to see how they feel about it as well. 

Remember, the timeline is part of the vote!

Cheryl