Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR081402-01EX Detail

Exception request details

Requestor: WorldCom, Inc.

Description of request with good cause for seeking an exception:

Qwest hosted a meeting on August 14th and requested that a vote be cast by Parties to determine how to deal with LSOG 6 upgrades.  Per Qwest notification, a vote of "yes" would "indicate a preference that IMA 12.0 be comprised of approximately 50% Industry Guideline CRs and

approximately 50% CLEC and Qwest originated CRs.  A vote of "No" will indicate a preference to follow the existing CMP as described in Section 10.2.2 ofthe Qwest Wholesale Change Management Document,http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/whatiscmp.html."

WCom presented the following option:  That the 12.0 prioritization

stand and Qwest implement CRs accordingly.

Qwest stated this could not be an option for today's call because no formal CR was presented for consideration.  Thus,this exception CR has been generated.

Per Qwest's notification "Qwest cautions that if this request is

granted Qwest will not be able to achieve full LSOG compliance for an indeterminate period of time."  WCom would like it noted that on the 8/14/01 call, Qwest stated that even if 12.0 was devoted 100% to LSOG 6 CRs, not all LSOG 6 CRs would be implemented, thus Qwest would continue

to not be able to achieve full LSOG 6 compliance by the recommended implementation date of 3/14/03.

WCom reluctantly voted "yes" and objected to Qwest's interpretation of the language in Qwest Wholesale Change Management Process Document, Section 10.2.2, which states, "If the recommended implementation date for aIndustry Guideline CR requires all or a part of a change to be included in

the upcoming Major Release, the CR will not be subject to ranking and will be automatically included in that Major Release, unless Qwest and theCLECs unanimously agree otherwise." The language as it stands would call for Qwest to be LSOG 6 compliant by 3/14/03, a requirement in the Section

10.2.2 of the Qwest Wholesale Change Management Document that Qwest has ignored by giving the CLEC's its two options.  A "no" vote stated that it would indicate a preference to follow the existing CMP as described in Section 10.2.2 of the Qwest Wholesale Change Management Document.  In

reality a "no" vote was to indicate a preference to allow Qwest to

implement only a a portion of LSOG 6, based on the level of effort

assigned to LSOG 6 changes versus the the hours and resources available for Release 12.0 as unilaterally determined by Qwest, which, in fact,is not in compliance with Section 10.2.2 of the Qwest Wholesale Change Management Document.

That aside, the fact is that 12.0 has been prioritized.  The results

support the fact that CLECs care about their CRs as does a vote of a 50/50split, given the dilemma in which CLECs have been placed - either accept a

50/50 split or get part of LSOG 6 notwithstanding the fact that  Qwest is required to implement all LSOG 6 changes by 3/14/03 under Qwest Wholesale Change Management Document.

Therefore, WCom requests and Emergency Call/Meeting, pursuant to Section 16.2, prior to the next Monthly CMP Meeting.

A "yes" vote would allow the 12.0 prioritization results stand and

Qwest implement accordingly and a "no" vote would result in Qwest working 50%LSOG CRs and 50% CLEC and Qwest originated CRs.

Status History

Project Meetings

Michael Buck / Qwest began the discussion pointing to the IMA 12.0 Initial Prioritization List produced and distributed following the balloting from the July Monthly Systems CMP Meeting. There were no questions on the Initial Prioritization List. Michael Buck / Qwest then reviewed SCR080502-01EX, an exception that Qwest initiated. The purpose of the Qwest exception request was to seek clarity on the path for IMA 12.0. As noted at the July Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants expressed concern that sticking with the CMP process would result in IMA 12.0 being filled completely with LSOG candidates. In SCR080502-01EX Qwest proposed an alternative a 50/50 split of resources between LSOG CRs and CLEC/Qwest initiated CRs. At the exception meeting these two options were considered and the 50 / 50 split option was unanimously chosen. However, at that meeting WorldCom expressed an interest in pursuing another alternative. As a result, WorldCom initiated the exception request that includes two options for consideration today. There were no questions. Michael Buck/Qwest reviewed the quorum process. The quantity of carriers present at the last 6 days of Monthly Meetings (Product/Process and Systems) is gathered. The low and the high number is dropped. The remaining four numbers are averaged. The result is multiplied by 62.5% resulting in seven (7) as the quantity of carriers required to constitute a quorum. Michael Buck/Qwest reviewed all of the carriers at the meeting. There were eleven (11) carriers present so it was agreed that a quorum was established. He then asked WorldCom to review their exception request. Liz Balvin/WorldCom reiterated that this issue has been discussed in multiple forums. As discussed in re-design, WorldCom believes that the language requires Qwest to implement 100% of LSOG by the time required. However, doing so would mean that LSOG would take all of IMA 12 and 13. Such an approach doesn’t sit right because we feel that we’ve been waiting long and hard to get our CRs implemented. She noted that Qwest CRs were automatically implemented prior to the IMA 10.0 release. We are looking to get some of our CRs in. We would like to see this as an exception to the rule. We believe that Qwest needs to be LSOG compliant also. We believe that the prioritization has already taken place and that should stand. Jeff Thompson/Qwest sought to clarify WorldCom’s position. He indicated that WorldCom seemed to be saying that Qwest should be LSOG compliant while at the same time Qwest should not devote any resources to LSOG in IMA 12.0 unless we get to where LSOG CRs fall in the prioritized list. Liz Balvin/WorldCom expressed the point of view that the language was crafted after IMA 11.0 was prioritized. As a result, that backed us all up against the wall regarding LSOG – it all goes in IMA 12. WorldCom feels like we should stay with prioritization so that we can get some of our CRs. WorldCom would like there to be another way to get LSOG compliant without bumping CLEC CRS. Based on WorldCom’s analysis it appears that it could take until 2006 until all current CRs are implemented. And that doesn’t include LSOG 7 or any new CRs. We would like Qwest to be LSOG compliant, but we have many old CRs that have been sitting out there and it is impacting our business. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that Qwest recognizes WorldCom’s concerns. Qwest believes there are some actions that all CMP participants can take to make the situation better. One is for all of us who have OBF representatives to communicate to OBF that these large, frequent LSOG releases are impacting us all in this way. Qwest welcomes other suggestions for how to solve the problem because the LSOG releases are affecting us all. Regarding WorldCom’s position, Qwest is very concerned that if we do the CRs as they are currently prioritized we might never get caught up with LSOG. Failing to move forward on LSOG now might cause Qwest to continually fall behind. Qwest wants to make sure that all participants understand what the trade off is. If we go forward with this, certainly Qwest will not be able to be LSOG compliant. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated that even if we devote all of 12.0 WorldCom believes Qwest still won’t be LSOG compliant. But these issues will still come up going forward. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that part of the WorldCom position is that IMA should be LSOG compliant but that the age and size of the CR backlog means that CLEC CRs need to be addressed now. WorldCom also expresses concern that business is being hurt because of old CRs that remain unworked. He stated that he was not sure if WorldCom’s position lines up with the data. Of the top 30 prioritized CRs, only 4 are older than January 2002. And those four are all Qwest CRs. So the idea of CLECs being hurt when the top CRs are new issues doesn’t seem to fit. Terry Wicks/Allegiance asked if during the prior re-design discussion of this topic was there any discussion on how 13.0 would be treated. Judy Schultz/Qwest indicated that re-design attendees did not address that; we were just brainstorming ideas. Terry Wicks/Allegiance expressed his view that from what he’s hearing, it sounds like if we accept WorldCom’s exception request then IMA 13.0 will be totally above the line candidates. Depending on synergies, it will probably all be LSOG upgrades, which is how he thought IMA 12.0 should have been. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated that was a critical issue. WorldCom also believes that Qwest doesn’t mean all LSOG when they say ‘above the line.’ Terry Wicks/Allegiance indicated that he understood that and that the concern would need to be dealt with. But based on where we are today, IMA 13.0 is looking to be all LSOG, that’s what I’m predicting realistically. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T also sees this as a chronic problem. Because there are my CRs, your CRs, LSOG CRs. I don’t know how to get total compliance. Terry Wicks/Allegiance indicated that Allegiance deals with all the other LECs, and when LSOG comes out they do it at one time, not piece meal and then they are compliant. Qwest is the only one that implements piecemeal. Jeff Thompson/Qwest responded that it was important to understand the use of the word compliant. One could take the position that once you do the foundation candidates you are compliant. All the forms now work with the standard format, etc. I’m not saying that other ILECs claim that, I don't know, but there are multiple ways of getting to compliance. Qwest will claim compliance when the ones applicable to Qwest are completed. Other ILECs may have a shorter list or longer list of issues that apply to their business. My understanding is that other ILECs do devote a full release to LSOG. Qwest did one release in past where an entire release was devoted to LSOG. Terry Wicks/Allegiance expressed thanks for that information. I don’t know what they are considering to be compliant I just know the trend has been that they do it all at once. Judy Schultz/Qwest indicated that there was not certainty that all of IMA 13.0 would be devoted to LSOG. If we follow existing Change Management Processes to the letter then quite possibly 13.0 would be entirely LSOG. But the caveat is that the CMP community could agree to something different. To my knowledge LSOG 6 was a monster, unlike anything we’d ever seen in terms of size and quantity of issues. Apparently, LSOG 7 could be just as large. So for starters we all need to try and stop the problem at the source we’ve got all of that to consider. What we all have to consider with this vote, is that if the exception is approved, at best, it will put Qwest even further behind in implementing LSOG. The CMP community needs to come up with further ideas on how to deal with this. Gary Veik (Qwest’s OBF representative) is at OBF trying to put Qwest’s point of view on the table. But he is just one voice in the forum. Terry Wicks/Allegiance asked if September is still the date OBF has given for providing more information on LSOG 7? Connie Winston/Qwest said for definition, yes. Terry Wicks/Allegiance asked if we will have time to do analysis before IMA 13.0? Jeff Thompson/Qwest indicated that Qwest should be able to provide some analysis in October. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon indicated that when Liz Balvin/WorldCom threw those numbers out she was astonished. When we had the vote last week on the previous exception request, Eschelon opted to abstain because of the 2 options on the table, our interpretation indicated LSOG would go above the line. But there was no stipulation to that up to the assigned amount of hours. I would have felt differently if I felt that 12.0 would be all LSOG and it all LSOG would have been done with that release. That’s why I abstained. Byron Dowding/Alltel asked if there was a list of what would be in the 50/50? Liz Balvin/WorldCom said if you look at the prioritization form, my quick view of the results, we will definitely get to #9 as the results for 12.0 prioritized list. Byron Dowding/Alltel asked how can he vote on something that he doesn’t see. Judy Schultz/Qwest indicated that he could look at the LOE on the 12.0 prioritization list. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated her analysis shows that the 50/50 approach will provide maybe 3 LSOG candidates. Byron Dowding/Alltel said he would like to see the options. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that this is not a packaging discussion. The goal of today’s discussion and vote is not to select which CRs to implement but rather which process to follow. Terry Wicks/Allegiance indicated that 12.0 Initial Prioritization List ranks everything the way the CLECs voted. If you take the first 5 on the list, those CRs are the most likely candidates for the 50% of the release devoted to prioritization. Then, the first 3 LSOGs on the list would be the 50% of the release for the LSOG part. That estimate is based on taking the highest level of efforts. Jeff Thompson/Qwest indicated that if something went wrong during definition, design and there was a mistake then the results might be different. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated that Qwest also looks during the packaging phase for other CRs that could be implemented easily. Jeff Thompson/Qwest confirmed this. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if Qwest resources are working on this right now? They are not waiting for the results of this vote? Jeff Thompson/Qwest indicated that they are experiencing churn at this time, but yes they are working. Terry Wicks/Allegiance noted that if the exception is agreed to instead of the 50/50, then CRs 1 through 12 on the list would most likely go into IMA 12.0. So you can compare those to see what you will get for your vote. He noted that with this approach more CLEC/Qwest CRS would get in, but fewer LSOG CRs. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that Terry Wicks/Allegiance has sliced & diced this list thank you for that. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked Qwest to vote first. Judy Schultz/Qwest reiterated that if the vote is yes, in favor of the exception, that it is with the express approval of everyone that Qwest will not be LSOG compliant, Qwest will vote yes. SBC abstain AllTel yes AT&T yes NC Telecom yes US Link yes Eschelon yes Covad yes WorldCom yes Allegiance yes Integra yes NOTE: The voting results are also captured in the CLEC-Qwest Voting Tally Form for SCR081402-01EX. Michael Buck/Qwest with unanimity the WorldCom CR is agreed to and that will dictate how Qwest will move forward with the definition of CRs for IMA release 12.0. Mike Zulevic/Covad said that the real issue that we need to address in re-design is the resource issue. The thing that makes it difficult for me is not knowing what the resources will be going forward, and I understand that Qwest has resources issues like the rest of us, but we need to address what we’ll have going forward. Liz Balvin/WorldCom voiced the concern that the resource allocation is 100% in Qwest’s court and that’s one of the obstacles that we have to overcome.

TYPE OF MEETING: WORLDCOM EXCEPTION TO SECTION 10.2.2 FOR IMA 12.0 PRIORITIZATION DATE, TIME, PLACE: THURSDAY AUGUST 22, 2002, 10:30 A.M. (MT), 1801 CALIFORNIA STREET, DENVER Meeting Attendees:

NOTE: The attendee list below includes those companies and individuals who spoke during the Exception discussion and/or cast a vote. Because the exception meeting took place as an agenda item on the Monthly Systems CMP Meeting a full list of CMP Meeting attendees can be found in the meeting attendees list for the August Monthly Systems CMP Meeting.

Name Company Attendance Judy Schultz Qwest In Person Reggie Dampier SBC On Phone Byron Dowding Alltel On Phone Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T In Person Linda Wilson NC Telecom On Phone Jennifer Arnold USLink On Phone Bonnie Johnson Eschelon In Person Mike Zulevic Covad In Person Liz Balvin WorldCom In Person Terry Wicks Allegiance In Person Scott Ambrose Integra On Phone Jeff Thompson Qwest In Person Michael Buck Qwest In Person

August 22, 2002 Exception CR Emergency Call/Meeting meeting minutes

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. MT. The meeting took place as an agenda item during the August Monthly Systems CMP Meeting. The Exception component of the meeting was originally scheduled for 3:00 p.m. but was rescheduled to 10:30 a.m. without dissent from CMP meeting attendees. Introductions IMA 12.0 APPROACH RECAP AND DISCUSSION Michael Buck / Qwest began the discussion pointing to the IMA 12.0 Initial Prioritization List produced and distributed following the balloting from the July Monthly Systems CMP Meeting. There were no questions on the Initial Prioritization List. Michael Buck / Qwest then reviewed SCR080502-01EX, an exception that Qwest initiated. The purpose of the Qwest exception request was to seek clarity on the path for IMA 12.0. As noted at the July Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants expressed concern that sticking with the CMP process would result in IMA 12.0 being filled completely with LSOG candidates. In SCR080502-01EX Qwest proposed an alternative a 50/50 split of resources between LSOG CRs and CLEC/Qwest initiated CRs. At the exception meeting these two options were considered and the 50 / 50 split option was unanimously chosen. However, at that meeting WorldCom expressed an interest in pursuing another alternative. As a result, WorldCom initiated the exception request that includes two options for consideration today. There were no questions. Michael Buck/Qwest reviewed the quorum process. The quantity of carriers present at the last 6 days of Monthly Meetings (Product/Process and Systems) is gathered. The low and the high number is dropped. The remaining four numbers are averaged. The result is multiplied by 62.5% resulting in seven (7) as the quantity of carriers required to constitute a quorum. Michael Buck/Qwest reviewed all of the carriers at the meeting. There were eleven (11) carriers present so it was agreed that a quorum was established. He then asked WorldCom to review their exception request. Liz Balvin/WorldCom reiterated that this issue has been discussed in multiple forums. As discussed in re-design, WorldCom believes that the language requires Qwest to implement 100% of LSOG by the time required. However, doing so would mean that LSOG would take all of IMA 12 and 13. Such an approach doesn’t sit right because we feel that we’ve been waiting long and hard to get our CRs implemented. She noted that Qwest CRs were automatically implemented prior to the IMA 10.0 release. We are looking to get some of our CRs in. We would like to see this as an exception to the rule. We believe that Qwest needs to be LSOG compliant also. We believe that the prioritization has already taken place and that should stand. Jeff Thompson/Qwest sought to clarify WorldCom’s position. He indicated that WorldCom seemed to be saying that Qwest should be LSOG compliant while at the same time Qwest should not devote any resources to LSOG in IMA 12.0 unless we get to where LSOG CRs fall in the prioritized list. Liz Balvin/WorldCom expressed the point of view that the language was crafted after IMA 11.0 was prioritized. As a result, that backed us all up against the wall regarding LSOG – it all goes in IMA 12. WorldCom feels like we should stay with prioritization so that we can get some of our CRs. WorldCom would like there to be another way to get LSOG compliant without bumping CLEC CRS. Based on WorldCom’s analysis it appears that it could take until 2006 until all current CRs are implemented. And that doesn’t include LSOG 7 or any new CRs. We would like Qwest to be LSOG compliant, but we have many old CRs that have been sitting out there and it is impacting our business. Judy Schultz / Qwest stated that Qwest recognizes WorldCom’s concerns. Qwest believes there are some actions that all CMP participants can take to make the situation better. One is for all of us who have OBF representatives to communicate to OBF that these large, frequent LSOG releases are impacting us all in this way. Qwest welcomes other suggestions for how to solve the problem because the LSOG releases are affecting us all. Regarding WorldCom’s position, Qwest is very concerned that if we do the CRs as they are currently prioritized we might never get caught up with LSOG. Failing to move forward on LSOG now might cause Qwest to continually fall behind. Qwest wants to make sure that all participants understand what the trade off is. If we go forward with this, certainly Qwest will not be able to be LSOG compliant. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated that even if we devote all of 12.0 WorldCom believes Qwest still won’t be LSOG compliant. But these issues will still come up going forward. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that part of the WorldCom position is that IMA should be LSOG compliant but that the age and size of the CR backlog means that CLEC CRs need to be addressed now. WorldCom also expresses concern that business is being hurt because of old CRs that remain unworked. He stated that he was not sure if WorldCom’s position lines up with the data. Of the top 30 prioritized CRs, only 4 are older than January 2002. And those four are all Qwest CRs. So the idea of CLECs being hurt when the top CRs are new issues doesn’t seem to fit. Terry Wicks/Allegiance asked if during the prior re-design discussion of this topic was there any discussion on how 13.0 would be treated. Judy Schultz/Qwest indicated that re-design attendees did not address that; we were just brainstorming ideas. Terry Wicks/Allegiance expressed his view that from what he’s hearing, it sounds like if we accept WorldCom’s exception request then IMA 13.0 will be totally above the line candidates. Depending on synergies, it will probably all be LSOG upgrades, which is how he thought IMA 12.0 should have been. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated that was a critical issue. WorldCom also believes that Qwest doesn’t mean all LSOG when they say ‘above the line.’ Terry Wicks/Allegiance indicated that he understood that and that the concern would need to be dealt with. But based on where we are today, IMA 13.0 is looking to be all LSOG, that’s what I’m predicting realistically. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T also sees this as a chronic problem. Because there are my CRs, your CRs, LSOG CRs. I don’t know how to get total compliance. Terry Wicks/Allegiance indicated that Allegiance deals with all the other LECs, and when LSOG comes out they do it at one time, not piece meal and then they are compliant. Qwest is the only one that implements piecemeal. Jeff Thompson/Qwest responded that it was important to understand the use of the word compliant. One could take the position that once you do the foundation candidates you are compliant. All the forms now work with the standard format, etc. I’m not saying that other ILECs claim that, I don't know, but there are multiple ways of getting to compliance. Qwest will claim compliance when the ones applicable to Qwest are completed. Other ILECs may have a shorter list or longer list of issues that apply to their business. My understanding is that other ILECs do devote a full release to LSOG. Qwest did one release in past where an entire release was devoted to LSOG. Terry Wicks/Allegiance expressed thanks for that information. I don’t know what they are considering to be compliant I just know the trend has been that they do it all at once. Judy Schultz/Qwest indicated that there was not certainty that all of IMA 13.0 would be devoted to LSOG. If we follow existing Change Management Processes to the letter then quite possibly 13.0 would be entirely LSOG. But the caveat is that the CMP community could agree to something different. To my knowledge LSOG 6 was a monster, unlike anything we’d ever seen in terms of size and quantity of issues. Apparently, LSOG 7 could be just as large. So for starters we all need to try and stop the problem at the source…we’ve got all of that to consider. What we all have to consider with this vote, is that if the exception is approved, at best, it will put Qwest even further behind in implementing LSOG. The CMP community needs to come up with further ideas on how to deal with this. Gary Veik (Qwest’s OBF representative) is at OBF trying to put Qwest’s point of view on the table. But he is just one voice in the forum. Terry Wicks/Allegiance asked if September is still the date OBF has given for providing more information on LSOG 7? Connie Winston/Qwest said for definition, yes. Terry Wicks/Allegiance asked if we will have time to do analysis before IMA 13.0? Jeff Thompson/Qwest indicated that Qwest should be able to provide some analysis in October. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon indicated that when Liz Balvin/WorldCom threw those numbers out she was astonished. When we had the vote last week on the previous exception request, Eschelon opted to abstain because of the 2 options on the table, our interpretation indicated LSOG would go above the line. But there was no stipulation to that up to the assigned amount of hours. I would have felt differently if I felt that 12.0 would be all LSOG and it all LSOG would have been done with that release. That’s why I abstained. Byron Dowding/Alltel asked if there was a list of what would be in the 50/50? Liz Balvin/WorldCom said if you look at the prioritization form, my quick view of the results, we will definitely get to #9 as the results for 12.0 prioritized list. Byron Dowding/Alltel asked how can he vote on something that he doesn’t see. Judy Schultz/Qwest indicated that he could look at the LOE on the 12.0 prioritization list. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated her analysis shows that the 50/50 approach will provide maybe 3 LSOG candidates. Byron Dowding/Alltel said he would like to see the options. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that this is not a packaging discussion. The goal of today’s discussion and vote is not to select which CRs to implement but rather which process to follow. Terry Wicks/Allegiance indicated that 12.0 Initial Prioritization List ranks everything the way the CLECs voted. If you take the first 5 on the list, those CRs are the most likely candidates for the 50% of the release devoted to prioritization. Then, the first 3 LSOGs on the list would be the 50% of the release for the LSOG part. That estimate is based on taking the highest level of efforts. Jeff Thompson/Qwest indicated that if something went wrong during definition, design and there was a mistake then the results might be different. Liz Balvin/WorldCom indicated that Qwest also looks during the packaging phase for other CRs that could be implemented easily. Jeff Thompson/Qwest confirmed this. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if Qwest resources are working on this right now? They are not waiting for the results of this vote? Jeff Thompson/Qwest indicated that they are experiencing churn at this time, but yes they are working. Terry Wicks/Allegiance noted that if the exception is agreed to instead of the 50/50, then CRs 1 through 12 on the list would most likely go into IMA 12.0. So you can compare those to see what you will get for your vote. He noted that with this approach more CLEC/Qwest CRS would get in, but fewer LSOG CRs. Jeff Thompson/Qwest said that Terry Wicks/Allegiance has sliced & diced this list thank you for that. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked Qwest to vote first. Judy Schultz/Qwest reiterated that if the vote is yes, in favor of the exception, that it is with the express approval of everyone that Qwest will not be LSOG compliant, Qwest will vote yes. SBC — abstain AllTel — yes AT&T — yes NC Telecom — yes US Link — yes Eschelon — yes Covad — yes WorldCom — yes Allegiance — yes Integra — yes NOTE: The voting results are also captured in the CLEC-Qwest Voting Tally Form for SCR081402-01EX. Michael Buck/Qwest—with unanimity the WorldCom CR is agreed to and that will dictate how Qwest will move forward with the definition of CRs for IMA release 12.0. Mike Zulevic/Covad said that the real issue that we need to address in re-design is the resource issue. The thing that makes it difficult for me is not knowing what the resources will be going forward, and I understand that Qwest has resources issues like the rest of us, but we need to address what we’ll have going forward. Liz Balvin/WorldCom voiced the concern that the resource allocation is 100% in Qwest’s court and that’s one of the obstacles that we have to overcome. Michael Buck/Qwest—any other comments or questions? No questions. He gave one last reminder that next month’s regularly scheduled Monthly Systems CMP Meeting will be at Inverness.

CenturyLink Response

Pursuant to Sections 16.5 and 17.4.4 of the Qwest Wholesale Change Management Process Document, http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/whatiscmp.html, this notification announces the disposition of Exception Change Request SCR081402-01EX and the results of the vote taken during the August 22, 2002, Exception Request Emergency Call/Meeting.

In this vote, conducted in accordance with Sections 16.4 and 17.0, the participants unanimously agreed to treat the SCR081402-01EX as an Exception. Accordingly, IMA Release 12.0 will be comprised of CRs addressed in the order in which they were voted on the Initial Prioritization List published on July 26, 2002 in notice CMPR.07.26.02.F.01299.Prioritization12.0. Qwest will proceed with the CLEC-Qwest OSS Interface Change Request Lifecycle as defined in Section 5.2.

The results of this vote supersede the results of the previously conducted vote for SCR080502-01EX and communicated via disposition notice CMPR.08.19.02.F.01316.CRVote&Minutes published on August 19, 2002.

Please see the attached tally form and meeting minutes for specific voting results.

Sincerely,

Qwest