Wholesale: Products & Services

Open Product/Process CR PC072505-1 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Delivery:

ASAP

Status History

Project Meetings

- December 14, 2005 Monthly Product Process CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR is pending the decision from Granite, to see if they would accept Qwest’s proposed solution. Jill noted that Granite has requested that the CR be placed in Deferred Status until they can do some testing internally and make their decision. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that Eschelon has an interest in sponsoring this CR if Granite chooses to withdraw their request. Bonnie stated that she did not want the effort stopped. Jill Martain/Qwest stated that the effort is not stopping, Granite just wanted to perform some internal tests before they decide whether Qwest’s proposed solution would work for them. Jill stated that Qwest would continue to follow-up, with Granite, and once they make their decision, the CR would move out of deferred status and would be back on the agenda for discussion at CMP.

- December 7, 2005 Email Received from Granite: Hi Peggy, Thanks for your assistance. I hope to contact you in the near future. Happy Holidays. Lisa

-- December 7, 2005 Email Sent to Granite: Hi Lisa, It may be better to place the CR in Deferred Status...for now. Once you make your decision, please let me know and we can then take it out of Deferred Status and see what you want to do regarding the proposed solution. There is no set amount of time that the CR must remain in Deferred; so if you have your decision soon, we can remove it from Deferred and proceed with the next step, at that time. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Wholesale CMP

December 7, 2005 Email Received from Granite: Hi Peggy, Thanks for your quick response. Apparently, we have to test "how the messages come in, how big they are, if our system can support it". At this time, our team is not ready to do this. Would it be best to put the CR in deferred status until we take this preliminary step? Thanks, Lisa

-- December 7, 2005 Email Sent to Granite: Good Morning Lisa, Thanks for the email. I am a little confused as to what you plan to test. There have been no changes, and nothing implemented so far, as a result of this CR. This CR can’t be implemented until we know which path to pursue and that is based on your accepting the proposed solution or not accepting it. If it is Granite’s preference, we can place the CR in a Deferred Status until you make your decision. Let me know. Thanks much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Wholesale CMP

-- December 7, 2005 Email Received from Granite: Hi Peggy, We will contact you as soon as we are ready to test the possible solution. Again, thanks for all of your assistance. Thanks, Lisa

December 6, 2005 Email Received from Granite: Hi Peggy, I forwarded this email to get a response for you and unfortunately I didn’t get one. Let me try again and get back to you asap. Thanks for your diligent follow-up. Lisa

December 6, 2005 Email Sent to Granite: Hello Lisa - This email is a follow-up to see if Granite has made their decision regarding PC072505-1. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Wholesale CMP

- November 30, 2005 Email Sent to Granite: Good Morning Lisa, This email is just to follow-up to see if you have made a decision to accept Qwest’s proposed solution for your CMP CR for Cable Pair and Binding Post Identification. Please let me know if the solution is acceptable so we can proceed with the development effort. If the proposed solution will not fit your need and is not accepted, let me know that as well. If more time is needed for you to make your decision, please let me know when the decision is anticipated. I appreciate it. Thanks much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Wholesale CMP

- November 16, 2005 Monthly Product Process CMP Meeting Discussion: Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that the original request was that the Cable Pair and Binding Post information be provided on the FOC. Denise stated that Qwest investigated the request and determined that it could not be done via the FOC because the information is not yet available and a delay in the FOCs is not desirable. Denise stated that an alternate solution was presented to the CLEC Community, to provide the information via the PSON. Denise stated that at a minimum the PSON Header and a message indicating that there has been no activity would be provided. The majority of the PSONs would contain Cable Pair and Binding Post information. Denise then stated that the CLECs asked if the information could also be provided on the Completion Notice and noted that it could be. Denise stated that the information would be provided on both the PSON and on the Completion Notice. Denise stated that both Notices would contain a disclaimer that states that the assignments could change up to and including the Due Date. Denise stated that this solution was proposed and that it is pending the approval of the CR originator. Stephanie Prull/Eschelon asked why the Completion Notice would have a disclaimer when the order is already done at that point. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that the same information is needed on both notices and that on the Completion Notice it would identify if there was a change to the assignments from when the PSON was issued. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that on the Completion Notice when the information is sent, because the order has completed, the information should not have changed. Bonnie asked if Qwest wanted the information from the PSON mirrored on the Completion Notice. Denise Martinez/Qwest said yes and stated that it is a snapshot at a different point in time of the process. Denise stated that there had been problems in the past in getting the notices in synch and would like to avoid that risk if can, of having them be different. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that in reality, the information on the Confirmation Notice would not have changed. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that it shouldn’t. Jill Martain/Qwest stated that there could be a timing issue that may result in the information being different. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that in a rare instance, it could happen. Denise stated that more would be known when it is developed and tested. Jill Martain/Qwest stated that the CR remains in Evaluation, pending the approval of the proposed solution, from Granite Telecommunications.

November 9, 2005 Email Received from Granite: Hi Peggy, Our EDI group needs to do user and analyst testing and they have a few things ahead of this issue. We are estimating that it will be several weeks before the group can take on this project. Until then, there are no necessary next steps required of Qwest. We will keep you posted on the progress. Thanks for your assistance.

Lisa

November 4, 2005 Email Sent to Granite: Lisa, Thank you for meeting with us on November 1st to discuss the proposed solution for your submitted CMP CR for Cable Pair and Binding Post Identification. This email is a follow-up to see if the solution presented on that call is workable for you. If the proposed solution is acceptable to you and you would like us to proceed with that option, let me know so we can then proceed. Please let me know ASAP so we can determine next steps. Thanks much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Wholesale CMP

November 1, 2005 Ad Hoc Meeting Minutes: ATTENDEES: Jeff Sonnier-Sprint, Joyce Philo-McLeod, Sharon Van Meter-AT&T, Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon, Jody Thompson-TDS, Stephanie Prull-Eschelon, Jennifer Arnold-TDS, Chelsea Payne-Mcleod, Rosalyn Davis-MCI, Kim Tosi-Granite, Lisa Mui-Granite, LouAnn Miller-McLeod, Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest, Jim Recker-Qwest, Shirley Tallman-Qwest, Chris Viveros-Qwest, Denise Martinez-Qwest DISCUSSION: Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest stated that the ad hoc call was for Qwest to present a proposed solution to Granite and the CLEC Community, for PC072505-1 Cable Pair and Binding Post Identification. Peggy stated that at the October CMP Meeting, Qwest had indicated that we are unable to provide the information on the FOC, because at FOC, there are no assignments yet. This call is for discussion of the proposed solution. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that at FOC, the data is not yet available and noted that it would also result in FOCs being delayed. Denise stated that no one wants delays in the FOCs. Denise stated that an Assignments Section would be added to the PSON when the PSON is created. Denise stated that it would include a header and that it would display ‘no activity for section’. Denise stated that when the data was then available, another PSON would be sent. Denise stated that also added to the PSON would be a disclaimer that would state that the assignments could change on and including on the due date. Denise then asked for questions. Lisa Mui-Granite stated that she was not familiar with the PSON. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that the PSON is sent after the FOC. Denise noted that it is not the completion; it is the Pending Service Order Notice. Denise stated that it is a snapshot of the service order after the FOC and pre-completion. Denise noted that updated PSONs are sent when there has been an update to a service order. Lisa Mui-Granite asked if they could be viewed via IMA. Denise Martinez-Qwest yes and noted that they could not be viewed in the FAX Gateway. Lisa Mui-Granite stated that they do not currently get PSONs. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that it is a snapshot of the SOP and noted that they could request to start receiving them. Sharon Van Meter-AT&T stated that not all request a PSON and asked what would be done for those CLECs. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that they would need to request the PSONs in order to get the information. Lisa Mui-Granite stated that she would discuss this proposed solution with their IT people to see why PSONs are not currently requested. Lisa stated that this could be tremendously helpful. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that the information may or may not change on the due date. Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if the information did change on the due date, if another PSON would then be sent. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that it could and noted that it would depend on timing. Denise stated that if the last PSON was sent and then the information changed, it would then be time for a Completion Notice to be sent. Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if the updated information could then be on the Completion Notice. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that Qwest would internally discuss that request. Lisa Mui-Granite asked if Granite could view the service order. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that they could view the service order via the PSON. Lisa Mui-Granite stated that she needed to speak internally to see if this solution is acceptable for them. Lisa asked if this was the only solution. Denise Martinez-Qwest said yes and stated that no one want delays in the FOCs. Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest asked if there were any other questions. Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon advised Granite that Eschelon does receive the PSONs for EDI and GUI and stated that she and/or Stephanie Prull (Eschelon) would be happy to discuss with Granite. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon asked if this was a Systems CR. Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest stated that the CR was submitted as a Process change and stated that if today’s proposed solution was acceptable, the CR would be crossed over to a Systems CR. Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if Qwest would look into providing the information on the Completions Notice. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that Qwest would look into that. Jim Recker-Qwest asked if there was feedback from other CLECs. Joyce Philo-McLeod stated that she would check and see if McLeod receives PSONs or if they would need further development. Joyce asked if they could be viewed in IMA. Denise Martinez-Qwest stated that they can view via IMA if they have requested PSONs. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that McLeod would need to certify for PSON and then they would see them. There were no additional questions. Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest asked Granite to please let her know if this solution was acceptable to them.

-- October 19, 2005 Monthly Product Process CMP Meeting Discussion: Jim Recker/Qwest stated that this request is for Cable Pair and Binding Post to be provided on the LSR FOC. Jim stated that we are unable to do that because at FOC, there are no assignments yet. Jim then stated that Qwest has a potential solution and that an ad hoc meeting was being scheduled for Qwest to present the potential solution and for discussion. Jim stated that this CR would remain in Evaluation Status pending the outcome of the ad hoc meeting.

-- September 21, 2005 Monthly Product Process CMP Meeting Discussion: Jim Recker/Qwest stated that Granite is requesting that the cable pair and binding post be placed on the order at FOC. Jim stated that another call was held, with Granite, yesterday in order to communicate that some information is currently available to Granite, in CEMR. Jim stated that we are continuing to evaluate this request. Jim noted that when the information is put on the order, at FOC, it has not yet gone through the assignment process. Jim said that changes to the PSON may be an option but if the cable pair & binding post information is placed on the PSON, that information could change and may not be the final assignments. Jim stated that based on the call yesterday, with Granite, we are still looking into items internally to see if we can move forward with this request. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she understands Qwest’s concern regarding the information on the PSON possibly changing and noted that the assignments could change in the course of the installation process. Bonnie asked if that was a common occurrence. Jim Recker/Qwest stated that he was trying to get some numbers around that. There were no additional comments. Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR would move to Evaluation status.

-- August 17, 2005 Monthly Product Process CMP Meeting discussion: Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest stated that Granite Telecommunications is requesting that Cable Pair & Binding Post Information be provided sooner and that currently the information is provided via repair. This CR moves to presented status.

-- Clarification Meeting-August 4, 2005 Attendees: Lisa Mui-Granite Telecomm, Kim Tosi-Granite Telecomm, Kim Isaacs-Eschelon, Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest, Janean Van Dusen-Qwest, Jim Recker-Qwest, Becky Ferrington-Qwest, Denise Martinez-Qwest, Alan Braegger-Qwest, Terri Kilker-Qwest, Gary Stacy-Qwest, Caroline Myers-Qwest

Review Requested (Description of) Change: Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest read the CRs description: Identification of cable pair and binding post information when the order reaches confirmed status (FOC). The cable pair and binding post information is currently provided via repair after the order is completed.

Obtain the Business Need from the CR Originator: Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest asked Granite Telecom for their business reason for the requested change or for information as to what problem has been encountered that prompted this request. Granite Telecomm stated that they need the information as soon as the FOC. As soon as the order confirms, they schedule the installer and they would look for the information. If they wait until the order completes, it is a longer wait for their end user customer to get service. They now have to call repair for the information.

Additional Discussion: Becky Ferrington-Qwest asked if the requested product set is UNE-P POTS. Lisa Mui-Granite Telecom stated that it is for any installation but that the bulk for Granite is POTS. Lisa Mui-Granite asked for the likelihood of getting this request. Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest stated that Qwest will need to analyze the request and stated that the next step is for Granite to present this CR to the CLEC Community at the August 17th Monthly CMP Meeting and then Qwest would provide a response in September. There were no additional questions or comments

Confirmed Impacted Area(s): Ordering

Confirmed Impacted Products: All

CenturyLink Response

For Review by the CLEC Community and Discussion at the September 21, 2005 Product Process CMP Meeting

TO: Lisa Mui Granite Telecommunications

SUBJECT: CR # PC072505-1 Cable Pair & Binding Post Identification

This letter is in response to Granite Telecommunications Change Request PC072505-1 (Cable Pair & Binding Post Identification). This CR requests the identification of cable pair and binding post information when the order reaches confirmed status (FOC). The cable pair and binding post information is currently provided via repair after the order is completed.

A clarification call was held on August 4, 2005 for discussion of this request, and this CR was presented at the Product Process Monthly CMP Meeting on August 17, 2005. Qwest has requested another call with Granite Telecommunications, for further discussion of this Change Request.

Qwest would like to place this CR in evaluation status in order to continue with analysis of this request. The current process was developed via several previously submitted Product Process and Systems CMP CRs. Qwest is continuing to and look at viable solutions for this change request. Qwest will provide an updated response at the next CMP meeting. Qwest requests that this CR move to Evaluation status.

Sincerely, Qwest