Archived System CR SCR012802-1 Detail |
| Title: Loss and Completion Reports , TNs should appear on both reports for the same date. | |||||
| CR Number |
Current Status Date |
Level of Effort |
Interface/ Release No. |
Area Impacted |
Products Impacted |
|
|
|||||
| SCR012802-1 |
Completed 2/19/2004 |
3000 - 5500 | 13/ | Resale, Unbundled Loop, Unbundled Switch, UNE, Interim Number Portability and Line Sharing | |
| Originator: Stichter, Kathy |
| Originator Company Name: Eschelon |
| Owner: Winston, Connie |
| Director: |
| CR PM: Stecklein, Lynn |
| Description Of Change |
|
Currently the Loss and Completion reports are launched at the same time but use different programs and different edits. An order to remove service may go through one program without error and post on one day but may err because of edits in the other program and not post until another day. Eschelon asks Qwest that if a TN appears on both the Loss Report and the Completion Report that that TN appear on both reports for the same date.
|
Status History |
| Date | Action | Description |
| 1/28/2002 | CR Submitted | CR submitted at 3:46 p.m. |
| 1/28/2002 | CR Acknowledged | CR acknowledged at 7 p.m. |
| 2/1/2002 | Clarification Meeting Held | Held the clarification meeting with Kathy Stichter and Bonnie Johnson. Curt Anderson, Angela Stewart, Donna Svendgaard, and Ann Robberson |
| 2/14/2002 | Draft Response Issued | Sent Initial Response to Bonnie Jonhson and Kathy Stichter |
| 2/21/2002 | Status Changed | Presented in the Feb. CMP meeting and the status has been changed to Evaluation |
| 2/21/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed during 'New CLEC CR' portion of February Systems CMP Monthly meeting; Attachment B for February Distribution Package |
| 3/21/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | Status update for SCR012802-1 provided at March Systems CMP Meeting as part of "Loss & Completions Matrix" (Attachment H) within AI360 |
| 5/16/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | Connie Winston provided an update at the May Systems CMP meeting. This issue is still being evaluated. |
| 6/20/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at June Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package July CMP -- Attachment I |
| 7/18/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at July Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package July CMP -- Attachment I |
| 8/22/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at August Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package August CMP -- Attachment I |
| 9/19/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at September Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package September CMP -- Attachment I |
| 9/19/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at September Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package November CMP -- Attachment I |
| 9/19/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at September Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package November CMP -- Attachment I |
| 10/17/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at October Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package October CMP -- Attachment I |
| 12/19/2002 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at December Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package December CMP -- Attachment I |
| 1/17/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at January Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package January CMP -- Attachment I |
| 3/3/2003 | Communicator Issued | SYST.03.03.03.F.04261.UpdtLossCmpltnsRprts Notification |
| 3/17/2003 | Status Changed | Status changed to development |
| 4/8/2003 | Status Changed | Status changed to CLEC Test |
| 4/17/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at April Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package April CMP |
| 5/22/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 Discussed at May Monthly CMP Meeting - See May Distribution Package - Attach G |
| 6/19/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR101102-01 Discussed a June Monthly Systems Meeting - See Distribution Package June Attach G |
| 7/17/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | SCR012802-1 discussed at July Systems CMP Monthly meeting; please see Systems CMP Distribution Package July CMP -- Attachment G |
| 8/22/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | Discussed at August CMP Monthly Meeting - See August Systems CMP Distribution Package - Attachment G |
| 9/22/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | Discussed at theSeptember Systems CMP Monthly Meeting; please see September Systems CMP Distribution Package - Attachment G |
| 10/30/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | Discussed at the Oct CMP Systems Meeting - See attachment G |
| 11/20/2003 | Status Changed | Status changed to evaluation |
| 12/11/2003 | Discussed at Monthly CMP Meeting | Discussed at the November CMP Systems Meeting - See attachment G |
| 2/19/2004 | Status Changed | Status changed to completed |
Project Meetings |
| 2/19/04 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we have done research on the Loss and Completion issue and found that it tends to be mostly on accounts where there is a partial loss. Connie stated that our research has found that it maps back to the order typist. Connie said that too many losses are appearing on the loss report. Connie stated that we have coached and re-trained the typists and have not seen any errors in the past two weeks worth of data. Connie said that we would like to put this CR into CLEC Test. She said that the Centers are also doing quality checks. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she was on a call this week about manual errors on the line loss report. Phyllis stated that she realized with the 15.0 Virtual CSR functionality they can do a query CSR to see who owns the account. Phyllis stated that this could prevent mistakes on the report. Connie Winston/Qwest stated we do that check and it is a field that can be typed. Connie stated that the Centers look at all order activity including anything that is pending and is part of their training. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if the typist does anything to kick off the CSR. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that they do not generate the CSR but they do take into account pending activity for the current order. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if with Virtual CSR is there a check for pending service order and is there is a trigger back to the rep. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we do an ownership check way upfront in the process and that there is no edit that can be applied. Connie said that the basis of the CSR is what is typed on the service order. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that creating the Line Loss Report is not a manual effort. She said the DCR code is the driver for the Loss and Completion logic. Connie stated that the DCR code would determine if the loss were external or internal. Connie stated that this is also part of the training and quality reviews. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if a query could be done against the CSR at the backend to ensure that it is not a loss to the CLEC. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the check has to happen when the service order is issued because that is the only time all the elements are there. Connie said that we are constantly looking for ways to help the Centers issue service orders. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said thank you for the renewed focus on training. Bonnie said that when there is focus you do a good job but when you get new employees, for examples that focus is lost and the process is broken. Bonnie asked how Qwest could address that and asked what assurance they have that the employees will be re-trained every 30 to 60 days. Bonnie also said that the 10% quality check does not work for Loss and Completions. Bonnie said that she is willing the close the CR and action item because Qwest has stated that there is no more system work that can be done. Bonnie said that she feels that this is a manual process and is a compliance issue. Bonnie stated they might have to address this issue in the measurement performance forum. (3/2/04 Revision from Eschelon – Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked that this CR and action item be closed because in LTPA Qwest said they are working with CLECs on a new process. Bonnie said that is not the case.) Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we would close the CR and action item. Connie recapped Eschelon’s expectation regarding this issue stating that they would like Qwest to ensure that we continue to refocus our Centers every 30 to 60 days on this process. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that they agree with that assessment. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we would close the CR and open a Global Action Item to determine if we can re-train the Centers every 30 to 60 days. 11/20/03 CMP Systems Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we made it pretty far into the month without any discrepancies or problems. Connie stated that Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon has now found and forwarded discrepancies to Qwest for investigation. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the incorrect DCR was entered by the Center. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that this CR was issued to have the information shown on the report the same day. Bonnie said that because the Loss Report is created manually there would never be the assurance of an accurate loss report. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that yes; there is human intervention. Connie stated that we need to have an off-line call and include the business. Connie stated that it needs to be determined if we need to show every loss. Connie also stated that the Loss and Completion Report is very manual intensive. Liz Balvin/MCI said that MCI would like to be invited to the meeting unless the information that would be shared is proprietary. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the meeting would be a definition meeting and that Eschelon's results would be e-mailed to Eschelon. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that Qwest and Eschelon have done alot of work with this issue for 2 years and we are to the point that no more system changes can be made. Liz Balvin/MCI asked what the DCR was intended to do. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that DCR is the Disconnect Code Reason and it shows if there is an external or internal loss. Liz Balvin/MCI asked if Qwest could create an edit to eliminate the human intervention. Connie Winston/Qwest that it would require too tight of an edit. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would schedule an adhoc call to discuss this issue further. Connie also said that the status of this CR would be changed to Evaluation. 10/16/03 CMP Systems Meeting Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she has someone monitoring these reports daily and for 3 days has found no discrepancies. Bonnie said that she also sent examples after the original fix and said that she would only send new examples if any discrepancies were identified. Connie Winston/Qwest asked Bonnie if she had received the analysis from Qwest. Bonnie said that she had not seen the analyis. Connie Winston/Qwest will have someone send the analysis to Bonnie. This CR will remain in CLEC Test. 9/18/03 CMP systems meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated Eschelon provided examples and that we did a compare of the data. Connie said that we would like to schedule a meeting to discuss findings with Eschelon through Jean Novak/Qwest. Connie explained that the TRAK DCR edit is not working like we thought it should and we have issued a fix to the TRAK DCR. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that the TRAK DCR did not appear on the loss report. She said that they have to manually look to identify the loss and have decided to contact Qwest on a daily basis to question data. Bonnie said that she would continue to send examples if Qwest needed them. Connie Winston/Qwest said that Eschelon only needed to send examples if they are seeing a different behavior. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that Eschelon would be comfortable with this when they have an accurate report for 30 days and do not have to look at the completion report. Connie Winston/Qwest said the 30 day window could start with an event notification. 8/21/03 CMP Systems Meeting Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if Connie Winston/Qwest had an opportunity to review the data that Eschelon provided. Connie stated that she would talk off-line with Bonnie. 7/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that she would like to leave this open. She stated that the analysis is a very intensive manual process for Eschelon and they are still sorting through the evaluation. 6/19/03 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Eschelon had concerns with an instance where something wasn’t on the Loss Report on the same day it was on the Completion Report. Connie stated that on that particular day, Qwest had a program problem, which was fixed. Connie stated that with the fix, Qwest also added some alarms to make sure it wouldn’t happen again. Connie stated that Qwest then looked at a week’s worth of data and we believed it is fixed. Connie asked if Eschelon has had a chance to validate it. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she would look at it and let Qwest know. There were no questions or additional comments. This CR remains in CLEC Test. 5/21/03 CMP systems meeting Connie Winston/Qwest said that we implemented edits further up in our process to deal with this. We also put in an edit for the TRAK DCR FID CR. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that she sent one day's data to 'CMPCR' and that Unbundled Loop was ok, but UNE-P and resale were not. Connie Winston/Qwest said thank you for the feedback. We will leave the CR open and continue to review the data. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that if Qwest wanted Eschelon to send in another day of data to let her know. She sent the previous data about three weeks ago. 5/5/03 These attached reports contain confidential customer information. Do not post report itself to CR. Please forward this information to Lynn Notoriani and/or Connie Winston on my behalf. Lynn and Connie, I am attaching a comparison of one day's worth of data. Included is: *The products and reports of UNE-P, Resale and UBL. We received the report on 5/1/03. The comparison is to determine if the data on the loss and completion report is showing up on the same date. As you can see from the data, UNE-P and Resale are far from accurate. The UBL is correct. I wanted to include the UBL in the report because maybe there is logic applied to it that is not applied to UNE-P and Resale. Let me know if you have questions. As I communicated in CMP last month, Eschelon is having a significant problem with loss report accuracy. I have sent a large amount of data to my Service Manager (Eschelon starting sending data to be analyzed in the first week of March and has not received any response on analysis yet almost two months later). These include: * Complete accounts leaving but only a portion of the account appearing on the report. * Accounts not showing up at all There are also additional issues discovered recently that I need to send to my Service Manager. * Entire account showing lost when only a portion left (Could this be a outward activity on an entire account for partial conversion when there is another order with inward activity on the completion report for the lines remaining with the CLEC.) Bonnie Johnson Sr. Manager ILEC Relations Eschelon Telecom, Inc. Phone612 436-6218 Fax612 436-6318 Cell612 743-6724 <<05-01-03 Loss VS Completion All Products.xls>> 4/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this request was deployed on 4/3/03 and asked if Eschelon was ok to close. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that they would like to keep this open for another month. 1/16/03 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the status remains the same. There are about 6 items that contributed to these errors. When these fixes are implemented in April, we believe the fix will take care of about 95% of the problem. Connie stated that the problems were small to begin with. Connie Winston/Qwest said that we propose closing this action item and re-visit in April/May to determine if the fixes are acceptable. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that there is still an open CR for EDI that is not yet scheduled. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she is ok with closing the action item. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR remains open and in April it will change to CLEC Test. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked what date in April would the fix go in. Connie Winston/Qwest said that we don’t know the exact date yet and that we have been very clear that it won’t be past the last day in April. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if this will change the way the information is received and should they be looking for documentation. Connie Winston/Qwest stated it will not change the way you receive the information and it won’t change the format. This action item will be closed. 12/19/02 December Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest said that this is tentatively targeted for April 2003. She said that the fixes would cover roughly 90% but it will actually cover about 95% of the fallout. It will make a significant change to the L&C report and fixing the six errors on the matrix will be noticeable. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if it was that Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon is sending only Central Region examples. Connie Winston/Qwest said that no, we have examples from all regions. She also noted that as we discover any other items that warrant fixing and that would have a significant impact we will let you know. 10/17/02 Discussion from the October CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we are still targeting this for 1st quarter of 2003, no commitment date yet. There was a question from last month as to what percentage of the error bucket are these fixes. Is around 90%, it fluctuates. We are analyzing the onesie - twosies that are coming in right now. We will add clarity around what will be fixed in the first quarter. Discussion from the September 19 CMP meeting: Connie Winston/Qwest said that the matrix is attached and we’ve included LOEs. As we’ve discussed before, the Loss & Completion team is a small development team and as they have bandwidth they start to take the changes into their development cycle. The target is by the end of 1st quarter next year. Their goal is to do them sooner but since they never know when spikes will happen in CLEC requests for contractual changes they don’t like to have any hard commitments on those dates because those are their first priority. This work is their second priority, but they have begun work on this. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that she has asked folks at Eschelon to track any differences between records on the loss and completions reports. As we’ve discussed before, it could show up on the report a couple of days before or after depending on which one errored. So, if I get any feedback on where it’s happening, I’ll provide that information. It’s my understanding that if one errors it would never be more than two or three days, so we should we should see the respective match to it sometime three before or three days after. Connie Winston/Qwest — And as Qwest discovers other things causing that condition we’ll add them to the matrix and start to block those changes into the development team. Jonathan Spangler/AT&T asked if on the ones that Qwest has identified on this report, what sort of percentage did these incorporate as far as what you had identified in your research. Connie Winston/Qwest said that the percentage of errors in the total bucket was very low. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t cause the CLECs a lot of pain when it happens. The percentage of errors included in the matrix, on the other hand, should be fairly high. Mike Buck/Qwest said that the action is still open and ongoing status will be provided.
|
CenturyLink Response |
| Since our clarification call on SCR012802-1 (Loss and Completion Reports, TNs should appear on both reports for the same date.) Qwest has completed it's initial analysis. We agree that it is beneficial to always have a TN appear on the Loss and Completions reports on the same date, however, in order to do this, Qwest would have to rebuild the entire reporting architecture. The difference in the dates today is caused by the fact that if one or the other reporting process detects an error in the TN it is recycled to an error file for correction and is processed in the next day's cycle, appearing on the the next day's report. The reason we have 2 processes running concurrently is that we have a limited night time window to get this information generated and made available to the reports. In addition, this change would cause the information to be reported on the later date, not on the date that the information was initially generated The Level of Effort for this request is Extra Large.
|
Information Current as of 1/11/2021