Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR112503-02X Detail

This is Phase 1 of the Adjustment Recognition request. Phase one deployed on December 6, 2004 and all functionality, with the exclusion of the Circuit ID/TN, was deployed on the 12/6/04 date. Please see SCR030105-01 for Phase 2 of Adjustment Recognition for the Circuit ID/TN portion of the request.

--------------------------------------------------------

Currently Qwest adjustments appear with only the date that Qwest issued the adjustment, a description such as 'credit adjustment' and the amount. When Eschelon submits a dispute, Qwest requires the bill date of the disputed amount, the USOC and/or the description of the disputed amount, the TN or CKT ID of the disputed amount and the amount in dispute. Qwest should return the same information (we supply) on its adjustments. Without the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC it is extremely time consuming and sometimes impossible to determine what Qwest is adjusting. Many times Eschelon has to contact Qwest for the needed information. Sometimes even Qwest can not determine what the adjustment was for. Eschelon requests that Qwest return the same information Eschelon supplies on its disputes i.e. the bill date, the USOC (or description, if a USOC is not applicable) and the TN or CKT ID on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest’s bills including the BillMate Adjustment file.

Expected Deliverables - Qwest will include all the information Eschelon supplies on a dispute i.e. the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC (or description) on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest’s bills including the BillMate Adjustment file.

Status History

Project Meetings

- December 15, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that Qwest is still looking at options and the CR remains in Evaluation. There were no questions or comments.

-- November 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest said that this CR would go back to an Evaluation Status once Phase 1 is complete on 12/6/04. Kathy Stichter/Eschelon asked what was included in Phase 1. Jill Martain/Qwest said that Phase 1 included all but the TN and CKT ID.

- October 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR, except for the circuit id portion, is targeted for deployment on December 6, 2004. This Action Item is Closed.

-- August 18, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that the circuit information piece was separated out and that all other requested information is funded and we are targeting implementation in the 4th quarter. Kathy Stichter/Eschelon asked if there would be no circuit id or would it be as it is now showing on the bill. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that the circuit id information would not change in 2004, that it would be the same as the CLECs currently see it.

- July 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Susie Bliss/Qwest provided status on funding for billing CRs. Susie recapped the CRs and the order in which the CLECs ranked each CR in the ranking session. 1) SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition (originated by Eschelon) 2) SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN (originated by AT&T) 3) SCR0121102-01 Capability to request suppression of the paper Summary Bill except the summary page (Originated by Eschelon 4) SCR071603-02 Bordertown Change to Billing Files (originated by McLeod) 5) SCR121603-01 Only show the actual circuit ID on all billing media in the Eastern Region (originated by Qwest) 6) SCR112003-03 CSR Data on Bill (originated by Cbeyond) Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that she did not know if we would be moving forward on CR#6 SCR1120030-03 due Stephan Calhoun leaving Cbeyond. Susie said that she has two action items to complete before taking the issue up the ladder again. Susie said the 1st action item is to meet with the billing center to determine all the business benefits and the 2nd action item is to work with the Compliance Team to understand which CRs we may be obligated to meet. Susie said that she is hoping that by next week we will know which CRs will go down the obligation path, the CRs that require business cases, and which CRs will be denied. Liz Balvin/MCI said that she was surprised that Qwest was only to this point on this issue. Liz said that she understands Qwest is working on behalf of the CLECs and needs to understand why we are only this far in this process. Susie Bliss/Qwest said that SCR112303-02X Adjustment Recognition is the most expensive to implement. Susie said that if this CR was submitted today, it would have been denied upfront. Susie said that on billing and repair CRs each CR is looked at on an individual basis and needs funding approval. Susie said that this won’t change in 2005. Liz Balvin/MCI said that she wished she would have known that SCR112303-02X was causing Qwest a headache. Liz said that they could have been driving other CRs. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that based on what she knows today that #2 SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN (originated by AT&T) and #3 SCR0121102-01 Capability to request suppression of the paper Summary Bill except the summary page (Originated by Eschelon) should be implemented in 2005. Liz Balvin/MCI said that she thought we were looking to implement by the end of 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if Qwest expected any movement at all in 2004. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that we talked about pulling some CRs out of scheduled releases but IT advised against that. Liz Balvin/MCI said that Qwest has not yet run this issue up the chain. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that the funding request went up the chain and then back down the chain. Kathy Stichter/Eschelon asked if Qwest had any releases scheduled in 2005. Connie Winston/Qwest said that she has not seen the OSS schedule yet. Liz Balvin/MCI asked if Retail was getting enhancements in 2004. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that she could not speak to Retail’s schedule. Liz Balvin/MCI said that she thought the CLECs ranked the CRs to get them implement by end of year. Susie Bliss/Qwest said that the plan was to start the funding process and to get the CRs implemented as soon as we could. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she thought that a few months ago that Qwest was running this up the chain and now it appears that none of these CRs will be implemented. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that there were questions that had to be answered before moving forward and we also wanted to validate the LOEs to determine if they could possibly be lowered. Susie also said that with additional research, we were able to lower the LOE on SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN (originated by AT&T). Liz Balvin/MCI asked if Qwest was fighting for the 5 CRs mentioned earlier. Susie Bliss/Qwest said yes. Liz Balvin/MCI asked if Qwest would be providing the number of hours and the number of releases. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that we are not obligated to provide X amount of hours for Billing and CEMR CRs. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that MCI has been clear that if we are competing for resources we need to prioritize. Susie Bliss/Qwest said that MCI has been clear and that Qwest will provide a letter stating our position. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that if we are equivalent to Retail and Qwest has a 271 obligation, MCI would like to see it in writing. Susie Bliss/Qwest said that in the past we have not provided a set number of hours on Billing and CEMR. Comment from Eschelon 7/30/04 - Liz Balvin/MCI said that it’s because there was no resource issue. Liz stated that Qwest should have invoked the prioritization process as outlined in CMP Redesign. Comment from Eschelon 7/30/04 - Stephanie Prull/Eschelon asked if there would be a resource issue if the 5 CRs were approved for funding in 2005. Stephanie asked to have clarification of how that process worked. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that she was 95% sure that if funding was approved, there will not be a resource issue. Susie said that she is 95% sure if funding is approved that the CRs will be implemented and that there is no difference in Retail. John Berard/Covad asked if funding is done annually. Susie Bliss/Qwest stated that IMA funding is annual and Billing and Repair is done as needed by individual CR. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that they will wait for the response from Qwest on their position. Jill Martain/Qwest asked if there were any other questions and there were none.

-- May 19, 2004 Trial Ranking for Billing CRs - Ad Hoc Meeting Minutes Meeting Start Time: 2:00 p.m. MT

Purpose The purpose of the Ad Hoc Meeting was for Qwest to provide the additional information requested by the CLECs at the May 13, 2004 ad-hoc meeting and for the CLECs to rank the 6 Billing CRs.

Attendees Liz Balvin-MCI, Ron Stanker-AT&T, Carla Pardee-AT&T, Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon, John Berard-Covad, Lori Mendoza-Allegiance, Terri Kent-AT&T, June Kornett-AT&T, Emily Baird-Popp Telecom, Wayne Hart-Idaho PUC, Kim Isaacs-Eschelon, Matt Connelly-Birch Telecom, Candy Davis-Covad, Kathy Stichter-Eschelon, Jennifer Arnold-USLink, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest, Lynn Stecklein-Qwest, Susie Bliss-Qwest, Sue Kriebel-Qwest, Brenda Kerr-Qwest, Connie Winston-Qwest

Meeting Minutes Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest reviewed the purpose of the meeting and stated that the Billing CR’s that are eligible for ranking are: SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition SCR112003-03 CSR Data on Bill SCR121102-01 Capability to Request Suppression of the Paper Bill Except the Summary Page SCR071603-02 Bordertown Change to Billing Files SCR121603-01 Only Show the Actual Circuit ID on All Billing Media in the Eastern Region SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that Qwest and the CLECs are trialing the process for the billing requests, that require funding, to rank them by your level of importance.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that some Billing CRs have already been targeted and funded. Susie stated that for those billing CRs that have not been funded, we need to determine which CRs need to go forward for funding.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that the original discussion was why the prioritization process was not automatically invoked based on the CMP process. Liz stated that IMA was the only impacted system and she is now hearing that the CLECs need to tell Qwest which CRs are important to the CLECs in order for Qwest to fight internally to see which CRs get prioritized.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that we need to rank the CRs for funding approval, not to get prioritized.

John Berard-Covad asked if the ones identified as the most important would be implemented.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest would then need to write mini business cases for the CRs in order to go for funding approval.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that these billing CRs impact the CLECs and that Qwest is saying that Retail is resources are competing for system changes. Liz stated that she would like to see the CLECs have an allotted set of hours for billing. Liz stated that we should collectively say what should get done. Liz stated that item 1 would not be voted in if they knew that they only had 4000 hours.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that the CLECs need to tell Qwest what is important to the CLECs so Qwest can try and get the funding. Susie stated that Qwest no longer has an open checkbook and noted that Judy (Schultz-Qwest) had previously stated that fact.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that there are 2 items to address. Bonnie stated that the first item is the process going forward starting in 2005. Bonnie stated that Qwest needs to meet internally and decide what that process could look like. Bonnie stated that the second item is that we need to look at the 6 CRs that are currently on the table so Susie (Bliss-Qwest) can try for funding. Bonnie stated that Susie may not get any funding. Bonnie stated that the CLECs need to tell Qwest what is important to the CLECs so Susie can attempt to get funding.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that she does not have an issue with the previous discussion but that she is not comfortable that Qwest will get the funding. Liz asked who Susie was fighting with for the funding, both Wholesale and Retail.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that Retail uses the same funding process and it also goes up the latter. Susie stated that Qwest knows that Qwest has an obligation and understands the legal requirements for Qwest to not impede the CLECs ability to compete and do business. Susie stated that Qwest needs to know which CRs are impeding the CLECs ability to compete and which ones are nice-to-haves.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that Qwest is still making the decision.

John Berard-Covad stated that this is the current process and not the going forward process.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if all the CRs that have funding approved would be implemented in 2004.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest is working towards that but is still looking at scheduling.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that some CRs that are funded may have work to continue and carry over into the first few weeks of 2005 and noted that should be okay.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that the CLECs do not know what the Qwest scheduling is or where it is. Liz stated that the CLECs are truly competing for the Qwest resources so they need to have input. Liz stated that the CLECs are not able to fight that battle, Susie (Bliss-Qwest) fights it.

Carla Pardee-AT&T asked if we were going to discuss the 2005 process.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that the process needs to first be developed, then communicated.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that when this was discussed in redesign, it was not inclusive to IMA. Liz stated that she needs to know how the CLECs get to provide input. Liz stated that the IMA process should be the process for Billing.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that prioritization takes place only if the capacity is exceeded.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that there are more CRs than can be implemented. Liz stated that it could be the same as IMA in the background and the CLECs just don’t see that. Liz stated that years ago, Qwest was building an entire billing system (4P) and now, 2-years later, it is gone. Liz stated that Qwest received a new CFO and 4P stopped. Liz stated that she now understands and feels better.

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that the 6th CR, SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN, has not been formally presented so she would like to present it at this meetinf and could provide a recap at tomorrow’s Systems CMP Meeting.

SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that one of the questions that Qwest needs to respond to is why this CR is a systems CR and not a process change. Sue stated that a process change would require no systems input and in order to track the information that is not currently tracked, there is systems work involved. Sue stated that an example of information not currently tracked is the bill date. Sue stated that if the data is not in the system, the data cannot be obtained. Sue stated that the requested functionality does not currently exist. Sue stated that currently, there is not a field to allow the information to be in the systems in order to carry it thru to the output. Sue stated that bill date information is not stored in the system but noted that it is captured for bill output. Sue stated that back-end billing systems need to create the data for extraction to the bill.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked for which bills and asked if for all.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated is for all electronic media and the paper bill. Sue stated that this would be a benefit to all CLECs.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that the problem or business need is that there is a spreadsheet passed back and forth and there is no way to validate it. Bonnie stated that the CLECs don’t ever know what is being credited and they need to know what a credit is for.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that this CR builds on to AT&Ts CRs for CABS/BOS.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked how this CR is different from the AT&T CRs.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that the bill date was not requested to be returned on the adjustment. Sue stated that USOC level information is not captured in order to go thru the systems. Sue stated that the output media is ready for the Telecordia systems but not for EDI, ASCII, or the paper bill.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if it would be down to the level of detail. Bonnie stated that Eschelon disputes a USOC on the Summary Bill for 25 of them. The Qwest Billing group says that the credit is for 20 of the 25. Bonnie asked if the CLEC would then know which 20 are being credited. Bonnie stated that the CLEC needs to provide the detail to Qwest but then Qwest does not provide it back.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that piece is a process change. Sue stated that Qwest can do at the sub level or the Summary level.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that this is good conversation because maybe there is a different way to do this.

Sue Krieble-Qwest stated that the EXCEL Spreadsheet contains the TNs.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that it does not always show-up the same way on the bill. Kathy stated that she realizes that mistakes can be made but they cannot validate what was actually credited. Kathy stated that the CLEC needs to try and figure out what was adjusted and credited.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked that if this were to be at the sub account level, would it then be a process change only.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest responded no, because the system still would not have the from and thru date information or the USOC. Sue stated that the detail is currently not captured in order for the CLEC to see at the summary or sub account level.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if it could be done, it’s just that it cannot be retrieved from the system.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon asked if this woild provide the WTN or the circuit ID at the sub account level.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that it would not if there were multiple TNs. Sue stated that the information is needed to be input for the adjustment.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked how Qwest verifies that the adjustments are accurate and asked if it was a manual process.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that the SDCs input into the system, BOS/CARS or IABS. The SDCs then pull reports but the detail is not on the reports.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked how Qwest validates that the adjustment is valid.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated if the question is regarding a dispute, that would be a separate discussion and a separate meeting from this ranking session.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that they need the ability to validate an adjustment.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that Qwest understands and agrees. Sue stated that the SDCs currently validate via a manual process.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked that when they receive a credit, does the adjustment provide details.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated is generic because the from and thru dates are currently not captured. Sue stated that an Out of Service adjustment may contain details. Sue stated that it is manually input into BOS/CARS.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked that when Qwest evaluated this CR, was it to update the systems to house the information or to pull data in order to provide the date to the CLECs.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated to input into BOS/CARS in order for the system to pass information through to the billing systems, for media output.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if the information was currently housed somewhere, to grab it from, without changes to the back-end systems.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that the billing system would have to be aware of it thru the entire bill process or the bill output could be incorrect.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that this CR appears to be a benefit to Qwest and to the CLECs. Bonnie stated that they currently spend a lot of hours verifying adjustments. Bonnie stated that Eschelon goes to great lengths to provide details to Qwest and it is appropriate that when the credit appears, that the CLECs know what the credit is for. Bonnie stated that it is a very manual process to validate the credits.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that Qwest does not argue that, we just need to get the data in the systems.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked how disputes are currently sent.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated by Billing Spreadsheets.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that if the information is provided by the CLECs, we need to think of the easiest way to capture the data.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that some CLECs have created a text file and noted that Qwest is not yet there.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if Qwest would be looking for other options, for this request.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that she would check with her Business Partners but stated that she did not think that there were other options.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon asked if the LOE was for BOS/CARS.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that the LOE is for capturing the data and carrying it thru for processing.

Brenda Kerr-Qwest stated that there are a lot of systems files but CRIS is the bulk of the estimate.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that this CR seems to be of high importance.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that it is very high for Eschelon.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if this request is for all UBL products.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon responded yes.

Carla Pardee-AT&T asked if any AT&T participants had any comments or questions. None were brought forward.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that she does not know if all UBLs are billed out of CRIS and this is good information to know.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that all UBL via IMA LSR are billed out of CRIS. Connie stated that in QORA ASR, they are billed out of IABS.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that was helpful information.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that there would be no restriction built in CRIS.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if this would benefit Retail as well.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest responded yes.

John Berard-Covad asked if we were looking to get these 6 CRs ranked today.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that a big driver of prioritization is knowing if you can get 4 CRs for 20000 hours. Liz stated this could benefit the ranking process.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that she currently has no dollars to say a number of hours.

There were no additional questions or comments for SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition.

SCR112003-03 CSR Data on Bill Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that this request is asking for CSR data on the bill. Sue stated that EDI does not have 811 series records for CSR data. Sue stated that the CLECs can get CSR via CABS output or via ASCII, but there is no EDI version of the CSR. Sue stated that if the CLECs want CSR data in the 811 records, Qwest would have denied this CR due to the fact that Qwest does not own the 811 records. Sue stated that the CSR data is on the CABS BOS file and it is currently available to them.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if it was available for all products.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated for UNE-P, UBL, and maybe for Line Sharing. Sue stated that there are some out of BOS, such as Centrex.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that Qwest could currently provide CABS format or ASCII format.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that this CR is for BOS BDT.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if this would be a better CR if it asked for other products.

Connie Winston-Qwest responded if the CLECs wanted to re-LOE this CR.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if this CR covered all UB Local.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that is not for LIS Trunking.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that it sounds like CR is at the low end of importance.

There were no additional questions or comments for SCR112003-03 CSR Data on Bill.

SCR121102-01 Capability to Request Suppression of the Paper Summary Bill Except the Summary Page. Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that their Service Manager has suppressed all paper.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that they could currently select to suppress all paper or none of the paper.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that Eschelon is asking for the Summary Page. Bonnie asked if this would apply to ASCII.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that it is for the paper bill only.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that the CLECs want the ability for the option to suppress if they want to, or if they want an all paper bill, they can continue to get it.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that as an FYI, there is a black diamond symbol in the top corner that tells you that you are at the end of the bill.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if Eschelon currently receives the Summary Page electronically.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that they did but noted that it is not always correct.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that EDI and BOS, or the paper, could be the bill of record. Sue stated that ASCII cannot be the bill of record.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that Eschelon wants an accurate ASCII Summary Page.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that ASCII phase 2 was denied funding, as it was a very big effort. Connie stated that is why this CR was taken out of Deferred Status.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked Kim (Isaacs-Eschelon) for an estimate of the inaccuracy of ASCII.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that she was told, by Alan Zimmerman (Qwest), that some have sub-totals or that totals are not carried forward to ASCII.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if it was fractionalizing.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that she did not know.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if the other CR was denied.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that it was a Qwest originated CR and that it was very large, about 20,000 hours.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that if it was looked at as to how much Qwest spends on printing paper bills, would it be easier to sell.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest is supportive of this change.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if all UNE Loops were included and stated that she needs the product set for this CR.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that it is for everything that is currently summary billed.

There were no additional questions or comments for SCR121102-01 Capability to Request Suppression of the Paper Summary Bill Except the Summary Page.

SCR071603-02 Bordertown Change to Billing Files Liz Balvin-MCI stated that this CR is of high importance to MCI.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that Qwest should have to provide this.

There were no additional comments or questions for SCR071603-02 Bordertown Changes to Billing Files.

SCR121603-01 Only Show the Actual Circuit ID on All Billing Media in the Eastern Region Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that Qwest issued this CR for Eschelon, under duress. Bonnie stated that Eschelon has a CR for the correct circuit ID and asked for the status of that CR.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that she knows that it is very, vary big and that it is still being evaluated.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that the circuit ID should be consistent throughout the process.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest is not sure how the other CR would be split. Connie stated that Qwest needs to know how important this CR, SCR121603-01, was to the CLECs.

Candy Davis-Covad stated that they see bills via the BTN instead of the circuit ID.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that was a different issue. Connie stated that in the Eastern Region, there is zero filling of the circuit ID and noted that this CR is to remove the uniqueness to the circuit ID. Connie stated that this CR does not address BTN.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if the circuit ID is not passed.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that it is stored in the unique way.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if with this CR, Qwest would remove the unique rules and would store the circuit ID correctly.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated yes and stated that it would always look right.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if this was a functional change.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that it would be for anytime there was a circuit ID.

Carla Pardee-AT&T asked if this was for all output or only for ASCII.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that it was for all output.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked what Qwest’s position was on this CR and asked if this was also an impact to Retail.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that she did not know if this would impact Retail.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that Qwest currently has no position, at this point.

There were no additional questions or comments for SCR121603-01 Only Show the Actual Circuit ID on All Billing Media in the Eastern Region.

SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN Carla Pardee-AT&T and Ron Stanker-AT&T presented the CR to the meeting participants. Ron stated that AT&T needs to verify the Qwest bills and asked to what extent do they get the WTN. Ron stated that they always need to know what the WTN is. Ron stated that they are looking at it nationwide. Ron stated that they need to validate the WTN and associated non-recurring charges.

Carla Pardee-AT&T questioned the LOE of 10,000 to 20,000 hours and stated that it seems to be extremely high.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that the change would be in CRIS, so it may be all output. Connie stated that this was a quick LOE and noted that Qwest has not had enough time to devote to this LOE since it was needed so quickly after the Clarification Call. Connie stated that the broad range could mean that the billing team is nervous about this CR.

Liz Balvin-MCI asked if Qwest bills for all WTNs that are associated to the Qwest BTN.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that she did not have the details of the CR and noted that the CR is too new.

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that this is #1 for AT&T.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if they currently have non-recurring charges identified at the WTN level.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that she would have to check if they get it on ASCII.

Ron Stanker-AT&T stated that Qwest was not passing it and noted that Qwest did state, on the Clarification Call, that a change had gone into effect but stated that he has not had the opportunity to validate the bills yet.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that understanding the scope will help get a cleaner LOE.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that she is seeing, on a UNE-P bill, WTN & BTN but not seeing on all.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that it could depend on the condition.

Ron Stanker-AT&T stated that he needs to see on all.

There were no additional questions or comments for SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that ranking would now occur for the following CRs: CR 1) SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition CR 2) SCR112003-03 CSR Data on Bill CR 3) SCR121102-01 Capability to Request Suppression of the Paper Bill Except the Summary Page CR 4) SCR071603-02 Bordertown Change to Billing Files CR 5) SCR121603-01 Only Show the Actual Circuit ID on All Billing Media in the Eastern Region CR 6) SCR041204-01 Populate CABS Billing with Activity by WTN

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that Eschelon ranks as follows: 1, 3, 5, 4, 6, 2

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that AT&T ranks as follows: 6, 1, 4, 5, 3, 2

Candy Davis-Covad stated that Covad has an interest in only CR 1.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that MCI ranks as follows: 1, 6, 4, 2, 3, 5

Jennifer Arnold-USLink stated that USLink ranks as follows: 1, 5, 4, 6 are the only ones of interest for USLink.

Connie Winston-Qwest stated Qwest ranks as follows: 1, 6, 3, 2, 4, 5

Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest would tabulate the results and communicate those results at the next days Monthly Systems CMP Meeting.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that the key is knowing if the change is being made in CRIS, then they know that it would make it to the CLECs.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that the CLECs want the going forward process to look like IMA does and stated that she feels that the CMP document supports that.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that the going forward process would be researched.

There were no additional questions or comments. The meeting was adjourned.

May 13, 2004 Ad Hoc Meeting - Trial Ranking of Billing CRs Meeting Start Time: 1:00 p.m. MT

Purpose The purpose of the Ad Hoc Meeting was to initiate the trial process for ranking of the Systems CMP CRs for the Wholesale Billing Interface. The purpose of the ranking is for the CLECs and Qwest to rank the Billing CRs by order of importance.

Attendees Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon, Kathy Stichter-Eschelon, Kim Isaacs-Eschelon, Emily Baird-Popp Communications, Maureen Carroll-Birch Telecom, Matt Connelly-Birch Telecom, Carla Pardee-AT&T, Nancy Sanders-Comcast, Jennifer Arnold-USLink, Liz Balvin-MCI, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest, Kit Thomte-Qwest, Lynn Stecklein-Qwest, Sue Kriebel-Qwest, Brenda Kerr-Qwest, Susie Bliss-Qwest, Connie Winston-Qwest, Michael Lopez-Qwest Meeting Minutes Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest reviewed the purpose of the meeting with call participants and stated that the Ad Hoc Meeting Notification included the spreadsheet containing the CRs to be discussed today and noted that the CR Detail is posted on the Wholesale web site.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that funding efforts are continuing but funds are limited. Susie noted that she still needs to send CRs for funding approval. Susie stated that Qwest would like to trial a process in order to help Qwest understand which CRs are important to the CLECs.

Carla Pardee-AT&T asked how many hours the CLECs were limited to and noted that there are CRs that are 1.5 years old: SCR012103-06ES and SCR012103-04ES.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that SCR012103-06ES and SCR012103-04ES are on their way to obtaining targeted dates and have funding approved.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that Covad had asked if CRs that have approved funding could be swapped out for CRs not yet approved. Susie stated that those CRs that are funded need to continue down their path. All agreed. Susie stated that SCR012103-06ES and SCR012103-04ES are just waiting for targeted dates.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked what today’s call was trying to achieve.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that this is only a Trial.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked if the Ranking List that was sent was only an example, as it does not list all of the Billing CRs.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that the Ranking List is a complete List, to date, of all the Billing CRs that are not yet funded or scheduled. Peggy stated that the CRs that have targeted implementation dates are not included in the list and are not to be included in this trial ranking exercise.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon said okay.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that items 1 thru 6 on the Ranking List need to be ranked and items 9 and 10 are on the list due to parity, as Liz (Balvin) had asked about Retail.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon asked if there was a process to prioritize CRs and stated that is where we should begin.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that there is not a process for Billing CRs and noted that this meeting was to start discussing how that would work.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that she thought the LOEs would be provided today for the 2-CRs listed as LOE TBD.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that those LOEs are as follows: SCR112503-02X is 8000 to 12000 hours. SCR041204-01 is 10000 to 20000 hours.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked why SCR112503-02X (Adjustment Recognition) is not a process CR and asked how many hours are allocated to billing. Bonnie asked if Qwest has a certain amount of hours available and asked how many of the 6 CRs would have an opportunity for implementation.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that the 6 CRs need to be looked at and we need to make a case for funding. Susie stated that this is an evolving process.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked to confirm that no one has told Susie (Bliss) that she has 30000 hours for Billing and that she has to build a business case for getting funding approval because you have used-up your time for the year.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that it is not that all the hours have been used-up for this year; it is the fact that the funding approval process was put into place. Susie stated that these are all doable.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked that unlike IMA, where the CLECs are given the Release dates and hours, Billing is a different process and will need to rank them on an ongoing basis.

Susie Bliss-Qwest responded yes, and noted that CEMR may also be looked at for a ranking process.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that CEMR Releases are already identified.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that they are but that the CEMR CRs also go through the same funding approval process; even though there are scheduled releases.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that she and Liz were confused because they thought that there was going to be a number of hours for billing CRs. Bonnie stated that Susie (Bliss) said that this would be an ongoing process and that the challenge is that all CLECs have different billing processes.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that thru redesign, only IMA fell into prioritization because there were so many CRs competing for resources and other systems were not prioritized because Qwest just did them. Liz stated that she believes that where we are today is that we need to invoke the prioritization process. Liz stated that due to the limited resources and that there are so many CRs; Qwest cannot implement the CRs within a year.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that she interprets resources to mean systems. Susie stated that CRs need to first be funded, and then the system’s team works on getting the CRs implemented.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that is not how prioritization works. Liz stated that in IMA, Qwest tells the CLECs how many hours are available in a release. Liz stated that when Qwest says that funding approval is needed, it is not for CRs. Liz asked how much Qwest will allow for CLEC CRs.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that she understands that and stated that she can take that back for internal discussion. Susie stated that she does not know what she can do for 2004 and stated that realistically, this would be a 2005 thought. Susie stated that Qwest will still be receiving CRs, in addition to the 6 that we currently have that are not yet funded.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that she understood from the last meeting, that for billing CRs in 2004, there would not be any more funding approved and what has been approved would be implemented in 2004. Bonnie stated that she thought that the gate was closed for 2004 and now she is hearing that it is not the case.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that she does not know that the gate is closed until she tries. Susie asked the CLECs what they want her to try for.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that the CLECs can tell Qwest what is more important but they need to know what is left, in hours, to go forward.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that she would take that back.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that SCR112503-02X would benefit all CLECs.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that it looks like only #s 9 & 10, SCR030204-01 and SCR011504-01, will be implemented.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that they need to look at items 1 thru 6 and stated that items 7 thru 10 are going forward.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that item #5, SCR121603-01, should not be on the list and stated that Qwest should implement as SCRP.

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that the CLECs need to know what billing systems each CR is for.

Susie Bliss-Qwest asked if that information is available.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that some CRs cross multiple systems. Susie noted an example: SCR041204-01 is BDT format and impacts CRIS and IABS.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that Eschelon uses ASCII and asked what this CR would do for Eschelon.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that changes would need to be made in CRIS in order to populate the ASCII file. Sue stated that this CR, SCR041204-01, did not request the inclusion of any other media outputs.

Kathy Stichter-Eschelon asked that if they later need the changes for ASCII, would it be a smaller effort.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest responded yes.

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that is good information to know.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked what the difficulty would be to add ASCII to the LOE.

Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that she did not know and stated that she is just communicating the systems that are impacted. Sue stated for example, SCR112503-02X is impacting to CRIS, but it does impact multiple processing pieces.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that the Systems CRs are not discussed every month and noted that is part of the problem.

Liz Balvin-MCI stated that Qwest has many billing systems and stated that the CRs are usually pretty specific. Liz stated that the information needs to be in the CRs

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that since there are a few days before the next Monthly CMP Meeting, she is requesting that SMEs be available at the CMP Meeting in order to answer questions such as; what are the impacted systems and what bills will the changes be coming in on.

Susie Bliss-Qwest asked if the CLECs wanted to discuss the 6 CRs after the May Product/Process Meeting.

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that she would like a review of the CRs and prioritization to occur every month.

Kit Thomte-Qwest stated that maybe they could be reviewed quarterly.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that a process needs to be developed, for 2005 and going forward. Bonnie stated that we need to start now with the 6 CRs. Bonnie stated that Susie (Bliss) needs to fight for funding and she is looking to the CLECs to identify the order of importance.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon asked that going forward, for CEMR and Billing, will Qwest have a set amount of hours allotted or will ranking work the same as today. Bonnie asked that for example, if they know that there will be 60000 hours, will the ranking occur twice a year.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that there is no current process that has been defined for 2005.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that it does not work today like IMA and Qwest does not envision that will be the case, so it does need to be looked at as to how it will be managed.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that we do need to look at what the current process is and what the going forward process should look like.

Jennifer Arnold-USLink asked if the Billing SMEs will be available on Thursday.

Susie Bliss-Qwest stated that we would look and see if they are available Wednesday afternoon, after the Product/Process Meeting.

Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon stated that if Qwest can provide SMEs and get down to the root, the CLECs can commit to meet then to rank the billing CRs.

Carla Pardee-AT&T stated that the CLECs will have SMEs available as well and needs the time of the meeting.

It was agreed by the meeting participants that the meeting will start at 2:00 p.m. MT. This meeting will be to discuss the 6 CRs with the billing SMEs.

There were no additional comments or questions.

-- February 20, 2004 Email Received from Kathy Stichter/Eschelon: Peggy, Please send this onto Sue. I do not need to update my CR since the expected deliverables states " Qwest will include all the information Eschelon supplies on a dispute i.e. the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC (or description) on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest's bills including the BillMate Adjustment file." Thanks

- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Sue Kriebel/Qwest stated that a call was held with Eschelon and stated that some information is currently included in other CRs. Sue stated that 2-points are not covered, so this CR is not a duplicate change request. Sue stated that the points not covered are the request for the bill date for an adjustment and the request for providing USOC level detail. Sue stated that this CR needs to be revised to include those 2-points. Sue stated that the other points are covered in the other CRs. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she would pass that information on to Kathy Stichter and ask her to revise the CR.

Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that she wanted to provide an update to the funding approval process that was discussed in the January CMP Systems Meeting. Judy referred everyone to Attachment J in the Distribution Package. She stated that all CRs are being re-evaluated and must be approved. Judy said that CRs could not be scheduled without approval. Judy noted that the status of this CR is that it is being reviewed at the Qwest CEO level.

There were no other questions or comments.

- February 13, 2004 Email Received from Kathy Stichter/Eschelon: Peggy, See my answers below. Let me know if I was not clear. Thanks

Q1: If Qwest provides the From and Thru dates for the period of time that the adjustment is covering, or if the bill date is the date that is provided in the From and Thru Date Fields, is Eschelon's expectation is that there would be an additional field for the bill date itself? A1: [Stichter, Kathleen L.] There would not have to be another field for the bill date itself but if the from and thru dates span more than 1 bill date then Qwest would need to supply the monthly rate so we can break down the adjustment and apply the correct amount to the individual bill dates.

Q2) If the From and Thru dates are provided, do you have a need for the bill date? If yes, can you help us understand what the need for the bill date is. A2) [Stichter, Kathleen L.] For our accounting we need to apply the adjustment to the appropriate disputed bill.

Kathy Stichter Senior Invoice Validation Analyst Eschelon Telecom, Inc

- February 13, 2004 Email Sent to Kathy Stichter/Eschelon: Kathy, Thank you for taking the time to talk with us this today about SCR112503-02X (Adjustment Recognition). There are two clarification's, or question's, that we would like to ask:

1) If Qwest provides the From and Thru dates for the period of time that the adjustment is covering, or if the bill date is the date that is provided in the From and Thru Date Fields, is Eschelon's expectation is that there would be an additional field for the bill date itself?

2) If the From and Thru dates are provided, do you have a need for the bill date? If yes, can you help us understand what the need for the bill date is.

Thanks again. We will provide a status at the February Systems CMP Meeting.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

-- February 13, 2004 Conference Call: Date: February 13, 2004 CR No & Title: SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition

Introduction of Attendees: Kathy Stichter-Eschelon, Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest, Jeff Jones-Qwest, Brenda Kerr-Qwest, Sue Kriebel-Qwest, Jami Larson-Qwest

Meeting Discussion: Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest stated that the purpose of the call was to discuss this CR for Adjustment Recognition and determine if 2 other CMP CRs will meet Eschelon’s need. Those CRs are: SCR110802-02IG Provide adjustment FROM and THRU dates for BOS formatted UNE accounts and SCR012103-07ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that Eschelon does not use BOS, they use BillMate. Kathy stated that neither of the CRs, SCR110802-02IG and SCR012103-07ES, request the use of TN or circuit ID for the charge that is being adjusted. Kathy stated that SCR110802-02IG might satisfy the request for the bill date but she doesn’t know how much is involved, as BOS and BillMate are different systems. Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that in order for Qwest to be able to pass the information, the information would first be needed in CRIS, to pass in the BOS format. Sue stated that it would then be available to BillMate in an ASCII format. Jami Larson-Qwest stated that it would be available to any format coming out of BillMate. Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that CRIS is BOS/CARS so the changes would be needed in CRIS/BOS CARS in order to be able to provide the information. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that she was aware of that because of her background and noted that is why this request was originally submitted as a Product/Process CR and not systems. Kathy stated that previously it was because of the way the reps did the input, that is why she thought it would be a process change. Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that a manual process would not allow flow-through. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that she was aware that several systems would be impacted by this requested change. Kathy stated that the Qwest and the AT&T CRs are dealing with BOS. Kathy stated that she might be agreeable to add her portion of the request to the AT&T CR. Jami Larson-Qwest stated that the change would include the way adjustments are currently input. Jami noted that the data is not currently captured. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon asked about the TN or the circuit ID being part of the adjustments. Kathy stated that so many of the adjustments are for multiple items that have the same USOC Kathy stated that if she needs to dispute 18 items, the dispute is agreed to, an adjustment is issued, then only 17 of the 18 show up. Kathy stated that without a TN or circuit ID, she doesn’t know which of the 18 were adjusted and which were not. Jami Larson-Qwest asked if Eschelon is requesting the WTN or the sub-account number and asked to clarify that the USOC or circuit ID is to be listed. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that Jami is correct, otherwise cannot determine what is being adjusted. Jami Larson-Qwest stated that she thought it could be included in the scope. Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that she agrees with Jami. Sue stated that Qwest would need to match-up the change, to allow an adjustment at the sub-account and summary account levels. Sue stated that this refers back into the process of how an adjustment is issued. Sue stated that this piece could probably be added into the AT&T CR. Jami Larson-Qwest stated that she needs to look at other CMP CRs to see if this request is covered in another change request. Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that the change would be for the electronic media and not for the paper format. Jami Larson-Qwest agreed with Sue Kriebel. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that Eschelon uses the electronic media and noted that the adjustment file comes thru BillMate, so Eschelon does not have a problem with the paper format not being touched. Kathy Stichter-Eschelon stated that she also needs this for Resale, UNE-P, UNE-STAR, and UBL. Jami Larson-Qwest stated that for UNE-P and UBL she would need to check if the data is available. Sue Kriebel-Qwest stated that UNE-STAR is a special arrangement so it could be a concern. Sue Kriebel-Qwest asked Brenda Kerr-Qwest if Qwest needs to do for UBL, UNE-P, UNE-STAR, and Resale or if there are existing CRs for UNE-P and UBL Brenda Kerr-Qwest stated that she would check. There were no additional questions or comments.

-- January Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this is in Evaluation. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that this CR is very important to Eschelon. There were no additional comments or questions.

December 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that this CR was discussed in the Product/Process Meeting this morning. Kit stated that this CR would be crossed over to Systems.

12/17/03 December Product/Process CMP Meeting: Kathy Stichter with Eschelon presented this CR. Kathy said that she submitted the CR because of problems figuring out adjustments on bills. Liz Balvin with MCI said MCI supports this CR and that they are unable to determine if adjustments are PAP payments or the result of a dispute. Kit Thomte with Qwest said we would like to cross over this CR to Systems because of billing system implications. Kathy Stichter agreed and this CR will be moved to Presented status and crossed over to Systems.

CLEC Change Request Clarification Meeting

2:00 p.m. (MDT) / Tuesday December 9, 2003

1-877-572-8687 3393947# PC112503-2 Adjustment Recognition

Name/Company:

Kathy Stitcher, Eschelon John Gallegos, Qwest Brenda Kerr, Qwest Elaine Maynard, Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed, Qwest Linda Sanchez-Steinke, Qwest

Introduction of Attendees Qwest welcomed all attendees to the meeting.

Review Requested (Description of) Change Linda Sanchez-Steinke with Qwest read the description of change from the submitted change request; Currently Qwest adjustments appear with only the date that Qwest issued the adjustment, a description such as 'credit adjustment' and the amount. When Eschelon submits a dispute, Qwest requires the bill date of the disputed amount, the USOC and/or the description of the disputed amount, the TN or CKT ID of the disputed amount and the amount in dispute. Qwest should return the same information (we supply) on its adjustments. Without the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC it is extremely time consuming and sometimes impossible to determine what Qwest is adjusting. Many times Eschelon has to contact Qwest for the needed information. Sometimes even Qwest can not determine what the adjustment was for. Eschelon requests that Qwest return the same information Eschelon supplies on its disputes i.e. the bill date, the USOC (or description, if a USOC is not applicable) and the TN or CKT ID on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest’s bills including the BillMate Adjustment file

Kathy Stitcher said that the reason the description of the disputed amount should be included is because toll usage types charges have no USOC associated with them. ; for instance toll usage type charges have no USOC associated with them. The last statement in the CR is mainly in connection with BillMate. The adjustment file should appear on all adjustments for bills. With maintenance and repair, TIC is a big problem and the billing reps lump a bunch of adjustments together rather than give the information item by item.

Elaine Maynard clarified that Eschelon is looking for the bill adjustments item by item rather than in a lump adjustment. Kathy Stitcher said that she usually knows what the adjustment will be ahead of time, however, when she looks at the bill it doesn’t match up. Kathy also said that she wasn’t sure if the CR should be Product & Process or Systems.

Brenda Kerr asked if the request is for all regions and states. Kathy responded yes.

Confirm Areas & Products Impacted Billing

Confirm Right Personnel Involved Correct Qwest personnel were involved in the clarification meeting

Identify/Confirm CLEC’s Expectation Qwest will include all the information Eschelon supplies on a dispute i.e. the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC (or description) on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest’s bills including the BillMate Adjustment file.

Identify any Dependent Systems Change Requests No dependent Systems Change Requests

Establish Action Plan (Resolution Time Frame) Eschelon will present this CR at the December meeting. Qwest will provide a response in January.

CenturyLink Response

--

Revised Response for Circuit ID/TN Portion of Change Request (SCR030105-01, phase 2 of this CR) February 10, 2005

To: Kathy Stichter Eschelon

CC: Jill Martain, Connie Winston, Peggy Esquibel-Reed

RE: SCR112503-02X-Adjustment Recognition

SCR Description: Currently Qwest adjustments appear with only the date that Qwest issued the adjustment, a description such as ‘credit adjustment’ and the amount. When Eschelon submits a dispute, Qwest requires the bill date of the disputed amount, the USOC and/or the description of the disputed amount, the TN or CKT ID of the disputed amount and the amount in dispute. Qwest should return the same information (we supply) on its adjustment. Without the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC it is extremely time consuming and sometimes impossible to determine what Qwest is adjusting. Many times Eschelon has to contact Qwest for the needed information. Sometimes even Qwest can not determine what the adjustment was for. Eschelon requests that Qwest return the same information Eschelon supplies on its disputes i.e. the bill date, the USOC (or description, if a USOC is not applicable) and the TN or CKT ID on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest’s bills including the BillMate Adjustment file. The Expected Deliverables is that Qwest will include all the information Eschelon supplies on a dispute, i.e. the bill date, TN or CKT ID and USOC (or description) on all adjusted amounts that appear on any of Qwest’s bills including the BillMate Adjustment file.

History: This CR was submitted on November 23, 2003 as a Product/Process CR, was determined to require system changes, and was crossed-over as a Systems CR on December 22, 2003. Numerous discussions have taken place for this request due to its size and complexity. On August 18, 2004, Qwest communicated to the CLEC Community that the TN/Circuit ID information portion of this request was partitioned and that all other requested information was targeted for the 4th quarter of 2004. On October 20, 2004, Qwest communicated that all requested functionality, with the exception of the TN/Circuit ID portion, was targeted for deployment on December 6, 2004. On November 17, 2004 Qwest advised the CLEC Community that this CR would go back to an evaluation status once Phase 1 was deployed on December 6, 2004. Qwest stated, on December 16, 2004, that the remaining TN/Circuit ID portion was a very complex and large work effort and that options were being explored.

Qwest Response for TN/Circuit ID Portion of Change Request: Qwest has completed the analysis for Phase 2 of SCR112503-02X, the TN/Circuit ID portion of this change request. The changes proposed by this request are quite extensive; therefore, Qwest has determined that this change is economically not feasible. In order to implement this request, there are numerous systems that would require changes to store and/or utilize the Circuit ID, to recognize the new data, imbedded base changes, and changes for the data to be available for billing output. Process changes would also be required and would include changes to the media procedures, changes to PCAT documentation, and re-training of Center personnel. The cost for these required changes is estimated to be $1,393,687; therefore, Qwest is respectfully denying the TN/Circuit ID portion of the change request due to economic infeasibility.

Cost Summary: Changes to Ordering Systems: $597,016 Changes to Billing Systems: $695,104 Changes to Provisioning Systems: $51,567 Process Changes: $50,000 TOTAL: $1,393,687

Sincerely, Qwest

- DRAFT RESPONSE for Original Request

January 9, 2004

RE: SCR112503-02X Adjustment Recognition

Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of the cross-over Change Request, SCR112503-02X. Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the February Systems CMP Meeting.

At the January Monthly 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 at the next Monthly Systems CMP Meeting into further evaluation of this Change Request.

Sincerely, Qwest