Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR030403-01ES Detail

Expected deliverable: Utilize the attribute "commitment time" and for this information to be communicated on an Event Report.

Status History

Project Meetings

Jill Martain - Qwest stated that this CR deployed on June 27th and that AT&T was ok to close.

6/15/05 Systems CMP Meeting

Jill Martain - Qwest stated that the implementation date for this request is 6/27/05

3/16/05 Systems CMP Meeting

Jill Martain - Qwest stated that the targeted implementation for this CR is 6/27/05 and that this action item will be closed.

12/15/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Jill Martain/Qwest asked if there were any questions for Attachment J. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T asked for an updated status on #52, #57, #66 and #67. Sharon stated that these CRs are still in a Presented Status and asked if the status should be changed to something else. Jill Martain/Qwest said that these CRs are being worked on even though they are in a presented status and are part of the funding effort that is underway. Jill said that they remain in presented status until the CRs are scheduled and would then move to development status. There were no additional questions or comments.

9/16/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Jill Martain/Qwest stated that the targeted date for this CR needs to be pushed out. Jill stated that we will provide a new targeted date in the 4th quarter. 3/18/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that in the February CMP System Meeting, Judy Schultz indicated that we would have additional information on the funding approval process. Susie said that we have completed research on several additional CRs and will provide status on those CRs today. Susie said that our goal is to wrap this action item up in the next couple of weeks pending our CEO’s calendar. Susie said that we intend to start looking at the next batch of CRs and figure out a process going forward. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if it was Qwest’s goal to schedule all outstanding CRs. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that we need to get funding approval and then work with our IT partners to get the CRs scheduled. Susie Bliss/Qwest provided status on the following CRs: SCR042303-01EX (AT&T requests that Vendor Meet (coordinated dispatch) requests for non-design POTS service be at specific times) – Targeted Implementation Date 4/4/04 SCR061303-01 (Access to MLT Post Order Placement – Pre Order Completion) – Targeted Implementation Date 12/12/04 SCR100703-01 (Provide log information in CEMR for non-design tickets as Qwest provides for design tickets) – Targeted Implementation Date 10/10/04 SCR101802-1X (Electronic Access to Demarc Information) Targeted Implementation Date 10/10/04 SCR103003-05IG (ASOG 28 Exact Upgrade) Implementation Date 3/22/04 SCR030403-01ES (AT&T requests changes to commit time to be communicated on an Event Report through the attribute “commitment time”) Implementation Date 12/12/04 SCR103003-04IG (ASOG 28 TELIS Upgrade) Implementation Date 3/22/04 SCR103003-06 (TELIS Retirement) Targeted Implementation Date 8/31/04 SCR103003-02IG (ASOG 28 – QORA Upgrade) (Targeted Implementation Date 3/22/04)

2/19/04 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we did get funding approval and that this CR is targeted for the December 12, 2004 release. Connie stated that the team is looking to see if the date can be moved up. She also stated that we may need a call to discuss this candidate and SCR042303-01X (AT&T requests that Vendor Meet (coordinated dispatch) requests for non-design POTS service be at specific times) also submitted by AT&T.

1/22/04 CMP Systems Meeting Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this has not yet been scheduled. 12/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this action item will remain open because we do not have a scheduled date yet.

11/20/03 CMP Systems Meeting Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that we are still finalizing with the Vendor that maintains the backend system which is heavily impacted by this change and so we do not have a scheduled date yet. This action item will remain open.

10/16/03 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is targeted for the 1st quarter of 2004. Connie said that we are working with the development team to get a firm date. This action item will remain open.

Adhoc meeting with CLEC Community 9/19/03

Introduction of Attendees Craig Zimmerman/AT&T, Lydia Braze/AT&T, Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Kim Isaacs/Eschelon, Stephanie Prull/McLeod, Liz Balvin/MCI, Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon, Julie Pickar/US Link, Jackie Dibold/Qwest, Dan Busetti/Qwest, Cathy Auguston/Qwest, Daronna Landon/Qwest, Craig Suellontrop/Qwest, Cathy Garcia/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Beth Foster/Qwest, Lynn Stecklein

Review purpose of meeting The purpose of this meeting was to walk through the process of how this CR will impact work associated with cable cuts, company load misses, and no access. AT&T also will provide an update on whether or not they will accept the call and the electronic message.

Craig Suellontrop/Qwest provided the walk through on cable cuts, company loads, and no access. Cable Cuts - The CLEC has submitted a ticket before being aware that there has been a cable cut. The CLEC will be notified of the new commitment date. CEMR will also sent out an electronic message to the CLEC with the new commitment date. Company Load Miss Qwest will contact the CLEC with the new date and time if Qwest has missed a commitment due to company work load. Qwest will create a subsequent repair ticket with the new commit date and time. CEMR to sent out an electronic message to the CLEC with the new date and time. No Access If the Field Tech can not get access at the end user customer premise, the Tech will call the CLEC to renegotiate access. The CLEC will contact their end user customer to determine new date and time. The CLEC will call the Qwest Tech with access date and time. An electronic message will be sent to the CLEC with the new date and time. If the Field Tech can not make contact with CLEC, Qwest will continue to contact the CLEC. Once contact is made, Qwest will inform the CLEC that they need to contact their end user customer to determine the new date and time. The subsequent ticket will trigger CEMR to send out electronic message to the CLEC with the new date and time.

Craig Zimmerman/AT&T stated that AT&T can live with the Call and the Electronic Message.

There were no further questions associated on how this CR will impact the changes to the commit time.

9/18/03 CMP Systems Meeting

Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that we currently do not have a scheduled date. Lynn said that a meeting will be held on September 19, 2003 to walk through the process on how cable cuts, Company Load Misses, and No Access will be impacted if this change is implemented. Lynn also stated that we need one process for all CLECs. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that she will have the answer tomorrow as to whether AT&T will accept the telephone call and the electronic message.

E-mail sent 9/15/03

Scott, This request does involve MEDIACC and CEMR users. The products impacted are UNE-P and Resale. Hope that answers your questions. Thanks.

E-mail received 9/15/03 Lynn,

Do you know if this request only involves MEDIACC users, or does it also involve CEMR users? Also, I don't believe it is only limited to the UNE-P product?

Thank you, Scott Ellefson, Wholesale Service Mgr. 515-286-6871

--Original Message-- From: Mendoza, Lori [mailto:Lori.Mendoza@allegiancetelecom.com] Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 5:09 PM To: 'Scott Ellefson'; Coleman, Ian J. Subject: FW: CMP - Ad Hoc Meeting

Scott, Per the CR, it only affects MEDIACC users and UNE-P. So I'm thinking this will not affect us. Have you heard different?

Ian, Is that your take as well?

SCR030403-01 AT&T requests changes to commit time to be communicated on an Event Report through the attribute "commitment time" LOE 1500 - 2500 System/Interface: MEDIACC Product: UNE-P Status: Evaluation Description: Qwest's OSS limitation prevents Qwest from modifying and updating due dates on missed commits. Qwest today,communicates changes to commitment time via a narrative field (add'l. status info.) Receipt of information in a narrative field prohibits any tracking of missed commits and "new" commit performance. This narrative field is "overwritten"as new narratives are received, therefore it is not keeping a historical record of status messages sent. How are new commitments tracked, monitored and met? Does Qwest's OSS keep the entire history of status messages sent, or only the last status message sent in this field? Does Qwest use a specific and consistent text string to communicate missed commitments and new commitment dates that AT&T can use to indentiry these transactions in their system? Expected deliverable: Utilize the attribute "commitment time" and for this information to be communicated on an Event Report.

Lori Mendoza Director, Industry & State Regulatory Affairs AllegianceTelecom, Inc. TN: 425-888-8585 Text Pager: lmendoza@imcingular.com Numeric Pager: 800-862-0399 PIN 17317538

This email, including all context, content, attachments and documents contain information which is confidential and proprietary to Allegiance Telecom. All above may also be protected by the attorney/client privileges, and may constitute non-public information. This email and all attachments documents is intended to be conveyed only to the designated recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this message(s), please notify the sender at 425-888-8585. Unauthorized use, in any way is prohibited and possibly unlawful.

--Original Message-- From: Ellefson, Scott [mailto:Scott.Ellefson@qwest.com] Sent: Friday, September 12, 2003 1:26 PM To: 'lori.mendoza@algx.com'; 'shannon.bishop@hickorytech.com'; 'djewell@birch.com'; 'ahamilton@blackhillsfiber.com'; 'marylohnes@mmi.net' Cc: Samarripa, Gayla; Hurless, Cheri; Ellefson, Scott Subject: CMP - Ad Hoc Meeting

Hello,

I'm sending this CMP meeting notification as an FYI. Gayla, Cheri and I previously asked for your input regarding the manner of notification (call or email) you would like to receive if a commit time changed on one of your pending orders. This meeting next week is being held to discuss the current process, as well as AT&T's request to change the process.

Thank you, <> Scott Ellefson 515-286-6871

8/21/03 CMP systems meeting

Lynn Notarianni/Qwest reviewed the history of the CR. She stated that Qwest had worked with the service management team to discuss the change with all CEMR and MEDIACC users. She noted that 70% of the respondents wanted the call and that some wanted both a call and the email. She continued that because it was a process change for network, Qwest was not currently at a point where they could move forward with the change without further investigation. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that initially she had asked for a separate status and that Qwest was going to research an alternative solution. She stated that the team had discussed putting the information into the subject line to communicate that the commitment time had changed. She stated that if the team could resolve the issue, perhaps the change could move forward. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Dan Busetti/Qwest could address the email subject, but that she understood that several CLECs still wanted the call to negotiate the timeline. Dan Busetti/Qwest stated that it was not possible to send a change in the commitment time in a status because of the standards guidelines set by TSIF. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if there is any way to create something that would tell the CLECs that the status had changed. Dan Busetti/Qwest stated that would require a change in the national standard. He stated that it was possible to send the commitment back in the information, but that a whole new status would require a new attribute be negotiated at an industry level Lynn Notarianni/Qwest suggested providing both the call and the electronic message. She asked AT&T if this would be a solution. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she thought so, but that she wanted to talk with her SMEs. Donna asked how many CLECs Qwest had heard from on this issue. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that there were 13 CLECs that responded, 6 requested a call only, 3 requested both, 3 requested electronic only, and noted that Qwest still waiting to hear from Eschelon on their final decision. She continued that rather than just changing the commitment time, Qwest would call the CLEC to negotiate the commit time and then send the electronic information. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she agreed with the solution, but that she wanted to talk with her SMEs. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest would detail out the process and that a discussion could be held at either next month’s CMP meeting or at an ad hoc meeting. She stated that Qwest would also continue to talk with the service managers and other CLECs because they had not heard from many MEDIACC users.

CMP Monthly Meeting July 17, 2003

SCR030403-01 Communicate scheduled date. (SCR030403-01 Commit time to be communicated on an Event Report through the attribute "Commitment Time") Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest held an Ad-Hoc call, but that not many CLECs attended. She reviewed what was covered during the meeting and discussed the current process. She stated that under today’s process a CLEC would receive a call that the commitment was missed and that negotiation would take place to reschedule. She continued that through this CR, the new commit time would be automatically regenerated in MEDIAC and CEMR. She noted that Johnson/Eschelon had expressed some concern and that she had sent in several questions to Qwest. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if there was a possibility that there could be a status added in the status line to note that the commitment time changed. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T asked what subject line Johnson/Eschelon as referring to. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that they used CEMR so that this did not make sense to a MEDIAC user. Dan Busetti/Qwest stated that Johnson/Eschelon question was in reference to CEMR and stated that there were national standards for MEDIAC. He continued that in CEMR there were not statuses that relate to the change of commit time. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon questioned if this was not possible. Dan Busetti/Qwest stated that because of the national standard, this was not possible. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if this CR would then be denied. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T asked Johnson/Eschelon how Eschelon handled this process under today’s process. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that currently Qwest calls Eschelon, so without the phone call, there is no mechanized system available to identify multiple status on a ticket. She continued that regardless there was nothing to flag that that commit time has changed. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T stated that he thought that Qwest would continue to call CLECs (who wanted calls) with this change. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Zimmerman/AT&T was not correct. She said that in order to modify the system if a CLEC called in then it would be communicated on the phone, but if it the CLEC was using the electronic process then the change would be communicated electronically. She stated that it would be very expensive to call or send electronically by CLEC preference. She continued that would require impacts to various backend systems that would need to be worked through Telcordia and so we know that this would be huge. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the CR and noted that they were also requesting that the narrative field be re-written and so that it is possible to track what Qwest changes each time. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T stated that they wanted to track how many times Qwest changes the commit time and what is changed. He continued that currently the previous information is deleted out. He stated that currently the tracking piece is through a narrative field and that CLECs are unable to flag unless the field is coming over in a very specific format to let the CLEC know that things have changed. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that the CLECs were receiving calls too. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T stated that they did not want the calls and that they wanted everything electronically for tracking purposes. He stated that the way the system is built they could not go into the system to make the change to the commitment time. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that given Qwest’s response to her concerns, her next question is if there could be a note or something in the subject line that noted that the commitment time had changed. Dan Busetti/Qwest stated that a process change would need to occur. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that it sounded like Eschelon needs to be able to know that the commit time has changed and that Qwest would research a process change. She continued that Qwest needed feedback from all CEMR and MEDIAC users because the CR would effect all users. She suggested that the proposed change be communicated through the Service Management team. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she would talk to her internal team and see if they had any other suggestions. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T asked if Qwest had any TCIF statuses that they were not using that could be used for the Commit Time. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest would continue to investigate possible options. She stated that MEDIAC was behind CEMR and that Qwest would need to sort through how CEMR would work with this proposed change to the statuses. She said that Qwest may need an additional Ad-Hoc call and that she wanted to make sure that all CLECs were aware of the change. Donna Osborne-Miller/ AT&T agreed and discussed issue of overwriting the history field again. Craig Zimmerman/AT&T stated again that they wanted to eliminate calls and that they wanted to be able to compare between the old time and new time. He stated that AT&T puts the information onto a work list so that their customers can be called.

Ad-Hoc Meeting

Meeting attendees: Lydia Brazes- AT&T, Sharon Van Meter-AT&T, Cathy Auguston-Qwest, Lynn Notarianni-Qwest, Dan Busetti-Qwest, Grant Brown-AT&T, Wayne Hart-Idaho PUC, Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T, Pete Butner-Qwest, Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon, Sheila Jones-AT&T, Doranna Landon-Qwest, Beth Foster-Qwest, Craig Zimmerman-AT&T, Carla Pardee-AT&T, Cathy Garcia-Qwest, Stephanie Prull-McLeod, Laurel Nolan-CRPM Qwest.

Discussion: Nolan-started the meeting and stated that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss the current network process and how this change request will change the process. Auguston-Qwest walked the team through the current process and stated that Qwest’s current process was to contact the CLEC by phone and negotiate a new commit time. She stated that if the CR was implemented, then CLECs who used the electronic system would only receive electronic message and not phone calls. Busetti-Qwest stated that a change in the attribute ‘commit time’ would mean an email with a status change. Brown-AT&T stated that AT&T already received this through other ILECs and that the change would flag a trouble report. He continued that they needed this information for cable cuts as well. He stated that the CR needed to be applied to any change on the ‘commitment time’ on the Qwest side. Landon-Qwest stated that currently Qwest does not call all customers that are effected by a cable cut. Brown-AT&T stated that when Qwest identifies and knows that there is a problem, Qwest needs to send the new commitment time back to the CLEC. He continued that if there is a cable cut and Qwest has communicated a cut with the TNs effected, then the CLEC will not send any further referrals for those TNs. He stated that they did want the status on the ones already sent in. Notarianni-Qwest stated that she understood that if there was a change in the commitment time then they wanted to know, but did the CLECs want to see the new time in the status too? Brown-AT&T stated that the CR should be applied to any change in commit time. Notarianni-Qwest asked the Qwest SMEs if they agreed with this scope or if other investigation needed to take place. Auguston-Qwest stated that Qwest needed to do further investigation on the process for cable cuts.

Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked if Qwest was stating that the CR was doable. Notarianni-Qwest stated that Qwest needed to look at the scope of the CR and that the purpose of the call was to discuss with the CLEC Community the change to the network processes. Johnson-Eschelon asked how this change would effect CEMR. Notarianni-Qwest stated that the CR would apply to CEMR and MEDIAC. Johnson-Eschelon then asked what would occur if a CLEC called in. Notarianni-Qwest stated that if a CLEC called in then they would receive a call. Prull-McLeod agreed with the process. Johnson-Eschelon stated that she wanted to take the issue back to her team. Notarianni-Qwest stated that Qwest wanted to bring this process change to all the users because it would effect everyone. She stated that the team needed to be clear on what events changed the commit time. Johnson-Eschelon stated that she agreed with AT&T in regards to the fact that if they knew that there was a cable cut then they wouldn’t open any additional tickets. She continued that the CLECs needed to be notified on a ticket-by-ticket basis. Auguston-Qwest stated that Qwest needed to continue its investigation. Nolan-Qwest stated that the CR would also be discussed in the upcoming CMP Monthly Systems Meeting.

Brown-AT&T stated that once the CLEC has entered the information on the cable cut into their system they wouldn’t be allowed to enter any additional trouble tickets. He stated that they wanted to know what the reschedule date/time was for the ones that had already been submitted and were effected by the cable cut. He stated that a cable cut was not a trouble ticket. Prull-McLeod stated that McLeod also continued to track cable cuts internally so that they would not submit additional tickets. Busetti-Qwest stated that he wanted to understand that exact response that the CLEC wanted. Brown-AT&T stated that he thought that the 97 standard should be used. Nolan-Qwest asked if there were any other questions or concerns. None. She stated that the CR would be discussed in the upcoming CMP Monthly Systems Meeting and that Qwest would continue to review the proposed process.

Meeting adjourned.

Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting Minutes June 19, 2003

SCR030403-01 Communicate Scheduled Date for Commit Time to be Communicated on an Event Report Through the Attribute "Commitment Time" (originated by AT&T) Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that there is progress. Lynn stated that as we moved into design we found that it is requiring us to go to an outside vendor. Lynn stated that Qwest is in the process of obtaining information from the vendor and that the LOE may need to be modified and then will need to be scheduled. Lynn stated that Network processes would need to be modified. Lynn stated that the CLECs need to be okay with the process change on subsequent commit time on a Qwest caused miss. This process would automatically provide a new commit time and send it electronically. Lynn stated that this process would be implemented for everyone and that it would eliminate the conversation between Qwest and the CLEC. Lynn stated that the process change needs discussion to make sure everyone is ok with this. Lynn noted that this is for MEDIACC and for CEMR. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked what the Network implications were. Dan Busetti/Qwest stated that it would eliminate the phone calls for everyone. Dan stated that Qwest would not be able to sort out who want’s a call and who does not. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T requested a call with the CLECs, Qwest and Network to discuss this process change. Donna stated that one of the things AT&T wants housed within the commit time system is a measurement and performance issue. Donna stated that from a quality & expectation perspective, AT&T has some concerns. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest would coordinate a conference call and include Network. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked that information be provided ahead of time, in order to determine who should be on the call. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked for several date & time options for the conference call. Kit Thomte/Qwest agreed to provide several dates & times. There were no additional questions or comments.

Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting Minutes May 22, 2003

SCR030403-01 AT&T requests change to commit time to be communicated on an Event Report through the attribute “commitment time”. (originated by AT&T) Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this change was specific to MEDIAC and CEMR. She continued that as Qwest was defining the CR they ran into significant complexities that delayed them in getting a commit time for deployment of the change. She said that Qwest’s understanding is that AT&T is looking to not receive calls from Qwest’s centers when Qwest is unable to make commit times. The LOE that was communicated is for the system to pass on the info to the CLEC electronically. She continued that there were issues with getting the data into the system in order to be able to pass on to AT&T. She said that if Qwest is able to work through the issues then they would be able to provide a scheduled date for the change. She said that she wanted to keep the action item open, finish that investigation, and then respond back to AT&T. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked for the information as soon as it was available. She continued that AT&T was anxiously awaiting the change. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest would communicate information as soon as it was determined. She said that Qwest also wanted to make sure that other CLECs who have already developed to the MEDIAC interface would realize what this change would mean to tehm and that all MEDIAC CLECs will need to be involved to make sure the change does not negatively impact their interface. She said that unfortunately it was getting more complicated it was developed.

Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting April 22, 2003

SCR030403-01 AT&T Requests Changes To Commit Time To Be Communicated On An Event Report Through The Attribute "Commitment Time" (Originated By AT&T) Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the description of the CR. She stated that AT&T had participated on the clarification call and that she had also walked-on the CR during the last CMP Meeting. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE of 1500-2500 was reflected in the CR and that the change would also require a change to CEMR, and not just MEDIACC. She stated that Qwest was currently looking at scheduling. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked about the schedule for MEDIACC changes. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that MEDIAC is not bound to a set number of releases a year, releases are scheduled as the work arises. She indicated that Qwest was currently looking at scheduling. Dan Busetti/Qwest said that the two AT&T CRs were the only CRs open for MEDIAC which were currently being looked at for scheduling. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if Qwest had any indication as to when the CRs would be implemented. Dan Busetti/Qwest said that the CR (SCR030403-01) needed to wait until several of the CEMR changes were complete. He stated that the change in CEMR was incidental and that the change showed up in CEMR because of the commitment date and time. He also stated that the change would go through on the CEMR email. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest asked if that change was not tied to a CEMR release. Dan Busetti/Qwest said that the statement was true. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest asked what AT&T’s timeframe was. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that they would like to have the change implemented in June. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest said that Qwest would take an action item to review scheduling and try to provide a date in the May CMP Monthly Meeting

Clarification Call SCR030403-01 March 14, 2003

Introduction of Attendees: Sheila Jones-AT&T, Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T, Dan Busetti-Qwest, Carolyn Fernandez-AT&T, Craig Zimmerman-AT&T, Cathy Garcia-Qwest, Lynn Stecklein-Qwest, Laurel Nolan-Qwest

Review of Request: Nolan-Qwest reviewed the CR Title and Description of Change. "AT&T requests changes to commit time to be communicated on an Event Report through the attribute "commitment time" "Qwest's OSS limitation prevents Qwest from modifying and updating due dates on missed commits. Qwest today,communicates changes to commitment time via a narrative field (add'l. status info.) Receipt of information in a narrative field prohibits any tracking of missed commits and "new" commit performance. This narrative field is "overwritten"as new narratives are received, therefore it is not keeping a historical record of status messages sent. How are new commitments tracked, monitored and met? Does Qwest's OSS keep the entire history of status messages sent, or only the last status message sent in this field? Does Qwest use a specific and consistent text string to communicate missed commitments and new commitment dates that AT&T can use to indentiry these transactions in their system?" She then reviewed AT&T stated Expected Deliverable of "Utilize the attribute "commitment time" and for this information to be communicated on an Event Report."

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were any changes or additions to the CR. Jones-AT&T stated that this change will drive calls into the center and impact resourses. Busetti-Qwest asked about the product impacts. He asked if the product should be UNE-P POTS. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that it would be UNE-P POTS. He stated that it would also be line-splitting. Garcia-Qwest asked about Non-Designed. Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that shared loop would also be added. Nolan-Qwest stated that she would update the products impacted to be UNE-P POTS and Shared Loop.

Nolan-Qwest reviewed the interfaces impacted as MEDIACC. AT&T agreed.

Meeting adjourned.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

Dear Ms. Osborne-Miller:

This letter is in response to your January 16, 2004 escalation # SCR030403-01-E21. In this escalation ATT is requesting two CMP Systems CRs; SCR030403-01 Commit time to be communicated on an Event Report through the attribute "Commitment Time" and SCR042303-01X AT&T Vendor Meet(coordinated dispatch), be implemented by the end of February of 2004.

Qwest is still evaluating these CRs to determine potential implementation timeframes. Specifically, with regards to SCR042303-01X requesting Vendor Meets, Qwest is addressing fairly significant back-end system changes associated with this CR to determine the most efficient ways to get the changes implemented, and is exploring other options that may fulfill the intent of this CR. Additionally, with regards to SCR030403-01 Commit time, this CR does require Qwest working with a contracted vendor and coordinating that development work with additional back-end system requirements.

Given these activities, Qwest cannot commit to an implementation date of the end of February 2004 for these CRs. Qwest will communicate the implementation dates as soon as they are finalized. Please contact me by telephone at (303) 624-4450 or by e-mail at Lynn.Notarianni@qwest.com if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Director - Information Technologies Qwest

April 10, 2003 RE: SCR030403-01

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR030403-01. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meetings (held March 14, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an LOE for this change of 1500-2500 hours.

At the April 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