There are only so many IDs that an entity might have - what if a Payer only has (one) NAIC that it publishes as its EDI ID, and refuses to use its D-U-N-S or FEIN? Isn't the purpose of the interchange (test, production, real-time) a separate issue from the ID of either the receiver or the sender?
I realize many people feel queasy about using the ISA I14 Usage Indicator (e.g., P for Production Data, T for Test Data) to indicate whether an interchange is batch or production, but surely it is overloading the ISA receiver ID to burden it with the duty of segregating test from production. Further, I would be loathe to burden the sender with the need to pick ISA receiver IDs from a list depending on whether the interchange is batch or real-time. Why should a provider have to make that decision - to select the appropriate receiver ID arbitrarily imposed by the payer for a particular purpose - when the function of the interchange can be readily determined by the payer? For example, the payer can discern that real time transactions, like the Eligibility Request, are included in the interchange simply by looking at the functional group ID on the GS. William J. Kammerer Novannet, LLC. +1 (614) 487-0320 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rachel Foerster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, 22 January, 2002 01:59 PM Subject: RE: Whose name is it, anyway? William, Additionally, payers may wish to use more than one ISA id for different business purposes: one for trading partner implementation testing; another for when the TP is rolled into production; another for real-time processing, and so. Thus, I concur with your conclusion that the payer should establish their ISA id(s) and make these publicly available. Rachel Foerster Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. Phone: 847-872-8070
