Wholesale: Products & Services

Archived System CR SCR050203-01 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected deliverables/proposed implementation date (if applicable): As soon as possible

Status History

Project Meetings

SCR050203-01 UNE-P PAL in IMA (originated by Arizona Dialtone) Laurel Nolan/Qwest stated that this CR was a duplication of a current CR submitted by Ernest Group. She stated that Qwest was currently looking at other alternatives to address some of Arizona Dialtone’s concerns. She stated that because of this Arizona Dialtone accepted withdrawing the CR.

Email from Tom Bade Arizona Dialtone to Laurel Nolan-Qwest CMP July 7, 2003

thanks do it! Email from Laurel Nolan-Qwest CMP to Tom Bade Arizona Dialtone July 7, 2003

From: "Nolan, Laurel" To: "'Tom Bade'" Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 8:59 AM Subject: RE: CR for UNE-P PAL in IMA

Tom,

Thanks for your email. Through the CMP you can request manual solutions for systems change while the system solution is going through the prioritization process.

I would like to suggest that we hold a meeting with your Service Manager and Qwest's Process Specialist to review the current process and discuss the problems that you are having. During this meeting we can discuss possible solutions like emailing PDFs. After the meeting you are welcome to submit CMP CRs for any possible manual change you would like.

Please let me know if you're interested in attending a meeting with your Service Manager and Qwest's Process Specialist and what times work best for you on Friday, July 11th or Monday, July 14th.

Thank you, Laurel CMP

Email From: Tom Bade [mailto:tombade@arizonadialtone.com] Sent: Monday, July 07, 2003 9:35 AM To: Nolan, Laurel Subject: Re: CR for UNE-P PAL in IMA

As I have indicated in several communications, it appears that une-p pal will never receive any favorable prioritization unless Qwest ways in on the difficulty for qwest to provision service properly and the amount of time Qwest employees take to implement PAL lies and go back and check for all the provisioning errors that have been occurring. I think our request supports Ernest position and would like it to stay in the process.

I thought that you were checking on alternative methods of transmission such as e-mail instead of the poor quality faxes which seem to cause most of the problems.

Email from Laurel Nolan to Tom Bade July 1, 2003

Tom,

Thank you for your voice mail. As I stated in my message, Qwest would like to hold a call with you and your Subject Matter Experts to discuss the problems that you are having with the IIS System and the submission of UNE-P PAL orders.

As you know, there is currently a CR, submitted by Ernest, that addresses the need for UNE-P PAL in IMA. I would suggest that after we have the internal call to discuss the problems and determine if you would like to open a product/process CR for a manual solution while the Ernest CR waits for prioritization.

Please let me know your thoughts.

Thanks, Laurel

Laurel Nolan Qwest Communications CMP-Systems 303.965.3715 lnolan@qwest.com

June CMP Systems Meeting Meeting Minutes SCR050203-01

SCR050203-01 UNE-P PAL in IMA (originated by Arizona Dialtone) Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is in evaluation and noted that Qwest is working with Arizona Dialtone. Connie noted that Qwest believes that this request is a duplicate and we are working towards combining them, if they are in fact the same. There were no questions or comments.

Subject: Re: Related CMP CR-SCR082202-01 Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 14:55:07 -0700 From: "Tom Bade" To: "Laurel Nolan" References: 1 , 2 , 3

I would like qwest to accept e-mailed pdf files (or any reasonable format for that matter) for LSRs as it appears as if IMA is not a viable alternative. This would at least save a lot of paper and be more legible for the data entry people.

Subject: Re: Related CMP CR-SCR082202-01 Date: Thu, 29 May 2003 15:34:31 -0600 From: "Laurel Nolan" Organization: Qwest Communications International, Inc. To: Tom Bade References: 1 , 2 Tom,

Thank you for your email. I understand your concerns, but Qwest does not have control over the order in which IMA CRs are worked. Under section 10.0 of the Qwest Wholesale Change Management Process Document, Qwest and the CLECs work IMA CRs through the Prioritization Process. The prioritization process provides an opportunity for CLECs and Qwest to prioritize CRs and each CLEC and Qwest receive one vote.

The Qwest Wholesale Change Management Process Document is available at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/whatiscmp

If you would like to change your CR to request that Qwest send you pdf files, I am more than happy to help you.

Regards, Laurel CMP

Subject: Re: Related CMP CR-SCR082202-01 Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 14:51:35 -0700 From: "Tom Bade" To: "Laurel Nolan" References: 1 Good Morning Laurel,

Ernest request doesn't address the multitude of problems, delays and incorrect provisioning because of legibility of faxes and data input when the Qwest order entry department works each order each of the several times it takes to get it provisioned properly. If I keep mine in there will it's priority be set and reset further back in the bunch as Ernest's was? Does Qwest consider that making it harder to provision certain types of lines as anti-competitive, as it certainly discourages selling PAL lines (which Qwest didn't want to do until settling with Ernest on their FCC Complaint)? Perhaps the request should be changed to request acceptance of pdf files attached to e-mails.

Thanks for the update. I look forward to your response.

Tom

Subject: Related CMP CR-SCR082202-01 Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 12:09:56 -0600 From: "Laurel Nolan" Organization: Qwest Communications International, Inc. To: tombade@arizonadialtone.com CC: me

Tom,

Attached is a CR that Qwest believes addresses the CR that you submitted regarding UNE-P PAL in IMA, SCR050203-01.

Please review the attached CR and let me know if you would like to withdraw your CR or move forward with your request.

Thank you,

Laurel Nolan Qwest Communications CMP-Systems 303.965.3715 lnolan@qwest.com

Clarification Call: May 13, 2003

Attendance: Tom Bade-Arizona Dialtone, Carrie Ranges-Arizona Dialtone, Suzy Enny-Qwest, John Gallegos-Qwest, Conrad Evans-Qwest, Monica Manning-Qwest, Berkley Loggie-Qwest, Laurel Nolan-Qwest CRPM

Review of request Nolan-Qwest read through the description of change and the expected deliverable. She asked Bade-Arizona Dialtone if he had any changes to the CR. He stated that he thought that this would be something that Qwest would really want because of the number of times that CLECs had to send manual orders over and over again. He asked Carrie (Arizona Dialtone) how many orders out of 10, were not correct. Ranges-Arizona Dialtone stated that only 3-4 would be correct. She stated that there were a lot of problems with fax and that sometimes PONs were transposed. She continued that they (Arizona Dialtone) submitted 100 orders at one time and that remarks weren't read. She stated that manual processing always has problems. Bade-Arizona Dialtone stated that there were problems with features not apearing on the lines. Gallegos-Qwest asked if the problems were on UNE-P PAL. Bade-Arizona Dialtone stated yes.

Nolan-Qwest confirmed the products, interface, and impacted areas. She asked if there were any additions or changes.

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were any other question or concerns in regards to this CR. Manning-Qwest stated that she thought that there might be a simular request currently open. Nolan-Qwest stated that she would research related CRs and provide any to Bade and Ranges (Arizona Dialtone) for review.

Nolna-Qwest stated that the CR would be presented by Bade-Arizona Dialtone in the June systems meeting and that she would provide him with the details prior to the meeting. She stated that Qwest would provide a response to the CR prior to the meeting as stated in the CMP.

Meeting adjourned.

Called CLEC: May 5, 2003

Contact Tom in regards to classification of CR. CR form stated Product/Process, but Qwest believes it to be a systems change. Left voice mail stating that the CR would be acknowledged as systems and that Qwest would like to discuss.

CenturyLink Response

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR050203-01. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification Meeting (held May 13, 2003) Qwest has determined that SCR082202-01, submitted by Ernest, addresses this request.

At the June 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

Archived System CR SCR060903-01 Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T revision sent 6/23/03 features requesteing as a part of this change request.

Caller ID;

Call waiting;

Call forwarding;

Speed dial 8 and 30;

Call transfer;

Talking call waiting.

Status History

Project Meetings

--Original Message-- From: Martain, Jill [mailto:Jill.Martain@qwest.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 2:05 PM To: Van Meter, Sharon K, NEO Cc: cmpcr@qwest.com Subject: RE: Close CR SCR060903-01

Thank you for your quick reply. Let me know when you hear back on the other CRs.

Jill

--Original Message-- From: Van Meter, Sharon K, NEO [mailto:svanmeter@att.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 17, 2004 1:47 PM To: Martain, Jill Subject: Close CR SCR060903-01

Jill,

Qwest can close CR SCR060903-01. I'm still checking on the other ones.

Sharon Van Meter AT&T Western Region LSAM 303-699-6483 303-540-1637 (pager)

11/17/04 Systems CMP Meeting

John Gallegos/Qwest asked if AT&T had been able to test this CR. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T said that she needs to research this CR further and will close offline if possible.

10/22/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that a Patch for this CR was completed in 16.0.

9/16/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was completed in the 15.0 release. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would like to keep this CR in CLEC Test for further investigation.

8/18/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was implemented in 15.0 and would remain in CLEC Test.

7/22/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this was implemented in 15.0 and would remain in CLEC Test.

6/17/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated this CR will remain in CLEC Test for another month per the request of Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T.

5/20/04 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion This CR will remain in CLEC Test.

-

4/22/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was just deployed in the IMA 15.0 Release and will remain open for another month.

Malia Tasi/VCI Company said that they were unable to add Call Waiting ID and that they had to use the workaround. She asked if there was an Event Notification. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that there was an Event Notice (Ticket Number HD727575) that the NWT USOC (Call Waiting) began rejecting in March with the description ‘Feature NWT requires one of the following USOCs and that this was patched.

Malia Tasi/VCI Company stated that they received an error that the NWT was not valid at switch and that it is on every order and that they had to add a remark.

Liz Balvin/MCI stated that an edit went in with the IMA 15.0 Release. Liz asked VCI Company if they turned in a trouble ticket.

Michael Lopez/Qwest said that the trouble ticket number is 727575.

Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that this is specific enough to not impact other orders. 5/3/04 Revision to Minutes from Eschelon - Bonnie also asked what progress Qwest had made on defining errors to a lower level so this override functionality could be used more frequently. Connie said Qwest was still looking into this.

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest will take an action item to determine if the patch went in and to determine if the override functionality can be used.

This CR remains in CLEC Test.

3/18/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is deploying on April 19, 2004, in the IMA 15.0 Release. There were no questions or comments.

MEETING MINUTES - February 17, 2004 Hi-Level Walk Through of IMA 15.0 Committed CR's

Attendees: Anne Robberson-Process Analyst (Qwest), Curt Anderson- IT Systems Analyst (Qwest), Diane Burt-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Donna Osborne-Miller - Carrier Relations Manager (AT&T), Dusti Bastian-Process Analyst (Qwest), Ellen McArthur-Process Analyst (Qwest), Hank Martinez-IT Systems Analyst (Qwest), James McCluskey-ILEC Manager (Accenture), John Daugherty-Product Management (AT&T), John Gallegos-IT Manager (Qwest), Kathy Miller-Process Manager (Qwest), Kim Isaacs- ILEC Relations Process Analyst (Eschelon), Kyle Kirves-IT Analyst (Qwest), Linda Miles-Process Manager (Qwest), Lori Langston-Process Manager (Qwest), Marie Acceno-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Nancy Denny-IT Analyst (Qwest), Nicole James-IT Analyst (Qwest), Pat Bratetic-Process Manager (Qwest), Phyllis Burt-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Randy Owen-IT Manager (Qwest), Shon Higer-Process Analyst (Qwest), Shonna Pasionek-IT Analyst (Qwest), Stephanie Prull-EDI Business Analyst (Eschelon), Susie Wells-Product/Process Analyst (Qwest) Meeting Facilitator: Nancy Denny (Qwest)

Purpose: High-level walk-through of the CRs that are committed in the IMA 15.0 Release.

Supporting Documents: Qwest Notification: SYST.02.13.04.F.01366.IMAEDI15.0Cand&DocWkth Documentation containing 15.0 Candidate Summaries: February 17, 2004, attached to notification CRs can be found in the Qwest Wholesale Change Request Interactive Report located at: http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/changerequest.html Functional Overview: This enhancement will introduce a Qwest reject for LSR if the feature is not available at the end user Central Office Switch and allow the CLEC to contact the customer and let the customer make the decision as to whether or not the customer still wants the service without the feature.

Form Impacts: Resale (RS) form

Products: Resale POTS UNE-P POTS UNE-Star POTS

Activities: ACT = N, T, V, Z, C

Discussion

SCR060903-01 Reject message required if Call Waiting ID Unavailable in Switch

Susie provided the overview based on the document circulated with the meeting agenda.

Phyllis: In the Appendix E of Disclosure, it looks as if the AN or TNS on Resale form should be used as the NPXX. The Service Availability requirements states that we should use the LSO from the validation. When NPXX does not equal the LSO, what do we do? (Phyllis cited an example). John: Qwest will takeaway that question and research an answer.

12/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Liz Balvin/MCI stated the SOC indicates that something is provisioned and Qwest is saying that is not the case. Lynn Stecklein/Qwest stated that Qwest has completed the analysis of the examples Liz provided and will forward to her. Lynn also said that a meeting will be scheduled with MCI after the 1st of the year to discuss.

11/20/03 CMP Systems Meeting Denise Martinez/Qwest reviewed that the current process in the Center is to issue service orders supporting what the CLEC has requested in the LSR. The assumption is that a Service Availability check has been done by the CLEC before sending the request to Qwest. Once the service order(s) has been created and submitted in the Qwest SOP, the SDC sends an FOC. When it is identified that a requested feature is not available in a particular switch after an FOC is sent, a Jeopardy notice is sent with a C05 (designed order) or SX (non-designed order) jeopardy code which identifies Error Conditions Identified After an FOC is Sent. The documentation supporting Error Conditions Identified after an FOC is Sent PCAT can be found at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/provisioning.html. For LSRs where a jeopardy notice is sent due to a CLEC error being identified after FOC and if a supplement is not received to correct the error condition within 4 hours, the service order(s) will be cancelled but the LSR remains in a jeopardy condition. If after 30 business days the LSR is still in a jeopardy status, the LSR will be rejected. If for some reason it was identified that a requested feature is not available in a particular switch before an FOC being sent, an Error Notification is sent to the CLEC. Information regarding the Error notification process PCAT can be found at URL http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/ordering.html. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that the jeopardy process is not happening. Bonnie asked if the feature type is not compatible with switch, will it error out. Denise Martinez/Qwest said that it depends. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she had an example last month where the feature was not available in the switch. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that she could take a look at the examples. Denise stated that if the order is completed and the feature is not available that is a different issue. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the example she reviewed showed that we removed what was not available on the switch and that the CLEC was not billed and that’s why Denise was asked to provide the jeopardy process. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that she could check to see if after completion, if someone could contact the CLEC to notify. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that the USOCs were on the completions. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that they have issues with this as well where they were not notified. Bonnie asked if once the order is completed could it post to the bill. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated that the process states if there are any changes after completion, you will be notified via e-mail. Denise stated that we could review the examples and determine if any coaching is needed. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if the e-mail is sent to the submitter. Denise Martinez/Qwest stated yes. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that would not work for MCI. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that MCIs first example was processed correctly with no change, but that the other examples were of the FOC and was corrected internally prior to completion. John said that they should have been notified back to MCI and that was not done. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we will work off-line with MCI. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that for 15.0 it would become an upfront reject. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if it is based on feature availability. Lynn Stecklein/Qwest stated that the applicable features are listed on the CR.

10/16/03 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we did review the examples sent to us by AT&T and the research done indicated that the USOCs did not make it all the way to billing. Connie said that the process is to send a jeopardy back to let you know that the feature is not available so that you can remove. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if the jeopardy process is fully documented. Liz Balvin/MCI said that she has an example where the USOCs were not available at the switch and that the end user called to ask why they did not get the service they requested. Liz stated that you did confirm on the SOC that you did provision the feature. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it should have fallen off the SOC and will validate the MCI's example. Bobby Chen/Qwest will provide the example. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we need to true-up the jeopardy process and make sure it is documented. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this action item will remain open to review the MCI examples.

10/23/03 e-mail from Liz Balvin --Original Message-- From: Elizabeth Balvin [mailto:liz.balvin@mci.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 11:23 AM To: 'Kast, Steven' Cc: 'ChadWarner (E-mail)'; 'Chen, Bobby'; 'Doug Lacy (E-mail)' Subject: RE:

Steve,

We are researching what it will take not send features not available at Qwest switch but in the mean time, we need to determine how to deal with the issue of Qwest reflecting provisioned services (when a reject should result) for features not available.

Thanks,

Liz Balvin MCI Carrier Management - Qwest Region Internal Line - V625-7305 External Line - 303-217-7305 Pager (888) 900-7221

--Original Message-- From: Kast, Steven [mailto:Steven.Kast@qwest.com] Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 7:09 AM To: liz.balvin@mci.com Cc: ChadWarner (E-mail); Chen, Bobby; Doug Lacy (E-mail) Subject: RE:

Liz, A quick thought to this question. I believe that we have seen this problem before and MCI (Carren) was looking into using feature availability. Is MCI not using feature availability to determine what features are available in the switch before placing provisioning orders? We will reexamine this this issue.

Steve Kast 303 965-0427

--Original Message-- From: Elizabeth Balvin [mailto:liz.balvin@mci.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 4:46 PM To: Kast, Steven Cc: ChadWarner (E-mail); Chen, Bobby; Doug Lacy (E-mail) Subject:

Steve (and/or Bobby),

Please advise on the following issue...Qwest is completing orders for USOCs not available at the switch. While I can understand there may not be system edits in place that would cause rejects on these orders, I don't understand why there were not manually generated rejects. The completed orders places MCI LSRs out of synch with what was actually provisioned by Qwest. In addition, the end-user does not get provisioned what was requested.

Here are four examples:

1) 507-283-4893/S016268380qwmnpr 7/21/03 7/21/03 ticket #25237514 (Per Qwest, NWT not compatible with switch AXRSS)

2) 320-629-8123/S016162284qwmnpr 7/14/03 7/14/03 ticket #25237535 (Per Qwest, NWT not compatible with switch AXE10)

3) 507-835-2447/S016179601qwmnpr 8/13/03 8/13/03 ticket #25237550 (Per Qwest, NWT not compatible with switch AXE10)

4) 320-679-5594/S016302699qwmnpr 8/06/03 8/06/03 ticket #25237580 (Per Qwest, NWT not compatible with switch AXRSS)

Thanks,

Liz Balvin MCI Carrier Management - Qwest Region Internal Line - V625-7305 External Line - 303-217-7305 Pager (888) 900-7221

9/18/03 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest said that Qwest has researched this issue and believes that provisioning is catching this information. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she provided examples. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we need to review the examples from AT&T and would like to leave this action item open.

8/21/03 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest noted that we did look at the LOE for just call waiting and the LOE for all features and the LOE remains the same.

Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that this CR was critical and very very important to AT&T. Stephanie Prull/McLeod stated that they were moderately interested.

8/21/03 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we are still reviewing all USOCs and combinations of USOCs.

7/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this CR was initiated because Call Waiting ID was not available in a switch. When the feature was not available, the order was accepted instead of rejected. Carla stated that she did not think this should be a CR and that she sees this as a defect. Carla also said that she did not think they should have to come to Qwest to ask to have their orders provisioned correctly. She stated that she did not know if this would be an edit that would affect all USOCs, or if you have to go feature by feature. If you have to look at feature by feature, AT&T would like Caller ID first and the other features can wait. Carla also would like Qwest to provide two LOEs, one LOE for Caller ID and one LOE for the other features. Connie Winston/Qwest said that Qwest can certainly take that as an action item and provide the LOE for all features and the LOE for just the Caller ID portion. She stated that the LOE that we have provided on the CR, is the LOE for all features. She reviewed the current process and how we reject LSRs with features that cannot be provisioned. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that it sounds like there is an existing manual process and the LOE provided is for the mechanized process. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that is correct. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked since this applies to pre or post FOC, could Qwest confirm that in all cases it would be before the due date. Is there opportunity for the order to actually go all the way through the system and complete inaccurately with the feature on the service order. Connie Winston/Qwest said that the examples we researched did not apply to that scenario, but that we would take an action item to research if there were USOCs that could make it all the way to billing. Carla Pardee/AT&T said that she has specific examples if we need them. Connie Winston/Qwest said that would be great. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that the post FOC rejects cause the CLECs more headaches. Connie Winston/Qwest said that she understood, however, the post FOC is a jeopardy. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that a jeopardy means that the facilities are not available. Connie Winston/Qwest that’s correct the feature is not available. Pre-order provides feature availability and should be used to reduce the potential of adding a feature that isn’t available in the switch. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that pre-order is not a requirement and that she would like to see the up front edit as stringent as possible. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if Qwest could look at the ICONN database when defining the up front edit and said that she thought this might be an optimum solution. Connie Winston/Qwest said that if this candidate is voted into the 15.0 release, that we can certainly consider that when we are in definition.

To: cc:

Subject: FW: SCR060903-01 Reject Message Required if Call Waiting ID Unavailable in Switch

Lynn:

At our clarification call last week, you asked for a list of all of the features AT&T requested as a part of this change request. Our biggest priority right now, is call waiting ID. I don't want to do anything to jeopardize this request for that feature. Once that is done, we would also request the following features be added to the request. Caller ID; Call waiting; Call forwarding; Speed dial 8 and 30; Call transfer; Talking call waiting.

Thanks. Let me know if you have any questions or need additional information.

Carla Dickinson Pardee AT&T Local Services & Access Management 1875 Lawrence Street, Suite 8-38 Denver, Colorado 80202 Phone: 303-298-6101 6/16/03 Clarification Call

Introduction of Attendees Carla Pardee - AT&T, John Gallegos - Qwest, John Ebert - Qwest, Denise Martinez - Qwest

Review Description of Change Lynn Stecklein/Qwest reviewed description of change. Currently, if a CLEC submits an LSR for UNE-P requesting Call Waiting ID (USOC = N2W) and the feature is not available in a particular switch, Qwest will process the order without the feature. AT&T requests that Qwest reject the LSR and allow AT&T to contact the customer and let the customer make the decision as to whether or not the customer still wants the service without the feature.

Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the USOC noted in the description should be NWT and not N2W. She also stated that AT&T would like to include other features, not just call waiting.

John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the USOC of N2W is for residential and NWT is for business and that we would look at doing both.

Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she wouldsend the list of features that AT&T would like to include in the description of change to Lynn Stecklein/Qwest.

Confirm Areas and Products Impacted The Products associated with this change request is UNE-P and AT&T will verify the features.

Identify/Confirm CLECs Expectation AT&T requests that Qwest reject the LSR and allow AT&T to contact the customer and let the customer make the decision as to whether or not the customer still wants the service without the feature.

Identify any Dependent Systems Change Requests NA

Establish Action Plan AT&T will present this CR in the July 17, 2003 CMP Systems Meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T will revise the CR with the additional features they want Qwest to evaluate

CenturyLink Response

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR060903-01. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held June 16, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1100 to 1825 hours for this IMA Change Request with no SATE impacts. .

At the July 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 15.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR070203-01 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable : October 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

September 4, 2003 Email Sent to Sharon Van Meter/AT&T: Sharon, RE: SCR070203-01 CABS Billing for Line Splitting This email is in response to the Action Items that came out of our September 3rd conference call. The captured Action Items were for Qwest to confirm that the recurring and non-recurring charges are on the bill, confirm that cross connects are on the UNE-P summary accounts, and that if cross connects are not on the UNE-P bill, to advise where they are billed. Qwest is able to confirm that the UNE-P recurring loop charges, UNE-P nonrecurring charges and Line Splitting channel termination charges (associated with the tie-pairs) are all billed on the same UNE-P POTS BAN. All charges, which are currently billed on the UNE-P POTS bill, are mapped to the CABS/BOS billing format media. There are no "cross-connects" associated with UNE-P Line Splitting; if you are currently being billed for cross-connects, it is associated with another product and would appear on a bill separate from your UNE-P POTS bill. As stated above, however, there are tie-pairs associated with Line Splitting which are billed as Channel Terminations with a TYL++ USOC.

Based on the above information, please advise of the disposition for this CR. Is AT&T okay to withdraw this CR. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM - Systems Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com

- September 3, 2003 Conference Call Meeting Minutes Attendees: Sharon Van Meter/AT&T, Gary Duffy/AT&T/ Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeff Lindsay/AT&T, Marie /AT&T, Jami Larson/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Terri Kilker/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that Line Splitting is available in CRIS, AT&T would like confirmation that they can get Line Splitting in CABS format. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that if Line Splitting is on UNE-P, then is currently available to AT&T. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that it should then be okay. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that she read the PCAT and that Line Splitting is referenced under different systems. Sharon asked Gary (AT&T) if is okay regarding CABS. Gary Duffy/AT&T stated that is okay for recurring and non-recurring charges for Line Splitting; the question is regarding if cross connects are on the UNE-P bill. Terri Kilker/Qwest stated that she would verify that the recurring and non-recurring charges appear for Line Splitting and will verify if cross connects are billed on the UNE-P bills. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that the PCAT references cross connects but AT&T needs on the bill. Sharon stated that once Qwest verifies that cross connects do appear on the UNE-P summary accounts, AT&T may be able to withdraw this CR. Gary Duffy/AT&T agreed. Terri Kilker/Qwest will email information to Peggy Esquibel-Reed (Qwest) for distribution to AT&T. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that she would distribute within AT&T. Gary Duffy/AT&T stated that if Terri (Qwest) finds that the cross connects are not on the UNE-P bills, AT&T needs to know where they are billed. Terri Kilker/Qwest stated that she would research and would try and have the information this afternoon. There were no other questions or comments. The call was concluded.

- August 26, 2003 Email Received from Sharon Van Meter/AT&T: Peggy, Thanks for setting up the call. I would like for Qwest to further explain what elements are billed to which billing systems. We have read the PCAT and see that different pieces of the Line Splitting process are billed to different systems, so we want to make sure that the elements billed to CABS meet our needs. Also, Carla Pardee has a CR requesting that UNE-P charges are billed through the CABS billing system. I think the resolution for that is that UNE-P is billed through CRIS but in a CABS format. We will want the same thing for Line Splitting since a customer needs UNE-P to support Line Splitting. Let me know if you have any questions or need further clarification. Sharon

August 26, 2003 Email sent to Sharon Van Meter/AT&T: Good Morning Sharon -- I have scheduled a conference call to discuss CABS Billing for Line Splitting. DATE: Wednesday, September 3, 2003 TIME: 8:00 a.m. MT CALL IN: 1-877-564-8688, passcode 8571927 Would you please send me a list of your questions prior to the call. I would like to have them to make sure that I have invited the correct SMEs to answer those questions. It would also give us the opportunity to investigate the questions and have the info ready for you on the 3rd. Please note that my email address has changed to Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com. The pesquib@qwest.com will soon no longer work. Thanks Much. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332 Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com

-- August 25, 2003 Email received from Sharon Van Meter/AT&T: Peggy, We'd like to have a conference call on Wednesday, September 3 from 8-9 AM (MDT) to further discuss this CR. We have some questions and need more information before we withdraw the CR. Can you please have the SMEs on the line who would be able to answer our questions. Thanks. Sharon

- August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that this CR is in Pending Withdrawal status. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that her internal customer is reviewing the PCAT to determine if their need will be met. Sharon stated that this CR needs to remain in Pending Withdrawal and noted that she would withdraw off-line if the PCAT does meet their need. There were no other questions or comments.

- August 13, 2003 Email sent to Sharon Van Meter/AT&T: Hi Sharon -- This is an email to follow-up on the email sent to you on July 24th, see below. Have you had the opportunity to review the referenced PCAT to see if it takes care of your request stated in SCR070203-01 CABS Billing for Line Splitting? I will place this CR in Pending Withdrawal, pending your approval to Withdraw. If you feel that the referenced PCAT does not result in your need being met, please advise ASAP. Thanks much. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com

July 24, 2003 Email sent to Sharon Van Meter/AT&T: Good Morning Sharon -- This email is in regard to your submitted Systems CMP CR asking for CABS Billing for Line Splitting. Based on analysis performed after the Clarification Call, held on July 14th, it has been determined that there is no systems work to be done for this request. CABS Billing for Line Splitting is currently available to you, in conjunction with UNE-P POTS. It is a matter of sending in the LSR with the appropriate information. Please refer to the PCAT located at http://qwest.com/wholesale/pcat/linesplitting.html for ordering information. After reviewing the PCAT, please advise if you feel that a follow-up call is needed to further discuss or advise that the CR can be withdrawn at the August CMP Meeting. Thanks, Sharon. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com

- Clarification Meeting - July 14, 2003

Introduction of Attendees: Sharon Van Meter/AT&T, Carla Pardee/AT&T, Marie Ivanov/AT&T, Jeff L./AT&T, Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Crystal Soderlund/Qwest, Judy Teshima/Qwest, Luke Von Hagen/Qwest Review Requested Description of Change: Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Currently Qwest only provides CRIS as a wholesale billing option for line splitting. AT&T receives its UNE-P and UNE-Loop bills via the CABS system. AT&T requests that Qwest provide CABS as an option for CLECs to receive a wholesale bill via the CABS system. Expected Deliverable of October 2003. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest asked AT&T if they wanted to provide additional information. AT&T responded no. Confirm Impacted Interface: Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest confirmed the impacted interface of Wholesale Billing Confirm Impacted Product(s): Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest asked to confirm impacted product of Line Splitting. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated product is Line Splitting for DSL. Meeting Discussion: Crystal Soderlund/Qwest asked if UBL is currently billed via CRIS. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that is also billed via CABS. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that CABS is not billing UNE-P and UNE Loop. Jami stated that is on bill data tape, the CSR is in CABS BOS format, and is sent via NDM. Crystal Soderlund/Qwest asked if this request is the same for line splitting. Marie Ivanov/AT&T stated that Covad requires line splitting in CABS format for DSL and that AT&T is requesting in CABS, in order to provide it to Covad. Luke Von Hagen/Qwest asked to confirm that AT&T is looking for something similar, looking for BOS format via the bill data tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that could be referred to as CABS or BOS. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that Is CABS/BOS format. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T’s concern is that if AT&T is the customer of record, they need one consistent format. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that UNE-P and UNE Loop are billed via CRIS and that they format and put on the appropriate bill data tape. Jami stated that CRIS does this function. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T is requesting consistent billing format. Marie Ivanov/AT&T stated that they are referring to format and asked if there are standard fields. Luke Von Hagen/Qwest asked if this was a USOC or usage sensitive product. Marie Ivanov/AT&T stated is USOC for DSL. Crystal Soderlund/Qwest stated that line splitting is by TN but is USOC specific. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was receiving a bill for usage. Crystal Soderlund/Qwest responded no, we are billing a monthly charge. Marie Ivanov/AT&T confirmed Crystal’s comment. There were no additional questions or comments. Establish Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest stated that AT&T will present this CR at the August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting and that Qwest will be providing the CR response.

CenturyLink Response

Archived System CR SCR072303-01 Detail

Description Of Change

Status History

Project Meetings

8/6/03 Clarification Meeting

Introduction of Attendees Carla Pardee - AT&T, Dave Green - AT&T, Qiana Davis - Qwest, John Gallegos - Qwest, Nicole James - Qwest, Barb Carlson - Qwest, Lynn Stecklein - Qwest

Reviewed Description of Change Currently Qwest does not provide 2 way blocking restriction capabilities. AT&T requests that Qwest provide this functionality at the TN level. This essentially means, that when a customer is in delinquency, Qwest would be able to block both in bound and out bound calls, with the exception of 911 calls.

John Gallegos/Qwest stated that an AT&T request was submitted on February 27, 2003 (SCR022703-22 Line Level restrict for Non-Payment) and said that this CR may be a duplicate. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if this CR could be combined with SCR022703-22. Lynn Stecklein/Qwest stated that SCR022703-22 was denied on March 14, 2003 due to economic feasibility.

John Gallegos/Qwest confirmed that AT&T was requesting two way blocking but wanted to allow 911. AT&T said yes. John also asked if AT&T was looking for this change at a TN level and if a multi-line account was involved, the TN level restriction would be applicable to each line. In addition, 1 line would have full capability. AT&T said yes. Dave Green/AT&T said that AT&T internally submits at the account level and asked if there is any difference in their TN versus out TN or if they requested 2 way blocking restriction at the BTN level would it be the same as our BTN. John said that he would have to assume yes. Dave stated that Qwest provides 2 way blocking restriction at the account level and AT&T would like the restriction at the TN level. John said that AT&T send the request by the TN (or what AT&T identifies as the BTN)

Confirm Areas & Products Impacted John Gallegos/Qwest confirmed that the interface impacted is IMA Common and the Product is UNE-P. Dave Green/AT&T asked what other products would be looked at. John stated for example resale POTS.

Identify/Confirm CLECs Expectation AT&T stated that Qwest provides 2 way blocking restriction at the account level and AT&T would like the restriction at the TN level.

Identify Any Dependent Requests SCR022703-22 Line Level restrict for Non-Payment

Establish Action Plan AT&T will present this request in the August 21, 2003 CMP Systems Meeting.

CenturyLink Response

Carla Pardee AT&T

CC: Lynn Notarianni Connie Winston Sue Stott Beth Foster Kit Thomte

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR072303-01, dated 07/23/2003, titled: Request for 2 way blocking restriction.

CLEC CR Description as written by AT&T: Currently Qwest does not provide 2 way blocking restriction capabilities. AT&T requests that Qwest provide this functionality at the TN level. This essentially means, that when a customer is in delinquency, Qwest would be able to block both in bound and out bound calls, with the exception of 911 calls.

History: A clarification meeting was held on Friday August 8, 2003 with AT&T and Qwest representation. At this meeting Qwest confirmed with AT&T that this CR was requesting similar functionality as SCR022703-22, Line Level restrict for Non-Payment, which AT&T submitted in February of 2003.

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for CR SCR072303-01, Request for 2 way blocking restriction, and has determined that this change is economically not feasible. As discussed in the clarification call, in February of 2003, AT&T submitted SCR022703-22-Line Level restrict for Non Payment, requesting similar functionality, which Qwest ultimately denied due to economic infeasibility. However, the new CR submitted in July is requesting even more functionality than the original CR submitted in February 2003. The new change request would require Qwest to restructure the manner in which accounts are currently processed through the billing system. Through Qwest’s analysis it was determined that the estimate for the initial implementation of this change would be at least $1 million. Qwest believes that to implement a restriction at the line level for non-payment would be cost prohibitive.

Qwest is denying your request for SCR072303-01, Request for 2 way blocking restriction due to economic infeasibility.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR081803-01 Detail

Description Of Change

Qwest has also suggested an additional value of HA = BLANK in which the Hunting form would not need to be sent. The "BLANK" would indicate that the customer is being migrated and no hunting is being requested.

Expected Deliverable:

To not have to recap existing hunting USOCs and to utilize HA=N to be inclusive of the end state of the customers account.

Status History

Project Meetings

August 18, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was implemented in 15.0 and would remain in CLEC Test.

- July 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this was implemented in 15.0 and would remain in CLEC Test.

-- June 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated this CR will remain in CLEC Test for another month per the request of Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T.

May 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the majority of the CRs in Attachment G were deployed in 15.0. Connie said that we usually like to wait for the 1st EDI customer to certify a new release. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that when the submitting CLEC of a CR has not moved to the release and another CLEC performs the test, they may not understand the submitting CLECs intent or their system may be different. Bonnie said that she initiated a CR to establish a new status and Qwest voted no. 6/1/04 - Revision to Minutes from Eschelon. Bonnie said that we need to define in the CMP Document, a new status that fits the situation when a CR has not been tested in a release. Randy Owen/Qwest said that we might look at something between CLEC Test and Completed. Cheryl Peterson/AT&T said that we might use CLEC Test One and Two. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that we could use ‘Pending Test’ or ‘CLEC Hold’. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we would create an action item to research the possibility of establishing a new Status Code.

This CR will remain in CLEC Test.

April 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR was just deployed in the IMA 15.0 Release and will remain open for another month. There were no questions or comments. This CR remains in CLEC Test.

-- March 18, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is deploying on April 19, 2004, in the IMA 15.0 Release. There were no questions or comments.

- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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 stated that the CRs with an impact to the IMA interface would follow the existing prioritization process. Judy noted that the funding for IMA 15.0 and IMA 16.0 has been approved, as well as funding to begin work on IMA 17.0.

- MEETING MINUTES February 17, 2004 Hi-Level Walk Through of IMA 15.0 Committed CR's

Attendees: Anne Robberson-Process Analyst (Qwest), Curt Anderson- IT Systems Analyst (Qwest), Diane Burt-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Donna Osborne-Miller - Carrier Relations Manager (AT&T), Dusti Bastian-Process Analyst (Qwest), Ellen McArthur-Process Analyst (Qwest), Hank Martinez- IT Systems Analyst (Qwest), James McCluskey-ILEC Manager (Accenture), John Daugherty-Product Management (AT&T), John Gallegos- IT Manager (Qwest), Kathy Miller-Process Manager (Qwest), Kim Isaacs-ILEC Relations Process Analyst (Eschelon), Kyle Kirves- IT Analyst (Qwest), Linda Miles- Process Manager (Qwest), Lori Langston-Process Manager (Qwest), Marie Acceno-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Nancy Denny- IT Analyst (Qwest), Nicole James- IT Analyst (Qwest), Pat Bratetic- Process Manager (Qwest), Phyllis Burt-Systems Analyst (AT&T), Randy Owen- IT Manager (Qwest), Shon Higer-Process Analyst (Qwest), Shonna Pasionek- IT Analyst (Qwest), Stephanie Prull- EDI Business Analyst (Eschelon), Susie Wells-Product/Process Analyst (Qwest)

Meeting Facilitator: Nancy Denny (Qwest)

Purpose: High-level walk-through of the CRs that are committed in the IMA 15.0 Release.

Supporting Documents: Qwest Notification: SYST.02.13.04.F.01366.IMAEDI15.0Cand&DocWkth Documentation containing 15.0 Candidate Summaries: February 17, 2004, attached to notification CRs can be found in the Qwest Wholesale Change Request Interactive Report located at: http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/changerequest.html

Functional Overview: This enhancement will allow the CLEC to provide end state hunting information for Conversions/ Migrations as Specified. If hunting is desired on the converted account, the CLEC will populate the HTQTY field on the LSR with a quantity greater than zero and provide hunting information on the HGI form. On the HGI form, the only HA allowed will be N = New. If an HGI form is not provided, Qwest will remove any existing hunting from the account. If an HGI form is provided, Qwest will provision hunting on the converted account as specified on the HGI form. If no HGI form is provided, hunting USOCs and FIDs will be prohibited in FEATURE and FEATURE DETAIL on the Product Specific Form. This enhancement will not affect hunting functionality in previous versions of IMA. In addition, current hunting functionality for ACT = C, N or T will remain unchanged.

Form Impacts: Hunt Group Information (HGI) Resale (RS) Centrex Resale (CRS) Port Service (PS) - FEATURE/FEATURE DETAIL fields. LSR - HTQTY field

Products:

Functionality will be available for ACT= V or Z for: Resale POTS Resale BRI ISDN Centrex 21 PBX Analog Line Side Port Digital Line Side Port Designed Trunk Resale Qwest DSL UNE POTS (P or STAR) UNE-P ISDN BRI UNE Centrex (P or STAR) UNE-P PBX Designed Trunk

Functionality will be available for ACT = V only for: Centrex Plus/Centron UNE Centrex 21 (P or STAR)

Activities: Activity Type = V and Z

Meeting Discussion: Susie Wells/Qwest: provided the overview based on the document circulated with the meeting agenda.

Stephanie Prull/Eschelon: For ACT = W, hunting will remain even though the HGI not sent? Susie Wells/Qwest: That is correct. (John Gallegos/Qwest confirmed).

- October 16, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Kit Thomte/Qwest noted that the CR Title has been revised for the 10th ranked CR on the list. There were no questions or comments.

September 18, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the CR. Regina Mosley/AT&T stated that this CR was issued to be in synch with OBF standards. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this was all shared on the Clarification Call. There were no additional comments or questions. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR has been requested to be a Late Adder into the IMA 15.0 Prioritization. Peggy stated that it might be appropriate to do the vote at this time instead of waiting until the end of the CMP Meeting. There was no dissent for taking the vote. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest reviewed the following: A vote of ‘Yes’ will indicate that SCR081803-01 is to be included in the IMA 15.0 Prioritization, utilizing the Late Adder Process. A vote of ‘No’ will indicate that SCR081803-01 will NOT be included in the IMA 15.0 Prioritization as a Late Adder request. There were no questions associated with the Yes and No vote. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest stated that Quorum was achieved with 7 Carriers. Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest stated that emailed ‘Yes’ votes have been received from AT&T and from Qwest. Bonnie Johnson stated that Eschelon votes ‘Yes’. Monica Avila stated that VarTec votes ‘Yes’. Liz Balvin stated that MCI votes ‘Yes’. Ian Coleman stated that Allegiance ‘Abstains’ from the vote. Stephanie Prull stated that McLeodUSA votes ‘Yes’. Jennifer Arnold stated that USLink votes ‘Yes’. John Berard stated that Covad votes ‘Yes’. Alan Flanigan stated that Time Warner ‘Abstains’ from the vote. Nancy Sanders stated that Comcast votes ‘Yes’. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that based on the results of the vote, SCR081803-01 was granted by a vote of 9 ‘Yes’ votes, 0 ‘No’ votes, and 2 ‘Abstain’ votes. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if this effort could include Resale. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would review for a possible revision to the LOE. Connie stated that if the LOE can be determined in time for the ranking, it would be included in the Notification. Connie stated that if Qwest could not have the revised LOE in time for the Notification that the effort would be for UNE-P only.

-- September 8, 2003 Email Received From Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: May I please change my mind about the vote. I would like to ask that a vote to allow this cr as an exception be voted on the this month's systems forum. I had stated in my exception request that we did not want it to take place, but we do. If I need to send this "change of heart" would you like me to send another exception to cmpcr......? Thank you, Donna

September 4, 2003 Email Received From Donna Osborne-Miile/AT&T: AT&T would like to request an exception as a late adder to IMA 15.0 SCR 081803-01 Recapping of hunting USOCs After much consternation and discussion on the hunting process and the eventual agreed- upon matrix creation and distribution, we seek changes and additions to the hunting process as it relates to end state and recapping of USOCs. We seek consideration as a late adder exception to the latest IMA prioritization. In addition AT&T wishes to have the vote NOT taken at the next systems CMP meeting. We believe the community may need time to resonate on the change and to re-examine the results of IMA 15.0 prioritization. If there are any question or concerns on this request please contact: Donna Osborne-Miller at 303.465.4134 Thank you, Donna

-- September 2, 2003 Email Received From Regina Mosley/AT&T: Donna/Peggy, Hope it's not too late to make the revisions to the CR......see below...Regina Please correct wording to read: Description of Change: AT&T does not want to recap any existing hunting USOCs the customer has on their account. Whatever the customer wants as their "end state" hunting arrangement (whether the USOC is existing or not), we would populate using HA=N. This includes the hunting USOCs and the lines hunting is to be applied to. Also, if Hunting exists on the Qwest retail CSR, but is NOT specified on the LSR, it should be deleted when the customer is migrated over. Qwest has also suggested an additional value of HA = BLANK in which the Hunting form would not need to be sent. The "BLANK" would indicate that the customer is being migrated and no hunting is being requested. Expected Deliverable: To not have to recap existing hunting USOCs and to utilize HA=N to be inclusive of the end state of the customers account.

August 29, 2003 Email sent to Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Subject: SCR081803-01 Late Adder ?? Hi Donna -- In regard to your submitted CMP CR, SCR081803-01. I have attached the revised CR for your review. Please advise if corrections need to be made. I revised the CR description, Interface, and Impacted Products. A question for you - Have you submitted your exception requests? One asking to invoke the late adder process and a separate request asking that the vote be held outside of the monthly CMP meeting? If you have, can you please resend them to CMPCR@qwest.com with a copy to me? I apologize but I am not finding them. I will start the late adder process as soon as we have the exception CRs. Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems Peggy.Esquibel-Reed@qwest.com

- August 26, 2003 Email Received From Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Hello Peggy, As agreed on the clarification call, I owe you a correction in wording in the description of change to SCR081803-01: Please correct wording to read: Description of Change: AT&T does not want to recap any existing hunting USOCs the customer has on their account. Whatever the customer wants as their hunting arrangement, we would populate. This includes the hunting USOCs and the lines hunting is to be applied to. IMA release 13.0 introduces new hunt values that are more specific that what is in IMA 12.0. AT&T would like to utilize HA= N to include "end state" as well. Expected Deliverable: To not have to recap existing hunting USOCs and to utilize HA=N to be inclusive of the end state of the customers account.

- Clarification Meeting - August 22, 2003: ATTENDEES: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Regina Mosley/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest, Curt Anderson/Qwest, Mallory Paxton/Qwest, Shon Higer/Qwest REVIEW REQUESTED DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: AT&T does not want to recap any existing hunting USOCs the customer has on their account. Whatever the customer wants as their hunting arrangement, we would populate HA= (value determined by team)and provide the hunting USOCs and the lines hunting is to be applied to. IMA 13.0 will introduce new hunt values that are more specifice than what was in IMA 12.0 . AT&T woiuld like to add another hunting value: perhaps that of A, for example. To illistrate, associated rules for A would look something like this: A= to show end state of the account (this would be used for E (to convert hunting with no change) and C (to change hunt sequence) The E and the C values would not br replaced with the end state as the CLECs would be given a choice to use A versus E or C. Expected Deliverable: As stated and requested in the description of change, adoption of HA=A to the hunting rules. CONFIRM INTERFACES: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the interface noted is IMA EDI. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that it should be IMA Common, in the interest of the CLEC Community. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest agreed to revise the interface to reflect IMA Common. CONFIRM PRODUCTS: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the noted product is UNE-P. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that in the interest of the CLECs, it is for all products. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest agreed to revise the impacted products to All UNE-P. DISCUSSION: Regina Mosley/AT&T requested to change the CR Description to ask for a new value and to use an existing value of 'N' to be end-state, as well as for new. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she thought that would be better. Curt Anderson/Qwest stated that he agreed with Mallory and that it is OBF compliant to use 'N' for end-state. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that then there would be 2 options for migration or conversion, An 'N' would be for end-state. A blank would result in the removal of all hunting. Mallory noted that an 'N' would be used to keep, add, or change hunting; that it would be treated like a request for new service. Mallory stated that if the Hunting Form is not filled out, the CLEC would not get hunting. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that in other words, a blank or no hunting form would result in no hunting. N would be the only valid value for HA. Regina Mosley/AT&T asked if hunting exists on the Qwest CSR and is not specified on the LSR, how would the other USOCs get deleted, does not want to recap anything. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that with conversion as specified, if the USOCs are left off, they don't get the feature. Shon Higer/Qwest stated that if hunting is not specified, it would be removed and would not get converted. Regina Mosley/AT&T stated that she does want hunting to work the same way, if it is not specified, they are not to get hunting. Shon Higer/Qwest stated that he understands the request. Donna Osborne-Miller/Qwest stated that she would like this to be a late adder. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest advised AT&T that they will need to submit an exception request asking to invoke the late adder process and needs to submit an exception request asking that the vote be held outside of the CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments.

- August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion (Attachment F - Walk-on Requests): Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the CR description. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked Regina Mosley (AT&T) if this request should also include blocking. Regina Mosley/AT&T stated that she was still checking with Peter Cole (AT&T) and noted that 14.0 does include blocking for end state. Regina stated that this CR is for the 15.0 vote. Kim Isaacs/Eschelon stated that end state for Listings is via recapping in LML. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that was also in 14.0. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if this candidate made the cut-off date for 15.0. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it did not make the cut-off date to be included in the 15.0 vote. There were no additional questions.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR081803-01 Seeking Ability To Migrate UNE-P Customer As End-State

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request (SCR081803-01). Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held August 22, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1900 to 2400 hours for this IMA Change Request, and an impact to SATE of 40 to 60 hours.

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.

This Change Request is currently an eligible candidate for the IMA 16.0 prioritization. At the request of AT&T, there will be a vote conducted at the September Systems CMP Meeting seeking to allow this candidate as a Late Adder into the IMA 15.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR092503-03 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

For AT&T to be able to use it’s RSID in SATE testing.

Status History

Project Meetings

-- October 7, 2003 Email Sent to AT&T: Donna, In the SATE enviroment, there is no other field but the CCNA field that uniquely identifies one customer from another. Let me know if you have additional questions. Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

-- October 7, 2003 Email to AT&T: Donna, I will forward your question to John and Woldey. Thanks, Peggy

October 7, 2003 Email Received from AT&T: Hi Peggy, Is it too late for Qwest to consider this: is there another field that IT could look at in the SATE environment that uniquely identifies the CCNA? We were hoping that is a key field in which logic could be built to support this suggestion? Can you please take back to John and Woldey? Thank you, Donna

- October 7, 2003 Email Sent to AT&T: Hello Donna, Attached is a current revised report of your submitted CMP CR, SCR092503-03 Request to Change CCNA (RSID) in SATE Test Environment. The revision contains the Qwest Response to your request. Due to the denial response, there will not be a vote at the October CMP Meeting for this CR to be considered as a Late Adder into the most recent SATE Prioritization. I'm sorry this could not be better news. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

- 10/30/03 Clarification Call

ATTENDEES Donna Osborne-Miller - AT&T, Regina Mosley - AT&T, Phyllis Burt - AT&T, Woldey Assefa - Qwest, Shonna Pasionek - Qwest, John Gallegos - Qwest, Lynn Stecklein - Qwest

REVIEW DESCRIPTION OF CHANGE Lynn Stecklein - Qwest reviewed the description of the CR. AT&T is requesting Qwest to Change CCNA (RSID) in SATE Test Environment. SATE is coded with predefined SATE specific RSIDS. With this limitation AT&T is forced to use what has been designed in logic. This restriction forces AT&T to do code changes while testing. AT&T would like to use its RSID in production, in the SATE test environment.

CONFIRM AREAS & PRODUCTS IMPACTED The interface impacted is SATE for all products.

IDENTIFY/CONFIRM CLEC'S EXPECTATION Expected Deliverable: For AT&T to be able to use it’s RSID in SATE testing.

DISCUSSION Woldey Assefa - Qwest asked AT&T to describe the problem they were having with the RSID for SATE. Regina Mosely - AT&T stated that the problem is that when they begin testing they are using the production RSID, then they have to change to R03, and finally have to change back to T02. Woldley asked if the field was a drop down and AT&T said no, it is coded. Woldley said that the environment is very data driven and used the example of AT&T with the RSID of T02 and Woldey with the RSID of W02. The 'CC' field on the account is tracked by the last two digits of the RSID. In this example, the system only tracks the '02' portion of the RSID and that is where the problem is. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if CLEC has its own RSID and Woldley said yes. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked why SATE could not recognize the three character RSID. Woldley stated that to have SATE recognize the three character RSID would require a full re-architecture of SATE. Donna Osborne-Miller - AT&T asked Woldley to explain why recognizing the three characters would require a full re-architecture. Woldley explained that all the logic is driven by that code. John Gallegos - Qwest stated that this effort would be extremely large and that we are trying to look at other alternatives. Donna Osborne-Miller asked if Phyllis or Regina had any ideas of an alternative. They could not think of any at this time. Donna said that if they thought of an alternative, they would contact Qwest. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon said that Eschelon is in full support of this CR.

ESTABLISH ACTION PLAN AT&T will present this CR at the October CMP meeting as a 'late adder'

September 29, 2003 Email Received from AT&T: Hello Peggy, AT&T would like to submit SCR092503-03 as a late adder to SATE prioritization pertaining to IMA 15.0 Thank you, Donna Osborne-Miller

- September 29, 2003 Email to Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Donna, Would you please provide me with your availability for the Clarification Meeting for your CMP CR of SCR092503-03. Please provides me with several options through October 6th. Thanks much. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

-- September 18, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that her business partner has a business need for SATE and asked if she should wait until 15.0 SATE Prioritization has completed. Donna stated that the RSID of R03, in SATE, needs to be the same as production. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that would be the right approach. Jim Maher/Qwest stated that it would need to be requested as a Late Adder since prioritization process starts today. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that if SATE does not mirror production, that aspect should be researched. Woldey Assefa/Qwest stated that is the nature of how SATE works, that it has a different RSID. Liz Balvin/MCI stated okay. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would submit a CR.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller, AT&T

CC: Lynn Notarianni Connie Winston Sue Stott Beth Foster Christy Turton Kit Thomte

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR092503-03 dated 09/25/03, titled: Request to Change CCNA (RSID) in SATE Test Environment.

CLEC CR Description as written by AT&T: "SATE is coded with predefined SATE specific RSIDs. With this limitation AT&T is forced to use what has been designed in logic. This restriction forces us to do code changes while testing. AT&T would like to use its RSID in production, in the SATE test environment Expected Deliverable: For AT&T to be able to use it’s RSID in SATE testing."

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for CR SCR092503-03. The EDI SATE environment has been specifically architected and designed around the CCNA’s of R01 thru R99 in order to control environmental and data variables such as number of users, system performance, data integrity rules, simplicity of customer use, security of test transactions, parity between CLECs, proper documentation, thorough system testing, and achievement of expected results to the Customer. The implementation of production CCNA’s into the SATE environment equates to a significant increase in the scope of the current SATE environment, including potential test clients, transaction support, system testing, documentation, infrastructure, and maintenance. The proposed change would have significant impacts requiring the re-architecture of the SATE system, and a significant system scope increase requiring the purchase of additional hardware and software. The initial cost of implementing the SATE system rework, the required redesign of the multiple systems feeding into SATE, and on-going maintenance costs, makes this request economically not feasible.

Qwest is denying your request for CR SCR092503-03, Request to Change CCNA (RSID) in SATE Test Environment based on the economically infeasibility of implementing the request.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR042303-01XES Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T and AT&T vendors on coordinated dispatches. The current process used is to contact the CLEC center thirty minutes in advance of dispatch arrival. This is not enough lead time for AT&T or it's vendors to ensure that the actual meet takes place, since the Qwest tech will not wait for AT&T's vendor. AT&T had established with Verizon, Bell South and with SBC, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) around coordinated dispatches. Under these agreements, all AM-scheduled vendor meets are to occur at 9AM(local time) and all PM vendor meets are to occur at 1PM (local time). Wait time for either tech is limited to 30 minutes. Development and implementation of this process reduced "missed" vendor meets by 73% withing the first two months.

Expected Deliverable:

ATT requests a similar process as described above. (MOU) This would include any system changes necessary by Qwest to be implemented to support this type of process. Implementation of this process/system change would allow both AT&T and QWEST to better manage situations requiring a coordinated dispatch, resulting in fewer "no access" or "vendor meet ,no show" and would reduce missed commitments for these reasons.

Status History

Project Meetings

Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that this CR could be Closed.

6/17/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T had a conference call with Qwest Communications to discuss how Vendor Meet can be requested via Mediaac. Donna stated that Qwest provided the parameters and asked Qwest if this was documented. Donna stated that Qwest said that documentation was not required. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T would like to keep this CR open another month to determine how this process will work.

5/3/04 From: Bonnie Johnson , cmpcr@qwest.com Subject:CEMR Vendor Meet function

Eschelon committed to verify the functionality is working in CEMR for:

SCR042303-01XES ATT requests that Vendor Meet (coordinated dispatch) requests for non-design POTS service be at specific times (originated by AT&T)

I have verified with our RSB that this does work in CEMR.

Bonnie J. Johnson Director Carrier Relations Eschelon Telecom, Inc. Phone612 436-6218 Fax612 436-6318 Cell612 743-6724 bjjohnson@eschelon.com

5/20/04 Systems CMP Meeting

This CR will remain in CLEC Test.

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we are working internally on this AT&T request and that there will be more to come. This action item remains open.

4/22/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this request was implemented on April 4, 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that this request was not implemented per AT&T standards. Donna said that this request clearly stated that AT&T wanted this functionality implemented in MEDIAAC but Qwest implemented the request in CEMR. Donna stated that before this request was crossed over from Product/Process to Systems, AT&T made it clear that they wanted a Memorandum of Understanding process implemented including any system changes necessary to support this kind of process in MEDIAAC. Donna stated that Qwest should have advised AT&T upfront before crossing this request over to systems and that the request would be implemented in CEMR. Donna stated that there may have been confusion associated with this request and the 'Commit Time' CR. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest is still working with Network to evaluate a Memorandum of Understanding. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon will validate the functionality in CEMR.

This CR remains in CLEC Test.

- 3/18/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is due to deploy on April 4, 2004. There were no questions or comments.

2/19/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the original targeted implementation date for this CR was October 10, 2004. Connie said that she was notified that the new targeted date is April 4, 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would go back to her clients to determine if a conference call is still necessary and will contact Lynn Stecklein/Qwest with the details.

1/22/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this has not yet been scheduled.

12/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting

Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this action item will remain open because we do not have a scheduled date yet. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if Qwest requested an end date because they need to provide a by date to their Vendor. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the scheduling is done on a case-by-case basis. Lynn said that that we need to look at all Qwest systems impacted and try to schedule in conjunction with everyone’s timeframes.

Kit Thomte/Qwest said that Craig Suellentrop/Qwest thought this CR was Product/Process until late September. Kit also said that we discussed improvements to the CR identification process in the Documentation meeting yesterday. Kit stated that we have process improvements in place that should reduce this problem in the future.

11/20/03 CMP Systems Meeting

Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this CR is in Evaluation and that we do not yet have the LOE. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that she would like to know why it took so long to cross this CR over from Product and Process. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that we would take an action item to follow up why. (Eschelon Comment Received 12/9/03: Bonnie said there should have been an action item from last month to review the time frame.)

E-Mail sent to AT&T 10/27/03

Donna,

This is in response to your request that we determine if SCR042303-01X (AT&T requests that Vendor Meet requests for non-design POTS service be at specific times) could be implemented in December of 2003 and if there would be a manual process. After researching your questions further, the following has been determined. Qwest will not be able to implement this request in December of 2003 and that there will be no manual process. I have created an action item to communicate the targeted implementation date in the November 20, 2003 CMP Systems Meeting.

Please call me with any questions or concerns on 303 382-5770.

Thanks,

Lynn Stecklein CRPM Systems 303 382-5770 Lynn.Stecklein@qwest.com

10/16/03 CMP Systems Meeting Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that this CR was discussed in the Product/Process Meeting and agreement was reached to Cross Over PC042303-1 to Systems. Liz Balvin/MCI asked for the process associated with Cross Overs CR’s Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that when a CLEC CRs is received, Qwest evaluates to determine if the CR should be processed as a system or product/process CR. Kit stated that we confer with the IT and Process organizations. Kit stated that the CRPMs notify the CLEC as soon as the determination is made. Judy Schultz/Qwest stated that we should not be changing the category unless the originator agrees with the decision. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that PC042303-1 (AT&T request that Vendor Meet (coordinated dispatch) request for non-design POTS service be at specific times) submitted in mid April and has target date of December of 2003. Donna asked why this could not be done in November. Liz Balvin/MCI said that the manual portion could be completed until the system piece catches up. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked why it took so long to cross over. Connie Winston/Qwest said she could not speak to the timing issue and that she wasn’t engaged in the Product/Process CR. Connie said that the Product/Process owner owes you a response. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that if the December 2003 date is pushed out that they need 4 weeks internal notice. Donna asked if this CR would need to be prioritized since it is a system CR. Beth Foster/Qwest stated that there is not prioritization on the CEMR System. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that she would like Qwest to strongly consider this request to be in the next CEMR release and if that can’t be done, what kind of manual process can be done. Eschelon Comments 10/29/03 to Meeting Minutes – List Action Item Communicate targeted implementation date (SCR042303-01X AT&T requests that Vendor Meet (coordinated dispatch) requests) and determine if there will be a manual process in the interim.

October 15, 2003 CMP Meeting Craig Sullentrop – Qwest advised it has been determined that this CR has impacts to RBE, which are visable to CEMR. As a result of this, the CR needs to be crossed over to Systems. ATT uses Mediacc, and there are not changes to Mediacc, however other CLECs use RCE. Donna Osborne Miller advised okay to cross over to Systems.

September 17, 2003 CMP Meeting Craig Suellentrop – Qwest reported that an internal status meeting is scheduled for next week. The development is on track and estimated time frame is December 2003. Liz asked Craig to refresh her memory and Craig advised this is for the joint meet which has to be requested.

CMP Meeting 08-20-03

Suellentrop-Qwest stated that the CR should stay in development because there were a number of internal systems that had to move through the 90 day development cycle. Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked when she could expect delivery. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that he estimated implementation would come in December 2003.

=================================

CMP Meeting 07-16-03

Sullentrop-Qwest presented the Qwest acceptance. He stated that when Qwest developed the full solution it would follow the appropriate notification process. He stated that this might entail systems changes, but he wasn’t sure if they would be CLEC facing changes. Zimmerman-AT&T asked for Qwest’s tentative implementation date. Sullentrop-Qwest stated that he thought it would take at lease a couple of months. Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked if the systems changes would involve IMA. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that he didn’t think they would involve prioritized systems. He stated that he would have much more information at the August CMP Meeting. He stated that Qwest was looking at a 30 minute meeting window. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that was good. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that this new process would be available for systems other than electronic bonding. Johnson-Eschelon stated that Eschelon had submitted a CR in 2001 (PC092801-2) for the same thing and Qwest denied it. She asked why Qwest was accepting AT&T’s. White-Qwest stated that he would research the reason and correspond directly with Johnson.

=================================== CMP Meeting 06-18-03

Suellentrop-Qwest asked that the CR be moved into Evaluation status. Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that AT&T would forward their contacts in the other ILECs to Qwest. ========================================================== CMP Meeting 05-21-03

Osborne Miller-AT&T presented the CR. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that UNE-P and resale products are affected by this. Stichter-Eschelon stated that she had opened a similar CR that was denied. Johnson-Eschelon asked if there should be a CMP process to review previously denied CRs. Osborne Miller-AT&T stated that Verizon, SBC and Bellsouth have all converted to a similar process after AT&T presented them with the data. Suellentrop-Qwest asked AT&T to send the appropriate data to White-Qwest. ========================================== Clarification Meeting Friday, May 09, 2003

1-877-550-8686 2213337#

Attendees Matt White – Qwest Craig Suellentrop – Qwest Anthony Washington – Qwest Donna Osborne-Miller – AT&T Craig Zimmerman – AT&T Lydia Braze – AT&T Paulita Moore – AT&T

Introduction of Attendees White-Qwest welcomed all attendees and reviewed the request.

Review Requested (Description of) Change Osborne-Miller-AT&T reviewed the CR. Suellentrop-Qwest verified that this CR was for UNE-P and resale and that the request was for 24 hours advance notification. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that he envisioned a 24 to 48 hour notification. He explained that AT&T submitted the initial dispatch request via electronic bonding system and then followed up with a call. Zimmerman-AT&T asked if any other CLECs have approached Qwest with similar requests. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that he seemed to remember a similar request around 2 years ago. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that this request only applies to only 1-2% of total dispatches in any area.

Confirm Areas and Products Impacted White-Qwest confirmed that the attendees were comfortable that the request appropriately identified all areas and products impacted.

Confirm Right Personnel Involved White-Qwest confirmed with the attendees that the appropriate Qwest personnel were involved.

Identify/Confirm CLEC’s Expectation White-Qwest reviewed the request to confirm AT&T’s expectation.

Identify and Dependant Systems Change Requests White-Qwest asked the attendees if they knew of any related change requests.

Establish Action Plan White-Qwest asked attendees if there were any further questions. There were none. White-Qwest stated that the next step was for AT&T to present the CR at the May Monthly Product/Process Meeting and thanked all attendees for attending the meeting.

September 17, 2003 CMP Meeting Craig Suellentrop – Qwest reported that an internal status meeting is scheduled for next week. The development is on track and estimated time frame is December 2003. Liz asked Craig to refresh her memory and Craig advised this is for the joint meet which has to be requested.

CMP Meeting 08-20-03

Suellentrop-Qwest stated that the CR should stay in development because there were a number of internal systems that had to move through the 90 day development cycle. Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked when she could expect delivery. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that he estimated implementation would come in December 2003.

=================================

CMP Meeting 07-16-03

Sullentrop-Qwest presented the Qwest acceptance. He stated that when Qwest developed the full solution it would follow the appropriate process. He stated that when Qwest developed the full solution it would follow the appropriate notification process. He stated that this might entail system changes, but he wasn't sure if they would be CLEC facing changes. Zimmerman-AT&T asked for Qwest’s tentative implementation date. Sullentrop-Qwest stated that he thought it would take at lease a couple of months. Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked if the systems changes would involve IMA. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that he didn’t think they would involve prioritized systems. He stated that he would have much more information at the August CMP Meeting. He stated that Qwest was looking at a 30 minute meeting window. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that was good. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that this new process would be available for systems other than electronic bonding. Johnson-Eschelon stated that Eschelon had submitted a CR in 2001 (PC092801-2) for the same thing and Qwest denied it. She asked why Qwest was accepting AT&T’s. White-Qwest stated that he would research the reason and correspond directly with Johnson.

CMP Meeting 06-18-03

Suellentrop-Qwest asked that the CR be moved into Evaluation status. Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that AT&T would forward their contacts in the other ILECs to Qwest.

CMP Meeting 05-21-03

Osborne Miller-AT&T presented the CR. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that UNE-P and resale products are affected by this. Stichter-Eschelon stated that she had opened a similar CR that was denied. Johnson-Eschelon asked if there should be a CMP process to review previously denied CRs. Osborne Miller-AT&T stated that Verizon, SBC and Bellsouth have all converted to a similar process after AT&T presented them with the data. Suellentrop-Qwest asked AT&T to send the appropriate data to White-Qwest. ==========================================

Clarification Meeting Friday, May 09, 2003

1-877-550-8686 2213337#

Attendees Matt White – Qwest Craig Suellentrop – Qwest Anthony Washington – Qwest Donna Osborne-Miller – AT&T Craig Zimmerman – AT&T Lydia Braze – AT&T

Introduction of Attendees White-Qwest welcomed all attendees and reviewed the request.

Review Requested (Description of) Change Osborne-Miller-AT&T reviewed the CR. Suellentrop-Qwest verified that this CR was for UNE-P and resale and that the request was for 24 hours advance notification. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that he envisioned a 24 to 48 hour notification. He explained that AT&T submitted the initial dispatch request via electronic bonding system and then followed up with a call. Zimmerman-AT&T asked if any other CLECs have approached Qwest with similar requests. Suellentrop-Qwest stated that he seemed to remember a similar request around 2 years ago. Zimmerman-AT&T stated that this request only applies to only 1-2% of total dispatches in any area.

Confirm Areas and Products Impacted White-Qwest confirmed that the attendees were comfortable that the request appropriately identified all areas and products impacted.

Confirm Right Personnel Involved White-Qwest confirmed with the attendees that the appropriate Qwest personnel were involved.

Identify/Confirm CLEC’s Expectation White-Qwest reviewed the request to confirm AT&T’s expectation.

Identify and Dependant Systems Change Requests White-Qwest asked the attendees if they knew of any related change requests.

Establish Action Plan White-Qwest asked attendees if there were any further questions. There were none. White-Qwest stated that the next step was for AT&T to present the CR at the May Monthly Product/Process Meeting and thanked all attendees for attending the meeting.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

Dear Ms. Osborne-Miller:

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

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

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

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Director - Information Technologies Qwest

Revised Response November 12, 2003 DRAFT RESPONSE RE: SCR0042303-01X

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR042303-01X. Based upon research that has been conducted following the additional Clarification meetings (held October 16, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the November Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

July 9, 2003

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Response - CR PC042303-1

This CR requests that vendor meets for non-designed products be made at a specific date and time. AT&T has suggested that all AM vendor meets could take place at 9:00 am and all PM vendor meets take place at 1:00 pm.

A Joint Meet involves Qwest, CLECs, and possibly third party vendors, meeting at a designated location to isolate hard-to-find faults, verify existing trouble and diagnosis, and resolve chronic and repeat problems. Qwest accepts this change request to allow CLECs to request a joint meet at a specific time. Qwest proposes this CR be moved into development status. Qwest needs to finalize the mechanics of this process, including how far in advance a joint meet request must be made and any system changes that will be required.

Sincerely,

Craig Suellentrop Staff Advocate, Policy & Law Qwest

Cc: Mary Retka, Director-Legal Issues, Qwest Cathy Augustson, Lead Process Analyst, Qwest

June 11, 2003

DRAFT RESPONSE For Review by CLEC Community and Discussion at the June 18, 2003, Monthly CMP Product/Process Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

SUBJECT: Qwest’s Change Request Response - CR PC042303-1 AT&T requests that Vendor Meet (coordinated dispatch) requests for non-design POTS service be at specific times.”

This CR requests that vendor meets for non-designed products be made at a specific date and time. AT&T has suggested that all AM vendor meets could take place at 9:00 am and all PM vendor meets take place at 1:00 pm.

The current vendor meet process for non-designed products gives the customer a 4-hour window for the vendor meet. Because of the complexity in evaluating this request, including possible systems changes that may be required, Qwest requests that this CR be moved into Evaluation Status. Qwest will provide an updated response at the July CMP meeting.

Sincerely,

Craig Suellentrop Staff Advocate, Policy & Law Qwest

Cc: Mary Retka, Director-Legal Issues, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR102703-01ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable - Qwest to send all DUF files for calls crossing state borders as unrated calls no later than January 2004.

Status History

Project Meetings

Lynn Stecklein/Qwest stated that Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T agreed to close this CR on October 15, 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T agreed that the CR could be closed.

10/7/04 E-mail from AT&T

Hi Lynn, AT&T will not close this CR as there remain issues. We are still seeing rated DUF files pertaining to cross border scenarios. This should not be occurring. I have asked Lydell to have the SME that implemented this CR on our center to center call scheduled for Monday morning of next week. I hope we have permanent resolution and closure by the October meeting. We will see.

Thank you for your patience while awaiting response from my team members.

9/16/04 System CMP Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she needs to validate with her Customer before agreeing to close. Connie Winston/Qwest said that we could work offline to close this CR and AT&T agreed.

8/18/04 Systems CMP Meeting

Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this CR may not have been implemented per requested. Connie Winston/Qwest asked if AT&T opened a trouble ticket. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that they have been in touch with their Service Manager and will submit a trouble ticket. Donna asked if she should submit the ticket via the normal process. Connie Winston/Qwest said yes.

5/20/04 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this CR is 8/5/04. This action item will be closed.

1/22/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE for this request is 1500 to 3000 hours. This action item can be closed.

11/20/03 CMP Systems Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T presented the CR. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest understands this request and that the CR would remain in evaluation.

10/30/03 Clarification Meeting

Attendees: Brenda Tibbets - AT&T, Carla Pardee - AT&T, Cyndy Bray - AT&T, Don Kerschner - Qwest, Carrie Stirman - Qwest, Mark Heline - Qwest, Alan Zimmerman - Qwest, Kerri Waldner - Qwest, Peggy Esquibel - Reed - Qwest, Lynn Stecklein - Qwest

Review Description of Change AT&T is requesting that Qwest send all DUF files for calls crossing state borders as unrated calls no later than January 2004.

Discussion Alan Zimmerman/Qwest asked if this is only for the 10-01-19 record or any toll calls (etc) that cross stated boundaries. Cindy Bray/AT&T stated that this would apply to any unrated call that comes across the DUF and said that Qwest uses this process for informational purposes only. Alan Zimmerman/Qwest stated that you would expect to see a rated call alternately billed. Alan Zimmerman/Qwest asked if Independent Company unrated was included in this request. Cindy Bray/AT&T said no only 'incollect". Alan Zimmerman/Qwest asked what the business benefit to AT&T would be. Cindy Bray/AT&T stated that this will eliminate confusion with 'incollects'. Brenda Tibbets/AT&T stated that the state boundary should change the record. Alan Zimmerman/Qwest asked if this was happening in all regions. Cindy Bray/AT&T said she thought this was happening in the Central and Eastern Regions.

Confirm Areas & Products Impacted The products impacted are resale and UNE-P

Identify/Confirm CLECs Expectation

Establish Action Plan AT&T will present this change Request in the November 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting.

CenturyLink Response

SCR102703-01-E23 March 30, 2004

Carla Pardee AT&T LSAM Manager

SCR102703-01-E23 March 30, 2004

Dear Ms. Pardee:

This letter is in response to your March 22, 2004 escalation # SCR102703-01-E23 (Unrated DUF Files Across State Boundaries). In this escalation AT&T is requesting an implementation date of no later than June of 2004.

Qwest understands that AT&T has a desire for unrated DUF files in this change request and had been working to get funding for this work approved. Qwest has now approved the work associated with SCR102703-01 to be completed. Qwest is working to determine potential implementation timeframes and cannot commit to a June implementation at this time.

Qwest will commit to an implementation date as soon as the final solution can be determined and the necessary resources mobilized. Qwest will communicate the implementation dates as soon as they are finalized.

Sincerely, Connie Winston Director – Qwest Information Technologies

Carla Pardee AT&T LSAM Manager

Dear Ms. Pardee:

This letter is in response to your March 22, 2004 escalation # SCR102703-01-E23 (Unrated DUF Files Across State Boundaries). In this escalation AT&T is requesting an implementation date of no later than June of 2004.

Qwest understands that AT&T has a desire for unrated DUF files in this change request and had been working to get funding for this work approved. Qwest has now approved the work associated with SCR102703-01 to be completed. Qwest is working to determine potential implementation timeframes and cannot commit to a June implementation at this time.

Qwest will commit to an implementation date as soon as the final solution can be determined and the necessary resources mobilized. Qwest will communicate the implementation dates as soon as they are finalized.

Sincerely, Connie Winston Director – Qwest Information Technologies

REVISED RESPONSE

January 15, 2004

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR102703-01. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held October 30, 2003) Qwest is able to provide the LOE of 1500 to 3000 hours for this Wholesale Billing Change Request.

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

Sincerely, Qwest DRAFT RESPONSE

November 10, 2003

RE: SCR102703-01

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR102703-01. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held October 30, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the November Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR102703-02 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

Qwest to send Category 11 packs under the state specific RAO no later than January 2004.

Status History

Project Meetings

March 22, 2004 Email Sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Carla, This CR was Denied back in December. I sent an email to you and to Donna Osborne-Miller with the Denial Response on December 10, 2003. Qwest then provided the Deial Response to the CLEC Community at the December 17th Systems CMP Meeting. I have attached a copy of the CR containing the Denial Response. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

- March 22, 2004 Email Received from Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi again Peggy. I was looking over the list you forwarded earlier this morning, and did not see this request. I have been unable to get into the interactive CR site this morning. Do you know what the status of this is? I know I hadn't been attending the Systems meetings for a while - but I am concerned this one fell out of site somehow...maybe it was denied, and just didn't know. At any rate, could you check into this for me? Thank you.

-- December 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this CR was denied. There were no comments or questions.

- Received Email from Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: they are going to do the barest of bare in the billing arena, aren't they.

-- December 10, 2003 Email Sent to Carla Pardee & Donna Osborne-Miller at AT&T: Hi Carla and Donna, I am attaching a copy of SCR102703-02 (Change Category 11 DUF Packs by RAO) which contains the Qwest response. This CR will be in the December Systems Distribution Package. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

- November 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T reviewed the CR Description and stated that based on the Clarification Call, there does not seem to be a lot of gray area for this request. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest does understand the request and that Qwest is still evaluating this CR. Lynn noted that it seems to be a very large change. This CR was moved to Evaluation Status.

- Clarification Meeting - October 30, 2003 ATTENDEES: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Cindy Bray/AT&T, Brenda Tibbets/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Carrie Stirman/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Alan Zimmerman/Qwest, Don Kerschner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the Description of the CR is: Qwest is currently sending its Category 11 DUF files under one RAO (Colorado) for all Category 11 activity throughout the 14-state Qwest territory. AT&T requests that Qwest send the Category 11 DUF files by the state specific RAO the activity reflects. Qwest has a list of state specific RAO’s, and AT&T believes that Qwest should be sending activity using the state specific RAO list. The current Qwest practice makes it very difficult to identify and process records from other states. Expected Deliverable: Qwest to send Category 11 files under the state specific RAO no later than January 2004. IMPACTED PRODUCTS: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked to confirm that this CR is for UNE-P. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that can also add Resale to the impacted products. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest agreed to make the addition of Resale onto the CR. IMPACTED INTERFACE: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked to confirm that this is a CR for Billing. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated yes. DISCUSSION: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if AT&T had anything else to add, to the CR description. AT&T had no additional information. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked what questions did Qwest have. Alan Zimmerman/Qwest asked if this CR was related to DUF Packs, not files. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated yes. Don Kerschner/Qwest asked if this was appearing in all regions. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that Central appears with Colorado's RAO and Western with RAO 131, which is Oregon's. Carla stated that Eastern may be RAO for Nebraska. Alan Zimmerman/Qwest stated that they are packed per region, not per state. Kerri Waldner/Qwest asked for the business problem that this creates for AT&T. Cindy Bray/AT&T stated that they need seperated by state to make it easier to process and bill usage. Cindy stated that it would also be easier for AT&T to determine which state a problem is occurring in, when there is a problem. Don Kerschner/Qwest asked if the need is for separate files by state. Alan Zimmerman/Qwest stated that would be separate packs. AT&T stated yes, separate packs. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the CR information should be revised to indicate 'DUF Packs' in lieu of 'DUF Files'. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that yes, the CR should be revised. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would make the revisions to the CR. AT&T stated that this would then be similar to Category 10's. Brenda Tibbets/AT&T asked when this CR would be implemented. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest will now go back and determine what will be needed to make this change and stated that a status would be provided at the November Systems CMP Meeting. Peggy stated may not yet have an implementation date, but a status would be provided. There were no additional questions or comments. ACTION PLAN: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR will be presented, by AT&T, at the November Systems CMP Meeting. The call was concluded.

CenturyLink Response

Carla Pardee AT&T

CC: Connie Winston Lynn Notarianni Sue Stott Beth Foster Christy Turton Kit Thomte Judy Schultz

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR102703-02, dated 10/27/03, titled: Category 11 DUF Packs by RAO.

CR Description: Qwest is currently sending its Category 11 DUF files under one RAO (Colorado) for all Category 11 activity throughout the 14-state Qwest territory. AT&T requests that Qwest send the Category 11 DUF packs by the state specific RAO the activity reflects. Qwest has a list of State Specific RAO’s, and AT&T believes that Qwest should be sending activity using the state specific RAO list. The current Qwest practice makes it very difficult to identify and process records from other states.

Expected Deliverables/Proposed Implementation Date (if applicable): Qwest to send Category 11 packs under the state specific RAO no later than January 2004.

History: A clarification meeting was held on October 30, 2003 with AT&T and Qwest representation. At this meeting, Qwest stated that the RAO’s were packed per region, not per state. AT&T stated that they would like to have them separated by state in an effort to allow for easier processing and bill usage. Qwest asked if the CR should be revised to indicate ‘DUF Packs’ in lieu of ‘DUF Files’ since the request was essentially asking for separate packs and not separate files.

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for SCR102703-02, Category 11 DUF Packs by RAO, and has determined that this change does not provide a reasonable demonstrable business benefit. The requested change would require significant system costs and additional resources. Through Qwest’s analysis, it was determined that the information requested in this CR is already provided to the CLECs and can be customized by the CLEC based on their needs/requirements. The applicable TN is provided on each record of the Daily Usage File (DUF). The RAO can be derived using NPA-NXX of the TN. Therefore, all the information that is needed to identify and process records and to bill usage is currently available on the DUF file.

Qwest is denying your request for SCR102703-02, Category 11 DUF Packs by RAO, due to no reasonable demonstrable business benefit.

Sincerely,

Qwest

-- DRAFT RESPONSE

November 7, 2003

RE: SCR102703-02 Category 11 DUF Packs by RAO

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR102703-02. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification Meeting (held October 30, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the next Systems CMP Meeting.

At the November 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

Archived System CR SCR103003-03 Detail

Description Of Change

We seek relief and resolution to this dilemma immediately. We cannot wait for months to receive this detailed event log as day to day activity occurs and with it the possibility of order flow issues.

Expected Deliverable:

That Qwest will provide it’s documented chronological history logs at CLEC’s request. This includes OSS, ASR or any other electronic environment where such information may be needed.

Status History

Project Meetings

- November 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she has discussed this CR with Randy Owen (Qwest). Donna stated that she discussed, with Randy, the intent of the CR and an occurrence that happened on September 20th. Donna stated that AT&T wants to collect data from Qwest in order for AT&T to do a root cause analysis using a chronological event of what happened and what Qwest thinks happened in order to compare the two. Donna stated that the Clarification Call was held and that AT&T is withdrawing this CR. Donna stated that AT&T will ask for information via a data request and not via a CMP CR. There were no questions or comments. This CR is Withdrawn.

- E-mail received from Donna Osborne-Miller 11/10/03 - Action Item closed

Hi Lynn, I had an action item as a result of a clarification call that was held last Friday morning. This information pertains to SCR103003: ATT request Qwest's Chronological OSS Systems Log when a connectivity issue arises between trading partners. Randy Owen had requested a copy of what I had sent to Cim Chamber. Here it is. Thank you Lynn.

Description: Sporatic problem with connnectivity to Qwest. No information provided by Qwest on actions taken to resolve problem. Pre Existing Gap Description: Customer Impact: Users unable to perform pre-order with Qwest. Business Impact: Problem Description: Sporatic pre-order connectivity with Qwest. 14:05 User report problem with pre-order in LOS. CCC creates ticket. 14:20 First call to CCC from reps. CCC able to replicate. 14:26 Referred to NLP. 15:00 Ensure no problem on AT&T side. 15:12 Appears to be a problem with AZ / MN. 15:14 Ticket Upgraded to Sev 1. 15:15 Notified LEC - left message. 15:30 LEC returned call - helpdesk gave them the required information. 15:40 No call back from LEC yet. Helpdesk called and again left message. 16:06 Helpdesk called LEC again - reached Dawn Beck. 16:19 Kathy from Qwest said techs are working issue as a Sev 1 - no ETR 16:34 Qwest called indicating that they pulled a SWAT bridge together and will call every 15 minutes with status. 16:41 Dawn Beck called - see sees pre-order coming thru. 17:14 LEC said they are seeing responses going back to AT&T and we are rejecting them. 17:24 Paged out Tier II - Qwest says they will join bridge. 17:41 Bounce interactive agent - tried pre-order no success. 17:54 Qwest and Tier II working together on issue. 18:05 Pre-order started to work Was a 320 job that was running for 4 1/2 hours that needed to be killed. 18:24 Qwest decided to bounce something on their side 18:45 IBM ASM bounces interactive agent and pre-order daemon and servers. 22:03 GNOC joins bridge - could not find any problems. It appears to be sporatic. 23:00 Qwest system down for normal maintenance. Corrective Action: Qwest bounced some entity on thier end - problem resolved. Not currently known waht they did to fix problem.

Clarification Meeting - November 7, 2003: ATTENDEES: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Shonna Pasionek/Qwest, Lee Gomez/Qwest, Randy Owen/Qwest, Woldey Assefa/Qwest, Cim Chambers/Qwest, Brenda Kerr/Qwest REVIEW CR DESCRIPTION: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR Description: "AT&T requires Qwest to provide their OSS Chronological Event Log. AT&T had experienced Pre- ordering issues on September 20th. In trying to do a root cause analysis, AT&T requested Qwest’s OSS event log history. All that was provided back to AT&T was general information. AT&T provided it’s detailed documentation of the September 20th connectivity /order flow situation it was encountering to Qwest. The request was escalated to the Qwest Account Manager in order to obtain the accurate detailed log that we were seeking. The Account Manager was told that this would not be provided to AT&T because it was proprietary information and that this needed to be brought to CMP. AT&T is not seeking to infiltrate the proprietary nature of Qwest’s OSS environment. We need Qwest to share what it has documented in those cases where there are order flow issues between the two trading partners. We do not want Qwest’s abbreviated version of what occurred. We seek relief and resolution to this dilemma immediately. We cannot wait for months to receive this detailed event log as day to day activity occurs and with it the possibility of order flow issues. Expected Deliverable is that Qwest will provide it’s documented chronological history logs at CLEC’s request. This includes OSS, ASR or any other electronic environment where such information may be needed." CONFIRM INTERFACE(s): Other due to potential impacts to Directory Listings, IMA, Mediacc, and/or Billing CONFIRM PRODUCTS: All DISCUSSION: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked AT&T if they had additional information to share. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated no. Randy Owen/Qwest asked what is meant when AT&T refers to an OSS Event Log. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she has provided information to Cim Chambers (Qwest) and stated that is the same information that she is looking for on an OSS Log. Donna stated is looking for items such as when they call in trouble and a ticket is opened and talks to Qwest; wants to know who talked to and what happened to the ticket. Randy Owen/Qwest asked if AT&T was looking for a log of the SWAT; of who and what was involved with the ticket. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated yes and stated that she would forward some information to Peggy Esquibel-Reed (Qwest). Randy Owen/Qwest asked AT&T how they get from a connectivity issue to a flow-through issue. Randy asked AT&T if they could be more specific about what problem that they are encountering that an Event Log would help with. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that it would help with issue's and problems with pre-order. Cim Chambers/Qwest stated that AT&T is looking for help when information on a pre-order does not make it to Qwest and when Qwest responses do not get to AT&T. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated yes, that's correct. Donna stated that the details that she receives back are vague. Donna stated that flow-through may not be the correct term to use. Donna stated that there is a problem in pre-order and at the order level. Donna also stated that AT&T is also finding discrepencies, which makes determining a root cause, difficult. Donna stated that this results in Qwest determining that the root cause is different than what AT&T determines the root cause to be. There were no additional questions or comments. ACTION PLAN: AT&T to present CR at the November Systems CMP Meeting.

November 5, 2003 Email Sent to Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Donna -- I have scheduled the clarification meeting for your CR 'Request Receipt of OSS Chronological Event Log'. Details are: DATE: Friday, November 7, 2003 TIME: 10:00 a.m. MT CALL IN #: 1-877-564-8688, 8571927 Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

November 3, 2003 Email Sent to Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Donna, Thank you for talking with me this morning about your submitted CMP CR requesting an OSS Chronological Event Log. As agreed upon this morning, after our discussion, this CR will be processed normally (not as an exception). As agreed, we will have the Clarification call, then determine what the appropriate next step is, based on the Clarification call discussion and what the impacts are to the systems and/or documentation. Please provide several options of dates and times for the Clarification Meeting and I will get it scheduled as soon as possible. Thanks, Donna. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems 303.382.5761

CenturyLink Response

November 7, 2003

RE: SCR103003-03 Request Receipt of OSS Chronological Event Log

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR103003-03. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification Meeting (held November 7, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the next Systems CMP Meeting.

At the November 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-01 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003.

Status History

Project Meetings

- September 15, 2003 Email Received From Carla Pardee/AT&T: Peggy - sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I have been on vacation. I talked with our internal client, and they have not experienced any problems with these CABS changes. Consequently, AT&T is willing to close these two CRs. Thanks. See you Thursday. Carla

-- September 10, 2003 Email Sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- This email is in regard to 2 of your CMP CR's: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Process Bill Data and CSRs on the same day SCR012103-02 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills These 2 CR's were deployed on July 21, 2003. Would you please let me know if they are ready for closure, at the September Systems CMP Meeting or if there are issues that will prevent closure. If there are issues, please advise me of what they are so that we can research prior to the meeting. We will then be able to provide you with a status of the research, if any is needed. I appreciate any information that you can provide in advance of the CMP Meeting. Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems

- August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this CR was deployed on July 21, 2003. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she would like to leave this CR open for validation. There were no additional comments or questions.

- July 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the implementation date for this billing CR is July 21, 2003.

May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is July 2003. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the Action Item remain open until she communicates the date to Carla (Pardee/AT&T)

April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this is one of the CABS/BOS CRs and at the last meeting we gave a targeted date in May. Lynn stated that we need to communicate new dates. Lynn stated that coding has begun for the Eastern Region and that we are targeting end of July for completion. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if this was currently available in the Central and Western Regions. Beth Foster/Qwest stated yes. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest asked if this action item could be closed. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes.

April 3, 2003 Record Update: Qwest has determined that a phased implementation of SCR012103-01, will allow CLECs to begin to receive CABS formatted bills for the Eastern Region for processing bill data and CSRs on the same day. This functionality is currently available for the Central and Western Regions. The phased implementation for the Eastern Region began on April 1, 2003 and is targeted for completion on July 21, 2003.

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE for this request is 2500 to 3500 hours and the targeted implementation date is May 5, 2003.

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies.

I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated:

ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only.

ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item.

ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item.

ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate.

ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item.

ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true.

ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item.

ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item.

ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item.

Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates

Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer

--Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates

Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help.

Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date.

Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest

CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed.

Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing

Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set.

Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified.

CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1.

ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2.

ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3.

ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4.

ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5.

ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6.

ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7.

ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8.

ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9.

ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10.

Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Process Bill Data and CSRs on the same day.

Qwest has determined that a phased implementation of SCR012103-01 will allow CLECs to begin to receive CABS formatted bills for the Eastern Region for processing bill data and CSRs on the same day. This functionality is currently available for the Central and Western Regions. The phased implementation for the Eastern Region began on April 1, 2003 and is targeted for completion on July 21, 2003.

Sincerely, Qwest

- REVISED DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003

RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Process Bill Data and CSRs on the same day.

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-01. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 2500 to 3500 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface Change Request. This CR, SCR012103-01 has a targeted implementation date of May 5, 2003.

At the next Monthly Systems CMP Meeting, CMP participants will be given the opportunity to comment on this Change Request.

Sincerely, Qwest

-- DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003

RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates

Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments.

Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR022703-15 Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T is requesting that QWEST support a valid value of E (END STATE) allowing us to indicate the end state of on subsequent change orders. This will allows us to add and delete blocking within one order (BA = E) instead of sending two orders - one to specify the deletion (BA = D) and another to specify the addition (BA = A). The new BA value of E will in fact behave like a combination of Z (remove all blocking) and A(add) all on one order.

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Esquible-Reed-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Paxton-Qwest stated that the team could analyze if this CR could be incorporated into the Qwest CR. She stated that there might be a manual work around that could be used, but not as the long term solution. Mosley-AT&T asked about the manual work around. Paxton-Qwest stated that Qwest was currently working on PCAT updates and that the appropriate notice would be distributed. Pardee-AT&T asked when the notification would come out. Paxton-Qwest stated that she thought it would be within the next week and that a Level 3 notice would be issued with a comment cycle. She continued that the Qwest CR provided a mechanized solution.

Esquible-Reed-Qwest asked if there were any changes to the CR. No changes or additions were given.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-15 Resolve Production Issue with BA field

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-15. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 2450 to 4075 hours for this IMA Change Request.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-17 Detail

Description Of Change

CLEC has been told that the AN on the FOC may not be reliable and a subsequent CSR query is in order for subsequent ordering. This adds to time operationally

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Stecklein-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Green-Qwest asked about the statuses. Bert-AT&T discussed with AN to use on FOC. Leo-AT&T stated that they were looking for the correct AN on FOC SOC and BCN.

Nolan-Qwest stated that the products impacted would be changed to UNE-P Pots based on the eariler discussion. She asked the team what interfaces would be impacted. Green-Qwest stated that she believed that the request was IMA Common. AT&T agreed. Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that SCR022703-18 was more important to AT&T in comparison to SCR022703-17. She continued that if AT&T could "get" SCR022703-18 then there would be no need for SCR022703-17 and that it would be withdrawn. Nolan-Qwest asked if there were another other comments or changes to the CR. No changes.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

CC: Qwest Communications: Connie Winston Sue Stott Beth Foster Kit Thomte

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR022703-17, dated 02/27/03, titled: Account Number Reliability after completion of the order.

CLEC CR Description: CLEC current understanding is that the Account Number is assigned by QWEST after the order is FOC’s and Completed. CLEC will like to rely on this AN from the FOC, SOC, BCN as the AN the CLEC will need to use on all subsequent change orders for a specific account.

CLEC has been told that the AN on the FOC may not be reliable and a subsequent CSR query is in order for subsequent ordering. This adds to time operationally

History: A clarification meeting was held on Wednesday, March 12, 2003 with AT&T and Qwest representation.

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for CR SCR022703-17, Account Number Reliability after completion of the order, and has determined that this change is economically not feasible. This request would require Qwest to restructure the manner in which accounts are currently processed through the billing system. Through Qwest’s analysis it was determined that the estimate for the initial implementation of this change would be in the range of $2 - $3 million. In response to trouble ticket 6170469, Qwest will provide the final AN in the billing completion notice (BCN) a.k.a. Posted to be Billed Status Update. By providing the final AN in this notice, Qwest is providing the final AN to the CLEC in a notice therefore eliminating the need for a CLEC to perform a subsequent CSR query. Qwest believes that to provide the AN on the FOC and SOC would require a large, unnecessary expenditure.

Considering that Qwest is prepared to provide the AN on the BCN, Qwest is denying your request for SCR022703-17, Account Number Reliability after completion of the order, based on economic infeasibility.

Sincerely,

Lynn Notarianni Information Technologies Senior Director Qwest

DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003

RE: SCR022703-17 Account Number Reliability after completion of the order

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-17. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-18 Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T is requesting that QWEST internally manage the CUST CODE after the account has been converted and request the elimination of CUST CODE information on subsequent orders. The CLEC provided telephone number in the AN field and the ZCID information in the CCNA field on the Order should uniquely identify the account after conversion.

Expected Deliverables/Proposed Implementation Date (if applicable):

To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Status History

Project Meetings

February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that there seems to be a problem with the documentation in that it looks like something wasn’t covered. Phyllis stated that the CR’s intent was to get rid of the customer code. Phyllis stated that for UNE-P POTS, they send an order for a listing change only, with a HB request type, then receive an error stating that a full AN is needed and is looking for the customer code. Phyllis asked if there was anything that can be done to eliminate the customer code. Connie Winston/Qwest asked if a trouble ticket had been opened by AT&T. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she has been working with the EDI Team and that she was advised that the HB was not within the scope of the CR. Connie Winston/Qwest asked if AT&T had coded to that, encountered the problem, and now AT&T wants Qwest to fix it until they can re-code. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that the intent of the CR was to eliminate the customer code and it was not eliminated for UNE-P. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the CR description did state was for all UNE-P so Qwest will look at this, in more detail. Connie stated that she does not know what can be done and stated that the response would go thru the EDI Team. Connie stated that the Act Type of HB was not within this CR’s scope. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked if the CLECs needed to state all ACT Types on requests. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest was clear in the products and ACT Types in the 14.0 walk-through. There were no additional comments or questions.

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

- December 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T requested that this CR remain in CLEC Test.

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

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

Functionality Description: A CLEC is requesting that IMA remove or relax the requirement requiring a full AN (including customer code) on subsequent order activity of converted accounts. Today, IMA is rejecting a request if a fully-qualified AN (includes customer code) is not provided on the request; multiple active CSRs match the TN provided on the request and no failed pre-order CSR retrieval attempt has been recorded within the previous 24 hours. With this enhancement, IMA will not require the CLEC to provide Customer Code information on post migration requests. Additional functionality is being added that will help in determining recently or changed converted accounts. This will further enhance the ability to uniquely identify the CLECs CSR.

Products: All Products

Forms Impacted: N/A

Fields Impacted: N/A

ACTs: B, C, D, L, Y, T

Questions & Answers:

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, the existing Account Number field (LSR #7 AN) will still be used to capture the 10 digit BTN. A: Curt Anderson - Qwest responded yes and stated that the field functionality is not changing.

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

September 18, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that all products would be implemented, that has a CSR. Liz Balvin/MCI asked if Qwest is going to somehow secure the CSR. Connie Winston/Qwest stated with TN & SANO validation. Connie stated that if the SANO does not match, it would reject. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that with migrate by TN, if the SANO doesn’t match, you are to do a pre-order CSR check. Liz stated that if the customer code is not required, it should not be a requirement. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that you might want to check pre-order if the TN & SANO don’t match. Connie noted that if a CLEC doesn’t do pre-order, Qwest will reject. Connie stated that she could confirm that. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she was now okay. There were no additional comments or questions. This Action Item is closed.

September 10, 2003 Email sent to Liz Balvin/MCI: Liz -- In regard to your question on the product scope for SCR022703-18 Eliminate CLEC Cus Code Requirement. This CR will be implemented for all products. I have opened an action item to communicate this information at the September Systems CMP Meeting. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems

- September 5, 2003 Email sent to Liz Balvin/MCI: Liz -- I am checking into your question regarding SCR022703-18 Eliminate CLEC Cus Code Requirement and will send a response soon. The document that listed the products that are in-scope and out-of-scope is located on the Qwest Wholesale web site, URL: http://QWEST.COM/wholesale/cmp/teammeetings.html Please look under the Heading of 'Systems Attachments for August CMP Meeting'. The document is the fourth bulleted item. Let me know if you need further assistance in locating the document. Have a good weekend. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- System

September 3, 2003 Email Received from Liz Balvin/MCI: Kit, At the August CMP, Qwest provided a document titled SCR022703-18 "Eliminate CLEC Customer Code Requirement" with in and out of scope products list. MCI questioned the exclusions given customer code was an internal tracking code imposed by Qwest. MCI understood the CR requested Qwest secure the valid customer code such that the onus would not be placed on CLECs to track, please confirm. In addition, I could not locate the document, can you please provide me a copy. Thanks in advance, Liz Balvin MCI Carrier Management - Qwest

- August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that while Qwest was defining this CR it was determined that not all products were within the scope of this CR, as defined in the document that was brought into the room and posted to the web for those attendees on the phone. IN SCOPE: POTS Resale, Pvt. Line Resale, PAL-Co-Providers, Unbundled Loop, Interim Number Portability, BRI ISDN Resale, Centrex Plus/Centron, Centrex 21, PBX, Analog Line Side Port, Digital Line Side Port, DID In Only Trunks, Designed Trunk Resale, Unbundled Analog DID/PBX Trunk Port, Unbundled DS1 DID/PBX Trunk Port Facility, Unbundled DS1 DID/PBX Trunk, Qwest DSL, Unbundled Distribution Loop, Loop Splitting, Line Splitting, UNE POTS (P or STAR), EEL/UNE Combination, PRI ISDN Resale Facility, PRI ISDN Resale Trunks, UNE-P ISDN BRI, UNE Centrex (P or STAR), UNE Centrex 21 (P or STAR), UNE-P PRI ISDN Facility, UNE-P PRI ISDN Trunk, UNE-P PBX DID In Only Trunk, UNE-P PBX Designed Trunk, UNE P DSS Facility, UNE-P DSS Trunk OUT of SCOPE: Line Sharing, Shared Distribution Loop. Resale Frame Relay, Unbundled Feeder Loop, Facility Based Directory Listings - These products are not applicable since a CSR retrieval attempt is not performed at order time. Local Number Portability, Loop Number Portability, Listings Only, Unbundled Distribution Loop with NP - These products are not applicable for ACT=B, C, D, L, Y, or T. Liz Balvin/MCI asked why they were outside of the scope. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that some of products do not have customer codes. Phyllis Burt/AT&T recommended a walk through of the entire IMA 14.0 commitment list. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would hold an ad-hoc meeting before the monthly meeting. Liz Balvin/MCI suggested that Qwest send out a high level explanation of the CRs and then the CLECs could provide questions before the meeting. Connie Winston/Qwest agreed.

- Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting - April 17, 2003

IMA 14.0 INITIAL PRIORITIZATION LIST (ATTACHMENT N) Liz Balvin/MCI asked why the ‘Eliminate CLEC Customer Code Requirement’ CR is considered to be in 14.0 due to the Migrate by TN and SANO CR. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that while it does make progress towards it, she believes that there are still order types/ request types that are not covered. Lynn asked AT&T if they want this CR to remain. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the CR is actually for all products. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T still very much needs relief from the customer code requirement and the intent of their CR is to remove that requirement. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that if it covers all products, then it is a benefit for everyone. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest asked Liz if she was okay with this. Liz Balvin/MCI stated yes, she is fine.

- Clarification Meeting - March 12, 2003 9:00-11:00 AM

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

Nolan-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that this CR was dealing with an issue with the Cust Code. Bert-AT&T stated that there were issues with the account number and that reserve may not always work. Martinez-Qwest stated that there was a CR to change the LR form in the IMA 13.0 Release, but if the request was to change the Cust Code that was not part of the CR.

Nolan-Qwest stated that the products impacted would be changed to UNE-P Pots based on the eariler discussion. She asked the team what interfaces would be impacted. Bert-AT&T stated that the interface would be IMA Common.

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were another other comments or changes to the CR. No changes.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-18 Eliminate CLEC Customer Code Requirement

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-18. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1425 to 2400 hours for this IMA Change Request and 300 to 350 hours for SATE testing.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003

RE: SCR022703-18 Eliminate CLEC Customer Code Requirement

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-18. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-19 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverables/Proposed Implementation Date (if applicable): Compatible with release 14.0.

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Nolan-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Manning-Qwest stated that there was a simular CR submitted by WorldCom that had been prioritized for the IMA 13.0 Release. She stated that it was in regards to address valadation by TN. Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked what the CR number was. Manning-Qwest stated that it was SCR091302-01. Osborne-Miller stated that she would discuss with WorldCom and if it was found that the CR covered AT&T request then the AT&T CR would be withdrawn.

Nolan-Qwest stated that the products impacted would be changed to UNE-P Pots based on the eariler discussion. She asked the team what interfaces would be impacted.

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were another other comments or changes to the CR. No changes.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-19 Eliminate Multiple Match on Address Validation by TN

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-19. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1100 to 1825 hours for this IMA Change Request and there are no SATE impacts.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003

RE: SCR022703-19 Eliminate Multiple Match on Address Validation by TN

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-19. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-20 Detail

Description Of Change

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Nolan-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Martinez-Qwest asked if this CR was covered in Qwest's new CR. Paxton-Qwest stated that the Qwest CR currently had blocking. Bert-AT&T stated that for feature and blocking they have to know what the customer has and then act on it. Paxon-Qwest stated AT&T was requesting that when Qwest had the CSR and then AT&T wanted to tell Qwest what was new. She stated that this was different then the Qwest CR. Bert-AT&T stated that she wanted the end state of the CSR. Gallegos-Qwest stated that this request was simular to SCR022703-15. Bert-AT&T asked if change activity type after migration could be added to the Qwest CR. Paxton-Qwest stated that she would review and suggested that AT&T leave the CR open while she was researching. She asked if there were any other products that AT&T wanted to add. Bert-AT&T stated that it would be just UNE-P POTS.

Nolan-Qwest stated that the products impacted would be changed to UNE-P Pots based on the eariler discussion. She asked the team what interfaces would be impacted. Bert-AT&T stated that the interace was IMA Common.

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were another other comments or changes to the CR. No changes.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-20 Eliminate Positive Reports on Blocking

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-20. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 700 to 1175 hours for this IMA Change Request.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-21 Detail

Description Of Change

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Nolan-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Bert-AT&T stated that "D" should also be added to the request. Green-Qwest stated that this CR was very simular to WorldCom's CR SCR022703-24 that was submitted on the same day. Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that she would work with Balvin-WorldCom to review both CRs. She stated that maybe they could combine and withdrawal one.

Nolan-Qwest stated that the products impacted would be changed to UNE-P Pots based on the eariler discussion. She asked the team what interfaces would be impacted. Bert-AT&T stated that the interface was IMA Common.

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were another other comments or changes to the CR. No changes.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-21 Eliminate Service Address and Listed Name after Account has been converted

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-21. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1300 to 2200 hours for this IMA Change Request and SATE impacts of 200 to 250 hours.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-22 Detail

Description Of Change

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Nolan-Qwest reviewed the CR title and the Description of Change. She asked if there were any additions, changes or questions. Bert-AT&T stated that Qwest currently supported "deny" and "seasonal". She stated that "seasonal" could be restricted at the line level, but that "deny" was only at the account level. She stated that the CR was requesting "deny" at the line level. Paxton-Qwest stated that Qwest did not offer "seasonal" at the line level in the Western Region. She stated that there were large billing differences between "seasonal" and "deny". She stated that the CLECs currently use the Qwest retail collection tool. Gallegos-Qwest stated that Qwest billed at the account level, not the line level. He stated that Qwest would need to include that change in the LOE for the CR. Bert-AT&T asked if "seasonal" was billed at the line level. Gallegos-Qwest stated that it was, but not in the Western Region where it wasn't an option. Bert-AT&T asked if the LOE for this CR would include the Western Region and if they would have line level restrict for all regions. Gallegos-Qwest stated that the LOE would include all regions, but not for "seasonal". Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that they did not want two LOEs and that they were requesting line level non-pay for all three regions. Mason-Qwest stated that a charge for restoring a line would be charged at the line level with this change. Carne-Qwest stated that currently non-pay applies to the account level and that restoring was charged at the account level. Sear-Qwest stated that with this change, if the lines were seperated out, then the charge would apply to each TN.

Nolan-Qwest stated that the products impacted would be changed to UNE-P Pots based on the eariler discussion. She asked the team what interfaces would be impacted. Bert-AT&T stated that it was IMA Common.

Nolan-Qwest asked if there were another other comments or changes to the CR. No changes.

Clarification Call completed.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

CC: Qwest Communications: Connie Winston Sue Stott Beth Foster Kit Thomte

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR022703-22, dated 02/27/03, titled: Line Level restrict for Non Payment.

CLEC CR Description: Particularly for MultiLine accounts. CLEC would like the ability to restrict each line for non Payment individually, one at a time. Additionally, to restore each line one at a time.

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

History: A clarification meeting was held on Wednesday, March 12, 2003 with AT&T and Qwest representation.

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for CR SCR022703-22, Line Level restrict for Non Payment, and has determined that this change is economically not feasible. This request would require Qwest to restructure the manner in which accounts are currently processed through the billing system. Through Qwest’s analysis it was determined that the estimate for the initial implementation of this change would be a minimum of $1 million. Qwest believes that to implement a restriction at the line level for non-payment would be cost prohibitive.

Qwest is denying your request for SCR022703-22, Line Level restrict for Non Payment due to economic infeasibility.

Sincerely, Qwest

DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003

RE: SCR022703-22 Line Level restrict for Non Payment

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-22. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-04 Detail

Description Of Change

For Example:

Today QWEST is sending the following:

USOC = Feature 1 (3 way Calling)

FID = TN

FIDDATA = Telephone Number 1

USOC = Feature 2 (Call Waiting)

FID= TN

FIDDATA = Telephone Number 3

USOC = Feature 1 (3 way Calling)

FID = TN

FIDDATA = Telephone Number 2

USOC = Feature 3 (Speed Dial 8)

FID = TN

FIDDATA = Telephone Number 1

All of the information is randomly sent without any type of logical structure. We don’t know how many lines are within the account therefore we have to search thru the entire response to identify the unique line (TNs) and then restructure the CSR response so that this information is reported so that it makes sense to our service reps. They can view every available on each line at a quick glance.

We are requesting via this CR:

Quantity of Lines = 3

Telephone Number 1 has:

Feature 1 (3 way Calling)

Feature 3 (Speed Dial 8)

AT&T requests that QWEST supports a Parsed CSR based on predefined LSOG Fields instead of LICs (Listing Instruction Codes), FID and FID Data (see fields on associated Products forms such as RTY, LTY, PLA, PIC, ALI, LTOS, PIC, LPIC, FEATURE & FEATURE DETAIL)

For Example:

Today QWEST is sending the following:

FID = AL

FIDDATA = (B)(LNR) WINDOW, JANE

FID = LN

FIDDATA = (OCLS) FLEET, CALVIN

QWEST is not parsing the data in the desired LSOG fields. Our Service Reps are required to translate the QWEST specific FID & Listing Instruction Codes (LICs) information in order to understand what the customer currently has in place today.

We are requesting via this CR :

RTY (Record Type) = LAL

LNLN (Listed Last Name) = WINDOW

LNFN (Listed First Name) = JANE

BRO (Business/Residence Placement Override) = R

ALI (Alphanumeric Listing Identifier Code) = B

RTY = LML

LNLN = FLEET

LNFN = CALVIN

DML (Direct Mail List) = O

Expected Deliverables/Proposed Implementation Date (if applicable):

Compatible with Release 14.0.

Status History

Project Meetings

- March 10, 2004 Conference Call Attendees: Phyllis Burt-AT&T, Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T, Regina Mosley-AT&T, Carla Pardee-AT&T, Peggy Esquibel Reed-Qwest, Conrad Evans-Qwest, John Gallegos, Qwest, Terri Kilker-Qwest John Gallegos-Qwest stated that he requested the meeting to discuss and ensure that Qwest was going down the right path for this 14.0 candidate. John stated that Qwest did receive Phyllis Burt's email stating that it is not the direction that AT&T wants to go, based on the examples provided by Qwest. Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked if Qwest is now clear. John Gallegos-Qwest stated that Qwest is very clear and will make sure that the change that Qwest is currently working on will not take place. John stated that Qwest will not go forward and the bug fix would not go in. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that it impacted main listing only. John Gallegos-Qwest responded correct and will keep it as it is and make no changes. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest asked if the revision to SCR103103-01 needed to be removed. John Gallegos-Qwest stated that it did not need to be removed, the revision stays. John stated that it is just the 14.0 bug that would not go forward. Regina Mosley-AT&T stated that in Phyllis Burt's email, the Qwest example shows the LML under each SNL Loop. John Gallegos-Qwest stated that it what is being requested within SCR103103-01 Parsed and Structured CSR #2. Regina Mosley-AT&T responded okay. John Gallegos-Qwest re-stated that the 14.0 candidate would stay in place and Qwest would not make any more changes for the 14.0 candidate. Phyllis Burt-AT&T asked if any other CLECs have complained. John Gallegos-Qwest stated that they have not and that this is just an impact to AT&T. Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T thanked Qwest for the call. There were no additional questions or comments.

March 8, 2004 Email Received from AT&T: Hi Peggy, I wanted to provide some feedback before our meeting tomorrow. Based on the attachment, it seems that QWEST is proposing to send back multiple LMLs (resulting in multiple SLN Loops for the LML only). As QWEST is probably aware, this is not what AT&T requested. Our discussion was about one LML with multiple LFIDS (resulting in one SLN for each unique listing). See examples below.

As far as I can tell during SATE testing, this issue only occurs with the LML. I think sending multiple LMLs on the PreOrder CSR Response would cause confusion for the CLECs. Based on our IMA 14.0 SATE test results, AT&T Consumer had to modify our software and test this modification so we could handle listing data (SLN Loops) that was not associated to a listing. The QWEST proposed change would require additional code changes by AT&T Consumer since we're not expecting multiple LMLs. If my understanding of the QWEST proposal is correct, I would prefer that QWEST either make the changes as AT&T proposed or leave things the way they are.

For example: If the Customer has three listing one Main (LML) and two Additional Listings (LALs)

Thanks, Phyllis

March 8, 2004 Email Sent to AT&T: I have scheduled the meeting to take place as follows: DATE: Wednesday, March 10, 2004 TIME: 8:30 MT / 10:30 ET CALL-in #: 1-877-564-8688, 8571927 Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems

March 8, 2004 Email Sent AT&T: Hi All, Qwest would like to have further discussion with you in regard to your Parsed and Structured CSR Change Request. I have attached a document with some examples that we would like to use in this discussion. It looks like the Qwest calendars are open on Tuesday, March 9th at 12:00 p.m. MT / 2:00 p.m. ET. Please advise if this time works for you. I will then schedule the call and send you the call-in information. Thanks much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM -- Systems 303.382.5761

- February 25, 2004 - Conference Call SCR022703-04 Support of Parsed and Structured CSR (deployed with the IMA 14.0 Release) SCR103103-01 Support of Parsed and Structured CSR #2 (currently ranked 13 of 50 in IMA 16.0)

Attendees: Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T, Phyllis Burt-AT&T, Regina Mosley-AT&T, Kim Isaacs-Eschelon, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest, John Gallegos-Qwest, Conrad Evans-Qwest, Danelle Haynes-Qwest

Purpose: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the purpose of the call was to discuss the 2 CR’s that were submitted, by AT&T, for Parsed and Structured CSR.

Meeting Discussion: Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that something was noticed as part of the 14.0 release for Part 1 of the 2-CRs. Phyllis stated that EDI was not coming back as AT&T assumed it would, based on disclosure. Phyllis stated that AT&T expected every DL in a separate structure. Phyllis stated that there needs to be a fix for the LFID and stated that Qwest has said that it is not a bug and that the system is working as it was designed. Phyllis stated that her EDI Team suggested that she modify the CR for Part 2 to get the LFID issue taken care of. Phyllis noted that AT&T had sent an email (February 17, 2004) regarding this issue. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the emailed information was received. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that AT&T had specifically coded to handle the LFID. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that there have been extensive ad-hoc meetings to identify and close any gaps and noted that the Listing Section was not mentioned or discussed. Conrad Evans/Qwest stated that on previous conference calls, what was discussed was the structuring of the S&E Section. Conrad again stated that the Listing Section was not ever discussed. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she was in agreement that the discussions for Parsed and Structured CSR were regarding the S&E Section and that the Listing Section was not discussed. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that Qwest understands the issue and the concern and apologized that AT&T was experiencing difficulty surrounding this candidate. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that Qwest really couldn’t do a fix for the 14.0 candidate, as it would be a very large effort for the work that needs to be done for the Listing Section. John stated that AT&T can revise their Parsed and Structured CSR #2 to incorporate the Listing Section. John stated that Qwest understands what AT&T is looking for. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she agrees with revising of the #2 CR (SCR103103-01). Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Phyllis (Burt) could send the revision to her. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked what, in addition to the emailed information, needed to be provided. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the information from the email would be sufficient and could be incorporated into the CR as the revision. John Gallegos/Qwest again apologized for the difficulty that AT&T was having. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that AT&T agrees that the Listing Section was not discussed in the original scope of the first CR (SCR022703-04). Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would revise the CR and provide a copy of the revised CR to the participants on the call. There were no additional comments or questions.

-- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments G, H & J): Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest is working an open issue with AT&T and the CR needs to remain open. 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 stated that the CRs with an impact to the IMA interface would follow the existing prioritization process. Judy noted that the funding for IMA 15.0 and IMA 16.0 has been approved, as well as funding to begin work on IMA 17.0.

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

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

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

Functionality Description: Restructure the IMA Pre-Order CSR response to identify the Quantity of Lines on an account and display each service level TN with all of its associated Features together. For example, Quantity of Lines on Account = 2 Telephone Number 303 555-1234 has Feature 1 (3 Way Calling) and Feature 3 (Speed Dial 8). (not all inclusive) Telephone Number 303 555-1235 has: Feature 1 (3 Way Calling). Parse CSR response on pre-defined LSOG fields, instead of Listing Instruction Codes, FIDs, and FID data. Pre-order only. IMA Recap functionality is not in scope for this Candidate

Products: All TN based products. Note: Centrex is not included in scope.

Other impacts: Pre order Query /CSR Developer worksheet

Field Impacts: Note: TOS & Title2D are NOT IN SCOPE

ADI NOSL ALI NSTN BLOCK OMTN BRO PIC DML PLA FEATURE PROF FEATURE DETAIL PUL HID RTY HNTYP STYC HTSEQ TERS LNPL TITLE1D LPIC TL LSCP TLD LTEXT TMKT LTN TOA LTXTY WTN LTY DESD

ACTs: N/A

Questions & Answers:

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, will the Service and Equipment data be sent as a repeating structure for each TN similar to the RS form (one EDI PO1 segment for each TN). A: Connie Winston - Qwest responded yes and noted that repeating is not a pre-order function. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked if the CLECs would be getting a structured CSR. Connie Winston - Qwest responded yes, the CLECs would be getting a structured CSR.

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

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, will the Account Level data (such as Service Address, Cust code) be sent in the first occurrence of the repeating structure for each TN? A: Connie Winston - Qwest responded no, as there is no relationship to a TN. Connie stated that the account level S&E information would appear at the top of the S&E data before the Line level information. Connie stated that the Service address does not appear in the S&E section, it appears in the listing section. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked how they would appear. Connie Winston - Qwest stated that EDI Disclosure would provide more specifics. Phyllis Burt - AT&T asked to confirm that Qwest will give the CLECs information at the TN level. Sue Stott - Qwest responded yes. Phyllis Burt - AT&T stated that for example, have 3-way calling and call forwarding with 2 lines. Phyllis stated that she doesn’t get TN for line 1 and the associated features. Connie Winston - Qwest stated that Qwest will do that, will show for this TN, these are the features with USOCs and FIDs. Connie stated that the List Section would have USOCs and FIDs. Connie stated that disclosure will make more clear, when is S&E, the account level USOCs will appear first, then repeating will appear. Connie Winston - Qwest stated that Qwest is testing any which way we can to catch any CSR oddities. Connie stated that some oddities have been found and stated that Qwest would share if something were not clear.

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

Q: Please confirm that with the implementation of this CR, will the Listing data be sent as a repeating structure for each Listing similar to the DL form (one EDI PO1 segment for each listing). A: Connie Winston - Qwest responded that the listing area is repeatable, one time per listing. Connie stated that if more detail is needed for EDI, Qwest would provide it at disclosure meeting. Connie stated that each listing would have parsed information associated with it. Liz Balvin - MCI asked why TOS is out of scope. Monica Manning - Qwest responded that it cannot be derived based upon data on the CSR. Connie Winston - Qwest agreed with Monica’s response. Liz Balvin - MCI stated that it does not matter from an ordering perspective, but asked to confirm that it would not be required. Kim Isaacs - Eschelon stated that Eschelon does get a lot of rejects for an incorrect TOS because the TOS on conversion orders must match what is stored by Qwest. Connie Winston - Qwest stated that Qwest does not need to know the old TOS; Qwest will only need to know the new TOS.

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

-- September 18, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR is committed into the IMA 14.0 Release. Connie stated that it was de-scoped, effort will not be done for Centrex. Stephanie Prull/McLeod asked if there would be 2 CSR transactions. Connie Winston/Qwest stated just in the response that Qwest sends back. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Centrex would not break. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon stated that she was glad that Qwest de-scoped Centrex in order to get this CR into the Release. Bonnie stated that it was the right thing to do because no CLEC asked to have additional products (Centrex) added to the CR. There were no additional comments or questions. This Action Item is closed.

September 10, 2003 Peggy Esquibel-Reed (Qwest) advised Donna Osborne-Miller (AT&T) that Qwest is implementing all the fields that were on AT&T's priority list with the exception of the TOS and TITLE2D fields. Donna Osborne-Miller (AT&T) stated that she would send an email to the CLEC Community with this information.

September 9, 2003 Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked Peggy Esquibel-Reed (Qwest) if all fields, except for the four that were previously identified, would be implemented. Peggy agreed to check into and call her with info.

September 2, 2003 Meeting Held with CLECs and Qwest: Attendees: Sharon Van Meter/AT&T, Phyllis Burt/AT&T, Connie Winston/Qwest, John Gallegos/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest John Gallegos/Qwest stated that we (Qwest) communicated information to Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T, Stephanie Prull/McLeodUSA, and Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon on August 29th that this candidate is committed to the IMA 14.0 Release. John stated that this CR was descoped, Centrex functionality, will not be included, and stated that this has been discussed several times, in past meetings. John stated that Donna was agreeable to not having this functionality for Centrex. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that Qwest made Donna's weekend by calling her with the good news last Friday and thanked Qwest. Sharon asked for the deployment date for 14.0. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it is December 8, 2003. Connie thanked all CLECs for their patience in working through this matter. There were no additional coments or questions. The call was concluded.

August 29, 2003: Candidate included in IMA 14.0 Release. John Gallegos and Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest talked with Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T and advised that the candidate made the release but was descoped, will not include functionality for Centrex. John advised that candidate's functionality will be for the UNE-P POTS product, which was the original scope. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T very happy that the cadidate is to be included in 14.0. Donna stated that she was sorry for the other CLECs in the fact that Centrex was removed but agreed that it was not in the original scope. Donna had no other questions or comments.

John Gallegos and Peggy Esquibel Reed/Qwest left voice mail messages for Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon and Stephanie Prull/McLeodUSA advising that this candidate made the release but was descoped, will not include functionality for Centrex. John stated that this candidate's functionality will be for the UNE-P POTS product, which was the original scope. John stated that if there were questions to please contact Peggy Esquibel Reed at 303.896.6332.

August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that everything stayed the same on the IMA 14.0 Commitment List except #4 SCR022703-04 Support of Parsed and Structured CSR, originated by AT&T. Connie stated that Qwest has had several lockdowns to discuss potential issues with this CR and that most of the problems are associated with the Centrex. Connie said that we need until next Friday, August 29, 2003 to determine if this CR can stay in the release. Connie also said that the AT&T requirements are not changing. DPA is a left-handed FID that changes some of the logic of TN, which may cause address impacts for Centrex. Liz Balvin/MCI asked if this could go into a point release. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this could not go into a point release because it is fairly significant. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that if it is disclosed it can be in a point release. Connie Winston/Qwest said that there wasn’t a point release scheduled. Stephanie Prull/McLeod said that a point release would not work for McLeod because we would code to the new maps and then wouldn’t be able to get our LSRs in. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we are looking at several options. On August 29 we will commit or exclude this candidate into the 14.0 release. Connie said that it could be a late adder to the 15.0 Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that her client can’t accept that and asked when was this discovered. Connie Winston/Qwest said that we discovered it just this week and have been meeting daily. Carla Pardee/AT&T said that AT&T doesn’t offer Centrex. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that we understand you need to look at the needs of all CLECs. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we are still trying for 14.0. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if Qwest would schedule a meeting once a decision is made. Connie Winston/Qwest said that we would schedule a meeting on September 2, 2003. If it is still in, we will send out a notification stating that and then cancel the meeting.

-- June 19, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that there was a meeting with Qwest and the CLECs and stated that there are four fields that Qwest thought couldn’t be provided but Qwest is still defining as determining how the data can be derived. Connie stated that the goal is to provide the fields. Connie stated that more information would be provided prior to, or with, packaging. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that as soon as it is known if it is doable, to please let her know. There were no additional questions or comments. This action item was closed.

Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the four fields are still being evaluated and that any change to the LOE would be communicated at packaging. There were no additional questions or comments. This action item was closed.

- June 11, 2003 Meeting with Qwest and CLEC Community Attendees: Lori Mendoza-Allegiance, Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T, Sharon Van Meter-AT&T, James McCluskey-Accenture, Carla Pardee-AT&T, Phyllis Burt-AT&T, Dave Burley-MCI, Regina Mosley-AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest, Conrad Evans-Qwest, John Gallegos-Qwest, Monica Manning-Qwest, Deb Roth-Qwest, Connie Winston-Qwest Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T provided a history of the CR and stated that AT&T resubmitted a list of 13 fields. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest looked at the 'yes' rows on the spreadsheet to see if Qwest could incorporate and keep within the current scope of the CR. Connie stated that a revised LOE would be provided at packaging. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that for the HNTYP field: Qwest is unable to accommodate, cannot be derived from data that is on the CSR. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked for details as to what causes the inability to derive. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that the OBF value for HNTYP is 1 - 2 numeric's for different types of hunting. Monica stated that cannot locatethe needed information to derive the type of hunting to translate to a code. Connie Winston/Qwest asked if that was regarding series hunting. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that there are 12 different values in the LSOG and once it hits the account, they can look very similar. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if it is required on the order. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that the information is represented in multiple places. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that is on the LSR in order to construct the order correctly, then once the order is constructed it looks similar. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that when is migrating a customer with hunting, needs to populate on the LSR. The CLEC pulls the CSR to populate the LSR and the HNTYP field is one that of the fields. Phyllis asked that if Qwest cannot derive it, how can it be expected that the CLECs can. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would look into that. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that features are migrated and depending on the type, the hunting field on the LSR is populated. Monica stated that it is a complex process and needs to look in multiple places. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if Qwest supports the OBF Guidelines. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that Qwest does not use the hunt codes that are in the OBF (4 & 5). Connie Winston/Qwest stated that need to see if can map to a 4 or a 5. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the LTXTY is not supportable by CSR data. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that the OBF set's values for the kind of text and cannot make the determination by looking at the listing information. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if Qwest only supports what is in the disclosur document. Phyllis stated that the whole point of the CR is to take data from the CSR to put onto the order. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that we have discussed the difficulty when there is a stream of data that would have to be parsed out and not specific to a code; that is very difficult. Monica stated that we can take a lower level look at this but it could bring it outside the scope of this CR. Connie Winston/Qwest asked how much of the data, based on the scope, is necessary. Connie stated that the general theme seems to be migrations. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that they have to manually train their AT&T rep's to read the Qwest CSR in order to prevent rejects. Connie Winston/Qwest asked to confirm that when a CLEC is setting up or changing hunting, the CLECs will let Qwest know what the preference is and for migrations, the CLEC wants Qwest to derive and populate the fields. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated yes, for Consumer. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that the business side would like that as well. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest is requiring on migrations and we can explore how necessary they are on a migration. An option could be to keep the same stuff on a migration. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if Qwest will take a lower level look. Connie Winston/Qwest stated yes and that remapping and determining the field would increase the LOE. Connie stated that the business need is to keep the same thing on a migration order. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that relaxing the migration rules may not meet the need. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she needs to understand cross reference. Connie Winston/Qwest stated is based on the field. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that when LTXTY comes across, can see if there is a cross reference listing and determine action. Currently, needs to look at the CSR and then determine how to put it on the order. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that relaxing the migration rules would not meet the need and would take another look at it. Connie Winston/Qwest staed that STYC cannot be derived from the CSR data. Monica Manning/Qwest stated that there is not 1-piece of data that says is a caption header. Monica stated that this would involve some analysis. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if they can know if indent is causing the problem. Phyllis asked if Qwest can tell them if is staight line or caption. It was stated that the business side only uses straight line. Connie Winston stated that for TOA, it seems to be another migration issue and Qwest needs to understand the need. Connie asked if Res, Bus, Gov, & Military are the values and stated that the translations are difficult. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we are still in definition we will see what solutions we can come up with. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked if the revised LOE would be provided at the June CMP Meeting. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it would be provided at packaging, which is in July. Connie stated that Qwest will try and keep within scope of the current LOE. There were no additional questions or comments. The call was concluded.

- May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that we want to provide a status for this CR. Connie stated that the LOE that was provided (3225 to 5375 hours) was for exactly what was noted in the CR. Connie stated that AT&T then provided additional fields for exactly what they are looking for. Connie stated that when Qwest and AT&T met, it was discussed as to whether or not the scope was being clarified or increased. Connie stated that if the scope increases, we would communicate. Connie stated that Qwest does realize that this is a popular CR, as it was ranked #4. Connie noted that Qwest does want to deliver something that you want. Connie noted that AT&T submitted additional information yesterday, they ranked their priority order for the fields. Connie stated that Qwest is doing analysis and are taking everything into consideration and everything that AT&T has suggested. We need to determine if the data is available or if the data needs to be derived and from where. Connie stated that this CR is in Evaluation and asked that if the type of information that AT&T has provided is available for the initial Clarification Meeting, that would allow Qwest to LOE appropriately. Connie stated that we do not currently have an updated LOE but that we will certainly provide it no later than packaging. Connie asked the CLECs if they wanted to go through the AT&T list of fields during this CMP Meeting. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that we might want to take the discussion off-line, outside of the CMP Meeting. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon agreed that an ad-hoc meeting would be better. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that the LOE would probably change. Connie Winston/Qwest stated yes, it probably would. Connie stated that we might need to do some coding in order to derive the data. Connie stated that the CLECs might want to derive some of the data themselves. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that she would like her IT people on the ad hoc call. Liz stated that this seems to have synergies to an MCI CR, SCR081602-01, which is asking for the creation of fields that do not currently exist. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest would look at SCR081602-01 and see if that request is covered in this request. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked what this means to the timelines. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently taking all of the fields into definition and will have to re-LOE. Connie stated that the revised LOE would be provided no later than packaging. Connie noted that the initial LOE’s are fairly high level and once we have defined, we sometimes re-LOE and provide the revised LOE no later than packaging. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that there will be an ad hoc call to discuss the details of the matrix provided by AT&T. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if Qwest could provide the revised LOE before the ad hoc call. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it will be provided no later than packaging and stated that we’ve done a swag and the LOE looks to have at lease doubled, but that is just a swag because we have not had the opportunity to define to that level. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked what the purpose of the ad hoc call is. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the ad hoc call would be to discuss the AT&T matrix and ensure that everyone is on the same page. Connie noted that not all CLECs have seen the detail that AT&T has provided. Beth Foster/Qwest noted that 14.0 packaging will take place at the July Systems CMP Meeting. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest noted that the Action Item in Report Line Number 11, of Attachment I, can be closed. Peggy stated that the Action Item was for AT&T to provide the additional data and the data has been received by Qwest. There were no additional questions or comments.

-- May 15, 2003 Meeting with AT&T and Qwest

Attendees: Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T, Phyllis Burt-AT&T, Regina Mosley-AT&T, Diane Burt-AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest, Conrad Evans-Qwest, Monica Manning-Qwest, Connie Winston-Qwest

Discussion: Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that the purpose of the meeting was for a discussion as a result of the new information received from AT&T and to see if AT&T still had an open issue in regard to the format. Connie Winston-Qwest asked for a re-cap of the question from AT&T. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest read the question from the email received from AT&T: “When working this CR, will the format follow the OBF/LSOG guidelines? For example, will you list the account level data in the ATN section of the parsed CSR followed by the individual WTN(s) Features and Feature Details at the line level?” Monica Manning-Qwest stated that some research has been done and that more research is needed in order to provide an accurate response. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that the question does require a lot of research. Conrad Evans-Qwest asked for clarification as to the request of AT&T requesting for the account level and the TN level only or for more? Regina Mosley-AT&T stated that primarily is at the account level, TN section and feature detail. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that other ILECs format with the first occurrence at the account level and subsequent occurrences at the line level. Phyllis stated that the CR is asking for the account level and that Regina is also requesting that the line level be sent back. Phyllis recapped that the first occurrence would be at the account level and subsequent occurrences would be at the line level. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status, to the 4/28 AT&T question, at the May CMP Meeting. Connie stated that we might not have the detail but that a status would be provided. Peggy Esquibel-Reed-Qwest stated that an action item would be opened for the status. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that the requested discussion is due to the fact that a handful of fields were mentioned in the CR, AT&T agreed to provide additional fields that they wanted supported. Qwest anticipated a few more fields. AT&T provided alot more fields. Because there were a lot more fields requested, then what was anticipated, Qwest is doing additional research and Connie stated that the LOE does not reflect the number of fields. Connie stated that Qwest needs to find out how passionate AT&T and the CLECs feel about all the fields that were provided. Connie stated that all of the fields will certainly impact the LOE and will impact what will be in the 14.0 Release. Connie stated that it needs to be determined what the importance is to the CLECs for just the fields that were stated in the CR versus all of the additional fields. Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T stated that what was in the CR were examples and asked if Qwest believed that the CR contained the only fields that AT&T was requesting. Connie Winston-Qwest stated yes, that was the belief and that was what was LOE’d. Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked how much bigger the LOE is to include the additional fields. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that a rough ballpark is that it looks to be double the current LOE. Connie stated that it is a ballpark, it could be less than or more than double the current LOE. Connie stated that Qwest could start looking to see what the LOE would be for the current understanding of the request and will look to see what the LOE would look like for the full scope. Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked Phyllis Burt (AT&T) where AT&T can give & take. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest might not have some of the data, on the CSR, in order to provide it. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that some items are not required on the CSR. Phyllis stated that AT&T needs the items that are required on the CSR and stated that she will need time to research. Connie Winston-AT&T stated that as Qwest goes through definition phase, Qwest could identify what is not on the CSR. Connie stated that for other fields, maybe we could negotiate. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that for the fields that state ‘TBD by Qwest’, in the Word doc, it is up to Qwest to decide. Connie Winston-Qwest asked if those marked as TBD’s, they are not significant to AT&T. Phyllis Burt-AT&T responded yes. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that Qwest will get a new LOE and will provide at CMP, we need to discuss with CLECs and Connie asked AT&T to evaluate their required fields. Donna Osborne-Miller-AT&T asked when AT&T needed to supply the information to Qwest. Connie Winston-Qwest stated by the end of the first week of June and asked AT&T if that was doable. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that the fields marked as TBD’s are not being used for UNE-P POTS, but are on the list because doesn’t know if other products need them. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that will focus the re-LOE to the fields marked as New. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that the Products on the CR states as ‘All’ due to the potential needs for products other than UNE-P POTS, which is her interest. Connie Winston-Qwest stated that we would then need to look at the TBD’s as well, to LOE. Phyllis Burt-AT&T stated that she will provide the list of the AT&T required fields. Conrad Evans-Qwest asked if the format on the existing fields was ok, such as for the AN field. Regina Mosley-AT&T stated that the existing formats are ok for the existing fields. There were no other questions or comments. The meeting was adjourned.

- April 24, 2003 Email from Phyllis Burt/AT&T: Attached is the list of new CSR Response (CSRR) fields AT&T Consumer would like supported for this CR.

April 22, 2003 Sent email to AT&T requesting status of action item: Good Afternoon Donna -- Can you provide status regarding the email below, sent to AT&T on April 16th? Thank You, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems

-- April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that when doing a pre-order query for CSR in the GUI, it is not different than in EDI. Lynn stated that with the re-cap functionality in the GUI, the data is sorted with TNs and USOCs. In EDI, it is not. Liz Balvin/MCI asked to confirm that a re-cap does sort CSR feature information by TN. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest responded, yes, in the GUI. Sue Stott/Qwest stated that it is the same data and that this feature will be added for EDI in 14.0. Liz Balvin/MCI stated that CSR has been a real struggle for MCI and noted that MCI has had to code to support this. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest has had to as well. Regina Mosely/AT&T stated that Qwest says there is no structure difference but we notice that there are format differences, such as in thoroughfares and directionals. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that the differences discussed with AT&T are between AVQ and CSR. Regina Mosely/AT&T asked if this was only for CSR. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that this is isolated to the CSR. Regina Mosely/AT&T asked if it is 2 separate issues for address validation and CSR and asked if there was a CR open for that. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she and Regina would discuss off-line and get a CR submitted. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked if this action item could be closed. There was no dissent to close the action item.

- April 16, 2003 Email sent to Phyllis Burt and Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T: Good Morning Phyllis -- I am checking status of an action item that was assigned to you during our Clarification Meeting, held on March 12th. Below is the excerpt from the meeting notes. Can you please advise when we can expect to receive the information? We are at a critical point and are in need of the data. Thank you. EXCERPT FROM MEETING NOTES: Wendy Green/Qwest stated that if the request was for every field on the RS, LSR, and EU forms, she would like AT&T to send a comprehensive list of the fields. Phyllis Burt/AT&T agreed to send the list to Peggy Esquibel-Reed at pesquib@qwest.com Thanks again, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP -- Systems CRPM pesquib@qwest.com

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T introduced Phyllis Burt. Donna reviewed the description of the CR. Liz Balvin/WorldCom stated that WorldCom would very much support this and stated that this CR will resolve a number of issues. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that this is a need for both the AT&T business partner and the consumer side. Liz Balvin/WorldCom stated that the Level of Effort is provided on the CR and asked what the thought process was as to how Qwest would accommodate this CR. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it is how Qwest reads it into the systems and would need to restructure that. Connie stated that it was similar to PSON in that you have to read the data and interpret it. It is a change in how we read in the data and how we interpret it on the screen. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked if this will be through IMA. Sue Stott/Qwest stated yes, that is correct. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that the IMA GUI is structured and that IMA EDI is not. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that she does not know that to be true and stated that things typically behave very similarly in the GUI as in EDI. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that about several weeks ago, AT&T found disparity and is having a meeting with Qwest (Kim Chambers) to discuss. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that an action item would be taken to investigate if the EDI and GUI structures are different. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that the EDI team will meet with AT&T to review this. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that she would also discuss with Kim Chambers (Qwest). Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that this CR will move to pending prioritization

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

Reviewed CR Description: AT&T requests that QWEST supports a Structured CSR where information is reported for each Service Level TN instead of TN information being provided at the FID level for each USOC.

The Expected Deliverable is for compatibility with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: IMA EDI only

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

Discussion: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description. Phyllis Burt/AT&T noted and identified that the CR has duplication and asked Qwest to clean it up. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest agreed to modify the CR to remove the duplication. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that some of the identified fields are not associated to listings; PIC, LPIC, and others. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she wants everything listed to be passed and stated that those listed on the CR are examples only. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that if the request was for every field on the RS, LSR, and EU forms, she would like AT&T to send a comprehensive list of the fields. Phyllis Burt/AT&T agreed to send the list to Peggy Esquibel-Reed at pesquib@qwest.com Monica Manning/Qwest stated that it might make sense to use the LSOG Guide for Customer Service Inquiry for the fields. There were no additional questions or comments.

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

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-04 Support of Parsed and Structured CSR

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-04. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 3225 to 5375 hours for this IMA Change Request and SATE impacts of 120 to 200 hours.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR22703-05 Detail

Description Of Change

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Reviewed CR Description: QWEST does not support CORBA for PreOrder transactions today. AT&T would like QWEST to consider developing PreOrder CORBA capabilities. We believe higher performance measures can be reached.

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: IMA EDI

Confirmed Products: N/A

Discussion: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description. Jan Martin/Qwest stated that pre-order transactions are not product specific and would not look at products. AT&T agreed and advised to change Impacted Products to N/A. There were no other questions or comments.

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

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

CC: Connie Winston Sue Stott Beth Foster Kit Thomte

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR022703-05, dated 02/27/03, titled: PreOrder CORBA.

CR Description: QWEST does not support CORBA for PreOrder transactions today. AT&T would like QWEST to consider developing PreOrder CORBA capabilities. We believe higher performance measures can be reached.

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

History: A clarification meeting was held on Wednesday March 12, 2003 with AT&T and Qwest representation.

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for CR SCR022703-05, PreOrder CORBA., and has determined that this change does not provide a reasonable demonstrable business benefit in relationship to the associated costs. This request would require Qwest to develop an additional interface to IMA requiring Qwest to maintain 3 separate & multiple versions of IMA interfaces (GUI, EDI, and CORBA). Through Qwest’s analysis it was determined that the estimate for the initial implementation of this change would be $1.5 million and would also require significant maintenance costs and additional resources which Qwest estimates would be around $500K per release. Qwest believes that a move towards CORBA for PreOrder would not result in a reasonable business benefit to warrant the expense of this change.

In light of the information currently available to CLECs for PreOrder functionality, the cost prohibitive requirement for implementing this request, and no perceivable reasonable demonstrable business benefit for the associated costs, Qwest is denying your request for SCR022703-05, PreOrder CORBA.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-07 Detail

Description Of Change

For DL #9 LACT (Listing Activity) the Rule states that the Listing Activity can not be set to:

- delete main listing ( LACT =D & RTY= LML)

- new main listing (LACT=N & RTY=LML) unless this is a New or Move Order (ACT = N or T).

This rules prevent a New Main listing from being created during a partial migration when an additional listing does not exist. (not permitted to create LACT=N, RTY=LML for ACT=V)

For RTY #11 RTY (Record Type) the Rule states that when the Listing Activity Pair of Old and New (LACT = I and O) are used then the RTY must be the same.

This rules prevents an additional listing to be reassigned as a main listing (using LACT = I & O with RTY from LAL to LML) on Partial Migration where an additional listing exists and Change Orders where the LTN for the main listing is being disconnected. The previous LACT rules prevents an additional listing to be reassigned as a main listing (using LACT N & D with RTY from LAL to LML)

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Reviewed CR Description: QWEST requires each account must have one main listing. QWEST currently, has the following rules regarding the Main Listing causing several problems. AT&T Request that these restrictions be eliminated.

For DL #9 LACT (Listing Activity) the Rule states that the Listing Activity can not be set to: - delete main listing ( LACT =D & RTY= LML) - new main listing (LACT=N & RTY=LML) unless this is a New or Move Order (ACT = N or T). This rules prevent a New Main listing from being created during a partial migration when an additional listing does not exist. (not permitted to create LACT=N, RTY=LML for ACT=V)

For RTY #11 RTY (Record Type) the Rule states that when the Listing Activity Pair of Old and New (LACT = I and O) are used then the RTY must be the same. This rules prevents an additional listing to be reassigned as a main listing (using LACT = I & O with RTY from LAL to LML) on Partial Migration where an additional listing exists and Change Orders where the LTN for the main listing is being disconnected. The previous LACT rules prevents an additional listing to be reassigned as a main listing (using LACT N & D with RTY from LAL to LML)

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: IMA GUI

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

Discussion: Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that 12.0 would take care of this request and will withdraw the CR. Action Plan: This CR will be withdrawn by AT&T at the March 20th CMP Meeting.

CenturyLink Response

Archived System CR SCR022703-08 Detail

Description Of Change

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

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

Do not wish to disturb the remaining account.

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Forms Impacted: LSR DL

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

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

Questions & Answers:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: IMA Common

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

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

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

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-08

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

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-09 Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T is requesting that a Production Defect Issues List separate from the CR log be created and maintained. This reported would indicated:

- States impacted

- Products (REQTYP/ACT) impacted

- QWEST assigned Severity Level

- Current Workaround in Place

- Manual Indicator value for workaround

- Remarks required to identify this specific workaround

- Pending Long Term Solution with CR reference

- Target Implementation

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

Reviewed CR Description: QWEST currently support a Manual Indicator, which is used to indicate that the Remarks field contains information that needs manual attention and this field will also be used on occasion as part of a workaround. However a centralized list doesn’t seem to exist to indicate the known workarounds in place in which the Manual Indicator and Remarks are used. AT&T is requesting that a Production Defect Issues List separate from the CR log be created and maintained. This reported would indicated: - States impacted - Products (REQTYP/ACT) impacted - QWEST assigned Severity Level - Current Workaround in Place - Manual Indicator value for workaround - Remarks required to identify this specific workaround - Pending Long Term Solution with CR reference - Target Implementation

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: Process & Documentation

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

Discussion: There were no questions or comments.

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

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-09 Support Production Defect Report

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-09. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1050 to 1750 hours for this Change Request.

At the March 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

Archived System CR SCR022703-10 Detail

Description Of Change

AT&T requests that QWEST system generate this ILEC specific requirement based on the LSOG LTOS (LSOG field not currently supported by QWEST).

For example:

- QWEST should use the LTOS (Line Type of Service) field on the RS form.

- QWEST has an ILEC specific requirement that we supply the LINE LEVEL USOC on the RS Form.

- QWEST should system generate this ILEC specific data based on the LSOG LTOS field instead of requiring CLECs to reported this information in a different format.

Status History

Project Meetings

- July 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that Qwest would distribute the ballot on July 27th, it is due back to Qwest on July 30th, and Qwest would email the initial prioritization list to the CLECs on August 3rd. There were no questions. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated this was low for AT&T.

- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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 stated that the CRs with an impact to the IMA interface would follow the existing prioritization process. Judy noted that the funding for IMA 15.0 and IMA 16.0 has been approved, as well as funding to begin work on IMA 17.0.

-- January Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that this is a low priority for AT&T Consumer and a high priority for AT&T Business.

August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that their interest in this CR was low.

-- April 3, 2003 Email received from AT&T: Hi Peggy, Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Sorry for not getting back to you earlier. Yes, the revised version is ok with me. Thanks, Phyllis

April 3, 2003 Email sent to Donna O-M and Phyllis B. at AT&T: Good Morning -- Have you made a decision as to the revision of this CR? Please advise. Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com

- March 28, 2003 Email sent to AT&T: Hi Donna & Phyllis -- During the March Systems CMP Meeting there was discussion regarding this CR, SCR022703-10 (System Generate QWEST Specific information). During that discussion I believe there was agreement that this CR was for the LTOS Field only. An Action Item was created, and assigned to Phyllis Burt, to send Qwest a revised CR. I have not as yet received the revision. I know everyone is extremely busy....so....I have made a proposed draft revision to the CR. I am attaching a copy of the current CR and a copy of the draft revision. Revision's were made to the CR Title and Description only, the remaining text will stay the same. Please review the proposed revision and send me your concurrence OR if changes are needed, feel free do make them on the Word doc and send back to me for review. Be assured, I have NOT made any revisions to your actual CR, the revision is only a copy with the draft revised language. As soon as we have agreement on the revised language, I will make the appropriate changes to the CR, if you are ok with that. If you feel more comfortable, you can submit the revised CR via the CMP CR Form to cmpcr@qwest.com Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems

-- March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T presented the CR. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that AT&T reviewed with Wendy Green (Qwest) for the first portion of the CR, regarding TN FIDs, that the documentation on the Website was incorrect. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that Qwest is updating the Feature’s documentation and suggested that it be a global action item for tracking in this forum. Phyllis Burt/AT&T said that she agreed. Liz Balvin/WorldCom asked what the documentation was called. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that it was part of the PCAT. Liz Balvin/WorldCom said thank you. Wendy Green/Qwest asked AT&T if they believed that the other two portions of the CR were covered in Mallory Paxton’s (Qwest) CR (SCR022103-01). Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that the billing USOCs are taken care of with Mallory’s CR. Phyllis stated that she was not sure if the line level USOCs, TBE, are addressed in Mallory’s CR. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that her CR will generate USOCs and FIDs and that the TBE would be covered. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if she had to only provide the line level USOC. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated if the block field indicates the you are requesting screening. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she will revise the CR to be for the LTOS field only. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she would need to look into that as Qwest does not support that field. John Gallegos/Qwest asked if this CR is now only for the LTOS field. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated yes, that Mallory’s CR will satisfy AT&T’s need, except for LTOS. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the LOE will be revised for LTOS only. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the LOE may not change as LTOS is a significant piece of work. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked if the revised LOE would be available prior to the ballot going out. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that the correct LOE would be on the ballot. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T recapped that the TN FID is documentation, Blocking will be Mallory’s CR, and LTOS will be what this CR is for. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked if there were any other questions. There were no further questions or comments.

-- March 12, 2003 Email from AT&T: Hi Wendy, As a follow-up to our QWEST CR clarification call today. Here are the QWEST links that provide the TN FID Order requirement for multiline orders.

"Feature Detail (FID and Data Requirements) Include the FID TN and the 10-digit telephone number in the Feature Detail when the account is multi-line; e.g., N NSD/TN NPA-nnn-nnnn. "

This is just a sample list. This requirement is mentioned on almost every QWEST feature:

http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/callerid.html http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/callwaiting.html http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/callwaitingid.html http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/callforwardvariable.html http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/customringing.html http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/lastcallreturn.html

Please confirm that the QWEST documentation is incorrect and that QWEST require this information for any feature. AT&T Consumer will keep this logic in place until we receive confirmation.

Thanks,

Phyllis

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

Reviewed CR Description: Current QWEST requires the following ILEC specific information on the order

- TN FIDs on Features for Multi-line Accounts. AT&T requests that QWEST system generate this ILEC specific requirement based on the LSOG TNS field provided on the order.

For example: We populate the TNS field on the RS form for each telephone on the RS form. QWEST has an ILEC specific requirement that we also specify the telephone on each feature on the RS form as well for a multi-line account. QWEST should system generate this ILEC specific data based on the LSOG fields instead of requiring CLECs to reported this information in two separate formats.

- BLOCK USOCs AT&T requests that QWEST system generate this ILEC specific requirement based on the LSOG BLOCK field provided on the order.

For example: We populate the BLOCK field on the RS form. QWEST has an ILEC specific requirement that we supply the BLOCK USOC that corresponds to each BLOCK value on the RS form. QWEST should system generate this ILEC specific data based on the LSOG fields instead of requiring CLECs to reported this information in two separate formats.

- LINE LEVEL USOC with TBE information AT&T requests that QWEST system generate this ILEC specific requirement based on the LSOG LTOS (LSOG field not currently supported by QWEST) and BLOCK field.

For example: QWEST should use the LTOS (Line Type of Service) field on the RS form. QWEST has an ILEC specific requirement that we supply the LINE LEVEL USOC and the Toll Billing Exception BLOCK option as a FEATURE on the RS form. QWEST should system generate this ILEC specific data based on the LSOG LTOS and BLOCK fields instead of requiring CLECs to reported this information in a different format.

Expected Deliverables: To be compatible with Release 14.0.

Confirmed Impacted Interface: IMA Common

Confirmed Products: UNE-P POTS

Discussion: Wendy Green/Qwest stated that when placing an order, you don’t have to input the TN, it is derived from the TNS field. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that is basing this per current documentation. Wendy Green/Qwest stated that in EDI, it is not a requirement. Wendy Green (Qwest) and Phyllis (AT&T) agreed to look into off-line. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that she will modify the CR, if needed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she wants the documentation to be consistent. Wendy Green/Qwest agreed with Carla. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she has originated a new CMP CR, SCR022103-01 IMA Revise BA & BLOCK Fields on RS & CRS Forms, which will do what is being asked for here. Phyllis Burt/AT&T asked if line level TBE is being addressed. Mallory Paxton/Qwest stated that she thought it was and if not, she would revise her CR to include it. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that if that is the case, this CR may be withdrawn.

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

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-10

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-10 Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 1650 to 2750 hours for this IMA Change Request with no SATE impacts.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR030403-01ES Detail

Description Of Change

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

Status History

Project Meetings

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

6/15/05 Systems CMP Meeting

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

3/16/05 Systems CMP Meeting

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

12/15/04 CMP Systems Meeting

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

9/16/04 CMP Systems Meeting

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

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

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

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

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

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

Adhoc meeting with CLEC Community 9/19/03

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

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

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

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

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

9/18/03 CMP Systems Meeting

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

E-mail sent 9/15/03

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

E-mail received 9/15/03 Lynn,

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

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

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

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

Ian, Is that your take as well?

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

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

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

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

Hello,

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

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

8/21/03 CMP systems meeting

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

CMP Monthly Meeting July 17, 2003

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

Ad-Hoc Meeting

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

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

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

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

Meeting adjourned.

Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting Minutes June 19, 2003

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

Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting Minutes May 22, 2003

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

Excerpt from CMP Monthly Meeting April 22, 2003

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

Clarification Call SCR030403-01 March 14, 2003

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

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

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

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

Meeting adjourned.

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

Dear Ms. Osborne-Miller:

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

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

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

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Director - Information Technologies Qwest

April 10, 2003 RE: SCR030403-01

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

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-01 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected deliverable: Qwest not schedule maintenance downtime beginning in March 2003.

Status History

Project Meetings

- CMP Monthly Meeting July 17, 2003

SCR022703-01 Review possible downtime on Sunday's and overall process questions (SCR022703-01 No IMA downtime for last 3 days of the month) Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T was ready to close this action item and that she had spoken to her SMEs and that they had no objections to having downtime on Sunday’s. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the action item would be closed.

Discussion at CMP Monthly Meeting June 19, 2003

SCR022703-01 Review Possible Downtime on Sunday's and Overall Process Questions (SCR022703-01 No IMA Downtime for Last 3 Days of the Month) (originated by AT&T) Connie Winston/Qwest stated that there is a trial period to not utilize the last 3-days of the month. Connie stated that the Qwest legacy systems sometimes need Sunday’s in order to perform maintenance functions. Connie noted that it is very important and that it is something that the systems need. Connie stated that Qwest would continue the notification process for when Sundays are needed to do the work in the legacy systems. Connie stated that Qwest wanted to discuss this with the CLECs even though, based on the volumes, Sunday’s should not be a big impact to you. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would like to take this back to the AT&T IT team and to Comcast. Donna stated that it probably was not an issue. Bill Littler/Integra stated that Integra has no issue with it. Stephanie Prull/McLeodUSA stated that there is no issue with McLeod. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that in regard to notifications, the sooner the CLECs are notified, the better for the CLECs.

Clarification Meeting: March 10, 2003 10:00 am

Attendance: Sharon Van Meter-AT&T, Tom Kowal-Qwest, John Gallegos-Qwest, Laurel Nolan-CRPM-Qwest

Review the Request Nolan-Qwest reviewed the request and asked if there were any questions or changes to the CR. Kowal-Qwest stated that disputed the statement that Qwest had scheduled IMA downtime during November 2002 and January 2003. Van Meter-AT&T stated that she had received the Scheduled Maintance notifications stating that IMA was having scheduled downtime at the end of the month and that AT&T was requesting that Qwest not have it the last three days of the month. Kowal-Qwest stated that there have not been any downtimes schedules for the end of the month. He stated that it might have been downstream systems. Van Meter-AT&T stated that if Qwest hadn't done any of these then the request would be easy to comply with. She stated that the request nor the notification says downstream systems. Kowal-Qwest stated that other CLECs might not want scheduled maintance during the middle of the month or at the beginning of the month.

Confirm interfaces and products impacted Nolan-Qwest confirmed that this change request effected IMA-EDI and IMA-GUI and that no products were impacted.

Identify CLEC expectations and Action Plan Nolan-Qwest stated that this CR would be presented at the next monthly meeting by Van Meter (AT&T) on March 20th and that Qwest would provide a response as required. Van Meter-AT&T stated that she could forward the notifications to Nolan-Qwest that she had referenced. Nolan-Qwest stated that she would forward them off to Kowal (Qwest) and Gallegos (Qwest) when she received them. She asked Van Meter (AT&T) if there were any questions if the team could communicate over email. Van Meter-AT&T agreed.

Meeting adjourned.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-01 No IMA scheduled system downtime for the last three (3) days of the month

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-01. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003), Qwest has determined that it can implement this change on a one year trial basis.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-12 Detail

Description Of Change

Status History

Project Meetings

Connie Winston/Qwest asked if AT&T was still validating this request from the 14.0 Release. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked Phyllis (Burt/AT&T) if she was ready to close the CR. Phyllis Burt/AT&T stated that that CR could be closed. This CR moves to Completed Status.

2/19/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that AT&T would like to keep this CR in CLEC Test.

1/22/04 CMP Systems Meeting

Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that she would like to keep this CR open until the February CMP Systems Meeting.

12/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that they were still testing and would like this CR to remain open.

COMMUNICATOR ISSUED: Announcement Date: November 26, 2003 Effective Date: Immediately Document Number: SYST.11.26.03.F.01112.CandidateRegistration Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: Correction to SYST.11.25.03.F.01108.CandidateRegistrationReminder - CLEC Profiles Associated CR Number or Systems Release Number: N/A Qwest is publishing this correction to systems notification SYST.11.25.03.F.01108. Correction appears in red text below.

Qwest reminds all CLECs of the requirement to update their user profile by COB Friday, December 5th 2003 with the Wholesale Systems Help Desk prior to the December 8th deployment of IMA 14.0 Release for certain candidates. CLECs may do so by contacting the Wholesale Systems Help Desk at 1-888-796-9102.

For all IMA GUI CLECs, the updated profile will become effective with the release of IMA 14.0; IMA EDI CLECs will have their updated profile become effective with their corresponding migration to IMA EDI Release 14.0, or later EDI releases if the CLEC does not migrate to IMA EDI 14.0.

Candidates affected are: - Support IMA EDI Status Updates via IMA GUI - Offer Choice for Receiving Non-Fatal Errors - Change to Confirmation Completion Report for FBDL Responses - Line Loss Notification

CLECs may begin contacting the Wholesale Systems Help Desk effective Tuesday, November 25th.

Questions may be directed to itcomm@qwest.com.

Sincerely, Qwest

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

Functionality Description: This candidate will provide loss data in an 836 EDI format using the Provider Notification (PN) form and a push to GUI users via FAX or Email. IMA users will have the ability to view and query loss data in the IMA GUI. The CLEC must subscribe for this service through the Help Desk.

New functionality added:

Direct Inward Dialing (DID) will now display on Loss and Completion reports. New 836 Provider Notification (PN) form

Transactions coming from IMA will be at the Working Telephone Number (WTN) level mirroring current Loss Reports.

Forms impacted: Provider Notification (PN)

Fields impacted: PON will display as PONW and ORD will display as ORDW on the PN form per OBF guidelines. CVD translates to the completion date per OBF standards.

ACTs: N/A

Connie Winston - Qwest stated that this is for both EDI and GUI and that this is a design change so that the Loss & Completion Reports would be pulled from the same data that is sent to the CLECs. Connie stated that it would not be a different flow.

Questions & Answers: There were no questions submitted for this CR. Connie Winston - Qwest asked if there were any questions or comments. There were no comments, questions, or clarification requested.

7/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Connie Winston/Qwest said that Line Loss through IMA has been a unique experience because the notification if generated but to a CLEC that is not to originator of the LSR. The PON field with a ‘W’ character will be the PON for the loss. John Berard/Covad asked if the PON number would be the same from the new LSR. Connie Winston/Qwest said that only the field name changes and the PON value will remain the same. John Berard/Covad asked if are going to send a loss notification to a new CLEC with a different PON Liz Balvin/MCI asked what field would be populated. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that (PON-W) is a new field that is going to be implemented and you will have the ability on your side to read that field. John Berard/Covad reiterated that this field name will contain a W and that is how it will be recognized

3/20/03 CMP systems Meeting Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T presented the change request. Liz Balvin /WorldCom asked why the WorldCom CR was rejected. Lynn Notarriani/Qwest stated that the difference was a real-time EDI individual transaction vs. a report coming back from EDI. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that when we looked at your request, we thought you wanted all of Loss & Completions coming back through EDI. Liz Balvin/WorldCom said that she was frustrated because when she came to CMP she just wanted the Loss report and was told it had to be both (Loss & Completions). Connie Winston/Qwest stated that it is still a report. This is a transactional change and not a report. Lynn Notarriani/Qwest said that it might be helpful for WorldCom to go back and verify with their teams. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said that the confusion may have been the way the CR was worded. Liz Balvin/WorldCom stated that it is still frustrating and feels that there was a lack of communication in what was put in her CR and questioned why Qwest did not provide options. Peggy Esquibel/Reed/Qwest stated that she sent an e-mail asking WorldCom if this CR met their needs. Liz Balvin/WorldCom stated that she did receive the e-mail and wanted to discuss with AT&T but had not done so. John Gallegos/Qwest reviewed the title of the WorldCom CR and noted that it was for Loss & Completion. Lynn Notarriani/Qwest said that we do not want to spend a lot of time trying to look at how to do the same thing in a different format or way. Any gaps in communication on the clarification call should have been identified by the WorldCom and their technical team. John Gallegos/Qwest stated that in the clarification call the request was identified as Loss and Completions but one of the WorldCom SMEs referred to the report. Connie Winston/Qwest recommended that in the future we need to make sure we have the correct subject matter experts on the clarification call. When it clearly states ‘report’, that’s the direction we would take. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked how everyone felt about opening up the invitation to anyone interested in joining the clarification call. Connie Winston/Qwest said that when we get the whole community together some people may have different ideas or have additional questions. Liz Balvin/WorldCom stated that it’s hard enough to get the initiator together so perhaps we could have the meeting set up with only the initiator and they could invite the entire group. Kit Thomte/Qwest stated that she will take an action item and talk to Judy Schultz/Qwest. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T said that AT&T would be happy to create the CR to get the language in the CMP document changed. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T stated that this issue warrants readdressing especially when a vote is at stake. Kit Thomte/Qwest said she understood and will take the action item and address in the April CMP Product/Process meeting.

3/12/03 Clarification Meeting

Introduction of Attendees Donna Osborne-Miller- AT&T, Phyllis Bert-AT&T, Regina Mosley-AT&T, Carla Pardee-AT&T, Diane Burt-AT&T, John Blaszczyk- AT&T, Peggy Esquible-Reed-Qwest, Lynn Stecklein-Qwest, John Gallegos-Qwest, Wendy Green-Qwest, Berkley Loggie-Qwest, Monica Martin-Qwest, Jan Martin-Qwest, Denise Martinez-Qwest, Shelley Mason-Qwest, Rob Mitchell-Qwest, Laurel Nolan-Qwest, Shonna Pasionek-Qwest, Mallory Paxton-Qwest, Joan Pfeffer-Qwest, Deb Roth-Qwest, Carl Sear-Qwest, Kerri Waldner-Qwest, Scott Carne-Qwest

Review Requested Description of Change AT&T is requesting to receive 836 transactions to support Line Loss Notifications based on OCN.

Confirm Right Personnel Involved All appropriate personnel were involved in the clarification call.

Identify/Confirm CLECs Expectation AT&T is requesting to receive 836 transactions to support Line Loss Notifications based on OCN.

Identify any Dependent Systems Change Requests NA

Establish Action Plan AT&T will present this change request in the March 20, 2003 CMP Systems Meeting

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-12

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-12. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 3250 to 5400 hours for this IMA Change Request and SATE impacts of 100 to 150 hours.

At the March 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.

This Change Request is eligible for the IMA 14.0 Prioritization.

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-13 Detail

Description Of Change

Status History

Project Meetings

CenturyLink Response

Donna Osborne-Miller AT&T

CC: Connie Winston Sue Stott Beth Foster Kit Thomte

This letter is in response to CLEC Change Request number SCR022703-13, dated 02/27/03, titled: Single WCN and Single BCN.

CLEC CR Description: Currently a CLEC can subscribe to WCN/BCN as well as receive a SOC. The understanding is that Qwest supports multiple WCNs and then multiple BCNs, a function of the many work orders that Qwest can open as a result of one CLEC service order. This request is to have the Qwest OSS system support one WCN and one BCN. The BCN will be sent no later than 3 days after the CLEC Service Order has been provisioned.

History: A clarification meeting was held on Wednesday March 12, 2003 with AT&T and Qwest representation.

Qwest Response: Qwest has completed an analysis for CR SCR022703-13, Single WCN and Single BCN, and has determined that this change is economically not feasible. This change would require a restructure of the billing systems to deliver simultaneous transactions with the service order processor (SOPs). This request would require Qwest to develop a new process impacting several layers of Qwest management and impact currently monitored standards for billing completions notification. Qwest’s analysis determined that the estimate for the initial implementation of this change would be well above $5 million.

Considering that the information is currently available to CLECs and sent no later than 5 days after the CLEC Service Order has been provisioned, Qwest is denying your request for SCR022703-13, Single WCN and Single BCN, based on economic infeasibility.

Sincerely,

Lynn Notarianni Information Technologies Senior Director Qwest

DRAFT RESPONSE March 13, 2003 RE: SCR022703-13

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-13. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 12, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR022703-23 Detail

Description Of Change

Status History

Project Meetings

4/17/03 CMP Systems Meeting Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE is 40-60 hours and the target date is 4/28/03. Kit Thomte/Qwest asked if AT&T was ok to close this action item. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T said yes.

3/20/03 CMP Systems Meeting Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T presented this CR. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that we are evaluating this request to ensure that the Business is okay with reinstating these Trouble Types. The system change would not be difficult but I have asked Dan Busetti/Qwest to work with the Business on this action item Dan Busetti/Qwest said that the Business advised him in their last discussion that they wanted to review some of the processes that may be impacted. We will provide a status in the April CMP Systems meeting.

3/14/03 Clarification Meeting

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

Review Requested (Description of) Change Qwest has removed some trouble types for UNE-P service, that AT&T considers to not only be valid, but necessary for some customer troubles. These trouble types include the following: 1405 - ANI failure; failure to receive Automatic Number Identification digits completely, 1412 - Physical problem; a physical condition has been identified in wire or equipment, 1414 - wiring problem at csrs prem and 1513 - customer request dispatch

Confirm Areas & Products Impacted The Products impacted are UNE - P Pots and Shared Loop.

Identify/Confirm CLECs Expectation To reinstate the trouble codes outlines in the description of change

Identify any Dependent Systems Change Requests NA

Establish Action Plan AT&T will present this change request in the March 20, 2003 CMP Systems Meeting.

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR022703-23

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR022703-23. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting (held March14, 2003) Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 40 to 60 hours for this Change Request.

At the April 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

DRAFT RESPONSE March 14, 2003 RE: SCR022703-23

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of AT&T's Change Request SCR022703-23. Based upon research that has been conducted following the Clarification meeting (held March 14, 2003) Qwest is still examining the issue. Qwest will continue to research the problem and provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting.

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

Sincerely, Qwest

Archived System CR SCR012103-02 Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003.

Status History

Project Meetings

- September 15, 2003 Email Received From Carla Pardee/AT&T: Peggy - sorry for the delay in getting back to you, I have been on vacation. I talked with our internal client, and they have not experienced any problems with these CABS changes. Consequently, AT&T is willing to close these two CRs. Thanks. See you Thursday. Carla

-- September 10, 2003 Email Sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- This email is in regard to 2 of your CMP CR's: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Process Bill Data and CSRs on the same day SCR012103-02 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills These 2 CR's were deployed on July 21, 2003. Would you please let me know if they are ready for closure, at the September Systems CMP Meeting or if there are issues that will prevent closure. If there are issues, please advise me of what they are so that we can research prior to the meeting. We will then be able to provide you with a status of the research, if any is needed. I appreciate any information that you can provide in advance of the CMP Meeting. Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems

August 21, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this CR was deployed on July 21, 2003. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she would like to leave this CR open for validation. There were no additional comments or questions.

- July 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the implementation date for this billing CR is July 21, 2003.

- May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is July 2003. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the Action Item remain open until she communicates the date to Carla (Pardee/AT&T)

-- April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if there were targeted implementation dates for the CABS/BOS IABS Update CR’s. Carla stated that these are very important to AT&T. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that they do not yet have targeted dates and noted that they will be provided as soon as they are determined.

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE is 6500-7500 hours and is pending scheduling.

INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated: ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer --Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help. Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed. Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set. Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified. CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10. Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

RE: SCR012103-02 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills.

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-02 . Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 6500 to 7500 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface 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. Upon obtaining consensus from CMP participants as to the appropriate direction for Qwest to take on this Change Request, Qwest will review release schedules and development timetables in an effort to evaluate options for potential scheduling of Change Request SCR012103-02.

Sincerely, Qwest

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003 RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting. Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-03ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

October 19, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: This CR deployed on 10/17/05 and will remain in CLEC Test

September 21, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: This CR will deploy on 10/10/05.

- July 29, 2005 Communicator Excerpt: Announcement Date: July 29, 2005 Effective Date: Immediately Notification Number: SYST.07.29.05.F.03144.CRISOctRel73DrftRelAnncmt Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: CMP - Systems, October 10, 2005 CRIS Release: Draft Release Announcement Associated CR Numbers: CLEC CR #: SCR042902-01, CLEC CR #: SCR012103-03ES, CLEC CR #: SCR012103-05ES In conjunction with the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 10, 2005, Qwest is enhancing the application as outlined below.

Summary of Changes: 2. SCR012103-03ES Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges: In order to comply with the CABS/BOS standard to provide the activity date on the customer service record (CSR), CRIS will provide it for all left-handed FIDS (e.g., CLF, CLS, CKL, etc.) and USOCs in the service and feature section of the CSR.

The activity date is defined as the latest date that activity occurred impacting a specific service or feature.

The activity date will be provided in addition to the service established date (they may or may not be the same date). In addition to the date itself, CRIS will identify what kind of activity the date is associated with (e.g., service order, rate change, zone change, etc.) if activity posted to the account since the last billing cycle.

Qwest will be using the standard CABS BOS values for the Activity Indicator. CRIS will provide the activity date with an activity indicator associated to it and pass the data.

In turn, FIR and Billmate will keep the data associated (FID-activity date/type, USOC-activity date/type) and make it available in an identifiable manner to IABS. IABS will populate the date and appropriate value for the activity indicator on the BOS CSR records. Additionally, IABS will put BOS edit CER151000.01 in place (related to the activity date).

Note: There are no technical Specifications associated with any of the above SCRs.

Comments on the above changes need to be submitted to Qwest via the following link: http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/comment.html. Fill in all required fields and be sure to reference the Notification Number listed above.

-- July 20, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain-Qwest stated that the targeted implementation for this CR is October 10, 2005.

February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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.

July 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is December 2004. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she received the notification and noted that AT&T continues to not be happy with Qwest’s dates. There were no additional questions or comments. This Action Item is Closed.

July 9, 2003 Email to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- This email is to provide you with targeted implementation dates for three of your submitted CMP CR's. They are as follows: SCR012103-03ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Targeted implementation date is December 2004. SCR012103-05ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Targeted implementation date is December 2004 SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. Targeted implementation date of September 2004. These CR's will be in the July System's CMP Meeting Distribution Package, in Attachment I, Action Items amd Associated CRs. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com

June 19, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that these three CR’s are a subset of the BOS billing CR’s. Lynn stated that these would remain open as they are still currently in the scheduling process. Lynn stated that in response to the escalation that an August implementation is not technically feasible. Lynn further stated that for those that requested an LOE audit, that information is provided as part of the escalation response. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is extremely disappointed in the response and stated that AT&T will bring this to another forum. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that there are pieces that are consolidating into one billing format across the billing regions. Lynn noted that some of the billing work is being scheduled subsequent to this rearchitecture and stated that there are interdependencies. Lynn stated that Qwest does understand that you are wanting to get this work in, but we believe that, long term, this effort will be extremely beneficial as far as being able to get billing CRs worked more quickly. Bill Littler/Integra asked if this meant that Qwest is merging the three billing systems. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that she is referring to certain components of CRIS, the format. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that it is hard to believe that it really has that significant of an architecture change to separate out taxes and some of these other CRs that have such large LOEs. There were no additional questions or comments.

May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this effort has not yet been scheduled.

April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if there were targeted implementation dates for the CABS/BOS IABS Update CR’s. Carla stated that these are very important to AT&T. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that they do not yet have targeted dates and noted that they will be provided as soon as they are determined.

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE is 6000-7000 hours and is pending scheduling.

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated: ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer --Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help. Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed. Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set. Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified. CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10. Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

Carla Dickinson Pardee AT&T

Dear Ms. Dickinson Pardee:

This letter is in response to your June 5, 2003 (E12) escalation regarding the AT&T position that the CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges CMP CR SCR012103-03 should be implemented by August 2003 .

Qwest has determined that the following system changes will need to occur in order to implement the requested change:

- All CSR media must be changed across all three CRIS regions. - New fields will need to be established in the three CRIS systems to identify the activity date and type for each USOC on the CSR. - Online inquiry systems will need to be modified to accommodate the activity date and the new activity type field. - BILLMATE will need to be modified to accommodate the new activity date and the new activity type field on files sent to BOS processes. - BOS process will need to be modified to accommodate the new activity date and the new activity type field. - CRIS Bill and CSR must be pulled in concert with each other. This includes modifications to ensure the bill and CSR continue to be synchronized. - CRIS Service Order input processes will need to be modified to accommodate the new activity date and the new activity type field. - ASCII CSR processes will need to be modified to accommodate the new activity date and the new activity type field.

Additionally, as discussed in the Monthly Systems CMP Meeting on May 22, 2003, Qwest is currently performing a re-architecture of the overall billing platform which is being delivered in phases. This CABS/BOS work is contingent upon this re-architecture effort. If this CR were to be worked prior to the completion of this effort then the LOE would increase. Qwest is currently in the scheduling process on this candidate and will indicate the target implementation date when it is determined.

In light of all the systems impacts identified above, Qwest maintains its position that the LOE is appropriate for this CR. Considering the re-architecture effort currently underway, and the various back end systems impacts, Qwest’s position is that the requested implementation date of August 2003 is not technically feasible.

Please contact me by telephone at (303) 624-4450 or by e-mail at lnotari@qwest.com if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Senior Director Information Technologies Qwest

Revised Draft Response March 13, 2003

RE: SCR012103-03 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges.

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-03. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 6000 to 7000 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface 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. Upon obtaining consensus from CMP participants as to the appropriate direction for Qwest to take on this Change Request, Qwest will review release schedules and development timetables in an effort to evaluate options for potential scheduling of Change Request SCR012103-03.

Sincerely, Qwest

-- March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003 RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting. Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-04ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

- November 29, 2004 Email Sent to AT&T: Hi Sharon,

1) SCR012103-04ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T 2) SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 3) SCR012103-07ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments 4) SCR012103-08ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges.

This email is to follow-up on the discussion that took place at the November Monthly CMP Meeting. I believe you were going to check if the above 4 noted CMP CRs are ok to close, offline. Have you had the opportunity to research them and are you ready for them to close? If you are, let me know and I will close them out. If you are not yet ready to close them let me know that as well. I am not aware of any problems associated to the October 18th implementation of these CRs.

Thanks Sharon for your attention to these CRs. I look forward to hearing from you.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM

-- November 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: John Gallegos/Qwest asked if AT&T had an opportunity to test this CR. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that she would like to research further and will close offline if possible.

-- October 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR has deployed and asked if the CR was ready to close. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the CR remain in CLEC Test for validation.

-- September 16, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR will deploy prior to the next monthly CMP Meeting.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: September 3, 2004 Effective Date: October 18, 2004 Notification Number: SYST.09.03.04.F.02034.CRISOctRelFinalTechSpecs Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: CMP-Systems Document In Review October CRIS Release - Final Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CMP SCR012103-06, CMP SCR012103-07, CMP SCR012103-08, CMP SCR012103-04, CMP SCR0110802-02 On September 3, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Final Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Archive site.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP CR012103-06 Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP CR012103-04, CR012103-07, CR012103-08 & CR110802-02 For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

Timeline: Final Technical Specifications Issued, Available on September 3, 2004 CLEC Testing Window Begins, September 18, 2004 Targeted Production Date is October 18, 2004 ** No CLEC representative joined the walkthrough call.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: August 6, 2004 Effective Date: Immediately Notification Number: SYST.08.06.04.F.01956.CRISOctRelDrftTechSpecs Subject: CMP Systems Document In Review. October CRIS Release-Draft Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CLEC SCR012103-06ES, CLEC SCR012103-07ES, CLEC SCR012103-08ES , CLEC SCR012103-04ES, Qwest SCR110802-02IG

On August 6, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Draft Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Review site at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/review.html.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP SCR012103-06ES Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP SCR012103-04ES, SCR012103-07ES, SCR012103-08ES & SCR110802-02IG For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

- April 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is October 14, 2004. There were no comments or questions. This Action Item is closed.

February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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.

May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is June 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the Action Item remain open until she communicates the date to Carla (Pardee/AT&T)

April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if there were targeted implementation dates for the CABS/BOS IABS Update CR’s. Carla stated that these are very important to AT&T. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that they do not yet have targeted dates and noted that they will be provided as soon as they are determined.

March 20, Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated the LOE for this request is 10500-11500 hours and is pending scheduling.

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated: ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer --Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help. Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed. Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set. Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified. CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10. Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

SCR012103-04-E13 June 12, 2003

Carla Dickinson Pardee AT&T

Dear Ms. Dickinson Pardee:

This letter is in response to your June 5, 2003 (E13) escalation regarding the AT&T position that the target implementation date for CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T CMP CR SCR012103-04 should be moved up to August 2003 and requesting an audit of the LOE assigned.

As discussed in the Monthly Systems CMP Meeting on May 22, 2003, Qwest is currently performing a re-architecture of the overall billing platform which is being delivered in phases. This CABS/BOS work is contingent upon this re-architecture effort. If this CR were to be worked prior to the completion of this effort then the LOE would increase.

Qwest has reviewed this escalation and has determined that the initial high level LOE provided was valid based on the high level requirements developed upon initial review of the change request. Considering the re-architecture effort currently underway, and the various back end systems impacts, Qwest’s position is that the requested implementation date of August 2003 is not technically feasible. At this point, Qwest is targeting the implementation of this CR for June of 2004.

Please contact me by telephone at (303) 624-4450 or by e-mail at lnotari@qwest.com if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Senior Director Information Technologies Qwest

Revised Draft Response March 13, 2003

RE: SCR012103-04 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-04. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 10500 to 11500 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface 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. Upon obtaining consensus from CMP participants as to the appropriate direction for Qwest to take on this Change Request, Qwest will review release schedules and development timetables in an effort to evaluate options for potential scheduling of Change Request SCR012103-04.

Sincerely, Qwest

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003 RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting. Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-05ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

-- October 19, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: This CR deployed on 10/17/05 and will remain in CLEC Test

-- September 21, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: This CR will deploy on 10/10/05.

- July 29, 2005 Communicator Excerpt: Announcement Date: July 29, 2005 Effective Date: Immediately Notification Number: SYST.07.29.05.F.03144.CRISOctRel73DrftRelAnncmt Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: CMP - Systems, October 10, 2005 CRIS Release: Draft Release Announcement Associated CR Numbers: CLEC CR #: SCR042902-01, CLEC CR #: SCR012103-03ES, CLEC CR #: SCR012103-05ES In conjunction with the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 10, 2005, Qwest is enhancing the application as outlined below.

Summary of Changes: 3. SCR012103-05ES Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established: The service established date enables the customer to audit monthly charges accurately. In order for IABS to provide the correct service established date for FIDs and USOCs in the service and features section of a customer's service record (CSR), all CRIS regions will pass it - associated with each FID and USOC - in the information they send.

In turn, the intermediary systems, such as FIR and billmate, will keep the data associated (FID-service established date/USOC-service established date) and pass it.

The service established date information should be readily identifiable (i.e., unique field) so that IABS will be able to populate the appropriate BOS BDT CSR records (40-15-05, 10).

Note: There are no technical Specifications associated with any of the above SCRs.

Comments on the above changes need to be submitted to Qwest via the following link: http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/comment.html. Fill in all required fields and be sure to reference the Notification Number listed above.

July 20, 2005 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain-Qwest stated that the targeted implementation for this CR is October 10, 2005. Jill also noted that with these two LOEs that Qwest now has targeted implementation dates for all of the Billing and Repair CRs that were in backlog.

-- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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.

- July 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is December 2004. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she received the notification and noted that AT&T continues to not be happy with Qwest’s dates. There were no additional questions or comments. This Action Item is Closed.

-- July 9, 2003 Email to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- This email is to provide you with targeted implementation dates for three of your submitted CMP CR's. They are as follows: SCR012103-03ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Targeted implementation date is December 2004. SCR012103-05ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Targeted implementation date is December 2004 SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. Targeted implementation date of September 2004. These CR's will be in the July System's CMP Meeting Distribution Package, in Attachment I, Action Items amd Associated CRs. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com

-- June 19, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that these three CR’s are a subset of the BOS billing CR’s. Lynn stated that these would remain open as they are still currently in the scheduling process. Lynn stated that in response to the escalation that an August implementation is not technically feasible. Lynn further stated that for those that requested an LOE audit, that information is provided as part of the escalation response. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is extremely disappointed in the response and stated that AT&T will bring this to another forum. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that there are pieces that are consolidating into one billing format across the billing regions. Lynn noted that some of the billing work is being scheduled subsequent to this rearchitecture and stated that there are interdependencies. Lynn stated that Qwest does understand that you are wanting to get this work in, but we believe that, long term, this effort will be extremely beneficial as far as being able to get billing CRs worked more quickly. Bill Littler/Integra asked if this meant that Qwest is merging the three billing systems. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that she is referring to certain components of CRIS, the format. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that it is hard to believe that it really has that significant of an architecture change to separate out taxes and some of these other CRs that have such large LOEs. There were no additional questions or comments.

May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this effort has not yet been scheduled

April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if there were targeted implementation dates for the CABS/BOS IABS Update CR’s. Carla stated that these are very important to AT&T. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that they do not yet have targeted dates and noted that they will be provided as soon as they are determined.

-- March 20 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated the LOE of 8500-9500 hours and is pending scheduling.

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated: ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer --Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help. Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed. Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set. Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified. CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10. Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

Carla Dickinson Pardee AT&T

Dear Ms. Dickinson Pardee:

This letter is in response to your June 5, 2003 (E14) escalation regarding the AT&T position that the target implementation date for “CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate service established dates with the date on which serviced was established” CMP CR SCR012103-05 should be moved up to August 2003 and requesting an audit of the LOE assigned.

Qwest has reviewed this escalation and has determined that the initial high level LOE provided was valid based on the high level requirements developed upon initial review of the change request. Qwest has determined that the following system changes will need to occur in order to implement the requested change:

- All CSR media must be changed across all three CRIS regions. - New fields will need to be established in the three CRIS systems to identify the establish date and type for each USOC on the CSR. - Online inquiry systems will need to be modified to accommodate the establish date and the new field. - BILLMATE will need to be modified to accommodate the new establish date and the new field on files sent to BOS processes. - BOS process will need to be modified to accommodate the new establish date and the new field. - CRIS Bill and CSR must be pulled in concert with each other. This includes modifications to ensure the bill and CSR continue to be synchronized. - CRIS Service Order input processes will need to be modified to accommodate the new establish date and the new field. - ASCII CSR processes will need to be modified to accommodate the new establish date and the new field.

Additionally, as discussed in the Monthly Systems CMP Meeting on May 22, 2003, Qwest is currently performing a re-architecture of the overall billing platform which is being delivered in phases. This CABS/BOS work is contingent upon this re-architecture effort. If this CR were to be worked prior to the completion of this effort then the LOE would increase. Qwest is currently in the scheduling process on this candidate and will indicate the target implementation date when it is determined.

In light of all the systems impacts identified above, Qwest maintains its position that the LOE is appropriate for this CR. Considering the re-architecture effort currently underway, and the various back end systems impacts, Qwest’s position is that the requested implementation date of August 2003 is not technically feasible.

Please contact me by telephone at (303) 624-4450 or by e-mail at lnotari@qwest.com if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Senior Director Information Technologies Qwest

Revised Draft Response March 13, 2003

RE: SCR012103-05 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established.

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-05. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 8500 to 9500 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface 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. Upon obtaining consensus from CMP participants as to the appropriate direction for Qwest to take on this Change Request, Qwest will review release schedules and development timetables in an effort to evaluate options for potential scheduling of Change Request SCR012103-05.

Sincerely, Qwest

-- March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003 RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting. Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-06ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

November 29, 2004 Email Sent to AT&T: Hi Sharon,

1) SCR012103-04ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T 2) SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 3) SCR012103-07ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments 4) SCR012103-08ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges.

This email is to follow-up on the discussion that took place at the November Monthly CMP Meeting. I believe you were going to check if the above 4 noted CMP CRs are ok to close, offline. Have you had the opportunity to research them and are you ready for them to close? If you are, let me know and I will close them out. If you are not yet ready to close them let me know that as well. I am not aware of any problems associated to the October 18th implementation of these CRs.

Thanks Sharon for your attention to these CRs. I look forward to hearing from you.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM

November 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: John Gallegos/Qwest asked if AT&T had an opportunity to test this CR. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that she would like to research further and will close offline if possible.

-- October 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR has deployed and asked if the CR was ready to close. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the CR remain in CLEC Test for validation.

September 16, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR will deploy prior to the next monthly CMP Meeting.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: September 3, 2004 Effective Date: October 18, 2004 Notification Number: SYST.09.03.04.F.02034.CRISOctRelFinalTechSpecs Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: CMP-Systems Document In Review October CRIS Release - Final Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CMP SCR012103-06, CMP SCR012103-07, CMP SCR012103-08, CMP SCR012103-04, CMP SCR0110802-02 On September 3, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Final Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Archive site.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP CR012103-06 Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP CR012103-04, CR012103-07, CR012103-08 & CR110802-02 For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

Timeline: Final Technical Specifications Issued, Available on September 3, 2004 CLEC Testing Window Begins, September 18, 2004 Targeted Production Date is October 18, 2004 ** No CLEC representative joined the walkthrough call.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: August 6, 2004 Effective Date: Immediately Notification Number: SYST.08.06.04.F.01956.CRISOctRelDrftTechSpecs Subject: CMP Systems Document In Review. October CRIS Release-Draft Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CLEC SCR012103-06ES, CLEC SCR012103-07ES, CLEC SCR012103-08ES , CLEC SCR012103-04ES, Qwest SCR110802-02IG

On August 6, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Draft Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Review site at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/review.html.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP SCR012103-06ES Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP SCR012103-04ES, SCR012103-07ES, SCR012103-08ES & SCR110802-02IG For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

-- April 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is October 14, 2004. There were no comments or questions. This Action Item is closed.

- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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.

November 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the CABS Bill can be the Bill of Record and stated that it is documented in the PCAT. Bonnie Johnson/Eschelon asked that the CABS Bill can be the Bill of Record, but that Billmate cannot. Kerri Waldner/Qwest stated that the PCAT states that the CLEC can request something other than paper to be their Bill of Record. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the PCAT contains detailed information and noted that the URL for the specific PCAT is noted in the CR. There were no additional questions or comments. This Action Item is Closed.

- October 16, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the revised Level of Effort is 600 to 1200 hours due to the removal of the paper bill output. Connie noted that Qwest had assumed that paper be included even if it was not requested in the CR. Connie stated that the revised deployment date for this CR is now May 10, 2004. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the paper bill is the bill of record so they do need this done for paper unless the CABS bill can be the bill of record. Carla asked that if it is only 600 hours, why the May implementation date. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this effort would touch the application that is at full capacity and noted that Lynn (Notarianni) had previously discussed this. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR would be out 19 months before it is implemented and is completely unreasonable. Carla stated that it took 10-months to get an explanation of why this was changed. Carla stated that going forward; she may start asking for a line-by-line explanation of the Levels of Effort. Connie Winston/Qwest asked that if Qwest would have said paper bill, AT&T may have addressed this then. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated yes and that she does not understand the 17000 hours. Carla stated that it is unacceptable but does not know what can be done. There were no other questions or comments.

July 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is September 2004. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she received the notification and noted that AT&T continues to not be happy with Qwest’s dates. There were no additional questions or comments. This Action Item is Closed.

July 9, 2003 Email to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- This email is to provide you with targeted implementation dates for three of your submitted CMP CR's. They are as follows: SCR012103-03ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Targeted implementation date is December 2004. SCR012103-05ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Targeted implementation date is December 2004 SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. Targeted implementation date of September 2004. These CR's will be in the July System's CMP Meeting Distribution Package, in Attachment I, Action Items amd Associated CRs. Thank you, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com

- June 19, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that these three CR’s are a subset of the BOS billing CR’s. Lynn stated that these would remain open as they are still currently in the scheduling process. Lynn stated that in response to the escalation that an August implementation is not technically feasible. Lynn further stated that for those that requested an LOE audit, that information is provided as part of the escalation response. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is extremely disappointed in the response and stated that AT&T will bring this to another forum. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that there are pieces that are consolidating into one billing format across the billing regions. Lynn noted that some of the billing work is being scheduled subsequent to this rearchitecture and stated that there are interdependencies. Lynn stated that Qwest does understand that you are wanting to get this work in, but we believe that, long term, this effort will be extremely beneficial as far as being able to get billing CRs worked more quickly. Bill Littler/Integra asked if this meant that Qwest is merging the three billing systems. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that she is referring to certain components of CRIS, the format. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that it is hard to believe that it really has that significant of an architecture change to separate out taxes and some of these other CRs that have such large LOEs. There were no additional questions or comments.

- May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this effort has not yet been scheduled.

April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the Level of Effort for this request is 16,000 to 17,000 hours and is pending scheduling. Lynn stated that this action item would remain open until we provide the targeted implementation date.

-- March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that this CR is looking to be very large and is still being evaluated.

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated: ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer --Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help. Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed. Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set. Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified. CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10. Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

SCR012103-06-E15 June 12, 2003

Carla Dickinson Pardee AT&T

Dear Ms. Dickinson Pardee:

This letter is in response to your June 5, 2003 (E15) escalation regarding the AT&T position that the target implementation date for CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines CMP CR SCR012103-06 should be moved up to August 2003 and requesting an audit of the LOE assigned.

Qwest has reviewed this escalation and has determined that the initial high level LOE provided was valid based on the high level requirements developed upon initial review of the change request. Qwest has determined that the following system changes will need to occur in order to implement the requested change:

- All Bill Invoice media must be changed across all three CRIS regions. - Central CRIS paper invoice must be redesigned to include new lines for Tax and Surcharge sub-totals. - Eastern and Western CRIS will require a re-design of the paper invoice. The re-design will require the creation of two new bill sections, one for surcharges and one for taxes. - All three CRIS regions will need to establish appropriate, new taxability codes for all tax and surcharge types. This will require extensive analysis to identify and classify tax and surcharge types and assign appropriate bill phrases for each. - Invoice staging system will need to accommodate the new tax/surcharge details and sub-totals. - Online query systems will need to accommodate the new tax/surcharge details and sub-totals. Adjustment processing in Western region will need to be modified to accommodate the new tax/surcharge details. - Bill format systems will need to accommodate the new tax/surcharge details and sub-totals. There will be two separate sections in place of the Current Taxes Fees and Surcharges section - BILLMATE will need to accommodate the new tax/surcharge details and sub-totals. - BOS will need to accommodate the new tax/surcharge details and sub-totals. - EDI will require modification to support the new tax/surcharge details and sub-totals. - These changes will impact residential, small business and large business bill invoice formats.

Additionally, as discussed in the Monthly Systems CMP Meeting on May 22, 2003, Qwest is currently performing a re-architecture of the overall billing platform which is being delivered in phases. This CABS/BOS work is contingent upon this re-architecture effort. If this CR were to be worked prior to the completion of this effort then the LOE would increase. Qwest is currently in the scheduling process on this candidate and will indicate the target implementation date when it is determined.

In light of all the systems impacts identified above, Qwest maintains its position that the LOE is appropriate for this CR. Considering the re-architecture effort currently underway, and the various back end systems impacts, Qwest’s position is that the requested implementation date of August 2003 is not technically feasible.

Please contact me by telephone at (303) 624-4450 or by e-mail at lnotari@qwest.com if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Senior Director Information Technologies Qwest

DRAFT RESPONSE April 4, 2003

RE: SCR012103-06 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines.

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-06. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 16,000 to 17,000 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface 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. Upon obtaining consensus from CMP participants as to the appropriate direction for Qwest to take on this Change Request, Qwest will review release schedules and development timetables in an effort to evaluate options for potential scheduling of Change Request SCR012103-06.

Sincerely, Qwest

-- March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003 RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting. Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-07ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

- November 29, 2004 Email Sent to AT&T: Hi Sharon,

1) SCR012103-04ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T 2) SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 3) SCR012103-07ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments 4) SCR012103-08ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges.

This email is to follow-up on the discussion that took place at the November Monthly CMP Meeting. I believe you were going to check if the above 4 noted CMP CRs are ok to close, offline. Have you had the opportunity to research them and are you ready for them to close? If you are, let me know and I will close them out. If you are not yet ready to close them let me know that as well. I am not aware of any problems associated to the October 18th implementation of these CRs.

Thanks Sharon for your attention to these CRs. I look forward to hearing from you.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM

- November 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: John Gallegos/Qwest asked if AT&T had an opportunity to test this CR. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that she would like to research further and will close offline if possible.

- October 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR has deployed and asked if the CR was ready to close. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the CR remain in CLEC Test for validation.

September 16, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR will deploy prior to the next monthly CMP Meeting.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: September 3, 2004 Effective Date: October 18, 2004 Notification Number: SYST.09.03.04.F.02034.CRISOctRelFinalTechSpecs Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: CMP-Systems Document In Review October CRIS Release - Final Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CMP SCR012103-06, CMP SCR012103-07, CMP SCR012103-08, CMP SCR012103-04, CMP SCR0110802-02 On September 3, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Final Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Archive site.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP CR012103-06 Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP CR012103-04, CR012103-07, CR012103-08 & CR110802-02 For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

Timeline: Final Technical Specifications Issued, Available on September 3, 2004 CLEC Testing Window Begins, September 18, 2004 Targeted Production Date is October 18, 2004 ** No CLEC representative joined the walkthrough call.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: August 6, 2004 Effective Date: Immediately Notification Number: SYST.08.06.04.F.01956.CRISOctRelDrftTechSpecs Subject: CMP Systems Document In Review. October CRIS Release-Draft Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CLEC SCR012103-06ES, CLEC SCR012103-07ES, CLEC SCR012103-08ES , CLEC SCR012103-04ES, Qwest SCR110802-02IG

On August 6, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Draft Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Review site at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/review.html.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP SCR012103-06ES Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP SCR012103-04ES, SCR012103-07ES, SCR012103-08ES & SCR110802-02IG For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

April 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is October 14, 2004. There were no comments or questions. This Action Item is closed.

February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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.

May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is June 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the Action Item remain open until she communicates the date to Carla (Pardee/AT&T)

April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if there were targeted implementation dates for the CABS/BOS IABS Update CR’s. Carla stated that these are very important to AT&T. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that they do not yet have targeted dates and noted that they will be provided as soon as they are determined.

March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated the LOE for this request, 2000-3000 hours and is pending scheduling

March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

March 4, 2003 Email from Carla Pardee/AT&T to cmpcr@qwest.com with a cc to Peggy Esquibel-Reed: Peggy: Per our meeting this morning, I am resubmitting the CRs we discussed. I decided it would be best to leave the initial CR, and I am resubmitting 8 separate CRs. I assume you will assign new numbers? Also, for date submitted, I left the 1/22/03 as the initial submission date, and a resubmitted date of 3/4/03. Please feel free to call me if you have any questins in this regard. Thanks.

-- March 4, 2003 Email from AT&T: I definitely agree. Thanks for looking, I am not sure how I missed this, but I did! Thanks. This will be very helpful to us. --Original Message-- From: Peggy Esquibel-Reed [mailto:pesquib@qwest.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 12:28 PM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Subject: SCR012103-01 ITEMs 4 & 5

-- March 4, 2003 Email to AT&T: Carla -- In regard to items 4 & 5 on SCR012103-01, I have verified that they are in fact the same as what is to be delivered with the existing CMP CR of SCR110802-02IG. I have verified that SCR110802-02IG is not a BillMate specific effort. Based on that information, I do not believe that a new CR needs to be submitted for these 2 items. Item 4 is Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. Item 5 is Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. I have attached a copy of SCR110802-02IG for your review. Please let me know if you have additional questions or concerns. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

-- March 4, 2003 Meeting with AT&T with recommendation on how best to split CR into smaller efforts: Attendees - Carla Pardee/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Bob Hayes,/AT&T, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest, Dean Buhler/Qwest, Mark Heline/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the purpose of the call was to recommend to AT&T how it would be nest to split the original CR containing 10 items into smaller efforts. Peggy stated that the split recommendation is based on Qwest analyzing each piece of work and stated that splitting of the CR may also help when scheduling the CR's for deployment. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated the recommendation as follows and AT&Ts agreement is also stated: ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. AT&T agreed to modify the original AT&T CR, SCR012103-01, to include this item only. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There is an existing Systems CMP CR, SCR110802-02IG, for items 4 and 5 on the original CR. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if SCR110802-02IG was a BIllMate CR. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that it was not. Shelley Mason/Qwest confirmed. Peggy agreed to revalidate. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. AT&T will send a separate CR for this item. Qwest believes that this was delivered in an October Release. AT&T has stated that they may, in time, withdraw the CR if they find this to be true. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. AT&T agreed to submit a separate CR for this item. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked for status if the ICA call was a standing call. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that the calls take place each Tuesday and Thursday. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if these 10 items would be included in the agreement. Dean Buhler/Qwest stated that internal discussions were still taking place and stated that the redlined changes have not yet been completed. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is more than willing to split the original CR (SCR012103-01) and would send in the CR's today. Carla asked if Clarification calls would need to again take place. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that if AT&T and Qwest were comfortable that additional calls would not be needed, we would not have to hold them. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she is comfortable without additional clarification calls; she does not want to start over. Kerri Waldner/Qwest also stated that she was comfortable without additional clarification calls. There was no dissent from the call participants to not have additional clarification calls for the resubmitted CRs. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked when these would be scheduled. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that scheduling needs to be determined Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that Qwest would provide a status for each affected CR at the March Systems CMP Meeting. There were no other questions or comments. The call was adjourned.

March 3, 2003 Email to AT&T: Hi Carla -- Thanks for your email and voicemail resonse. I have scheduled the meeting for SCR012103-01, based on your availability. Meeting logistics are: Date: Tuesday, March 4, 2003 Time: 9:00 a.m. Call in #: 1-877-564-8688 Passcode: 8571927 Talk to you then. Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems

- February 27, 2003 Email from AT&T: Peggy: Here is your response - also, it looks like the only time we are available is March 4 at 9am MST. Hope this still works. Thanks for your help. Mer and Bob - Please mark your calendar. --Original Message-- From: Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2003 6:58 AM To: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM; Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM Subject: RE: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Carla, The Activity Date data element/field is only valid on the 40-15-05-00 and 40-15-10-00 records so our answer is Yes - we are referencing the 40-15-XX records. As to the conference call dates I am available from 11 AM to 12 Noon on March 4th. I am booked from 12 Noon until 3 PM on March 4th and all day March 5th. Thanks, Mer --Original Message-- From: Pardee, Carla D, CSLSM Sent: February 26, 2003 7:10 PM To: Hayes, Robert W (Bob), CSLSM; Thompson, Meri-Louise (Mer), CSLSM Subject: FW: SCR012103-01 CABS BOS IABS Updates Bob and Mer: Can you answer this questions for Qwest? Also, they want to have a follow-up call (this should be a "robust") discussion on either March 4 11am or 1pm EST, or March 5 at 11am or 2pm EST? Thanks.

- February 26, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Good Afternoon Carla -- We are in the process of analyzing how it makes the most sense to split your CR in order to present you with the recommendation and need clarification on one of the items. For the third item on your CR, which is 'Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges', will you confirm that you are referencing a 40-15-XX record and not a billing record? If that is not correct, would you please provide additional information as to where exactly, you want to see the activity dates? I appreciate you help. Here is an excerpt regarding item 3, from the Clarification Meeting Minutes, if it helps.: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. Thanks Much, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems 303.896.6332

February 25, 2003 Email sent to Carla Pardee/AT&T: Hi Carla -- I would like to schedule a meeting with you to discuss the splitting of your CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates. Will any of the dates & times noted below work for you? Please let me know which ones will work and I will get the meeting scheduled. Tuesday, March 4, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Tuesday, March 4, 2003 11:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 9:00 a.m. MT Wednesday, March 5, 2003 12:00 p.m. MT Thanks, Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest Communications CRPM -- Systems pesquib@qwest.com 303.896.6332

February 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T presented CR and asked what the next step was. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that Qwest is currently analyzing how to best split the CR and will be scheduling a meeting with AT&T to discuss. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that she would schedule the meeting. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated okay. There were no other questions or comments.

- Clarification Meeting - February 4, 2003 Introduction of Attendees: Carla Pardee/AT&T, Jeri Lancaster/AT&T, Mer Thompson/AT&T, Scott Carne/Qwest, Shelley Mason/Qwest, Kerri Waldner/Qwest, Deb Walker/Qwest, Lynn Notarianni/Qwest, Jami Larson/Qwest, Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest CR Description Review: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest reviewed the CR description: Qwest has filed for several exceptions from compliance with OBF standards for CABS/IABS. AT&T requests that Qwest implement the following changes so that Qwest will become compliance with the current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. Peggy stated that there are 10 items and each item would be discussed. Impacted Interfaces: Wholesale Billing Confirmed Products: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that the impacted products noted on the CR were UBL, UNE Switching, UNE Transport, UNE Loop, and UNE-P. Peggy asked AT&T for confirmation of the impacted products. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that the CR is for the current AT&T products. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that would look into the AT&T product set. Correct Personnel Involved: No other personnel identified. CLECs Expectations/Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that she was aware that this CR might need to be split into several smaller CR’s. Carla stated that the CR was issued with all 10 items so that there could be 1 discussion for all issues. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that after the Clarification call, Qwest will analyze to determine if a split of the issues would make sense and bring forward to AT&T recommendations for how the CR should be split. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that each of the 10 items would be discussed individually during this call. ITEM 1: Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for confirmation that this was regarding the bill date. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that is asking for the same extract date for the bill pull. Carla Pardee/AT&T asked Jeri (AT&T) what the process is. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that they are currently processed on the same invoice and appears on the differences list. Jeri stated that AT&T receives an error message and that the charges on the tape and paper bill do not match. There were no other questions or comments for Item 1. ITEM 2: Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if the requested edits are for the Bill Data Tape. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that was correct. There were no other questions or concerns for Item 2. ITEM 3: Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest asked if the reference activity date was the service order activity date. Carla Pardee/AT&T responded yes. Jami Larson/Qwest asked if AT&T was getting an error message. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that an error message was not received but that AT&T could not correlate a charge to a service order. Jeri (AT&T) stated that AT&T cannot validate the service order date. There were no other questions or comments for Item 3. ITEM 4: Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 4. ITEM 5: Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. There were no questions or comments for Item 5. ITEM 6: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that this issue is similar to Eschelon’s CR requesting the maintenance number, circuit ID on the bill. Carla (AT&T) asked AT&T to clarify this issue. Mer Thompson/AT&T stated that the audit number is a number associated to a billing dispute or is a reference number for a trouble ticket. Mer (AT&T) stated that AT&T needs a way to associate adjustments to a trouble ticket or to a dispute. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked if this would only apply to adjustment records and asked where the audit number appears, adjustments and OC&C’s. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that appear on adjustments and OC&C’s if provided. There were no other questions or comments for Item 6. ITEM 7: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. There were no questions or comments for Item 7. ITEM 8: Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked for clarification if ‘service established’ means the account established date or when an item of service was established. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that ‘service established’ is when service or a specific feature was established. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T asked if this was the provisioning date. Jami Larson/Qwest stated that it could be. Jami stated that it is the date that billing starts for the establishment of the service or of the feature. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that it is the completion date for the adding of a feature or an additional line. Jeri (AT&T) stated that the original established date is not the activity date when a change was made via a service order. There were no other questions or comments for Item 8. ITEM 9: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. There were no questions or comments for Item 9. ITEM 10: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that there are standard phrase codes within CABS/BOS. Jeri stated that Qwest Currently uses 3 phrase codes and are generic, not descriptive enough. Jeri stated that Qwest uses phrase codes such as ‘charge or credit for new service’. Jeri stated that might be X18 or X16. Jeri stated that AT&T needs the existing CABS/BOS phrase codes to be used for billing purposes; for example, ‘one time charge for service provided’. Jeri stated that the phrase codes are in the CABS documentation. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that the phrase codes are to be used for UNE charges and adjustments in CABS. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. Carla Pardee/AT&T stated that AT&T needs financial assurance of the charges, that is what is driving this CR. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T stated that the current bill that is being produced is a shell and a lot of needed detail is not there. Jeri stated that the bill is not a verifiable bill. Shelley Mason/Qwest asked to clarify that there is an existing set of phrase codes to follow. Jeri Lancaster/AT&T responded yes. There were no other questions or comments for Item 10. Action Plan: Peggy Esquibel-Reed/Qwest stated that this CR is due to be presented by AT&T at the February 20th Systems CMP Meeting

CenturyLink Response

June 12, 2003

Carla Dickinson Pardee AT&T

Dear Ms. Dickinson Pardee:

This letter is in response to your June 5, 2003 (E16) escalation regarding the AT&T position that the target implementation date for “CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments” CMP CR SCR012103-07 should be moved up to August 2003.

As discussed in the Monthly Systems CMP Meeting on May 22, 2003, Qwest is currently performing a re-architecture of the overall billing platform which is being delivered in phases. This CABS/BOS work is contingent upon this re-architecture effort. If this CR were to be worked prior to the completion of this effort then the LOE would increase.

Considering the re-architecture effort currently underway, and the various back end systems impacts, Qwest’s position is that the requested implementation date of August 2003 is not technically feasible. At this point, Qwest is targeting the implementation of this CR for June of 2004.

Please contact me by telephone at (303) 624-4450 or by e-mail at lnotari@qwest.com if you have any additional questions.

Sincerely, Lynn Notarianni Senior Director Information Technologies Qwest

Revised Draft Response March 13, 2003

RE: SCR012103-07 CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments

Qwest has reviewed the information submitted as part of Change Request SCR012103-07. Based upon the scope of this CR as agreed to in the Clarification Meeting, Qwest is able to provide an estimated Level of Effort (LOE) of 2000 to 3000 hours for this Wholesale Billing Interface 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. Upon obtaining consensus from CMP participants as to the appropriate direction for Qwest to take on this Change Request, Qwest will review release schedules and development timetables in an effort to evaluate options for potential scheduling of Change Request SCR012103-07.

Sincerely, Qwest

- March 4, 2003 INFORMATION CARRIED FORWARD FROM ORIGINAL SYSTEMS CMP CR, SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Update

DRAFT RESPONSE February 5, 2003 RE: SCR012103-01 CABS/BOS IABS Updates Qwest is reviewing the information submitted as part of AT&T’s Change Request SCR012103-01, which is requesting that Qwest become compliant with current OBF standards, and allow AT&T to validate several charges currently appearing on Qwest’s wholesale bills. This CR includes a list of 10 items that AT&T would like Qwest to address. Those items are: 01) Process bill data and CSRs on the same day. 02) Perform all standard CABS BOS edits on the UNE bills. 03) Populate activity date with the date of the activity associated with the charges. 04) Populate adjustment thru date with the date through which the adjustment applies. 05) Populate adjustment from date with the date from which the adjustment applies. 06) Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T (if provided). 07) Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges. 08) Populate service established dates with the date on which service was established. 09) Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 10) Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments. Based upon the discussion that took place during the Clarification Meeting (held February 4, 2003) Qwest is analyzing the best approach in splitting this CR into smaller efforts, with AT&T’s agreement. Qwest is also working to investigate each item in order to develop potential solutions. Qwest will continue to research the CR, and will provide an updated response at the March Systems CMP Meeting. Qwest is working diligently to address this Change Request and to provide the most accurate LOE possible. At the February 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

Archived System CR SCR012103-08ES Detail

Description Of Change

Expected Deliverable:

April 2003

Status History

Project Meetings

- November 29, 2004 Email Sent to AT&T: Hi Sharon,

1) SCR012103-04ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate audit number with the reference number provided by AT&T 2) SCR012103-06ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Separate taxes and surcharges and populate on the appropriate records per the CABS guidelines. 3) SCR012103-07ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Establish and use more descriptive local use phrase codes for UNE charges and adjustments 4) SCR012103-08ES CABS/BOS IABS Updates: Populate recurring/non-recurring charge indicator with a value of "1" for monthly recurring access charges and a value of "2" for non-recurring charges.

This email is to follow-up on the discussion that took place at the November Monthly CMP Meeting. I believe you were going to check if the above 4 noted CMP CRs are ok to close, offline. Have you had the opportunity to research them and are you ready for them to close? If you are, let me know and I will close them out. If you are not yet ready to close them let me know that as well. I am not aware of any problems associated to the October 18th implementation of these CRs.

Thanks Sharon for your attention to these CRs. I look forward to hearing from you.

Peggy Esquibel-Reed Qwest CMP CRPM

- November 17, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: John Gallegos/Qwest asked if AT&T had an opportunity to test this CR. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T stated that she would like to research further and will close offline if possible.

- October 20, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this CR has deployed and asked if the CR was ready to close. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the CR remain in CLEC Test for validation.

-- EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: September 3, 2004 Effective Date: October 18, 2004 Notification Number: SYST.09.03.04.F.02034.CRISOctRelFinalTechSpecs Notification Category: Systems Notification Target Audience: CLECs, Resellers Subject: CMP-Systems Document In Review October CRIS Release - Final Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CMP SCR012103-06, CMP SCR012103-07, CMP SCR012103-08, CMP SCR012103-04, CMP SCR0110802-02 On September 3, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Final Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Archive site.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP CR012103-06 Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP CR012103-04, CR012103-07, CR012103-08 & CR110802-02 For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

Timeline: Final Technical Specifications Issued, Available on September 3, 2004 CLEC Testing Window Begins, September 18, 2004 Targeted Production Date is October 18, 2004 ** No CLEC representative joined the walkthrough call.

-- September 16, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Jill Martain/Qwest stated that this CR will deploy prior to the next monthly CMP Meeting.

EXCERPT FROM COMMUNICATOR: Announcement Date: August 6, 2004 Effective Date: Immediately Notification Number: SYST.08.06.04.F.01956.CRISOctRelDrftTechSpecs Subject: CMP Systems Document In Review. October CRIS Release-Draft Technical Specifications Associated CRs #: CLEC SCR012103-06ES, CLEC SCR012103-07ES, CLEC SCR012103-08ES , CLEC SCR012103-04ES, Qwest SCR110802-02IG

On August 6, 2004, Qwest will post planned updates to its Draft Technical Specifications for the CRIS system release targeted for implementation on October 18, 2004. These will be posted to the Qwest Wholesale Document Review site at http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/cmp/review.html.

Summary of Change: Qwest will implement software changes related to five separate CMP CRs, with a summary of the changes listed below:

CMP SCR012103-06ES Qwest has been combining both taxes and surcharges on the BOS/BDT file for UNE accounts. Qwest will be making changes to separate the two so the BOS/BDT file will contain separate tax and surcharge records and separate totals will be provided.

CMP SCR012103-04ES, SCR012103-07ES, SCR012103-08ES & SCR110802-02IG For the UNE Pots and UNE Loop products, adjustment from and thru date information will be provided. This data will be provided on the Detail of Adjustments Record (10-20-05-01) in the "Adjustment From Date" and the "Adjustment Thru Date" fields. The audit number will be populated in the 10-20-05-00 record, when provided by the customer and the recurring/non-recurring indicator will be populated on the 10-20-05-01 record.

- April 22, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Connie Winston/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is October 14, 2004. There were no comments or questions. This Action Item is closed.

-- February 19, 2004 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion Excerpt (Attachments H & J): 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.

-- May 22, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the targeted implementation date for this request is June 2004. Donna Osborne-Miller/AT&T asked that the Action Item remain open until she communicates the date to Carla (Pardee/AT&T)

-- April 17, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Carla Pardee/AT&T asked if there were targeted implementation dates for the CABS/BOS IABS Update CR’s. Carla stated that these are very important to AT&T. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that they do not yet have targeted dates and noted that they will be provided as soon as they are determined.

- March 20, 2003 Systems CMP Meeting Discussion: Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that the LOE is 2000-3000 hours and is pending scheduling. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest asked that now that we have LOE’s and are reviewing scheduling can we close the action items. Sharon Van Meter/AT&T asked when scheduling be done. Connie Winston/Qwest stated that this can take a little while as some of theses are large and we are looking at all the piece parts to schedule. Lynn Notarianni/Qwest stated that as these are scheduled, the CR’s would be updated to reflect the targeted implementation dates.