Wholesale: Products & Services

Open Product/Process CR PC013102-1 Detail

Description Of Change

Project Meetings

03/19/03 - March CMP Meeting James Kaster Qwest reported ATT gave a presentation to the Colorado PUC on March 13, 2003. This was a very forward looking presentation and the PUC is currently reviewing the information. This team will continue as an ongoing task force. Cindy Macy Qwest asked if ATT would be able to share the presentation with the Forum and also if we could close this CR since the team will be an ongoing task force. Donna –ATT agreed to check with Ervin Rea and let us know if we could close the CR and share the presentation. The suggestion was made to share the presentation at the next CLEC Forum. Donna will advise Cindy of her decision.

02/19/03 - February CMP Meeting Kaster–Qwest advised the team is targeting to present to the PUC in March. The date of the meeting was not known at this time. Sharon Van Meter – ATT asked if Ervin Rea from ATT is involved and Qwest advised yes.

01/15/03 - January CMP Meeting

Kaster-Qwest stated that AT&T will present their report to the FCC in March. The CR remains Development.

12/18/02 December CMP Monthly Meeting Qwest-Kaster and ATT-Spangler advised SME Jim W. and Rich Kaplin are finalizing the presentation. Jim W is working on obtaining the cost estimate and reviewing the data that Entrado provided. They have found some inaccuracies in the data from Entrado that need to be clarified. They have approximately 43 pages of data that needs to be paired down into a presentation. There is a 911 Task Force meeting in January and then again in March. The team would like to present at the January meeting if their data is accurate, otherwise they will continue working on the presentation and present in March. This CR will remain in Development status.

11/20/02 November CMP Monthly Meeting ATT (Spangler) advised they are continuing to work on this project. ATT will plan on presenting their process at the January Colorado PUC meeting. This project will remain in Development status.

10/16/02 October CMP Monthly Meeting ATT advised they are continuing to work on this project but do to additional investigation needed they will not be able to submit their plan as scheduled and will not be able to present at the November Colorado PUC meeting, but plan on presenting at the January meeting. This project will remain in Development status.

Subject: RE: PC013102-1 DMS 100 SR/ALI Change Request Action Item Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2002 19:03:06 -0400 From: "Spangler, Jonathan F, NCAM" To: "Martin, Rick" CC: "Boykin, Timothy (Tim), NCAM" , "Kaplan, Richard S (Rich), NLNS" , "Roth, Diane F, LGA" , "Morgenstern, Dale C, NLNS" , "Bruno, Vincent G, NLNS" , "Friesen, Letty S, LGA" , "Ann Adkisson" , "Carla Pardee" , "Donna Osborne-Miller" , "Ervin Rea" , "Esther Scherer" , "Sharon Van Meter" , "Teresa Bahner"

Per AT&T's action item for CR PC013102-1 DMS 100 SR/ALI, AT&T will not be able to provide a presentation regarding solutions to the 911 default routing in the Denver MSA. AT&T recognizes that this delay jeopardizes our plan to present our solutions to the CO 911 Task Force to be held in November.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Jonathan Spangler Carrier Performance - Western Region AT&T Local Services & Access Management Voice: 303-298-6240 Fax: 303-298-6455 Email: jfspangler@att.com Pager: 888-858-7243 pin 106241 or jonathan.spangler@my2way.com

09/18/02 September CMP Monthly Meeting Minutes

Qwest advised that AT&T was developing a plan for the Denver area to have 9-1-1 calls default routed by CLEC. Qwest indicated that they would then review the plan and if acceptable schedule a preliminary meeting with the Colorado PUC and another CLEC (ICG). The next step would be to present the plan to the PSAPs at the PUCs formal meeting in November. Eschelon asked if the CLECs would be involved in any of the meetings and if they would have a chance to review the plan. Qwest advised that the meeting in November might be open and they would provide notification when the meeting was taking place. Qwest also indicated that they would post AT&T’s plan to this CR in the CMP Product/Process Change Request Interactive report. The CR will remain in Development.

-

08/21/02 August CMP Monthly Meeting Minutes

Qwest advised that there was a meeting on July 23, 2002 with a wide range of participation including other ILECs, Nortel, NENA Working Committee Chairperson, BellSouth and Idaho PUC. The result of the meeting was that the NENA Working Committee would work towards a national standard, and for the Denver Market, AT&T would be developing a plan for default routing by CLEC. AT&T is currently working with BellSouth to put a recommendation to submit to Qwest for Qwest to pursue funding. The goal is to have everything complete by 10/15/02 for presentation to the PUC and PSAPs. AT&T advised that they concurred with Qwest’s status and appreciated everybody’s participation. They were participating in the NENA working committee and were happy with the progress. They indicated that they would be sending some minor comments to the minutes.

--

CLEC Change Request Qwest & AT&T Conference Call

July 30, 2002, 8:30 am (MT) Conference Call

877-572-8687, P/C 7994817 PC013102-1, DMS100 SR/ALI

Attendees: Ric Martin, Qwest Jim Kaster, Qwest Jim Winegarden, Qwest Matt Kruzick, Qwest Jonathan Spangler, AT&T Ervin Rae, AT&T Richard Kaplan, AT&T

Introduction of Attendees Introduction of the participants on the Conference Call was made and the purpose of the meeting discussed.

Discussion Items Rich Kaplin indicated that based on 7/23/02 conference call, AT&T would like to pursue Tom Breen’s recommendation, for the Denver Market, as set forth in paragraph 2.13 of the 7/23/02 meeting minutes. The language from the meeting minutes is as follows: "Tom Breen responding as the NENA Network Technical Committee Chairperson indicated that if the need is to be able to default route at something more granular than the rate center, one would need to assume that the PSAPs play fair, and, with cooperation from Qwest, there would need to be negotiations with the PSAPs. Recommendation could be to get one default PSAP for a rate center or by carrier. Get a PSAP to volunteer to be the default PSAP for the rate center. If picked well, they would most likely be the PSAP handling most default routed calls anyway. Tom indicated that all PSAPs need to be involved in the process. Tom indicated that the long-term solution resides in NENA committees. He indicated that Tom Hinkleman could provide the pre-release final technical recommendation on rate center consolidation. It will be published by NENA shortly. Tom Breen stated that if the above could not be achieved, alternatively, all CLEC’s could ask to negotiate with Qwest for not using NPANXX based routing, however, once the TN/ESN is established (without the delete function on disconnects), the legacy record will remain and could misguide the call. This cannot be on a CLEC by CLEC basis because Number portability will mean that the NPA-NXX ranges will NOT be or will not remain unique to any given CLEC or ILEC. If the wild cards are to be removed it will require it being a switch wide process on each affected Selective Router/SR-ALI database. Tom Breen recommends trying to educate the PSAPs in the area on the technical limitations of the system, and ask them to cooperate in identifying a default PSAP per Rate Center, even if there has to be more than one to spread the load from all of the area’s carriers."

The general discussion was that we needed to look at the reduction in the number of trunks (7) going to the primary PSAPs in the Denver area. The general consensus was that there would be PSAP jurisdictional issues to overcome and we should first get the Colorado PUC buy-in and support from another CLEC. It was agreed that ICG would be an acceptable CLEC. In addition to the jurisdictional issues with the PSAP, the cost issues will need to be addressed.

It was agreed that Rich Kaplin would develop a plan with associated PSAP benefits for reducing the number of Trunks. Jim Winegarden would provide technical support to Rich. Jim Kaster would be Qwest’s point of contact for receipt of documentation of AT&T.

It was understood that the plan would look at the reduction in the number of trunks and does not change Qwest’s standard on default routing. Based on the PSAPs designated to the reduced number of trunks, Qwest will need to change their default wild card to that PSAP and update the NPA NXX, which will require a complete reload. This could be accomplished by staggered cuts.

The following plan was agreed to: - AT&T will submit a working plan by the end of September - Qwest will perform its cost evaluation by mid October - ICG support and participation will be obtained. - If Qwest agrees to move forward, Qwest will initiate a preliminary meeting with the PUC staff by the end of October. - Presentation will be made at the PUC Task Force meeting on November 14, 2002. - With support from the PUC, a presentation will be made to the PSAPs – timing to be determined.

It was agreed and recognized that participation in the NENA Default Path subcommittee was very important.

-

CLEC Change Request CLEC and Industry Conference Call

July 23, 2002, 8:30 am (MT) Conference Call

877-572-8687, P/C 7994817 PC013102-1, DMS100 SR/ALI

Attendees: Ric Martin, Qwest Linda McKelvey, Qwest Jim Kaster, Qwest Jim Winegarden, Qwest Mary Wallace, Adelphia Jonathan Spangler, AT&T Vince Bruno, AT&T Dale Morgenstern, AT&T Richard Kaplan, AT&T Bernard Brabant, Bell Canada – NENA Default Path Working Group Chairperson Tom Breen, BellSouth Gretchen Leedy, Cbeyond Michael Lipread, Cbeyond Susan Bumstead-Smith, Century Tel Sheila Stewart, Century Tel John Walker, Complete Telecommunications Amanda Owens, Eschelon David Frame, Eschelon Paul Hanser, Eschelon Wayne Hart, Idaho PUC Joe Schumacher, Intrado Steve Sipple, Nortel James Baron, Talking Nets Rana Peeling, US Link Kim Sattler, US Link

Introduction of Attendees Introduction of the participants on the Conference Call was made and the purpose of the meeting discussed.

Jim Kaster provided background on the AT&T Change Request and directed participants to the CMP Web site to review the CR. Jim addressed the parties involved being the end user, independent telephone companies, CLECs, Qwest, Public Service Answering Point (PSAP) and the State. The PSAP and the State would be left to accept or reject any recommendations on Default Routing.

Discussion Items Jim Winegarden provided a brief history of 9-1-1 default routing. Jim Winegarden provided a technical explanation of Qwest’s 9-1-1 process. Jim explained that the main issue is with the period of time delay between when the end user has service and the related Service Order Input (SOI) order is entered into the Selective Router Database (SRDB). Jim also indicated that a concern with the use of 10 digit number in the SRDB is that with a disconnect, the number will always remain in the SRDB.

Rich Kaplan indicated that the basis for AT&T’s provisioning found some misroutes caused by the NPA-NXX wildcard. Their issue with Arapahoe County facilitated their issuance of the CR. Arapahoe County withdrew their request. They are still looking for a collective solution for reducing the time period for updates after SOI record submission. The TN Emergency Service Number (ESN) legacy records could still cause misroutes and would require removal. Need to address the first few hours new customers could go to any of the (40) PSAPs in Denver. Jim Kaster explained the PSAPs will transfer the call to the appropriate PSAP.

General consensus in the meeting was that the best thing that could be done is to get the most timely SOI order updates processed.

Tom Breen advised the AT&T’s situation is similar to what BellSouth did in Atlanta with their Rate Center consolidation and linking one primary default PSAP to the Rate Center. Tom indicated that the best solution is timely updates of the database, speed-up the front end processing and PSAP designation to the appropriate Rate Center.

Jim Kaster advised the he believed there was another National Emergency Number Association (NENA) Work Group addressing real time updates.

Rich Kaplan addressed their request on the removal of wild cards and route to the trunk group ESN.

Bernard Brabant indicated that if we’re talking Denver, Colorado has gone through a major rate center consolidation. Records in the Selective Router Database (SRDB) would increase, as every TN/ESN records would have to be transmitted and kept in the SRDB. One of the issue would be uploading that information, due to transport and interface limitations. Need to apply 1 rule nationally. Removal of NPA-NXX wild card would require assignment of trunk group default by Customer entity (Municipality, Region, County, State, Primary PSAP, etc.) and at a minimum by rate center. Canada has deployed a province wide 9-1-1 system arrangement where trunk group default is provided at the Customer/entity/Primary PSAP level. NENA should address the needs of the wireline, wireless and IP worlds.

Jim Winegarden indicated that a default by trunk group would only happen with an ANI failure or no record found.

Tom Breen indicated that in addition to the ALI Database Manager, it is the responsibility of all carriers to improve their service order provisioning process. This may require significant changes to exisiting Operational Support Systems.

Jim Kaster addressed the additional impacts imposed by states. Example is the State of Washington that SOI orders can’t be sent until midnight the day after cut.

Tom Breen addressed NENA future planning. Tier 1 data delivered with each 9-1-1 call would have the incoming call location coded into the call. There is a Powerpoint presentation that was presented at Indianapolis that he could share. Tom also indicated that they were looking at the ability to make the TN ESN address info on the fly and simultaneously update the SRDB (for calls made from a PBX or CTX) .

Vince Bruno suggested that there are some long term solutions, some not so long term solutions and some solutions available today. He wanted to know what solutions are available today (i.e. get SOI orders delivered more quickly, explore issue of disconnects to reduce exposure). Bernard Brabant indicated that the NENA Default Call Path Working Group was being reinstated and there would be a meeting around mid-August. The goal is to come up with a Technical Information Document (TID) on E911default routing standards. Tom Breen suggested using the data technical committee working on ALI database. With his Network Technical Committee hat on Tom Breen suggested the Denver area matter may require special arrangements to solve. His statement in no way implies any obligation on Qwest, AT&T, any other CLEC or any PSAP(s). Rich Kaplan asked if their request to remove wild cards is an option. Tom Breen indicated that the removal of wild card doesn’t correct the problem when there is old record information in the SRDB. Rich Kaplan asked if with a new customer assigned an existing TN, does the legacy record get removed with a disconnect? Jim Winegarden explained that there is no disconnect and the record will remain but the new SOI overlays the old record covering the TN.

Steve Sipple clarified that a range of TNs could not be batch and loaded into the SRDB. Each individual TN needs to be loaded. It was established that the DMS100 could not accept a single tape load of the SRDB and instead must be loaded through individual transactions. Bernard Brabant indicated that an Ethernet Interface Unit (EIU) card allows for faster transactions processing to the selective router. Bernard further indicated that Bell Canada is using an Intrado's Management System set of software applications that does process delete for those TNs that are currently in exception in the MS' SRDBQ file, by sending the deleted TN with the NPA NXX default ESN to the 9-1-1 SRDB (selective router switch) for an overwrite. Tom Breen indicated that some E911 SSPs don’t use that faster TCP/IP port yet, and it would require changes to their ALI DBMS-to-SR update processes.

Bernard Brabant cautioned that before deciding on the best way to go, we need to look at the overall impact. Bernard suggested interested parties are welcome to join his NENA working group. If interested they should send an e-mail to bernard.brabant@bell.ca.

Rich Kaplan asked if Qwest was confident that the 40 PSAPs could effectively transfer calls between PSAPs. Jim Winegarden said yes.

Rich Kaplan asked Tom Breen if he had any recommendations. Tom Breen responding as the NENA Network Technical Committee Chairperson indicated that if the need is to be able to default route at something more granular than the rate center, one would need to assume that the PSAPs play fair, and, with cooperation from Qwest, there would need to be negotiations with the PSAPs. Recommendation could be to get one default PSAP for a rate center or by carrier. Get a PSAP to volunteer to be the default PSAP for the rate center. If picked well, they would most likely be the PSAP handling most default routed calls anyway. Tom indicated that all PSAPs need to be involved in the process. Tom indicated that the long-term solution resides in NENA committees. He indicated that Tom Hinkleman could provide the pre-release final technical recommendation on rate center consolidation. It will be published by NENA shortly. Tom Breen stated that if the above could not be achieved, alternatively, all CLEC’s could ask to negotiate with Qwest for not using NPANXX based routing, however, once the TN/ESN is established (without the delete function on disconnects), the legacy record will remain and could misguide the call. This cannot be on a CLEC by CLEC basis because Number portability will mean that the NPA-NXX ranges will NOT be or will not remain uniqie to any given CLEC or ILEC. If the wild cards are to be removed it will require it being a switch wide process on each affected Selctive Router/SR-ALI database. Tom Breen recomends trying to educate the PSAPs in the area on the technical limitations of the system, and ask them to cooperate in identifying a default PSAP per Rate Center, even if there has to be more than one to spread the load from all of the area’s carriers.

Tom Breen explained that BellSouth’s plan is to move to a centralized Off-Board Selective Routing (OBR) Interface developed by Nortel (ENS00011). Initially they would default route by incoming trunk group and in the future the originating switch’s Tier 1 call data will likely contain the info to route to the correct PSAP. It is anticipated that the OBR database will NOT use wild cards.

Joe Schumacher indicates that Intrado processes SOI records three times a day: 3 AM, 11 AM, and 3 PM

It was agreed that the follow-on CLEC and Industry meeting scheduled for July 30, 2000 would be canceled. Qwest and AT&T will meet to address the discussions from today’s meeting and discuss the appropriate steps to be taken.

07/17/02 - July CMP Meeting Minutes: Qwest is moving forward with the list of attendees for meetings scheduled for July 23, 2002 and July 30, 2002. Meetings are to look at establishing an Industry recommendation on 911 Default Routing. CR status remains development.

06/18/02 Conference Call

Attendees:

Susie Bliss – Qwest Jim Kaster – Qwest Jim Winegarden – Qwest Ric Martin Qwest Jonathan Spangler – AT&T Ervin Rea – AT&T Rich Kaplan – AT&T Vince Bruno – AT&T Tim Boykin – AT&T

It was agreed that two follow-on meetings would be held.

First - July 23, 200 8:30 to 11:30 MT conference bridge 877-572-8687, ID 7994817 Second - July 30th 8:30 to 4:30, hosted by AT&T at their Denver office on Lawrence street.

06/12/02 Conference Call

Attendees:

Susie Bliss – Qwest Matt Kruzick – Qwest Jim Kaster – Qwest Jim Winegarden – Qwest Ric Martin Qwest Jonathan Spangler – AT&T Ervin Rea – AT&T Rich Kaplan – AT&T Vince Bruno – AT&T Dale Morgenstern – AT&T Tim Boykin – AT&T

Conference call was held with AT&T to address action items from the May CLEC Forum, 911 Breakout Session and to discuss disposition of the CR

Qwest advised that they had received written communication from Arapahoe County that the issue with AT&T has been put to rest. AT&T is to work with Arapahoe County on obtaining the written communication that Qwest received.

Both Parties agreed that the solution to AT&T’s Change Request should come from NENA. NENA has a subcommittee on the topic of Default Routing. In addition there is another subcommittee on the topic of Global Dynamic Updates. It was agreed that each party would review internally what each party could contribute to developing a recommendation to take to NENA.

It was agreed that there would be another conference call on Tuesday, 6/18 to review a high-level framework of what this recommendation should be to move forward. AT&T will issue a draft high-level framework document by Friday 6/14 for review on Tuesday.

-

CLEC Change Request Information Exchange Meeting March 4, 2002, 10:00 (MT) Conference Call PC013102-1, DMS100 SR/ALI

Attendees: Ric Martin, Qwest Linda McKelvey, Qwest Jim Kaster, Qwest Patty Joe Ryan, Qwest Jim Winegarden, Qwest Phil Linse, Qwest Jonathan Spangler, AT&T Ervin Rea, AT&T Tim Boykin, AT&T Letty Friesen, AT&T Vince Bruno, AT&T Dale Morgenstern, AT&T Richard Kaplan, AT&T

Introduction of Attendees Introduction of the participants on the Conference Call was made and the Agenda was reviewed. Qwest explained that the purpose of the meeting was for each party to provide an exchange of technical information for each to fully understand each others respective 911 network architectures. AT&T expressed that they wanted the CR to be expedited. AT&T indicated that they also wanted as an outcome of the meeting a perspective of a path forward with Action Items. Qwest advised that they would not commit to coming up with solutions.

Discussion Items AT&T provided a power point presentation of their Architecture via e-mail to all Qwest participants. AT&T clarified that the AT&T Proprietary Statement was not applicable and AT&T would send and e-mail stating such. AT&T reviewed page 2 of their presentation and indicated that bullet number 6 is where the issue resides. Qwest provided the following comments: ? Bullet 3- ALI processed into Intrado and next day file received. ? Bullet 4 & 5 – These bullets are strictly on ANI failures and PSAPs have been aware of this since the inception of 911. ? Bullet 6 – This issue is understood due to the memory constraints and is also understood by the PSAP community. Qwest further explained that the issue in Bullet 6 can’t happen within a few days and that there are memory constraints in the in the DMS100. There was discussion on Nortel upgrades – the ENS 005 for 911 provides all the features and ENS004 would accommodate 32mm records. The original switch feature only allowed 300,000 records in the table, which set the standards for default entries on NPA-NXX. The current switch capability has 800,000 records. Qwest explained that any upgrade would be like doing an office upgrade, which is time consuming and presents an inherent risk to break existing things that are in place. This would be communities that come in on the same trunk group which are tied to different NPA NXXs. For these communities, an ANI failure would pick the larger PSAP and this would show on the screen. Qwest didn’t know if these communities fell within the Denver area. AT&T indicated that they didn’t believe Arapahoe County is aware of this and then what would the solution be. Qwest indicated that all default routing goes to 1 PSAP and a check that was made indicated that the dBase hadn’t been updated. AT&T questioned whether this was ANI failures or what. Qwest advised that this was complete defaults where no record was found and when there was a check with the dBase folks the records were not in the dBase. AT&T questioned that calls went to Arapahoe for anywhere in the Denver Rate Center because the NPA NXX was pointed to Arapahoe, but could have gone anywhere based on the assigned wild card. Qwest indicated that they could validate if the NPA NXX is correct. Qwest asked if the problem was prevalent due to AT&T’s change in testing procedure. Qwest indicated that they were aware that AT&T has multiple NPA NXXs. AT&T asked to get a listing of the Wild Cards used by Qwest. Qwest indicated that on moves with LNP there is a current record and the customer would be miss routed until the record gets updated. AT&T advised that the LERG has all of their NXX codes. Qwest clarified that change in its standard use of the wild card would use up memory, have timing constraints, be costly and would have follow-on impact with existing customers. AT&T asked how there would be a breaking and fixing of the communities that come in from one trunk. Qwest explained that when the community was added, they told us which PSAP the call would go to (i.e. 999 goes to PSAP A, 998 goes to PSAP B and 997 goes to PSAP C). This would be set in the system with its default. Any orders for selective routing are set to the 7 digit if there is a wild card with the same NXX. AT&T indicated that they would not put in any record and the new design would have separate trunk groups and not have the wild card. Qwest explained that with a default ESN to the NXX and you ripped out the NXX would act in the same manner. With a trunk in for 998 PSAP B and you pulled the wild card out the call would have gone to PSAP B. If the number borders 998 and 997, the entry would still show PSAP C. AT&T asked how the system gets built. Qwest explained that it boils down to the state and whether they build per trunk groups or number of lines. It was explained that the PSAP builds to the number of trunks and look at the concentration. In Colorado you are required to build to the number of records, which depend on the number of trunks and switch capacity. Qwest asked how AT&T builds its system. AT&T explained that they monitor to P.01 grade of service and augment/add as required. AT&T stated that Arapahoe is asking to add 6 trunk groups. AT&T feels they are asking for something that can be done in another way. Qwest explained the concentration factor as follows: With 6 communities A – F 3 trunks each for 911 going to the Selective Router would mean a total of 18 trunks. If a PSAP only has 8 trunks they would have to look at the potential volume of calls that could come in from the 18 trunks knowing they can only handle 8. AT&T asked if there were any other issue with eliminating wild cards. Qwest explained that the use of wild cards saves memory. Eliminating wild card could adversely impact others. There would be a ripple effect – Qwest would need a new contract with Intrado. AT&T indicated that the Selective Router has a data field. Qwest indicated that the Selective Router dBase is linked to Intrado. AT&T questioned if the Intrado dBase – data field could look for the information. Qwest advised that if the wild cards are removed, Intrado would have to put it in the table. Intrado would have to do a reload with the entry for the wild card. Denver has approximately 3 mm customers that would have to be reloaded – this would mean down time. Further the switch is in a tandem arrangement which duplicates the effort. AT&T asked if there was any way of arriving at what the situation would be for doing Cap Hill and Broomfield. Qwest indicated that it would come down to time, money and risk. Risk would be the human factor, we really don’t know what they are receiving on a trunk group, etc. Qwest explained that Cap Hill was initially 20 tapes and 10 days brand new. We now have 2 switches. Qwest explained that the dual tandem switch was installed for disaster recover purposes. The tandem switch could not be used as a back-up and both switches would need to be done in parallel. AT&T asked if Qwest could quantify the effort. Qwest identified they would have their costs, Nortel costs and Intrado costs. Qwest couldn’t commit to having quantifiable costs. Qwest asked if AT&T’s dBase has been updated. AT&T indicated that they had an updated report. Qwest advised that they would evaluate the options.

Action Items AT&T is to provide Qwest with their NXXs. Qwest to provide AT&T a list of their wild cards. Qwest to report back to AT&T with a preliminary plan for responding. Qwest will obtain information on how many misrouted calls have been reported by the PSAP, Arapahoe County.

-

1:30 p.m. (MDT) / Tuesday 05th February 2002 Conference Call TEL: 877.554.8688 CODE: 3269208 PC013102-1 "DMS100 SR/ALI"

Ervin Rea, AT&T Donna Osborn-Miller, AT&T Jonathan Spangler, AT&T Jim Kaster, Qwest Phil Linse, Qwest Christine Quinn-Struck, Qwest Peter Wirth, Qwest

1.0 Introduction of Attendees Attendees introduced.

2.0 Review Requested (Description of) Change {review long description from change request, confirm with all parties there is agreement on the change requested} Description: AT&T has been officially served by Arapahoe County Colorado that current 911 default routing is inadequate. Current 911 call routing for some jurisdictions that define designated serving areas for service providers, is not routed using the ALI database, but is routed via selective router in the DMS 100 switches. If no number is found, then routing should be done by utilizing information associated with the incoming trunk group of the service provider. Current routing methods can, in some cases, route calls to the wrong PSAP, requiring the call to be re-routed to the correct PSAP, resulting in a loss of time in a possible life threatening situation. This issue impacts all CLEC's providing business or residential service.

Expected Deliverables: DMS100 switches to be modified to ensure that the switch is routing calls according to the ALI database and not the selective router. Should a number not be located in the ALI database the routing should utilize information associated with incoming trunks.

1) Urban Ray reviewed the CR. Requested that "modified" be changed to "programmed" in the "Expected Deliverables" text. Basically, AT&T indicated that outside county "911" calls are being misdirected to Arapahoe County, CO. AT&T’s position is that programming of the router (Nortel DMS100) is required to correctly route using the Automatic Line Identification (ALI) database to the appropriate Public Service Access Provider (PSAP) (i.e., Arapahoe County). 2) Previous AT&T communications with Qwest were identified. Urban Ray, AT&T agreed to forward correspondences to the CRPM. 3) Qwest asked for a listing of any phone numbers that were misdirected to the Arapahoe County PSAP, if available, for Qwest investigation. Urban Ray, AT&T indicated he may speak with Arapahoe County in the near future and will request the listing. 4) Jonathan Spangler, AT&T asked if Qwest could respond to the CR in the February 20, 2002 Monthly Product & Process CMP Meeting. The CRPM indicated that due to the short timeframe, Qwest could give a status update & review the CR with the CLEC community.

3.0 Confirm Areas & Products Impacted {read from change request, modify if needed} Confirmed.

4.0 Confirm Right Personnel Involved {ensure the Qwest SME can fully answer the CLEC request. Confirm whether anyone else within Qwest has been involved with this issue, or whether we need to bring anyone else in} Qwest & AT&T confirmed appropriate personnel were in attendance.

5.0 Identify/Confirm CLEC’s Expectation {Identify specific deliverables from CLEC – what does Qwest have to do in order to close this CR? (in measureable terms ie provide a documented process, change a process to include training etc)} Qwest to evaluate CR. During the February 2002 Monthly P&P CMP Meeting, Qwest will solicit input from CLEC community.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller and Ervin Rea LSAM Managers AT&T

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Response - CR #PC013102-1 DMS100 SR/ALI

This letter is in response to AT&T’s Change Request PC013102-1 requesting Qwest to modify its DMS100 switches to ensure that the switch is routing calls according to the ALI database and not the selective router. Further, if a number cannot be located in the ALI database, AT&T is requesting that the routing utilize information associated with incoming trunks, as one possible solution supported by the manufacturer.

On March 21, 2002, Qwest and AT&T held a meeting with the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Staff. In the meeting, the issue of timely ALI database updates was discussed and it was agreed that timely updates would reduce default routing occurrences. It was agreed that the parties would hold off on pursuing default routing by trunk group ESN until a meeting could be held with the PUC and other industry stakeholders. The parties also agreed to participate in the appropriate Industry Forum on Global Dynamic Updates. In addition a meeting is to be scheduled by the PUC Staff with Arapahoe PSAP, Qwest and AT&T to review specific issues and discuss how the parties can address the Arapahoe PSAP’s concerns.

After the meeting Qwest and AT&T agreed that the CR should be placed in a hold status while the aforementioned issues are addressed.

At April 17, 2002 CMP Monthly Meeting it was agreed that the CR would be status as Development until further direction is agreed to.

Sincerely,

Richard H Martin Change Request Project Manager