TITLE 28.INSURANCE

Part 1. TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE

Chapter 21. TRADE PRACTICES

Subchapter T. SUBMISSION OF CLEAN CLAIMS

28 TAC §21.2821

The Commissioner of Insurance adopts amendments to §21.2821, concerning reporting requirements for pharmacy claims. The amendments are adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the May 7, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 4410).

The amendments are necessary to implement the provisions of Senate Bill (SB) 418, 78th Regular Legislative Session, by ensuring that the department receives complete and accurate information concerning all types of health care claims subject to prompt pay requirements. In addition to all other penalties or remedies authorized by the Insurance Code, SB 418 also allows for administrative penalties against carriers that are noncompliant in processing more than two percent of clean claims, including electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims. The department originally adopted reporting rules on September 15, 2003, and subsequently informed carriers by bulletin that staff would propose rules specific to reporting of pharmacy claims at a later date.

The department has made a change that affects several of the proposed subsection paragraphs as published; however, that change does not introduce new subject matter or impact persons other than those subject to the proposal as originally published. In response to a comment, the department has categorized all pharmacy claims that are subject to the 21-day statutory claims payment period in one group, without distinguishing between claims from non-institutional and institutional providers. The department has deleted references to non-institutional and institutional providers from §21.2821(d)(19)-(28). Also, clarification language has been added and grammatical corrections have been made to subsection (e) of the section.

Adopted §21.2821 generally imposes reporting requirements on carriers subject to prompt pay rules and addresses how those reporting rules apply to electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims.

Comment: A commenter supports the proposed rule, but suggests that the department not distinguish between non-institutional and institutional providers with regard to pharmacy claims. The commenter explains that pursuant to the definition of institutional provider, pharmacy claims would always be considered to be received from non-institutional providers because contracted pharmacies would always be considered to be non-institutional providers. Prescription drugs may be a covered service when provided by an institutional provider, but such service would be considered to be covered as a medical or health care service rather than as a pharmacy claim. The commenter states that separating pharmacy claims into non-institutional and institutional provider categories may inject an unintended administrative complication into institutional claims processing, and accordingly suggests that the pharmacy reporting requirements for claims be referenced simply as pharmacy claims rather than identifying them as derived from either non-institutional or institutional providers.

Agency Response: After further consideration of the definition of institutional provider in the context of pharmacy claims, the department agrees that pharmacy claims should not be separated into non-institutional and institutional provider claims categories because such a distinction is not applicable. Accordingly, the department has removed the distinction from the adopted rule.

NAMES OF THOSE COMMENTING FOR AND AGAINST THE SECTION. For, with changes: Scott & White Health Plan.

The amendments are adopted under the Insurance Code Article 3.70-3C §3I(k), and §§843.342(k) and 36.001. Article 3.70-3C §3I(k) and §843.342(k) require the department to assess an insurer’s or health maintenance organization’s prompt pay compliance in processing submitted clean claims and grants the department the authority to subject such entities to an administrative penalty if violations involve the processing of more than two percent of submitted clean claims. Section 36.001 provides that the Commissioner of Insurance may adopt any rules necessary and appropriate to implement the powers and duties of the Texas Department of Insurance under the Insurance Code and other laws of this state.

§21.2821.Reporting Requirements.

(a) An HMO or preferred provider carrier shall submit to the department quarterly claims payment information in accordance with the requirements of this section.

(b) The HMO or preferred provider carrier shall submit the report required by subsection (a) of this section to the department on or before:

(1) May 15th for the months of January, February and March of each year;

(2) August 15th for the months of April, May and June of each year;

(3) November 15th for the months of July, August and September of each year; and

(4) February 15th for the months of October, November and December of each preceding calendar year.

(c) The HMO or preferred provider carrier shall submit the first report required by this section to the department on or before February 15, 2004 and shall include information for the months of September, October, November and December of the prior calendar year.

(d) The report required by subsection (a) of this section shall include, at a minimum, the following information:

(1) number of claims received from non-institutional preferred providers;

(2) number of claims received from institutional preferred providers;

(3) number of clean claims received from non-institutional preferred providers;

(4) number of clean claims received from institutional preferred providers;

(5) number of clean claims from non-institutional preferred providers paid within the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(6) number of clean claims from non-institutional preferred providers paid on or before the 45th day after the end of the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(7) number of clean claims from institutional preferred providers paid on or before the 45th day after the end of the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(8) number of clean claims from non-institutional preferred providers paid on or after the 46th day and before the 91st day after the end of the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(9) number of clean claims from institutional preferred providers paid on or after the 46th day and before the 91st day after the end of the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(10) number of clean claims from non-institutional preferred providers paid on or after the 91st day after the end of the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(11) number of clean claims from institutional preferred providers paid on or after the 91st day after the end of the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(12) number of clean claims from institutional preferred providers paid within the applicable statutory claims payment period;

(13) number of claims paid pursuant to the provisions of §21.2809 of this title (relating to Audit Procedures);

(14) number of requests for verification received pursuant to §19.1724 of this title (relating to Verification);

(15) number of verifications issued pursuant to §19.1724 of this title;

(16) number of declinations, pursuant to §19.1724 of this title;

(17) number of certifications of catastrophic events sent to the department;

(18) number of calendar days business was interrupted for each corresponding catastrophic event;

(19) number of electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims received by the HMO or preferred provider carrier;

(20) number of electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims paid within the 21-day statutory claims payment period;

(21) number of electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims paid on or before the 45th day after the end of the 21-day statutory claims payment period;

(22) number of electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims paid on or after the 46th day and before the 91st day after the end of the 21-day statutory claims payment period; and

(23) number of electronically submitted, affirmatively adjudicated pharmacy claims paid on or after the 91st day after the end of the 21-day statutory claims payment period.

(e) An HMO or preferred provider carrier shall annually submit to the department, on or before July 31, at a minimum, information related to the number of declinations of requests for verifications in the following categories:

(1) policy or contract limitations:

(A) premium payment timeframes that prevent verifying eligibility for 30-day period;

(B) policy deductible, specific benefit limitations or annual benefit maximum;

(C) benefit exclusions;

(D) no coverage or change in membership eligibility, including individuals not eligible, not yet effective or membership cancelled;

(E) pre-existing condition limitations; and

(F) other.

(2) declinations due to inability to obtain necessary information in order to verify requested services from the following persons:

(A) the requesting physician or provider;

(B) any other physician or provider; and

(C) any other person.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 21, 2004.

TRD-200404071

Gene C. Jarmon

General Counsel and Chief Clerk

Texas Department of Insurance

Effective date: July 11, 2004

Proposal publication date: May 7, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-6327


Part 2. TEXAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION

Chapter 134. BENEFITS--GUIDELINES FOR MEDICAL SERVICES, CHARGES, AND PAYMENTS

Subchapter I. PROVIDER BILLING PROCEDURES

28 TAC §134.800, §134.802

The Texas Workers' Compensation Commission (the commission) adopts amendments to §134.800 and §134.802, with changes to the proposed text published in the March 5, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2202).

As required by the Government Code §2001.033(1), the commission's reasoned justification for these rules are set out in this order which includes the preamble, which in turn includes the rules. This preamble contains a summary of the factual basis of the rules, a summary of comments received from interested parties, names of those groups and associations who commented and whether they were for or against adoption of the rules, and the reasons why the commission disagrees with some of the comments and recommendations.

Rule 134.800 is amended with respect to the forms that should be used by health care providers when submitting medical bills for payment. This rule currently specifies the forms that must be used by health care providers when billing for medical services provided to injured employees. In compliance with statutory provisions, the amendments achieve standardization with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policies, as directed by the Texas Labor Code §413.011, certain subsections of the rule are amended to state that bills are to be submitted on forms consistent with current CMS requirements. The amended rule requires the use of billing forms that have a well-known, standardized structure that is more consistent with national health care billing standards for the delivery of quality medical care. This will provide greater administrative efficiencies to system participants, including the commission, by reducing multiple reporting requirements. Many healthcare providers are already billing on CMS-required forms, either in the workers' compensation setting or otherwise, and therefore, this rule will streamline business practices for system participants.

Subsection 134.800(g) is changed from proposal by providing for an effective date of September 1, 2004. The change in effective date from the proposed date of June 1, 2004 is to allow system participants sufficient time to prepare for the change in billing forms. Amended 134.800 does not require health care providers to file billing data that they are not currently required to file; it merely requires a different form for some types of services.

Rule 134.802 is amended to require insurance carriers to file medical billing data regarding pharmaceutical and dental benefits, which will create an improved system for monitoring the delivery of dental and pharmaceutical health care benefits. This in turn will allow the commission to more comprehensively and effectively monitor and evaluate patterns of practice among system participants, and to possibly develop pharmacy formularies. Other amendments to the rule require insurance carriers to file data on refunds to the insurance carrier for prior overpayments. These actions will aid the commission in its statutory duty to regulate and contain medical costs.

The effective date for filing pharmacy and dental billing data remains January 1, 2005, as proposed. This later effective date is allowed because amended rule 134.802 requires insurance carriers to file data that they have not previously been required to file with the commission.

Certain portions of these rules that are not amended at this time may be considered for amendment at a later time. In addition, portions of these rules may be moved to other commission rules at a later time.

The Medical Advisor reviewed and made recommendations regarding this adopted rule.

The following groups or associations provided comments regarding the proposed amendments:

Insurance Council of Texas supported the commission's adoption of amended rule 134.800 but opposed adoption of amended rule 134.802.

PMSI and Texas Pharmacy Association supported the proposed amendments to both rules.

Physiatry Reimbursement Specialists, Inc. opposed adoption of the proposed amendments to both rules.

In addition to supporting or opposing various portions of the rules, commenters made suggestions for improvements to the rules or asked for clarification on certain points. Comments containing such recommendations were received from the following groups or associations: Billings & Solomon, PLLC, and Texas Association of School Boards.

Summaries of the comments and commission responses are as follows:

§134.800

COMMENT: Commenter stated that the proposed rule does not clarify the effect of billing under a "differing platform" as a subclaimant under Texas Labor Code §409.009. Commenter further asserted that the rule should clarify that "billing under another platform as a subclaimant will not be an impediment to prosecution of a subclaim under §409.009."

RESPONSE: The commission disagrees that the rule, itself, needs to address whether it affects a health care provider's ability to seek reimbursement as a subclaimant pursuant to Texas Labor Code §409.009. The rule is amended to require the use of different billing forms than those currently required of certain health care providers, thereby achieving greater standardization with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) policies, in conformity with Texas Labor Code §413.011. Therefore, the amended rule should have no effect on subclaims.

COMMENT: Commenter stated that "the proposed changes will enable providers to better provide the necessary medical services required by injured workers, and lessen the billing time and confusion for providers and payers alike, thus truly streamlining the system."

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Commenter "strongly agrees with the commission . . . statement that the proposed changes will help providers, payers, and the commission achieve 'standardization with CMS policies and payment guidelines'." Commenter observed that the proposed changes will align commission billing requirements and practices with reimbursement policies in the Medical Fee Guideline.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Commenter stated that the proposed changes, including changes made to the TWCC-66 form, will create a smoother flow of information between provider and payer, enabling pharmacy providers to quickly and properly treat injured workers.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Observing that overpayment by insurance carriers is not an issue, commenter expressed a concern that insurance carriers currently pay units either incorrectly, partially, or without proper reasons for denial. Commenter added that providers will never be overpaid if insurance carriers continue to pay incorrectly.

RESPONSE: The commission disagrees with commenter's assertion that overpayments by insurance carriers do not occur. Commission records show that in 2003 the commission conducted refund audits of 18 health care providers for overpayments from insurance carriers. These audits revealed $141,543 in overpayments to health care providers by insurance carriers. Subsection (f), which has not been amended, supports the medical billing audit process of the commission by allowing the commission to order refunds of overpayment by the carrier when appropriate. The commission clarifies that incorrect payments are addressed in the Medical Dispute Resolution process (Chapter 133) and improper denial reasons are addressed in the Monitoring and Enforcement process (Chapter 180).

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that the Commission use "HIPAA 837," stating "it would add prohibitive costs to doctors participating in the system, requiring them to utilize two billing systems to separately accommodate workers' compensation and private patients."

RESPONSE: The Commission interprets this comment to advocate use of the HIPAA billing format, rather than future implementation of the International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions (IAIABC) billing format anticipated by the commission in its proposal preamble. The commission is not prepared to implement use of the HIPAA billing format. In order to capture data elements that are unique to workers' compensation, the Commission plans to implement the IAIABC version of the 837, as it contains specific elements required for reporting data to the commission. System participants were surveyed in January 2003 as to whether they would prefer that the commission adopt the IAIABC standard version since it was being used already in other jurisdictions, or whether they would prefer that the commission build its own payment format, based on the Health Care Claimant Payment/Advice 835 form, developed by National Electronic Data Interchange, with a small companion file containing some 837 elements as this could pave the way for the eventual evolution to full electronic medical billing processes between payers and payees. The survey results showed a clear majority of respondents wanted the commission to adopt the IAIABC version of the HIPAA compliant 837 format that was already being used in other states. As stated in the proposal preamble, as well as Advisory 2004-04, the Commission's Business Process Improvement (BPI) initiative is currently working with electronic submission trading partners to develop a process for the electronic submission of medical billing data.

COMMENT: Commenter supports the adoption of the proposed amendments and states that the rule will result in standardization with CMS policies pertaining to the submission of medical bills on forms consistent with current CMS requirements.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Commenter opposes the rule and states that it is ambiguous and leaves much room for interpretation, proves meaningless, and not possible with current technology. Commenter further opposes the rule stating that providers would have to communicate with each and every insurance company to determine whether or not electronic billing is accepted. Commenter also states that it is impossible for providers to attach documentation to each claim submitted electronically.

RESPONSE: The Commission disagrees that §134.800(e) is ambiguous. The rule provides flexibility for providers and carriers to utilize electronic billing technology when mutually agreed upon or use standardized paper billing forms. This flexibility allows for the development of technological advances, such as electronic medical record documentation, to be incorporated. The Commission agrees that healthcare providers and insurance carriers must communicate with each other to determine if electronic billing is possible between the two parties. However, this should only have to occur once for each carrier, and the commission views this communication as beneficial to all system participants, in that it will allow for increased efficiencies and potential cost savings within the workers' compensation system. In addition, subsection (e) does not require health care providers to determine if an insurance carrier will accept electronic transmission; it is wholly voluntary on the part of the health care provider (and the insurance carrier, as well). The Commission disagrees that this rule is meaningless, as it provides for standardization of paper billing forms until such time that the commission outlines electronic billing specifications to be implemented for carriers and healthcare providers. Regarding commenter's assertion regarding the ability to attach documentation to electronically submitted claims, the commission clarifies that any supporting documentation that cannot be submitted electronically should be provided to the carrier in paper format, either by facsimile, mail, or hand delivery.

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that subsection (e) of the rule be further amended to allow the submission of claims by electronic means (or fax) and payment timeframes of 14 days for electronic and 27 days for faxed or mailed submissions.

RESPONSE: The commission disagrees with the commenters suggested language and clarifies that the amended rule does not address payment timeframes, which are governed by the statute and other rules; instead, it provides for standardization of paper billing forms with an allowance for mutually agreed upon electronic bill submission until such time that the commission outlines electronic billing specifications. Although Section 408.027 (a) of the Texas Labor Code states, "An insurance carrier shall pay the fee allowed under Section 413.011 for a service rendered by a health care provider not later than the 45th day after the date the insurance carrier receives the charge unless the amount of the payment or the entitlement to payment is disputed," a carrier is not prohibited from paying a bill sooner.

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that subsection (e) be changed to require payment of interest by carriers starting on the 31st day after receipt of "clean electronic and paper claims no later than 30 days after receipt of the claim."

RESPONSE: The commission disagrees with the recommendation for the insurance carrier to pay interest on the 31st day, because this would be contrary to Texas Labor Code §413.019(a), which states, "Interest on an unpaid fee or charge that is consistent with the fee guidelines accrues at the rate provided by Section 401.023 beginning on the 60th day after the date the health care provider submits the bill to an insurance carrier until the date the bill is paid."

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that providers be required, in all instances, to submit certain types of claims in paper format, asserting that these claims require supporting documentation and, therefore, would not be appropriately submitted in electronic format. The claims identified by commenter relate to: Impairment Ratings, Independent Medical Evaluations, Maximum Medical Improvement Determinations, Required Medical Evaluations, Work Status Reports, Second Opinions, Functional Capacity Evaluations, and Initial Evaluations by all Providers.

RESPONSE: The documentation requirement concerns raised by commenter are addressed in other commission rules, not rules 134.800 and 134.802 and, therefore, are not the subject of this rule action. However, the Commission disagrees that providers should be prohibited from submitting certain types of claims electronically. Although supporting documentation for the services identified by commenter may need to be provided to the carrier in paper format, this would not prevent the provider from submitting a bill electronically. Any supporting documentation that cannot be submitted electronically should be provided to the carrier in paper format, either by facsimile, mail, or hand delivery.

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that carriers be required to pay claims up front and review them at a later date if discrepancies arise, and that providers be required to submit refunds if it is later determined that a provider was overpaid. Commenter asserted that a carrier should, upon receipt of a provider's claim, be able to request documentation from the provider to determine whether services billed were provided, and request a refund from the provider if documentation does not indicate that those services were, in fact, provided.

RESPONSE: Commenter's recommendation relates to reimbursement policies and retrospective review, neither of which is addressed by §134.800. These issues are addressed in commission rule 133.1(a)(3), which defines the term, "complete medical bill," and in commission rule 133.301, which provides for the circumstances in which retrospective review of medical bills is allowed. The commission disagrees with commenter's assertion, however, that carriers should be required to pay claims up front and review them later to determine whether there is a basis for seeking a refund for overpayment to a provider. This would be inconsistent with Texas Labor Code §408.027(a), which states, "An insurance carrier shall pay the fee allowed under Section 413.011 for a service rendered by a health care provider not later than the 45th day after the date the insurance carrier receives the charge unless the amount of the payment or the entitlement to payment is disputed. " The statute contemplates that carriers should be permitted to review each bill and its supporting documentation to determine if there is reason to dispute the bill before paying the provider. Moreover, the commenter's recommendation would not be appropriate due to the additional considerations of compensability and extent of injury within the Texas workers' compensation system.

COMMENT: Commenter indicated support for the rule and believes the system will benefit from the ability to consider the additional data that will be provided to the commission regarding pharmaceutical health care benefits. Commenter indicated that the data will allow pharmacists to better format or structure what the pharmaceutical benefits should be like, and questions of medical necessity and treatment patterns would be obviated.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Commenter is in favor of electronic filing, stating that it is a standard format, it is a simple process, and it saves money for providers and carriers. Commenter observed, further, that all carriers that have implemented the CMS billing system have the capability of accepting Electronic Filing as part of the software. In order to entice providers to return to or stay in the workers' compensation system, commenter recommends that the commission make the system easier and faster.

RESPONSE: The commission agrees that utilizing electronic bill submission provides benefits to all system participants. In subsection (e) of the adopted rule, the commission continues to provide for mutually agreed upon electronic bill submissions. However, the commission also clarifies that this rule provides for standardization of paper billing forms until the commission outlines electronic billing specifications. Currently, as stated in Advisory 2004-04, the commission, through its Business Process Improvement (BPI) initiative, is working with electronic submission trading partners to develop a process for the electronic submission of medical billing data. The Commission is identifying options for adoption of full electronic billing from the health care providers to the insurance carriers and to the Commission. These automated tools allow for fewer disputes over billing and much shorter payment timeframes. The improved billing system may encourage more doctors to participate in the Texas workers' compensation system. In the Medicare system, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) contracts with two intermediaries to process bills. These two carriers specialize in Medicare payment policies and have software programs that are specifically designed and maintained using the most up to date Medicare policies. But in the Texas workers' compensation system, there are over 250 workers' compensation carriers, and additional bill review entities under contract with the carriers, that need to be taken into consideration while determining how to incorporate electronic billing into the workers' compensation system. Furthermore, the need for documentation on whether the medical care being billed for is related to a compensable injury adds additional complication to the use of electronic billing in a workers' compensation environment.

§134.802

COMMENT: Commenter supported the changes, as it will allow the commission to better track and understand the true nature of workers' compensation pharmacy. Commenter observed that the commission will be able to gain first hand knowledge of the pharmacy process from the acceptance of the claim, to dispensing of medications, to billing and eventual payment by the carrier or payer. Commenter stated that the proposed changes will also permit the commission to gain a better understanding of the medical costs attributed to the workers' compensation system.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Commenter supports the amendments to §134.802, stating they do not believe the amended rules will cause any additional financial or billing burden for payers and providers, including pharmacy providers.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

COMMENT: Commenter states overpayment is not an issue; has concern that currently insurance carriers do not pay units correctly or with the proper denial reasons.

RESPONSE: The commission disagrees with commenter's assertion that overpayments by insurance carriers do not occur. Commission records show that in 2003 the commission conducted refund audits of 18 health care providers for overpayments from insurance carriers. These audits revealed $141,543 in overpayments to health care providers by insurance carriers. Subsection (f), which has not been amended, supports the medical billing audit process of the commission by allowing the commission to order refunds of overpayment by the carrier when appropriate. The commission clarifies that incorrect payments are addressed in the Medical Dispute Resolution process (Chapter 133) and improper denial reasons are addressed in the Monitoring and Enforcement process (Chapter 180).

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that the Commission should use the HIPAA 837.

RESPONSE: The Commission interprets this comment to advocate use of the HIPAA billing format, rather than future implementation of the International Association of Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions (IAIABC) billing format anticipated by the commission in its proposal preamble. The commission is not prepared to implement use of the HIPAA billing format. In order to capture data elements that are unique to workers' compensation, the Commission plans to implement the IAIABC version of the 837, as it contains specific elements required for reporting data to the commission. System participants were surveyed in January 2003 as to whether they would prefer that the commission adopt the IAIABC standard version since it was being used already in other jurisdictions, or whether they would prefer that the commission build its own payment format, based on the Health Care Claimant Payment/Advice 835 form, developed by National Electronic Data Interchange, with a small companion file containing some 837 elements as this could pave the way for the eventual evolution to full electronic medical billing processes between payers and payees. The survey results showed a clear majority of respondents wanted the commission to adopt the IAIABC version of the HIPAA compliant 837 format that was already being used in other states. As stated in the proposal preamble, as well as Advisory 2004-04, the Commission's Business Process Improvement (BPI) initiative is currently working with electronic submission trading partners to develop a process for the electronic submission of medical billing data.

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that the Commission improve the insurance carrier data collection process by specifying/identifying the required data elements and format, stating the rule does not provide enough specificity. In addition, commenter recommends that, if the commission anticipates adding any reporting requirements that are unique to the Texas workers' compensation system, the commission should keep them limited and provide an opportunity for public comment before they are implemented.

RESPONSE: The commission clarifies that the commission-specific Electronic Claim Submission (ECS) record layout specifications and edits required for insurance carriers to report medical billing information are posted on the commission website rather than in any of its rules. This allows for expedited ECS changes without formal rule proposal and adoption process. In order to capture data elements that are unique to workers' compensation, the Commission plans to implement the IAIABC version of the 837, as it contains specific elements required for reporting data to the commission. In addition, there may be data elements that are unique to Texas workers' compensation such as pharmacy data. For example, the commission may add a data element to capture data reflecting the amount an injured employee paid to "upgrade" to a brand name drug, in accordance with the statute and commission rule 134.504, relating to Pharmaceutical Expenses Incurred by the Injured Employee.

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that the Commission allow for a process of public comment when changes are proposed to the data elements or tweaking to the forms.

RESPONSE: The commission agrees that there is benefit from receiving informal comments to data element requirements and changes to forms that are not in the formal rule making process. The commission has on several occasions invited public involvement in these decisions. For example, in the fall of 2003, through the Business Process Improvement efforts, as outlined in the August 2003 BPI newsletter, the commission requested public comments on the electronic data exchange elements prior to a final version of the IAIABC 837 implementation guides was published. In addition, other medical forms, such as the TWCC-67 (Instructions for completing the CMS-1500) have had technical users from the public involved prior to changes made.

COMMENT: Commenter recommends that more work is required on the rule to ensure a smoother transition to the new data reporting requirements.

RESPONSE: The Commission disagrees that this rule will not allow for a smooth transition to the new data reporting requirements. The rule as adopted, provides for standard paper billing forms until the commission outlines electronic billing specifications for carriers and healthcare providers.

COMMENT: Commenter supports the rule, stating that the system will benefit from the ability to consider data and information on pharmaceutical health care benefits.

RESPONSE: The Commission agrees.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY These amendments are adopted pursuant to Texas Labor Code §402.042, which authorizes the Executive Director to enter orders as authorized by the statute as well as to prescribe the form and manner and procedure for transmission of information to the commission; Texas Labor Code §402.061, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules necessary to administer the Act; Texas Labor Code §406.010, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules necessary to specify the requirements for carriers to provide claims service and establishes that a person commits a violation if the person violates a rule adopted under this section; Texas Labor Code §408.021(a), which provides that an employee who sustains a compensable injury is entitled to all health care reasonably required by the nature of the injury as and when needed; Texas Labor Code §408.025, which requires the commission to specify by rule what reports a health care provider is required to file; Texas Labor Code §408.028, which requires health care practitioners providing care to an employee to prescribe any necessary prescription drugs in accordance with applicable state law; Texas Labor Code §413.011, which requires the commission to adopt the most current reimbursement methodologies, models, and values or weights used by the federal Health Care Financing Administration (now know as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), including applicable payment policies relating to coding, billing, and reporting, and may modify documentation requirements as necessary to meet other statutory requirements; and Texas Labor Code §413.053, which requires the commission to establish standards of reporting and billing governing both form and content.

These amended rules are adopted under: Texas Labor Code §402.042, §402.061, §406.010, §408.021(a), §408.025, §408.028, §413.011, and §413.053.

CROSS REFERENCE TO STATUTE

The previously cited sections of the Texas Labor Code are affected by this rule action. No other code, statute, or article is affected by this rule action.

§134.800.Required Billing Forms and Information.

(a) Except as provided by §134.801 of this title (relating to Submitting Medical Bills for Payment), health care providers shall submit medical bills for payment on standard forms used by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) or applicable forms prescribed in subsections (b) and (c), completed in accordance with Commission instructions. All information on medical bills shall be legible when submitted.

(b) Except as provided in subsections (c), and (d) of this section, all health care providers, as defined in §401.011 of the Texas Labor Code, shall submit medical bills using national standard health insurance claim forms, prepared according to Commission instructions.

(c) Pharmacists shall submit bills using the Commission form TWCC-66, Statement for Pharmacy Services, prepared according to Commission instructions.

(d) Dentists shall submit bills using a billing form currently approved by the American Dental Association prepared according to Commission instructions.

(e) Health care providers may submit medical bills by facsimile or electronic transmission, when mutually agreed upon between the health care provider and the insurance carrier, unless the bill and/or supporting documentation cannot be sent by those media, in which case the health care provider shall send the documentation by mail or personal delivery.

(f) The Medical Review Division may order the health care provider to reimburse a carrier when the carrier pays the health care provider in excess of the amount allowed by the appropriate Commission fee guideline.

(g) This rule shall apply to all dates of service on or after September 1, 2004.

§134.802.Insurance Carrier's Submission of Medical Bills to the Commission.

(a) The insurance carrier shall submit medical billing data to the Commission within 30 days after the insurance carrier makes payment, denies payment, or receives a refund of overpayment on a medical bill.

(b) Insurance carriers shall submit medical billing data electronically in the form and format prescribed by the Commission.

(c) The Commission shall prescribe the form, format, and content of the required medical billing data submission.

(d) This rule shall apply to all dates of service on or after July 15, 2000, for facility and professional medical services except pharmacy and dental services.

(e) This rule shall apply to all dates of service on or after January 1, 2005, for pharmacy and dental services in addition to the already required facility and professional medical services.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 21, 2004.

TRD-200404055

Susan Cory

General Counsel

Texas Workers' Compensation Commission

Effective date: July 11, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 5, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 804-4287