Wholesale: Products & Services

Open Product/Process CR PC060812-1EX Detail

Description Of Change

Integra submitted this request as an exception because CenturyLink/Qwest has agreed to this approach and has already done ground work related to this request.

6/15/12 – REVISION: The Exception Process requested above is to implement conditioning/remove all conditioning on a single trouble report in Minnesota using a 31 day implementation schedule. Implementation of condition/remove all conditioning on a single trouble report in other 13 states will follow the CMP Document Level 4 Product/Process guidelines.

Expected Deliverables/Proposed Implementation Date: Qwest/CenturyLink will expeditiously implement a process that allows a CLEC to request condition/remove all conditioning on a single trouble report.

Project Meetings

Kim Isaacs – Integra said that was fine.

09/19/12 Product/Process CMP Meeting Mark Coyne - CenturyLink said the Exception request specific to Minnesota went into effect on 8/6/12. For the remaining states, all remaining states are now in effect except for Idaho and Washington which will go into effect on 9/24/12. Mark said the CR will then be moved into CLEC Test. Mark asked if anyone has used the process and how the process is working to date?

There were no CLEC responses.

Mark Coyne- CenturyLink said it did not sound like it had been used.

08/15/12 Product/Process CMP Meeting Mark Coyne - CenturyLink said the level 3 notice related to the Integra Exception request specific to Minnesota went into effect on 8/6/12. For the remaining states, the initial level 3 notice went out 7/23/12 that includes a phased implementation. He said the final notice will be sent 8/17/12 and it will show the phased effective dates starting 9/4/12 through 9/24/12 for the remaining states.

07/18/2012 CMP Prod/Proc Meeting Mark Coyne - CenturyLink recapped the Change Request and activities to date. The Level 3 notice was distributed on July 6, 2012 with an effective date of August 6, 2012. Mark asked Bob Mohr for an update.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink stated that there was a document posted to the calendar that Bob will be speaking to.

Bob Mohr - CenturyLink indicated that the Minnesota implementation was scheduled for August 6, 2012. The SME team has completed the process and is in progress of training the Minnesota team. CenturyLink received comments from Integra on the Conditioning download and agrees to accept those changes. He stated that a new notice would be distributed on July 23, 2012 regarding implementation in the remaining states. The roll-out schedule is included in the document posted to the calendar.

07/02/12 Exception Vote Meeting Minutes Attendees: Laurie Roberson – Integra, Liz Tierney – Megapath, Al Finnell – Windstream, Joyce Bilow – Windstream, Bob Mohr – CenturyLink, Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink, Mark Coyne – CenturyLink, Susan Lorence – CenturyLink Susan Lorence – CenturyLink opened the call and identified that for this second vote meeting for the exception portion of CR PC060812-1EX, it was not required to reach quorum on the call for the vote to be taken. Susan provided the background for the CR as available on the Status History for this CR on the Product Process Interactive report.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink then asked Laurie Roberson – Integra if she had anything that she wanted to share in regard to this CR.

Laurie Roberson – Integra said no she did not.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink read what a vote of “Yes” and “No” would mean in regard to this CR. She then asked each Company representative on the call to state their vote. Susan identified that CenturyLink had received two votes via email.

Each Voting Carrier and their vote is listed in the table below: Voting Carrier Voting Participant VOTE Integra Laurie Roberson (by phone) Yes MegaPath Liz Tierney (by phone) Yes Windstream Al Finnell (by phone) Yes CenturyLink Mark Coyne (by phone) Yes Velocity Jim Hickle (by email) Yes TDS Metro Rod Cox (by email) Yes

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink relayed that the Integra request for the exception was granted and shared the following planned timeline for Minnesota ONLY for a level 3 notice for the “change in process” to be sent with a 31 day timeline: o Level 3 notice announcement date: 7/6/12 o Formal CLEC comments cycle: 7/7/12 – 7/21/12 o Final notice and response to comments, if applicable: 7/22/12 NOTE: THIS NOTIFICATION WILL BE SENT ON SUNDAY which is normally not the case for notifications. o Effective date: 8/6/12

Laurie Roberson – Integra asked if CenturyLink would share the timeline for the remaining states in the July CMP meeting.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink said yes; the SME team is currently determining the rollout schedule for the remaining states. Susan asked if there were any other questions. There were none.

The call ended at 11:10 AM MT.

06/27/12 Exception Vote Meeting Minutes Attendees: Kim Isaacs – Integra,Laurie Roberson – Integra, Jawaid Bazyar - FORETHOUGHT.net, Bob Mohr – CenturyLink, Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink, Don DeLand – CenturyLink, Donovan Trevarrow – CenturyLink, Mark Nickell – CenturyLink, Mark Coyne – CenturyLink, Susan Lorence – CenturyLink Susan Lorence – CenturyLink opened the call and identified that for the CR exception vote to be taken, quorum had to be reached per Section 17.0 of the CMP document. Quorum for the call is eight. Susan identified that CenturyLink had received three votes via email that would provide for representation of six which would not reach quorum. Susan relayed that if the call needed to be rescheduled, the vote would be postponed for three business days and that for the second exception call, the vote will be taken regardless of whether quorum was established. Susan said that the call-in Bridge would remain open for ten minutes to allow other attendees to join the call; ten minutes is the normal window for walkthroughs. Susan asked call participants if that was an appropriate timeframe.

Kim Isaacs – Integra agreed.

By 10 minutes after the call had started, no other attendees joined the bridge.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink read the specific wording from Section 17.4.1 in regard to the process when quorum is not reached and said she would reschedule the call for Monday, July 2. Susan asked Integra for the best times for the call to be scheduled based on their calendar.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said she would be out of the office on that day but said that Laurie Roberson – Integra would be available on Monday.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink said she would schedule a second Exception Vote call for Monday and would send out a notification to inform CLECs that a vote had not been taken; customers who had sent in email votes would also be informed no vote had been taken. Susan relayed that assuming that the exception is approved on Monday, the CenturyLink SME team had come up with the following tentative timeline for Minnesota ONLY for a level 3 notice for the “change in process” to be sent with a 31 day timeline: o Level 3 notice announcement date: 7/6/12 o Formal CLEC comments cycle: 7/7/12 – 7/21/12 o Final notice and response to comments if applicable: 7/22/12 NOTE: THIS NOTIFICATION WILL BE SENT ON SUNDAY which is normally not the case for notifications. o Effective date: 8/6/12 Susan Lorence – CenturyLink also relayed that during the July 18 CMP meeting, CenturyLink would provide the planned implementation timeline for the remaining states. Susan asked if there were any questions. There were none. The call ended at 10:45 AM MT.

06/20/2012 CMP Prod/Proc Meeting Kim Isaacs – Integra presented the CR that was also submitted as an exception request. The CR has since been revised to ask for a 31-day implementation in Minnesota only with the other states to follow the CMP Level 4 Product/Process procedures.

Mark Coyne – CenturyLink added that an exception pre-meeting was held June 13, 2012. CenturyLink has revised the CR to capture Kim’s changes. An exception vote meeting is scheduled for June 27, 2012. Mark relayed that the notice and voting specifics are posted to the wholesale calendar for that date. Some email votes have already been received. CenturyLink SMEs are working to develop the process.

Bonnie Johnson – Minnesota Department of Commerce asked if it would be implemented in Minnesota 31 days from the vote or on what date the 31 day clock would start.

Mark Coyne – CenturyLink responded that, depending on the outcome of the vote, CenturyLink would see how quickly it could be implemented.

06/13/12 Clarification Call and Pre-Meeting Exception Call Meeting Minutes Attendees: Kim Isaacs – Integra, Laurie Roberson – Integra, Al Finnell – Windstream, Joyce Bilow – McLeod dba Windstream, Jim Hickle – Velocity, Emily Davis – Midcontinent Communications, Chris Viveros – CenturyLink, Jill Seals – CenturyLink , Lucy Davis – CenturyLink, Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink, Bob Mohr – CenturyLink, Mark Coyne – CenturyLink, John Hansen – CenturyLink, Susan Lorence – CenturyLink

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink took attendance and explained the reason for the call. Susan said two things were key to address in the pre-meeting: clarify the CR and develop a clear statement of what the exception vote of “yes” and “no” means. Susan asked Kim Isaacs – Integra to give an overview of her Change Request (CR). Kim Isaacs – Integra said that the CR requests that CenturyLink expeditiously implement a process that allows a CLEC to request conditioning/remove all conditioning on a single trouble report. Kim said this would be similar to the provisioning process and that she believes the xDSL amendment allows the ability to request this. Integra said the exception is to implement this as soon as possible. Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink asked for clarification based on discussions in the Minnesota 1066 Docket. Jamal said that the (6/20/12 Updates received from Integra in CAPS) [delete EXPEDITED] process would be specific to Minnesota.

Kim Isaacs – Integra asked about the other states.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said CenturyLink is not saying “no” to the other states but until the impact is known, it would be Minnesota only.

Kim Isaacs – Integra asked if another CR would be required for the other states or would the process be phased similar to the original xDSL process.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said the original CR was phased but that CenturyLink is still evaluating this process change. Jamal said CenturyLink is focusing on Minnesota and evaluating the need for an amendment in the other states. Kim Isaacs – Integra said that Integra disagrees with the CenturyLink position. Integra believes the current amendment allows conditioning/remove all on a single ticket.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink says CenturyLink understands the Integra position.

Kim Isaacs – Integra asked if there was commitment for the other thirteen states.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said at this point there is not commitment but that CenturyLink may be looking at a phased approach at a later time but that we need to determine the impact to the Network organization.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said CenturyLink should have a good idea of the impact on repair based on the current process for installation. Kim said the data is available on how often conditioning/remove all is requested on LSRs and that CenturyLink could make some assumptions.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said the processes and organizations are different between provisioning and repair.

Chris Viveros – CenturyLink said it was not clear on the point that the LSR provisioning data would be used to estimate the impact to repair on a working circuit.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said she does not think there is high volume on installation where there has been conditioning and then CenturyLink has had to do “remove all”. She said needing both conditioning/remove all on installation is higher than on an existing circuit. Kim said if the volume is not high on installation, it will not be high on repair.

Chris Viveros – CenturyLink said CenturyLink was not implying that the volume would be overwhelming. He said the impact is more than quantity, it is the foreignness of the process. Chris said conditioning is part of provisioning and the issue is how to insert a provisioning step in the repair flow. He said we have allowed conditioning on repair but now the requirement is to determine the type of conditioning necessary. Chris said he understood the Integra exception request to implement more quickly in Minnesota since there were negotiations there.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said she thought CenturyLink the repair centers were the same in all states and no center was Minnesota only. Kim said she thought not including all states vs. just doing the process in Minnesota would be more difficult. Kim said the techs are currently doing the steps on two separate tickets and she did not understand why one ticket was more impacting.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said if it only impacts the center, that would be true. Jamal said the center has to send the request to the outside field. He said the provisioning process is totally different than conditioning, the technicians are different. Jamal said CenturyLink needs to understand the impact to the outside forces. It is much more involved work during the repair process than provisioning and different steps and resources are involved. . Kim Isaacs – Integra (6/20/12 Updates received from Integra in CAPS) [delete ASKED IF] QUESTIONED WHY combining the conditioning and remove all on a single ticket would cause the outside field techs too much confusion.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said it is not confusion but identifying what process to follow. It is combining two processes – conditioning and remove all and doing that effectively in repair.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said she was very disappointed.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said it was noted.

Kim Isaacs – Integra asked if Integra could get a commitment to start with Minnesota and then expeditiously phase the process in within the other states.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said he cannot commit to that today.

Jim Hickle - Velocity asked what could be committed to and over what timeframe. He asked what the normal implementation timeline was across the fourteen states.

Jamal Boudhaouia – CenturyLink said he could not commit to anything but would take it back.

Chris Viveros – CenturyLink said it depends on what is being implemented.

Jim Hickle - Velocity said he thought that CenturyLink had a normal implementation timeline for fourteen states and that it was frustrating for it to take this long to make a decision. He said it should be acceptable to both sides to say, barring unforeseen problems, the process could be implemented in six months. Susan Lorence – CenturyLink said she wanted to get back to the CMP process for this CR. Jim Hickle – Velocity said that getting to a timeline for implementation was within the realm of the CR.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink recapped that CenturyLInk was looking at Minnesota for the exception and that CenturyLink is considering the impact to the other states. Susan asked if everyone understood what (6/20/12 Updates received from Integra in CAPS) [delete THE CR WAS ACTUALLY] CENTURYLINK IS asking for.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said yes.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink explained the normal level 4 CR timeline and said the CR was asking for CenturyLink to expeditiously handle the state of Minnesota. She asked once the process for Minnesota was identified, would a 21 day implementation timeline be appropriate and then a normal phased implementation timeline would be used for the other states? Susan said we needed something to be defined as the exception to the CMP process.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said she thought that the exception request would be to have Minnesota implemented on a 21 day cycle and then the remainder of the states implemented on a phased approach.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink asked Kim to send in a revision to the CR to make that specific as part of the CR exception request.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said she would take that back.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink said from a CMP perspective, we need a clear understanding of what is being requested for the exception vote to occur. She said we do have a clear understanding of the process change that the CR is requesting. Regarding the actual exception vote, Susan said per Section 16.3 of the CMP document, if the vote was to occur in the June monthly CMP meeting, the CR would have had to have been received 13 days prior to the CMP meeting. Susan proposed that the CR be presented in the June meeting and that the exception vote be taken five business days later on June 27.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink asked if there were any other questions on the CR or on the exception request. There were none. Susan said CenturyLink would wait to hear back from Kim on submitting the update to the CR that specifies the actual exception for the CR.

Kim Isaacs – Integra said correct.

Susan Lorence – CenturyLink asked if there were any other points to discuss before the call was ended. There were none.

The call was concluded at 9:30 AM MT.