Open Product/Process CR 5527234 Detail |
| Title: Legacy CR Change the due date on the service order, instead of using a "hard hold" | ||||||
| CR Number |
Current Status Date |
Area Impacted | Products Impacted | |||
|
|
||||||
| 5527234 |
Completed 6/20/2001 |
Ordering | Unbundled Loop, related items such as voice mail and DSL | |||
| Originator: Powers, Lynne |
| Originator Company Name: Eschelon |
| Owner: |
| Director: |
| CR PM: |
Description Of Change |
|
When Qwest stops a cutover on the day of cut due to a Qwest issue, Qwest should change the actual due date in the Service Order Processor (SOP) on both the disconnect and the "n" order for loop installations, using the appropriate jeopardy code (indicating the reason the original due date is not met). If a cutover is stopped on the day of cut due to a CLEC issue, the CLEC submits a supplemental order, which causes the due date to be changed on the service orders. When a cutover is stopped on the day of cut due to a Qwest issue, however, Qwest testers currently use what they refer to as a "hard hold" on the service order that is disconnecting the customer’s existing service. This holds the line translations from completing through RCMAC. Nonetheless, many times, the service order in the SOP completes, and downstream departments complete their work. Because Qwest uses a "hard hold," the actual due date the cutover is performed is changed but the related service orders do not reflect the new date. It is unclear whether there is a jeopardy notice on the new connect installing the loop has a due date change in the SOP and reflects the appropriate jeopardy code or if the order appears to be completing on the original due date with no jeopardy code assigned to it. This process creates customer-affecting problems. In many cases, the "hard hold" fails to work as intended, and the customer loses service completely. Because the service order has completed, it may be difficult to obtain the same facilities and OE to rebuild the customer in a timely manner. Even if the "hard hold" works as intended, the customer’s service can still be affected. For example, when a "hard hold" is used for an order for a customer with voice mail, the forwarding features are still functioning (because the "hard hold" holds the line translations from completing through RCMAC) but the mailbox portion of the customer’s voice mail is taken down (because the due date on the service order was not changed to reflect the hold). Qwest takes down the mailbox because, without a due date change, one group at Qwest does not know that the other has changed the date for completion of the order. The calls are forwarded, but there is no mailbox to receive them. This problem is not limited to voice mail and affects other areas, such as DSL. Qwest should stop using the "hard hold" and instead change the due date on the service order itself.
|
| Date | Action | Description |
| 4/27/2001 | CR received from Karen Clauson of Eschelon | |
| 5/1/2001 | Status changed to New - To be Validated | |
| 5/1/2001 | Status changed to New - To be Evaluated | |
| 5/1/2001 | Updated CR sent to Jessica Johnson, Lynne Powers, Karen Clauson and Janet Houston | |
| 5/16/2001 | Status changed to Reviewed - Under consideration | |
| 6/20/2001 | CR status changed to Complete - Process Deployed as per Lynne Powers or Eschelon | |
| 3/28/2002 | Posted this legacy CR to CMP Database. Completed CR Form had been posted to the Web as part of the "Change Request (CR) Archive - Change Requests statused as Inactive before August 1, 2001" |
Project Meetings |
|
|
Information Current as of 1/11/2021