Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR022703-08 Detail

For example; WTN from account wishes to move across the street and retain their TN.

This would be a single line move order only for one of the WTNs on the MultiLine account.

Do not wish to disturb the remaining account.

Expected Deliverables/Proposed Implementation Date (if applicable):To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Status History

Project Meetings

-- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T Consumer just migrated to 14.0 on February 14th, so would like CR to remain open for validation.

-- January Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T Consumer is cutting to 14.0 on February 14th and asked that the CR remain in CLEC Test until February CMP.

-- December 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that this CR remain open for testing. This CR remains in CLEC Test.

- November 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR would be implemented with the IMA 14.0 Release on December 8, 2003.

October 16, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the information {Bullet Points}is located in the Project Meetings Section of the CR itself and asked all to please review it and bring their questions forward. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would like to have Phyllis Burt (AT&T) review it. This action item remained opened. Liz Balvin/MCI asked what Qwest’s definition of BTN is. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it is the first line that the CLEC has established on a migration; it is whatever the CLEC denotes it to be. Stephanie Prull/McLeodUSA asked if the LNUM1 is the first line. Connie Winston/Qwest responded yes. The action item is closed.

October 10, 2003 Action Item from 14.0 Hi-Level Walk-thru: Provide Bullet Points of ACT Types & How Order Activity Will be Generated for Support Partial Moves CMP CR Bullet Points for Action Item: LISTING SCENARIOS: LSR & DL ACTIVITIES

NOTE: Qwest will only address changes for TNs listed on the LSR/DL forms. TNs not addressed on the LSR/DL form will remain as they are on the account. Scenario1: Old End User Location Arrangement: Multi Line Account with one or more TNs moving to the new account.

1a) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN and LML remain on the original account Additional listing (AL) is present on the account ACT = T LNA = N LACT = D to remove the AL from the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account. This LML will be associated with the BTN.

1b) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN and LML remain on the original account Additional listing (AL) is NOT present on the account and will become associated with new BTN and LML. ACT = T LNA = N LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account. This LML will be associated with the new BTN.

Scenario 2: Old End User Location Arrangement: Multi Line Account with one or more TNs moving to the new account.

2a) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN remains on the original account LML moving to the new account ACT = T LNA = N LACT = O to remove the LML from the original account LACT = I to establish the new LML for the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account

Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: Additional listings (AL) are present on the account; 1 AL moving to the new account ACT = T LNA = N LACT = D to remove the AL from the original account LACT = N to establish the AL for the new account

2b) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN remains on the original account LML moving to the new account ACT = T LNA = N LACT = O to remove the LML from the original account LACT = I to establish the new LML for the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account

Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: Additional listings (AL) are NOT present on the account. ACT = T LNA = N Would not have an LACT

Scenario 3: Old End User Location Arrangement: Multi Line account with one or more TNs moving to the new location

3a) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN and LML are moving to the new account. Original account will have a new BTN and LML ACT = T LNA = N LACT = O to remove the LML from the original account LACT = I to establish the new LML for the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account.

Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: Additional listings (AL) are also present; 1 AL moving to new account ACT = T LNA = N LACT = D to remove the AL from the original account LACT = N to establish the AL on the new account.

3b) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN and LML are moving to the new account. Original account will have a new BTN and LML ACT = T LNA = N LACT = O to remove the LML from the original account LACT = I to establish the new LML for the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account.

Desired Outcome for New and Old Location is: Additional listings (AL) are NOT present on the account. ACT = T LNA = N Would not have an LACT

Scenario 4: Old End User Location Arrangement: Multi Line account with one or more TNs moving to the new location.

4a) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN is moving to new location Original LML is remaining on the original account LSR = T LNA = N LACT = O to remove the LML on the original account (Update the LTN) LACT = I to establish the new LML with new LTN for the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account Desired Outcome for New and Old Location is: Additional listings (AL) are present on the account; 1 AL is moving to the new account LSR = T LNA = N LACT = D to remove the AL from the original account LACT = N to establish the AL for the new account

4b) Desired Outcome for New and Old Locations is: BTN is moving to new location Original LML is remaining on the original account LSR = T LNA = N LACT = O to remove the LML on the original account (Update the TN) LACT = I to establish the new LML with new LTN for the original account LACT = N to establish the LML for the new account Desired Outcome for New and Old Location is: Additional listings (AL) are NOT present on the account; 1 AL is moving to the new account LSR = T LNA = N Would not have an LACT

REMINDER: Qwest will only address changes for TNs listed on the LSR/DL forms. TNs not addressed on the LSR/DL form will remain as they are on the account.

- September 19, 2003 IMA 14.0 High-Level Walk-thru Meeting Minutes Excerpt:

Functionality Description: A CLEC has requested the ability to move one or more lines from a multi-line account to a new location and account, retain the original TN(s) for each line, and not disturb the remaining lines on the original account. In order to perform this functionality today, Qwest requires that the CLEC submit two LSRs. The CLEC has requested that this functionality be implemented using only one LSR with an ACT=T, LNA=N.

Products: UNE-POTS (P or STAR) Resale POTS

Forms Impacted: LSR DL

Fields Impacted: The Partial Move Indicator (PMI) field will be added to LSR form, that when populated with a ‘Y’, will indicate that the request is for a partial move to a new location.

ACTs: For ACT=T, added valid LACT values of D, I, and O.

Questions & Answers:

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, for UNEP POTS Move Orders we currently send all listings as new (LACT=N) similar to a new install, why is the LACT of I, O & D being allowed? A: Curt Anderson - Qwest responded that the existing TN’s would remain.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, for UNEP POTS Move Orders how do we perform a partial move where the currently assigned Account Number and Main Listing are moving? For example Customer John Doe has 3 lines and 3 listings (one main and two additional listings). How do we move the existing main account number and main listing and reassign a new main account number and new main listing for the remaining two lines? A: Curt Anderson - Qwest stated that the CLEC would have 4 LACT’s: LACT = D to remove additional listing at the old end user account. LACT = O to out the old main listing, at the old end user location. LACT = I to in the new main listing, at the old end user location. LACT = N new LML at new end user account. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked if Qwest would know what account. Curt Anderson - Qwest responded yes, by the LTN field. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked what would be the old TN. Curt Anderson - Qwest stated by the TN or LTN field. Stephanie Prull - McLeodUSA asked how determine the main TN if there are 2 TN’s. Phyllis Burt - AT&T stated that was her scenario. Phyllis Burt - AT&T stated that have BTN & LML, the old account needs BTN & LML, using S&E TN to be BTN, LML going to the new address, asked how the LML is chosen. Curt Anderson - AT&T responded with a LACT = I. Phyllis Burt - AT&T responded okay. Kim Isaacs - Eschelon asked if there would ever be I of LML or N of LML. Curt Anderson - Qwest stated that the edits would change. Connie Winston - Qwest stated to support ACT = T. Phyllis Burt - AT&T stated that from Consumer perspective, this solution won’t work because of account structure. Connie Winston - Qwest stated that it would exist on the CSR for the account the CLEC is moving. Phyllis Burt - AT&T stated that she would verify with her systems folks. Terri Kilker - Qwest stated that Qwest could provide bullet points of ACT Type need and how order activity will be generated.

There were no additional comments, questions, or clarification requested.

Action Item: - Confirm that the first line will be the BTN. - Provide bullet points of ACT Types and how order activity will be generated.

March 27, 2003 Conference Call (AT&T and Qwest):

ATTENDEES: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Phyllis Burt/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Beth Foster/Qwest, Terri Kilker/Qwest, Kit Thomte/Qwest, Connie Winston/Qwest, Monica Manning/Qwest, Sue Stott/Qwest, Becky Sterk/Qwest DISCUSSION: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the purpose of this call was for further clarification on the request to determine if there are systems impacts for inclusion in the IMA 14.0 prioritization. Terri Kilker/Qwest stated that the current process was generating 2 LSR’s. 1st LSR is a ‘C’ order to move the TN to the new location and maybe identifying a new BTN. 2nd LSR is an ‘N’ order with the RPON relating the 2 LSR’s. Connie Winston/Qwest asked to clarify that the ‘C’ order was to disconnect the line and reestablish or add. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that the ‘C’ with LNA of D was to disconnect, with the RPON to relate the disconnect to the ‘N’, the add. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that on the Clarification Call it was stated that we already do this and not much further discussion took place. Connie stated that when IT was asked for the Level of Effort, they met to determine there could be a system change to support the existing process in a better way. Connie noted that the CR did not clearly state what system change was being requested. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked regarding the current process, is any of it system driven or is it all manual handling. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the first order flows thru and when there is an RPON on the LSR, the service order is created but the Center has to review the order, validate it, then they let it flow. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated for clarification that the first order flows thru and the second order falls out for manual handling. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the system can’t make decisions so there is human intervention to help out. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that the CR is vague because Qwest did not provide answer’s to a question, for a single line move with a T what happens if 1 line is specified. Phyllis stated that AT&T’s desire is for 1 LSR, not 2. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she was concerned that this CR was removed from the ballot. Donna stated that there should have been a conversation prior to the removal from the ballot. Donna stated that Qwest had previously stated that a process existed but that it was not documented. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest understands the concern. Connie stated that when it was stated that a current process existed, this was not taken any further due to the fact that it was stated that the process needed to be documented. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T wants this CR on the ballot. Connie Winston/Qwest asked what is to be put on the ballot, as there is no system work’s for this request. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that her client (Phyllis) wants a system change for the ability to order via 1 LSR, not 2. Donna stated that is what should be LOE’d and part of the vote. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked what happens today, if you don’t do a multi-line. Terri Kilker/Qwest stated that it is rejecting but not from a system perspective, is from a process perspective. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this call is the first time that the request of 1 LSR was heard and stated that this would be a significant change. Connie stated that this would need to be defined. Connie stated that Qwest did not have that clarification and apologized. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that might be due to the fact that she had the conversation with Wendy (Qwest). Phyllis stated that she wants to do a move order, do 1 line, and establish account at a new location. Terri Kilker/Qwest stated that Qwest did not understand that AT&T was requesting this to be 1 LSR. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the process needs to be documented but was not aware that 1 LSR was the request. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the Level of Effort would be fairly significant and asked Kit how would this CR be added to the vote. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that a revised ballot could be sent and stated that no votes have been received as yet. Kit stated that a Communicator could be sent that a candidate was omitted from the original ballot. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the LOE would be very hi-level as this is new information and Qwest needs time to see what the system can do for this request. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked what kind of timeframe is being looked at for the LOE. Donna stated that AT&T is willing to take that risk and that there could have been better clarification from both sides. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it would be a fairly hi LOE and will take a look at the request, along with the development partners. Connie stated that would try to have the LOE by noon (MT) tomorrow. Becky Sterk/Qwest stated that as a development group, would appreciate further clarification. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that all appropriate edits and things would need to be checked and done for an active T where only 1 line is done. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that for example, for 3 lines with 1 of them moving and 1 disconnecting (UNE-P POTS) an ACT = T with N & D in LNA. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the orders would still get a C & an N on FOC. LNA of N would be removed. LNA of T would move to new account. If 1 of the accounts, N or D is the BTN, we will automatically make that the BTN and would be on the FOC. Sue Stott/Qwest asked if there are 10 lines, is the bottom line that when you want to do activity on 3 lines, all others are to remain whole. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated yes, if there are 3 roommates, you could have 2 move orders. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that don’t know how, this would be 2 new addresses. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that it would be 2 separate LSR’s for move orders. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that the trick is that you (AT&T) are asking for 1 LSR. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated would be 1 LSR per location. If the roommates go to different locations, would send 2 LSRs with an ACT = T. Connie Winston/Qwest asked to clarify that if there are 3 roommates and 2 lines are moving to different addresses, AT&T would send 2 LSR’s due to different locations; 1 LSR would have an ACT = T, the 2nd LSR would have an ACT = T and LNA = N to establish the next one. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated correct. Needs to know if can do at the same time. Terri Kilker/Qwest stated that if moving 2, would be 2 LSRs and both would have ACT = T. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated yes, because moving the customer and retaining the TN. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the 2nd LSR would get stopped for Center involvement. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that they could wait until the first LSR completes before sends in the second LSR, AT&T would just need to know how to do that. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this is a complicated change and Qwest needs to make sure that the orders do not get mixed up. Connie asked if the Qwest developer’s needed further clarification. Becky Sterk/Qwest asked where would IMA get information for where the other lines are going to reside; the new addresses. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated on the move order. Becky Sterk/Qwest said ok. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that she has a hi level idea of the request and now needs to get with the development team to LOE. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that she wants to assure AT&T that Qwest did not cross this over to get rid of it and stated that Qwest truly believed that the process was the issue. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T has never submitted that many CRs at once and understands that Qwest was on a fast track due to prioritization. Donna stated that she appreciates the allowance with the team getting together to further discuss. Donna stated that she can provide Qwest with Phyllis’ TN if needs further clarification later in the day. Donna provided Phyllis’ number. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we have a better idea, we had no idea prior to this call of what system change was being requested. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked if we are still looking at noon (MT) tomorrow for the LOE. Connie Winston/Qwest stated yes. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that a notification would be sent tomorrow with the revised ballot. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that she wants to make sure that the process is documented externally. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that there has been a Global Action Item opened on the Product/Process side for the external documentation. There were no other questions or comments. The call was concluded.

- March 20 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T presented the CR. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she spoke with Wendy Green (Qwest) and Wendy was going to evaluate what happens with migrations. Wendy Green/Qwest asked John Gallegos (Qwest) if he had any additional information regarding the functionality. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that this CR is in evaluation due to needed investigation. John stated that during the clarification call we thought this functionality was already available. If we find that it is not, Qwest will provide the Level of Effort on the 14.0 ballot. Stephanie Prull/McLeod asked if this was about using the active T to do a partial move. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated yes. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if this would also be for GUI. John Gallegos/Qwest stated yes and that the CR does reflect IMA Common. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that if any system changes are needed, Qwest would provide an LOE and the CR would be added to the ballot. Connie stated that if no system changes were needed, the CLEC would be advised. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that the process needs to be documented if it is not. Connie Winston stated that this can be LOE’d and in the vote and if it is existing, an action item will be opened. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that she would like to have this CR withdrawn and an action item opened for the process. Stephanie Prull/McLeod stated that they have been told to use an active N, not an active T. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that an action item would be opened and that the process would be clearly stated in a notification. John stated that if systems work is needed, the LOE would be provided. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she did not want to withdraw this CR if a process exists. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that the CR will remain open to see where the information lands and potentially could have an action item. The CLECs agreed. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if the CR can also be for UNE-P CTX 21, Resale POTS, and Resale CTX 21. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the addition of the products might jeopardize getting the LOE. John stated within the application, needs to check scenerios for all products. John stated that he may or may not be able to get the LOE in time for the vote. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would like the LOE for UNE-P POTS and the LOE for all others. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she does not want to jeopardize this CR. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that if cannot get the LOE for all products in time for prioritization. Qwest will provide the LOE for UNE-P POTS only for the vote.

Clarification Meeting - March 12, 2003 Attendees: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Phyllis Burt/AT&T, Regina Mosley/AT&T, Carla Pardee/AT&T, Diane Burt/AT&T, John Blaszczyk/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Monica Manning/Qwest, Terri Kilker/Qwest, John Gallegos/Qwest, Berkley Loggie/Qwest, Lynn Stecklein/Qwest, Wendy Green/Qwest, Jan Martin/Qwest, Denise Martinez/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Rob Mitchell/Qwest, Laurel Nolan/Qwest, Shonna Pasionek/Qwest, Mallory Paxton/Qwest, Joan Pfeffer/Qwest, Deb Roth/Qwest, Carl Sear/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Scott Carne/Qwest

Reviewed CR Description: Scenario: Multi Line account. Roommates split but move near by and want to retain TN. For example; WTN from account wishes to move across the street and retain their TN. This would be a single line move order only for one of the WTNs on the MultiLine account. Do not wish to disturb the remaining account.

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: IMA Common

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

Discussion: Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that this may be covered with 11.0. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that she has no new information. There were no additional questions or comment regarding the request.

Action Plan: This CR will be presented by AT&T at the March 20th CMP Meeting and Qwest will be providing the CR response.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-08

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-08 Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

At the March Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants will be given the opportunity to comment on this Change Request and provide additional clarifications. Qwest is interested in the experiences of the CMP community as relates to this issue. Qwest will incorporate any feedback received into further evaluation of this Change Request.

Sincerely, Qwest