Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR120904-02 Detail

Items slated for combination or elimination are:

IMA EDI Disclosure Items:

Chapter 1 - IMA EDI Main Introduction: Information is either duplicated in the Implementation Guidelines, or has no utility. Qwest is therefore eliminating the following sections:

1.1 BASIS AND SCOPE

1.2 DISCLAIMER

1.3 EXPECTED AUDIENCE

1.4 DOCUMENT HISTORY

1.5 ASSUMPTIONS

1.6 CLEC IMPLEMENTATION OF EDI TRANSACTIONS

1.7 CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL

Chapter 2 - IMA EDI Introduction: Most information is either duplicated in the Implementation Guidelines, or has no utility. Some information will remain. Qwest will eliminate:

2.1 SCOPE

2.2 USE

2.3 DEVELOPER WORKSHEETS

2.5 EDI TRADING PARTNER ACCESS INFORMATION

2.5.1 Performance and Ease of Maintenance

2.5.2 Functional Group Envelope - Routing Information

2.5.3 Other EDI Envelope Information

2.5.4 Functional Acknowledgements '997'

2.5.5 Test Data

The following sections will remain:

2.3.1 Usage definition

2.4 CONTENT

2.5 EDI TRADING PARTNER ACCESS INFORMATION

2.5.6 Date/Time Reference

2.5.7 Exceptions

2.5.8 Delimiters

Chapters 3-69 (Product/Transaction Chapters): Some pages are needless cross-references. Some information will remain. Qwest will eliminate:

X.1 Business Descriptions

X.2 Order Flow Business Model (where cross references occur. NOTE: Where unique, product- or transaction-specific business

models/descriptions exist; those pieces will be RETAINED inside each individual product/transaction chapter.

X.3 DWS URLs

The following sections will remain:

X.4 Trading Partner Access Information

X.5 Mapping Examples

X.6 Data Dictionary

Appendix E - IMA Additional Edits: Eliminate.

Appendix H - Generic Order Flow Business Model: Move to chapter 2.

Appendix I - IMA Valid Product Conversion Chart: Eliminate.

Appendix J - Product Family and Product Matrices: Eliminate.

Other documentation:

X12 Populated Mapping Examples - Produce one populated mapping example for each transaction/product. Qwest will no longer produce populated mapping examples for all ACTIVITIES associated with each transaction/product.

IMA Release Notes: Eliminate.

Status History

Project Meetings

April 20, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain-Qwest stated that this CR was implemented on April 11th and would remain in CLEC Test for validation

- March 16, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain-Qwest stated that this Process and Documentation CR is scheduled to be implemented on April 11, 2005.

January 19, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was walked-on last month and that a meeting had been held with the CLEC Community. Connie stated that based on feedback, from the CLECs, some components were removed from this CR and will be moved to the 18.0 timeframe. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if Stephanie’s (Prull/Eschelon) concerns had been addressed. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that they had. [1-28-05 Comment Received from Eschelon: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that in Qwest’s view they had.] This CR is in Development status.

-- January 13, 2005 Ad-Hoc Meeting Minutes: Introduction of Attendees: Rosalin Davis-MCI, Jeff Sonnier-Sprint, Chris Terrell-AT&T, Sharon Van Meter-AT&T, Jeff Yeager-Accenture, Bonnie Johnson-Eschelon, Michelle Koetke-Eschelon, Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest, Kyle Kirves-Qwest, Randy Owen-Qwest, Cim Chambers-Qwest, Michelle Thacker-Qwest Conference Call Discussion: Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest stated that the purpose of the call was so that Qwest could provide status of the effort for the Qwest originated CMP CR SCR120904-02 (Combination and/or Elimination of Certain IMA EDI Documentation Components). Peggy stated that there have already been several meetings to discuss this request and noted that based on those discussions, the CR has been revised. Peggy stated that the revised CR is available via the Interactive Report and that a revised spread sheet was sent with the meeting notification. Peggy stated that there were several concerns raised in the last ad-hoc meeting and that today’s discussion would address them. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that as it has previously been mentioned, that Qwest periodically revisits our documentation and looks to see where some consolidation can be done and identify where there is duplication. Kyle stated that the combining or elimination of areas will make it easier for CLECs to find information. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that feedback received from the CLECs was considered and based on the feedback provided the following: 1.1 Basis and Scope: Qwest will make sure that all information is captured in the Implementation Guidelines and that Qwest would go with the original plan; the 17.0 timeframe. Kyle Kirves stated that Qwest would go with the original plan of the 17.0 timeframe for the following: 1.2 DISCLAIMER 1.3 EXPECTED AUDIENCE 1.4 DOCUMENT HISTORY 1.5 ASSUMPTIONS 1.6 CLEC IMPLEMENTATION OF EDI TRANSACTIONS 1.7 CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL 2.1 SCOPE 2.2 USE 2.3 DEVELOPER WORKSHEETS 2.4 CONTENT 2.5 EDI TRADING PARTNER ACCESS INFORMATION 2.5.1 Performance and Ease of Maintenance 2.5.2 Functional Group Envelope - Routing Information 2.5.3 Other EDI Envelope Information 2.5.4 Functional Acknowledgements '997' 2.5.5 Test Data 2.5.6 Date/Time Reference 2.5.7 Exceptions 2.5.8 Delimiters Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked if there were any questions so far. There were none. Kyle then reviewed the following for Chapters 3-69 and noted that there are eliminations and cross references: X.1 Business Descriptions: Eliminate as this is merely a cross reference to the PCAT. X.2 Order Flow Business Model: cross references to the Generic Order Flow Business Model will be eliminated. Kyle stated that Qwest will retain all unique, specific order flow business models within their individual chapters. X.3 DWS URLs: will be eliminated due to the cross reference to the DWS URLs. X.4 TPAI: will appear in a generic form in Chapter 2. Qwest will be proposing this change for the 18.0 timeframe. Kyle stated that Qwest would develop and provide a sample of this change prior to implementation. X.5 Mapping Examples: no change X.6 Data Dictionary: Code conversion elements will appear as part of Chapter 2. Qwest will also propose this change for the 18.0 timeframe and provide an example prior to implementation. Kyle noted that this CR has no changes to the Data Dictionary or Trading Partners. Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked for questions or comments and stated that there should be no surprises. There were no questions or comments brought forward. Kyle then continued as follows: Appendix E- IMA Additional Edits: will eliminate. Kyle noted that information is in the error’s list with IMA EDI. Appendix H - Generic Order Flow Business Model: Kyle stated that this will appear in a generic form in Chapter 2 Appendix I - IMA Valid Product Conversion Chart: Eliminate due to no IT need and buy-in from CLECs. Appendix J - Product Family and Product Matrices: Qwest will no longer produce Appendix J as it is not a critical component of documentation and is in the Developer Work Sheets. Kyle stated that this would also remove disparity between documents. Chris Terrell-AT&T asked if the information would be under ACT and LACT Fields in the DWS, where it has required fields. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that the information is in the Product Chapters of Disclosure, Chapters 3-69. Cim noted examples of UNE-P, LSR, EU, Resale, etc. Chris Terrell-AT&T stated that she could not find where Cim was referencing. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that is on the Wholesale web site at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/ima/edi/document.html. Cim also noted that this URL contains the 15.0 and 16.0 Mapping Examples. Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked if there were other questions. There were none. Kyle then reviewed the following: X12 Populated Mapping Examples: Kyle stated that Qwest was originally going to eliminate these due to low utility, but based on the feedback from the CLECs, there is a compromise. Qwest will produce one populated mapping example for each product or transaction for a single activity type, but will no longer continue to generate populated mapping examples for all products/transactions and all activity types. Kyle stated that these would be published with the Release and on the OSS documentation web site. IMA FBDL Corrective Procedures and Error Codes: will be combined with the IMA FBDL User Guide. IMA Release Notes: will be eliminated as they are not really release notes, they are a change summary for the User Guide. Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked if there were any question regarding any of the changes. Jeff Sonnier-Sprint asked when these changes would be effective. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that for the items that are indicated to go with the plan, which are Chapters 1-69 and the 4 appendices, the changes will be effective on January 28, 2005. The X12’s will be effective on April 11, 2005. Kyle stated that IMA FBDL piece will be effective 28-days prior to the release, so about on March 14, 2005. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that we would have another meeting to talk about the items that are slotted for the 18.0 timeframe. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest asked for questions or comments. There were none brought forward. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that the CR would be in the distribution package for next week’s Systems CMP Meeting and noted that the status of this CR is now Development.

- December 17, 2004 Email Received from Stephanie Prull, Eschelon: Thanks for the clarification Peggy. We look forward to the take backs from today's call. Stephanie Prull EDI Business Analyst Eschelon Telecom, INC.

-- December 17, 2004 Email Sent to Stephanie Prull, Eschelon: Steph, Thanks for the clarification to your question. This CR is classified as a Systems CR because it involves IT resources in order to do the work. The IT resources are not those that code, so this candidate does not fall into the prioritization process. The CR submitted by WorldCom actually was not prioritized. I believe that in the discussions at CMP, it was agreed that if the IT resources needed were the people who do the coding, the work effort would need to be prioritized. If the work effort involved the IT people that do not do the coding, it would be a Systems Process & Documentation CR, and prioritization would not be applicable. In regard to your concern about the timeframe for this CR, we have the concern noted, will discuss all the feedback that was received this morning, and then we will have another discussion. Thanks for the email and we will certainly address all of the concerns that were raised during the call this morning. Have a great Holiday. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP

- December 17, 2004 Email Received from Stephanie Prull, Eschelon: Peggy, I thought of a better way to ask my question about how the CMP timelines relate to this CR. I don't think I did a very good job asking it on the call.. ) I'm trying to understand why the 17.0 draft documents have any bearing on this candidate. I know that Kyle mentioned that that timeframe was one of the issues that has this CR "under the gun". Since this is a systems CR even though its documentation is it not subject to prioritization since the Documentation is EDI related. I'm trying to understand how this is any different then MCI's request for single source document that we had to prioritize due to the fact that they were IMA resources doing those changes. Just like they would be with this candidate. I'm caught because if you run this like a process CR this is a level 4 and subject to the Level 4 guidelines. But if this is a systems CR that involves EDI resources its subject to prioritization like the MCI candidate was. Let me know Qwest's thoughts on this. I appreciate it. Have a great Holiday. Steph

December 17, 2004 Ad-Hoc Meeting Minutes: ATTENDEES: Dianne Friend-Time Warner, Lan Nguyen-Wisor, Phyllis Burt-AT&T, Stephanie Prull-Eschelon, Jeff Yeager-Accenture, Kelly Morris-ELI, Amanda Silva-VCI, John Moran-MCI, Bill Littler-Integra, Julie Pickar-TDS Metrocom, Chris Terrell-AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest, Kyle Kirves-Qwest, Cim Chambers-Qwest, Woldey Assefa-Qwest, John Sanclaria-Qwest MEETING DISCUSSION: Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that the purpose of this ad-hoc call is to have conversation and get feedback from the CLEC Community on Qwest originated SCR120904-02 Combination and/or Elimination of Certain IMA EDI Documentation Components, which is a Process & Documentation change. Peggy stated that at last Wednesday’s Systems CMP Meeting, we did not think that we could provide a spreadsheet prior to this meeting, but thanks to Kyle, a spreadsheet was created and it, along with a copy of the revised CR was emailed yesterday afternoon. If you do not have them, we will be walking thru that information today. Peggy stated that this CR was walked-on at last Wednesday’s CMP Meeting so we could start familiarizing you with the changes and the CR will be formally presented at the January 19th CMP Meeting. Peggy again noted that Qwest would like feedback, from the CLEC Community, and if there are identified items that we are proposing to be eliminated and you feel strongly that the item needs to remain, we ask that you help us understand your need. We will then go back and consider the requested changes to the CR and revise it, if appropriate. Peggy then turned the call over to Kyle Kirves (Qwest) to present and start walking thru the CR and provided spreadsheet. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Qwest periodically reviews the documentation to identify where there is duplication and where there could be some tightening up of the documentation. Kyle stated that this effort would include the elimination of items that are no longer needed. Kyle stated that the CR Description itemizes the items but noted that it might be easier to use the spreadsheet in this discussion. Kyle noted that the items on the spreadsheet are the same as what is on the CR. Kyle stated that the spreadsheet does contain more detail as to where items are moving or where they are duplicated. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that there are 3 IMA EDI Disclosure Items slated for combination or elimination. Kyle noted that the items are in chapters 1, 2, and 3-69. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that in 1.1, Disclosure Basis and Scope, there is a statement and she is having trouble with the references to the duplication in the PCAT. Stephanie stated that normal EDI people do not use the PCATs. Stephanie stated that if the information is located somewhere on the OSS Site, she can deal with the changes a little better. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Qwest would take that back and see if we want to move information to the Implementation Guidelines. Kyle asked if there were any other questions. None were brought forward. Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked if there were questions or comments for the following: 1.2 DISCLAIMER: Eliminate due to low or no utility 1.3 EXPECTED AUDIENCE: Duplicated in Implementation Guidelines 1.4 DOCUMENT HISTORY: Eliminate due to no utility 1.5 ASSUMPTIONS: Duplicated in Chapter 2 1.6 CLEC IMPLEMENTATION OF EDI TRANSACTIONS: Duplicated in Implementation Guidelines 1.7 CHANGE MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL: Duplicated in Implementation Guidelines There were no questions or comments brought forward. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Chapter 1 appears to be okay, due to no feedback. Kyle Kirves-Qwest reviewed the following: 2.1 SCOPE: Eliminate due to low utility 2.2 USE: Eliminate due to low utility 2.3 DEVELOPER WORKSHEETS: Eliminate due to the information being in the DWS themselves. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that elimination would not be a problem for the older users but the information is good for new users. Stephanie stated that she does not want to see it removed. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that the similar information is in the Implementation Guidelines and is covered by their implementation partners. Kyle stated that this is minimal pieces if the documentation. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that she was fine. Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked for other questions or comments. None were brought forward. Kyle then reviewed the following: 2.4 CONTENT: Remains with no change 2.5 EDI TRADING PARTNER ACCESS INFORMATION: Remains with no change 2.5.1 Performance and Ease of Maintenance: Eliminate due to low utility 2.5.2 Functional Group Envelope - Routing Information: Eliminate due to low utility 2.5.3 Other EDI Envelope Information: Eliminate due to low utility Kyle stated that the implementation partners also cover items 2.5.1, 2.5.2, and 2.5.3. 2.5.4 Functional Acknowledgements '997': Duplicated in transaction chapter for 997s, in greater detail 2.5.5 Test Data: Duplicated in the Implementation Guidelines and SATE Data Document 2.5.6 Date/Time Reference: Remains with no change 2.5.7 Exceptions: Remains with no change 2.5.8 Delimiters: Remains with no change Kyle Kirves-Qwest asked if there were any questions or comments for Chapter 2. Phyllis Burt-AT&T asked if item 2.3.1 is really in the Developer Worksheets themselves. Phyllis stated that the information is good for new people. Woldey Assefa-Qwest stated that user definitions are remaining in 2.3.1. Phyllis Burt-AT&T thanked Qwest. Kyle Kirves-Qwest then reviewed Chapters 3-69: X.1 Business Descriptions: Eliminate as this is merely a cross reference to the PCAT. X.2 Order Flow Business Model: Eliminate due to low utility. The Generic flow will appear as part of Chapter 2. X.3 DWS URLs: Eliminate as this is merely a cross reference to the DWS URLs. Information only takes 1/8 of a page and is already part of disclosure. X.4 TPAI: Duplicated and will appear in a generic form in Chapter 2 X.5 Mapping Examples: Remains with no change X.6 Data Dictionary: Eliminate due to low utility. Code conversion elements will appear as part of Chapter 2. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that in looking at 3.1 CSR business model, it refers to Chapter 2. Phyllis stated that X.2 is where it shows how it works and is the first thing she looks at. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that they are not being removed; they are being moved to Chapter 2. Phyllis Burt-AT&T asked if would be moved by transaction. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that they are for pre-order because they are unique. Phyllis Burt-AT&T said okay. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon asked if Qwest intends to remove Appendix H and make it a part of Chapter 2. Kyle Kirves-Qwest responded yes. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon said okay. Jeff Yeager-Accenture asked if the same applies to miscellaneous post-order. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that where there are unique order flow business models, they would be published in Chapter 2. Chris Terrell-AT&T stated that it makes sense to keep them but she does not understand why they are being moved. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that we need to tighten the documentation and make it easier because it appears in one place. Kyle stated that he would make a note that CLECs would like kept in the chapters. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that it is okay to move them id the product follows the generic order flow. Stephanie asked to keep unique ones in the chapters. Chris Terrell-AT&T asked to have generics at the beginning. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that he would make a note. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that X.4, X.5, and X.6 would be modified for each Release. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that specific information varies product to product and asked if unique, would they stay. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that generic would be in Chapter 2, same approach as for the business model. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that it is good to see Qwest’s thoughts. Phyllis Burt-AT&T asked to confirm that the Data Dictionary would have each segment in detail, the value sets for transactions. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Chapter 2 will have code conversion elements. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that she uses a cheat sheet and the Data Dictionary. Woldey Assefa-Qwest asked if she uses the Data Dictionary to see if the transactions are correct. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that she uses both for format and translations, she needs to determine where to get the values. Woldey Assefa-Qwest stated that Qwest would review that information. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that if an order rejects because of the address, they use EDI UNE-P POTS for format and at mapping examples for values. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon, Dianne Friend-Time Warner, and John Moran-MCI stated that they use both as well. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Qwest would revisit the structure and determine if the CR would be revised. Kyle stated that there would be no changes to Appendices A, B, C, or D. Kyle reviewed the following: Appendix E- IMA Additional Edits: Eliminate due to low utility. Appendix H - Generic Order Flow Business Model: Duplicated and will appear in a generic form in Chapter 2 Appendix I - IMA Valid Product Conversion Chart: Eliminate due to low utility Appendix J - Product Family and Product Matrices: Duplicated in the PCAT, LSOG, and DWS Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that even though Appendix J information is in 3 places, are different formats and helpful to new users. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that the DWS do not have the same level of detail and noted that their IT group does not use the PCAT. AT&T, TDS Metrocom, and Wisor asked that it remain. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Qwest would review and see what can be recommended. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that she would also like to see Appendix E remain, as she references it when the DWS are not clear. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Appendix E would be eliminated because the edits are already in the errors list and in other places. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that the errors list does not have the detail. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that there are 4 change histories and at the end of the errors list. Phyllis Burt-AT&T said okay. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that he knows how valuable change summaries are and that is why information is in the errors list. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that she would look at that. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that Appendix I is a business unit need, not IT, and is okay with the elimination. Kyle then reviewed the following: X12 Populated Mapping Examples: Eliminate due to low utility IMA FBDL Corrective Procedures and Error Codes: Combine with User Guide, so is in one place. IMA Release Notes: Eliminate due to low utility. Kyle stated that these are not Release notes, is a change summary and the IMA User Guide contains the information. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated the she would like the X12 Mapping Examples to remain. Time Warner, AT&T, MCI, Wisor, and Accenture all want kept. Woldey Assefa-Qwest asked how they are different that the mapping examples that are provided in the Chapters. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that she can see the input and the output. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that she finds the FBDL info helpful. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Qwest would revisit and see what can be done without generating a document of the current size. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that maybe can move populated mapping examples to the product chapters. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that it is driven off the Release and the documentation is out 45-days in advance. Kyle stated that there is no information until right before the production date. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon said okay. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that Qwest would revisit and asked if there were any other questions. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that most agree with consolidation as it helps Qwest and the CLECs. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that there would be a draft on January 28th and that the CR may need to be revisited at a later time. Stephanie Prull-Eschelon stated that 17.0 may be too soon and stated that she sees this as a Level 4 instead of a Systems CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that she would review the Level 4 guidelines and noted that currently this CR is a Systems CR with impacts to Process & Documentation. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest thanked the call participants for the discussion and stated that Qwest would internally review the feedback that was received.

- December 16, 2004 Email Sent to CLEC Community: Hi All, Attached is a copy of the revised CR and a spreadsheet that may be helpful in the discussion at the ad hoc call to discuss the CMP CR titled ‘Combination and/or Elimination of Certain IMA EDI Documentation Components’. Ad Hoc Meeting details are: DATE: Friday, December 17, 2004 TIME: 9:00 a.m. MT CALL IN: 1- 877-564-8688, conference id 8571927# Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Wholesale CMP

-- December 15, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion; Walk-On Section: Kyle Kirves/Qwest stated that Qwest periodically revisits documentation to see where there can be improvements and where there are items that can be tightened up. Qwest looked at where there was little or no use of the documentation. Kyle presented the CR. Jill Martain/Qwest stated that there is an ad-hoc meeting scheduled for December 17th in order to discuss this CR in more detail. Liz Balvin/Covad stated that she had forwarded the invitation to her EDI Team. Liz stated that it appears that Qwest wants to eliminate duplication but she does not see where the appendices (12-28 - Change to meeting minutes from Covad) information will be reflected. Kyle Kirves/Qwest stated that the CR is to eliminate duplication and that some component’s will be combined. Kyle stated that this effort is to eliminate low usage utilities or those that have no usage. Kyle stated that at the ad hoc meeting, Qwest would like to get feed back and noted that the CR would be modified, if appropriate. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the sections that Qwest would like eliminated are those that have not had questions received for them. Connie stated that on the ad hoc call, if the EDI Teams feel differently, please let Qwest know and help Qwest understand what they are being used for. Liz Balvin/Covad stated that Chapter 1 has a clear definition of the testing process and the information needs to be in another section. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the ad-hoc call is to obtain those kinds of issues and that Qwest would research them. Dianne Friend/Time Warner asked if software vendors are able to attend the meeting. Connie Winston/Qwest responded yes. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if prior to the ad hoc call, if the CLECs can be provided with a document that identifies the elements that are being eliminated, the reasons, and where the duplications are being represented. Susie Bliss/Qwest asked if AT&T was asking for a spreadsheet. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that at the ad hoc call, Qwest will walk thru the sections that Qwest is recommending be eliminated, and noted that some of them are meaningless. Connie stated that duplications are within several chapters and need to be in one place. Connie stated that we would see if we could create something in the meeting. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she is not sure what should be eliminated or what is duplicated. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the information would be discussed in the ad hoc meeting. Connie stated that as the disclosure document grew, there was information that was repeated in multiple chapters and the document really needs to be collapsed. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that it would be helpful to be prepared and stated that Friday’s ad hoc call will identify if their needs would be met. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest needs to know how you use the information and if you want to keep the information. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T asked if the information would be sent out, after the ad hoc call. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the information would be in the meeting minutes. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T asked if there would be a follow-up ad hoc call. Jill Martain/Qwest stated yes. There were no additional comments or questions.

Clarification Meeting December 14, 2004 Introduction of Attendees: Kyle Kirves-Qwest, Woldey Assefa-Qwest, Cim Chambers-Qwest, John Sanclaria-Qwest, Guna Raju-Qwest, Brian Caywood-Qwest, Pam Harlan-Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest

Review Requested (Description of) Change: Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that this CR was submitted by Qwest and that an Ad-Hoc Call is scheduled for December 17, 2004 with the CLEC Community. Kyle Kirves-Qwest reviewed the Change Request, stating that effort would be to combine or eliminate pieces that the CLECs are currently not using or are using very little. Kyle stated that analysis was performed on the question logs, IMA EDI Disclosure, and other documentation. It was noted that the Developer Worksheets are copied into the Data Dictionary and that the Worksheets contain valid values. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that the Data Dictionary would be replaced with a reference to code conversion tables and worksheets, in chapter 2. John Sanclaria-Qwest asked if the X12 standards on XLN loops are being kept. Woldey Assefa-Qwest stated that they would be in Chapter 2. John Sanclaria-Qwest asked if the functional acknowledgement was being eliminated. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that the 997 Chapter would not be eliminated. John Sanclaria-Qwest asked which X12 examples were being eliminated. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that that the transactions used in SATE would be eliminated. Cim stated that the population of the data for end user name, address, etc. would no longer be provided. Cim stated that the examples would be generic mapping examples. Cim Chambers-Qwest what was happening with the error’s list. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that they would continue to be published and noted that the CLECs do use them for coding. Cim Chambers-Qwest agreed. Cim Chambers-Qwest stated that IMA Facility Based Directory Listing is folded into the User Guide and is not EDI specific. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that in the Release Notes, a change history would be in front of the User Guide. John Sanclaria-Qwest asked for the proposed effective date for these changes. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that would like to become effective with 17.0, on January 28th. John Sanclaria-Qwest asked if the addendum’s would be handled in the same manner. Kyle Kirves-Qwest responded yes. Cim Chambers-Qwest asked if this was a voteable candidate. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that it is a Systems Process & Documentation Change Request and is not voteable. Kyle Kirves-Qwest stated that he would revise the CR, based on this Clarification Call. Confirmed Impacted Interfaces: Process & Documentation

Establish Action Plan & Resolution Time Frame: Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that this CR is due for formal presentation at the January CMP Meeting but has been requested to be walked-on at the December 15, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting. Peggy noted that the ad-hoc call with the CLEC Community is scheduled for December 17, 2004.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR120904-02 Combination and/or Elimination of Certain IMA EDI Documentation Components

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request (SCR120904-02). Based upon the scope of this CR, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 20 to 50 hours for this Process & Documentation Change Request.

At the next Monthly Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants will be given the opportunity to comment on this Change Request and provide additional clarifications. Any clarifications and/or modifications identified at that time will be incorporated into Qwest's further evaluation of this Change Request.

Sincerely, Qwest