Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Chair:  @ David Pyke

Scribe: @ Suzanne Gonzales-Webb


(ATTENDEES TABLE moved to after Agenda)

Agenda Item

Meeting Minutes from Discussion

Decision Link(if not child)
Minutes Approval2019-11-05 CBCP Meeting Agenda/Minutes DRAFT

2019-11-12 CBCP Meeting Minutes Approval

MOTION / Vote :   

Abstain: 0 / Opposed: 0  /  Approve: 12

 November Harmonization - Kathleen

CDS is okay with proposed codes as written (not yet loaded on page)

Second approval vote (to submit as final 6 harmonization proposals )

2 for CBCP to sponsor, others CBCP co-sponsor

Abstain: none; Objections: none : Approval

Call tomorrow w CDS to discuss the use case - this was not in the enterprise where the patient had restricted it (a misunderstanding from CDS end) ; sounds like they will be on board as is per Kathleen - update next week

Proposal 5: CDA Compartment

MOTION (from 10/29 meeting): CBCP to approve to sponsor 5,6,7 Harmonization Proposals (GregW / Kathleen)

Discussion/Clarification: CBCP to support/sponsor, but hold off on approval of Proposal 5 (until we hear back from CDS WG)


From CDS 2019-11-13 Meeting Agenda minutes - CDS feedback on the CDS Compartment Proposal

Continued discussion focused on how the provider systems would know to use this label. The use case is within an HIE, satisfying consent use cases where participants have indicated the information can be shared but only in emergency (which averting a patient safety event would fall under emergency). It's still not clear how providers would know whether or not a given data element should be labelled with this.

The gist of this is that most of the use cases so far in CDS usually the access clearance in a particular instance is bound by the access token provided by the client. This is fundamentally trying to change that so that a CDS Server can have broader access and take into consideration that the client requesting the hook is not necessarily authorized to access.

Agree with the use case and intent, but provide the caveat that it will be difficult (if not impossible) in general to understand when to apply this, given that it's not possible in general to determine what data is required for CDS, because the specific CDS algorithms may not be known ahead of time. Committee also provides the feedback that there should be no expectation (and it should be clearly stated as such) that this has to be used in all cases. It should be a specific policy decision to enable use cases in particular environments. Also recognize that this is not the only mechanism to achieve this use case and implementations should be free to choose alternative mechanisms.


CBCP 6 harmonization proposals. - * awaiting on response from CDS group prior to CBCP approal

  • not yet resolved / some traffic from CDS WG, discussion to be continued in CDS meeting call
  • has a response been received?


Kathleen will bring forth to Harmonization Meeting for both Security and CBCP

MOTION (from 10/29 meeting): CBCP to approve to sponsor 5,6,7 Harmonization Proposals (GregW / Kathleen)

Discussion/Clarification: CBCP to support/sponsor, but hold off on approval of Proposal 5 (until we hear back from CDS WG)


Abstain: none; Objection: none; Approve:  12

PACIO ProjectUpdate/progress report coming in December!


 Going through gForge trackers internally. No additional update

Provenance DAM - Mike Davis, Kathleen

Normative ballot - Ballot Reconciliation

  • no update

 DS4P FHIR IG - Kathleen Connor

No update

  • maybe be morphed in to Sharing with Protections

Update: Approved, start date is in January for September balloting. 

Security will move forward that will be an IG, use of CUI and Security Labels - PSS(s) will be developed

  • DS4P PSS already approved, precursor to other projects (for 

PSS Approved 6/4/2019: FHIR Data Segmentation for Privacy (DS4P) Implementation Guide PSS (by Steering Division)

FHIR Consent - David Pyke

Meetings -  Thursday 2PM ET / 11AM Pacific -  CBCP Free Conference Call // Consent Resource

  • Craig N - continued to work through a few gForge tickets; people are encouraged to attend

Share with Protections - Mike Davis

No update

Meeting set-up TBD (question)

Mike is starting the PSS for this project "Share with Protections"

  • No new information this week
  • PSS update
  •  (document update)

Sequoia DURSA Review - Mike


Sequoia CUI Task Group (US-Realm)

 Sequoia Cross-Paradigm Profile PSS Update

The WGs (Security, CBCP) have both conceptually approved moving forward PSSs; Sequoia in turn has

from 11/5 meeting


Mike would like to proceed with PSS for the following items: 

  1. DS4P FHIR IG (v2 already exists "security labeling")
  2. FHIR Profiles specific to CUI and Sharing with Protections/ "FHIR CDA v2, Cross Paradigm"

MOTION: CBCP agrees to proceed with support for Sequoia specific request to create 1,2 (above) for three use cases Title 38, 42CFR and CUI.

Vote: Abstain: 0; Opposed: 0; Approval Agreement to move forward to create PSS for the above projects

OCP Work / SAMHSA / PPT - Mike

Follow up - update


Mike has been speaking with Jim Kretz/Ken Salyards about their OCP work - PPT?

  • it would be useful for them to speak on what they expect from their NPRM (Mike will contact them and let us know in advance

Additional Agenda Items

Adjournment Meeting adjourned at    /Temporary Meeting Recording:






Johnathan Coleman Co-Chair audio

VA (Book Zurman)

David Pyke  Co-Chair

Ready Computing
@Jim Kretz SAMHSA 

John Davis  aka Mike Davis

Kathleen ConnorVA (Book Zurman)
@Amber PatelSRS
Chris ShawnVA
VA (Book Zurman)
SSA (Aegis)

@Laura Bright 

@Forrest White forrest.white@altarum.orgAltarum
Greg WhiteSRS
@Pele Yu Children's Hospital
@Hannah Galvin hannah.galvin@lahey.orgLahey

Jamie Parker  Carradora
Victor Vadim Vadim@medside.comMedside
@Joseph Parker
@Sean Mahoney MITRE 
 Serafina Versaggi
@Jessica Scopac MITRE 
 @Beth Connor Beth.Connor@cms.hhs.govCMS 
@Dave Hill MITRE 

Supporting Documents

Outline Reference

Supporting Document

Minute Approval

Action items Suzanne Gonzales-Webb