The original link was retracted by the IWCC contractor, Optuminsight, due to data integrity issues.
Unless there are any further announcements from the IWCC, the 2013 fee schedule is effective January 1, 2013.
An HFN, Inc. weblog providing a dialog for analysis, updates, and opinions about the issues involved in the overhaul of the Illinois workers’ compensation system.
The 2013 fee schedule was posted, but some problems were identified, and the vendor, Optuminsight, took it down to work on it. Optuminsight is working on adding code descriptions and posting the correct surgical codes to the Hospital Outpatient and ASTC fee schedules, so please view the schedule with caution. We will announce when this work has been completed.
In the meantime, if you identify any issues with the 2013 schedule, please let us know.The 2013 medical fee schedule is effective on January 1, 2013. We will post additional updates when the IWCC website rereleases the schedule or Optuminsight announces any additional changes.
Differences between Proposal and Final Version: In subsections (f)(1)(B) and (f)(2)(B), the Final Version specifies that the assignment of a petition to disqualify either an Arbitrator or Commissioner shall be made randomly by the Commission. The Final Version adds a new subsection (f)(3), which specifies that a petition for substitution may be made to the Commission if reasonable notice of the application has been given to the adverse party or his or her attorney.
Summary and Purpose of Rulemaking: The amendment addresses an audit finding set forth by Auditor General William Holland in the audit directed pursuant to House Resolution 131 of the 97th General Assembly. Specifically, the audit found that the current version of Section 7030.30 conflicts with the changes of Public Act 97-18. Public Act 97-18 provided that the Canons of Judicial Conduct as adopted by the Illinois Supreme Court apply to the hearing and non-hearing conduct of the Arbitrators and Commissioner. Thus, these changes to Section 7030.30 align the bases for disqualification and also the remittal of a disqualification by and Arbitrator or Commissioner with the provisions of Canon 3 of the Canons of Judicial Conduct.
In addition, the amendment creates a formalized process for the filing of a Petition for Substitution of an Arbitrator or Commissioner. There is one published Appellate Court opinion that calls on the Commission to promulgate such a rule, Preston v. Industrial Comm'n, 332 Ill. App. 3d 708 (3rd Dist. 2002). In that case, a Commissioner who was subject to a petition to disqualify sat on the panel that ruled on the petition. While the majority found no error in the hearing process, the Court recommended that the Commission promulgate a rule to address the procedural handling of petitions to disqualify Commissioners.
Section 8.2(d)(2)
If the claim does not contain substantially all the required data elements necessary to adjudicate the bill, or the claim is denied for any other reason, in whole or in part, the employer or insurer shall provide written notification, explaining the basis for the denial and describing any additional necessary data elements, to the provider within 30 days of receipt of the bill.Section 8.2(d)(3)
In the case of nonpayment to a provider within 30 days of receipt of the bill which contained substantially all of the required data elements necessary to adjudicate the bill or nonpayment to a provider of a portion of such a bill up to the lesser of the actual charge or the payment level set by the Commission in the fee schedule established in this Section, the bill, or portion of the bill, shall incur interest at a rate of 1% per month payable to the provider. Any required interest payment shall be made within 30 days after payment.
Due to a scheduling conflict, we have eliminated the last day of the December call in Ottawa. Arbitrator Falcioni will conduct the call as scheduled on Dec. 24, and trials will be conducted on Dec. 26 and 27. He will not appear on Dec. 28. We apologize for any inconvenience.