Wholesale: Products & Services

Open Product/Process CR PC101904-1 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

Qwest will modify it’s commitment deliverables by communicating to the forum, exactly how systems change requests are going to be developed and delivered.

Project Meetings

Connie Winston – Qwest recapped that this request is asking for additional CR development information earlier in the process. Connie advised that we do not have additional information or clarity before the Release Walk Through. Qwest has made some assumptions in the past at the walkthrough meetings. Qwest will work to add more clarification and discuss assumptions at the walk through meetings. Jill Martain – Qwest added that we are now also reviewing the spreadsheet of products at the Clarification calls which helps Qwest obtain additional clarity. Jill advised we will be updating the CR form also per the CR request PC101904-2. Liz Balvin – Covad advised the CLECs are trying to avoid getting to far down the path and have CLECs expecting one thing and Qwest going another direction. Liz asked if Qwest has considered publishing a draft version of the Walkthrough document sooner. (Insert comment from Eschelon) Connie stated that Qwest doesn’t believe that providing draft version of the walk through would help the issue. (End comment) Connie advised that being more clear at the Clarification meetings will help Qwest and if we find that we need more clarification we will bring it to the CLEC Communities attention. For example, Qwest found an issue on the Parse and Structure CR and brought this to CMP to further define. Liz Balvin – Covad asked if Qwest is concerned about the CLECs bringing forth too many changes. Connie advised no. Qwest believes it would be a repeat of the Clarification call. Liz Balvin – Covad said at the clarification meeting CLECs only understand what they expect the changes need to be and it is not until Qwest publishes the draft specs that CLECs may identify issues. Connie agreed that is true and that is the 73-day time frame that Qwest provides. Connie said that Qwest doesn’t believe we are missing a lot of items and we need to be more stringent around bringing our assumptions forward. Sharon Van Meter – ATT would like us to change the denial to reflect ‘no demonstrable Qwest business benefit’ (insert comment from Eschelon) instead of no demonstrable benefit because the CLECs believe that there is a benefit to this CR. Jill said this CR will move to Denial Status.

December 7, 2004 Email Sent to Sharon Van Meter,AT&T: Sharon, I have attached a copy of the Qwest Response for your submitted CMP CR, PC101904-1 Modify Release Commitment Deliverables. The CR will be included in the Distribution Package for the December Product/Process Meeting, scheduled for December 15th. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM

-- 11/17/04 November meeting minutes Sharon Van Meter – ATT presented the CR. Sharon reviewed the CR description and read sections 5.2.3 and 5.2.4 from the CMP Document. Sharon explained their expected deliverable is to have Qwest provide additional information up front instead of later in the process. Stephanie Prull – Eschelon explained that the LNP UBL TN/SANO issue is an example of what they are trying to improve with this process. Stephanie advised that if we would have received more information sooner and discussed this in more detail it would have helped us react earlier. This CR will move to Presented Status.

Clarification Call PC101904-1 Modify Release Commitment Deliverables November 1, 2004 2:00- 3:00 MT

In Attendance: Roslyn Davis – MCI Sharon VanMeter – ATT Phyllis Burt – ATT Kim Isaacs – Eschelon Cindy Macy – Qwest Doug Andreen – Qwest Connie Winston – Qwest Jim Recker – Qwest Randy Owen – Qwest Stephanie Prull - Eschelon

The purpose of this meeting is to review the CR and ensure Qwest understands the CLECs expectations.

Phyllis and Sharon – ATT reviewed the CR. ATT explained that they need something that helps the CLECs understand the scope and limitations of the CR more clearly and earlier on in the process. The Disclosure Document provides us with much of this information but it is needed earlier on in the process.

Eschelon provided the example of TN and SANO. When this was deployed they didn’t realize it was only for certain products. We need to understand the limitations, differences or exceptions.

Cindy Macy – Qwest asked what would help the CLECs understand this. Is it another meeting, or documentation, more information on edits? Sharon – ATT advised that maybe a meeting to review the documentation earlier in the cycle would help. Sharon – ATT advised that the CLEC Walkthrough doesn’t provide enough information.

Stephanie advised that we have special walkthrough on specific CRs if the CLECs feel like they need it. Ones that are more complicated generally. Maybe we should do this more often.

Randy Owen – Qwest asked if we are trying to build a process around exceptions. Stephanie Prull – Eschelon advised scope issues happen quite often.

Stephanie advised that today we get the information 45 days prior to implementation (final disclosure). The walkthrough is day 68-58 generally. Stephanie said that if we have only 2 releases a year maybe we could adjust the dates.

Randy Owen – Qwest advised he understands the CLECs request and we will review the issue. Cindy Macy – Qwest advised that this CR would be presented at the November CMP meeting by ATT. Qwest will provide a response at the December meeting.

CenturyLink Response

For Review by CLEC Community and Discussion at the December 2004 CMP Meeting

Sharon Van Meter AT&T

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Revised Response - PC101904-1 "Modify Release Commitment Deliverables"

This document is a response to AT&T’s PC101904-1 "Modify Release Commitment Deliverables."

AT&T requests that Qwest present at the CMP release commitment : "a detailed summary of HOW the CR is going to be developed and delivered based on the design work completed on the candidates. By revealing this information, CLECs can obtain a better understanding of the scope and the limitation of the expected deliverable. It also gives Qwest and CLECs a final opportunity to make any additional comments/clarifications to eliminate any surprises at delivery."

A clarification call was held on 11/01/04 to discuss the request. AT&T is requesting at the CMP Scope commitment a detailed analysis of the means and requirements of delivery. AT&T is asking for detailed requirements that Qwest provides as part of its IMA EDI Draft Disclosure publication and walkthrough. It should be noted that scope commitment occurs five weeks prior to Qwest publication of IMA EDI Draft Disclosure documentation, or 108 days prior to the release date. Initial Draft Disclosure documentation publication occurs 73 days prior to the implementation. Therefore, in effect, AT&T is requesting detailed documentation about the scope of changes for a candidate 35 days prior to current CMP commitments.

Qwest is already addressing some of the concerns brought forward by this CR. During the Clarification Calls on System CRs, Qwest now discusses more detailed information to identify and understand the specific product, activity type and request type. Qwest also is working on enhancing the CR form (via another CR,) which will allow for additional detail and specifications to be identified earlier in the process. The intent of these changes is to gather additional data earlier in the process and allow for a more detailed discussion of the change.

Currently, Qwest provides a complete a set of documentation at IMA EDI Draft Disclosure publication and the walkthrough. This should, however, be considered a Draft version. Changes do occur between publication of the Draft and the Final (at day 45). To provide the documentation any earlier than the Draft Disclosure point in the timeline would actually provide less value as many issues are addressed between scope commitment and publication of the Draft Disclosure. Qwest believes that the timeline of 73 days prior to release is the optimal point for publication of the documentation, providing for both a large window for the fielding of questions and concerns and a relatively stable set of documents. And, at this point in the timeline, Qwest believes that it publishes technical specifications that address both the business requirements (WHAT the candidate changes do) and the systems requirements (HOW Qwest will deliver it) for the candidate and the release.

AT&T also requested additional meetings to be held earlier in the process to discuss the CR. Qwest would not have additional information to provide to the CLECs earlier in the process and additional meetings would take time away from the resources working on the CR, thus delaying the progress and delivery of the Disclosure Documentation walkthrough.

When circumstances come about as a normal part of trial and testing during the release week, Qwest adheres to its standard process and protocols around notifying of the issue, and works quickly and with the CLECs to resolve it.

Therefore, Qwest is denying this request as providing no demonstrable business benefit.

Sincerely, Connie Winston Director, Information Technology, Qwest