Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR061708-01 Detail

Status History

Project Meetings

Mark Coyne-Qwest said that this CR was submitted by Sprint and has been denied. He said that Qwest was able to provide an alternative solution that Lee Gomez (Qwest) will present. Lee Gomez-Qwest said that the customer is allowed one listing per listed telephone number, one Local Main Listing (LML) per account. She said that if the user has additional listing information with different Listed Telephone Numbers (LTN) than the LML, they can be entered as Local Additional Main (LAM) listings. She said that LAMs are treated like an LML; they are considered a Primary listing and are entitled to a complimentary listing in the Dex Yellow Pages. Lee said that Multiple LAMs are allowed on a single account as long as each LAM has a different LTN than the LML LTN. Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that this solution is satisfactory and that this CR can be closed.

8/8/08 Additional Clarification Meeting Clarification Meeting – Sprint SCR061708-01 Multiple LMLs per PON

Attendees: Jeff Sonnier-Sprint, Kim Isaacs-Integra, Lee Gomez-Qwest, Lori Langston-Qwest, Chuck Anderson-Qwest, Lynn Stecklein-Qwest

Lynn Stecklein-Qwest said that Qwest had questions during the evaluation of this CR.

Lee Gomez-Qwest said that after reading the minutes from the June clarification meeting and the July CMP meeting she wanted to be clear on what Sprint was requesting. She asked if Sprint was asking that all the lines and listings associated with 1 account be sent in as LMLs.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that is correct.

Lee Gomez-Qwest that there wouldn’t be any premium type listings they would be local main line listings.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that if the customer is trying to send in all listings on 1 order that currently they are all separate. He said they want to do a range and they can’t do that with DL because of their integrated systems. He said that the only way to do that is to submit a CR to issue multiple TNs where we add DLs on a single order PON to be able to send on 1 PON. He said that currently they can’t do that because it’s only 1 LML per PON. He said this is a way for them send in 1 order instead of 5 or 6.

Lee Gomez-Qwest asked if the end user is asking for the same telephone number that they want 4 different listings on 4 different telephone numbers. She said that today you have the ability to send in 1 PON with multiple listings; 1 local main listing per account and you have up to, for example, 900 additional type listings on 1 PON.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that they know they can do that today. He said this is asking for multiple LMLs on the account and the ability to transmit that to Qwest.

Lee Gomez- asked if the Multiple LMLs would be on 1 account number.

Chuck Anderson-Qwest clarified that they want 4 main listings on a single account number.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said yes 4 different TNs but on the same account number.

Chuck Anderson-Qwest said that the LMLs represented on the account level TN is the main listing and you want 4 main listings on one single account.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that Verizon offers this service.

Lee Gomez-Qwest said that she was checked the Verizon business rules and she said that she could not find where they allow multiple main listings on 1 PON. Lee asked if having a main listing and having 4 additional main listings would meet the customer’s needs. She said that they would have the 1 LML (which is the business rule today) per account but then they can have the same kind of listing but it is called an additional main listing She said that has to have a different TN than your LML but it allows them to send in multiple main listings other than your local main listing as an additional main listing.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint asked if that was the record of LAM.

Lee Gomez-Qwest said that it was.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that we can do the LAM today but that is not what the customer wants. He said that because they can do this in Verizon, the customer wants a product where they can send 1 order and all the listings can be LML.

Chuck Anderson-Qwest said that they get 1 single account not taking those 4 LMLs and breaking up into 4 different account numbers. He asked what is the difference between the LML and the LAM when it goes into the directory.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that it costs him money.

Lee Gomez-Qwest said that with an additional main listing you are entitled per the tariffs for 1 listing per TN – if this is a different telephone but billed to the same account an LAM is just like a local main listing. She said that you are not charged for it as long as the TN is different. It has all of the same attributes as the main listing; you get a phone book and it gets sent to yellow pages and is essentially like a LML. She said that since we can’t have more than 1 LML on an account we have the AM. It’s not chargeable and it is a primary type.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that he we back to Time Warner Cable and told them that if it is not LML it is a chargeable USOC and what I’m hearing is that LAM is not chargeable USOC.

Lee Gomez-Qwest said we are only talking about standalone FBDL and the number port. Lee verified that it is a primary type listing not chargeable and the only caveat is that the TN has to be different than the main TN.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that he would take this back to his customer. He said that he does not have a problem with Qwest denying this request.

Lee Gomez-Qwest said that in the Directory Listing Providers Business Procedures Document there is a table that provides this information for FBDL AM. She said that if it is not there that tells you that it is not chargeable. (Section 3-19 FBDL billing). She said that this information can also be found in the IMA FBDL guide and that it gives you information about record type.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that AT&T and Bell South have already denied this request.

Lynn Stecklein-Qwest asked if Sprint would be willing to withdraw this request.

Jeff Sonnier-Qwest said that he wanted the formal denial.

7/16/08 Systems CMP Meeting

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that they have a request from their cable providers to reduce costs associated with submitting LSRs. He said that this same request went to the other 5 ILECs. He said that they are requesting 1 PON be sent for all TNs on 1 order even though there may be 4 accounts for 1 customer rather than having to send 4 orders. Mark Coyne-Qwest said that the clarification call was held on 6/25/08 but that we may need to schedule an additional call. 7/22/08 – Additional clarification call not necessary.

6/25/08 Clarification Meeting

Attendees: Jeff Sonnier-Sprint, Kim Isaacs-Integra, Lori Langston-Qwest, Chuck Anderson-Qwest

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that they would like to request that Qwest allow more than one LML per order (CB-V with DL and JB-N). Currently if their customer wants all 4 lines to be processed as LML they have to send 4 orders, we would would like to be able to send one PON with all TNs as LML.

Lori Langston-Qwest said that there is one free listing on each account and that there is one DL form for each listing. She said that in the past CLECs were required to populate multiple forms when ordering or changing listings. She said that 2 forms were eliminated and the fields from these two forms were incorporated in the the DL form.

Jeff Sonnier-Qwest said that CTX is not applicable with this request.

Kim Isaacs-Qwest asked if Sprint was requesting that a customer with a LML with 3 additional listings that there would be 3 LMLs.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint said that today then have 1 PON and 3 additional listings. He said they can't have 4 unless the other listing is non-pub. He said that they are up against a business rule.

Lynn Stecklein-Qwest stated that Sprint would be presenting this CR in the July CMP Meeting.

Jeff Sonnier-Sprint asked if Qwest would have a response by then.

Lynn Stecklein-Qwest said we may have a preliminary response but that the response would be presented in the August CMP Meeting.

CenturyLink Response

This is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR061708-01 submitted by Sprint on June 17, 2008 and titled Multiple LMLs per PON.

CR Description: Sprint would like to request that Qwest allow more than one LML per order (CB-V with DL and JB-N). Currently if our customer wants all 4 lines to be processed as LML we have to send 4 orders, we would like to be able to send one PON with all TNs as LML.

Qwest Response: Qwest held two clarification calls (June 25 and August 8) to fully understand this system change request. Qwest expressed concern in the August call that the current description of change would not be cost effective to implement and that there was an existing solution to address this Change Request. In the August discussion with Sprint, this alternative solution was proposed by Qwest to meet the customer’s needs:

The customer is allowed one listing per listed telephone number, one Local Main Listing (LML) per account. If the user has additional listing information with different Listed Telephone Numbers (LTN) than the LML, they can be entered as Local Additional Main (LAM) listings. LAMs are treated like an LML, they are considered a Primary listing and are entitled to a complimentary listing in the Dex Yellow Pages. Multiple LAMs are allowed on a single account as long as each LAM has a different LTN than the LML LTN.

More detailed information can be found in the Directory Listing Providers Business Procedure available at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/dirlistuser.html

The desired information is currently available via the suggested options provided in the documentation listed above. Qwest is denying this request due to No Demonstrable Business Benefit since Qwest was able to refer to an existing solution.

Sincerely,

Qwest Corporation