Viveros Attachment O · C.V. PACIFIC BELL - “Final Minutes From April 28, 1999, Change Management Process Meeting ” Page O-3 of 34 Attendee Company Name Email Address Signature

ViverosAttachment O

C.V.PACIFIC BELL - “Final Minutes From April 28, 1999, Change

Management Process Meeting ”Page O-1 of 34

Accessible

PACIFIC BELL - “Final Minutes From April 28, 1999, Change ManagementProcess Meeting ”

Date: May 25, 1999

Number: CLECC99-191

Contact: Pacific Bell Account Manager

Attached please find the final minutes from the April 28, 1999, Change ManagementProcess Meeting hosted by Pacific Bell and Attendee Sign-In Sheet. Draft minutes werecirculated for comment to the participants of the meeting. No revisions to the draftminutes were received. Documents that were handed out in the meeting are also includedas an attachment to this Accessible Letter.

Please direct any questions you may have to your Pacific Bell Account Manager.

Attachments



Attendee Company Name Email Address SignatureBandaru, Nagaraju Covad [email protected]

Betz, Kathy First WorldCommunications

[email protected]

Brunet, Jacqueline L Pacific Bell [email protected]

Chamberlin, Mark Pacific Bell [email protected]

De Young, Sarah AT&T [email protected]

DeJong, Mary Liz Pacific Bell [email protected]

Donaldson, Marge Covad [email protected]

Gamble, Yvonne Cox Telcom [email protected]

Grant, Pat AT&T [email protected]

Green, Belinda SBC Communications [email protected]

Guiterrez, John Media One [email protected]

Hardman, Joe AT&T OSSRequirements

[email protected] via conference bridge

Jacobson, Robin SBC Communications [email protected]

Johnson, Jean SBC Communications [email protected]

Kieren, Joe SBC Communications [email protected]

King, Kathy SBC Communications [email protected]

Klueck, Cherri First WorldCommunications


Lee, Judy SBC Communications [email protected]

Leighs, Holly SBC Communications [email protected]

Lynch, Randall SBC Communications [email protected]

Malfatti, Ron MCI WorldCom [email protected]

Nanko, Yolanda First WorldCommunications

yolanda.nanko.firstworld.com

Peat, Ron SBC Communications [email protected]

Protheroe, Pam AT&T Mgr CarrierRelations/Negotiations

[email protected]



Attendee Company Name Email Address SignatureRiddick, Brenda RCN [email protected]

Riddick, Brenda RCN [email protected]

Roberts, Sharon TCI/AT&T [email protected]

Rodgers, Tom GTE Network Services [email protected]

Rosier, Leslee Nextlink [email protected]

Schwartz, Kurt SBC Communications [email protected]

Scott, Dianna Pacific Bell [email protected]

Sneddon, Diana First WorldCommunications


Sullivan, Hollylynn MCI WorldCom [email protected]

Taff, Steve Allegiance Telecom [email protected]

Talbot, Kevin SBC Communications [email protected]

Teece, Janet SBC Communications [email protected]

Thompson,Cash

GTECC [email protected]

via conferencebridge

Wehl, Arthur Sprint Account Team [email protected]

Williams, Kevin GTECC [email protected] via conference bridge

Yee, Grace AT&T [email protected]

Young, Recia Pacific Bell [email protected]



Quarterly Change Management Process Meeting

Wednesday, April 28, 19999:00am-5:00pm

370 Third Street, San FranciscoEmbarcadero Room

FINAL MINUTES

Welcome and Introductions

The Quarterly Change Management Process meeting began at 9:00am withintroductions. Please see the Attachments for a list of attendees and those whojoined the meeting on the conference bridge. Pacific Bell thanked theparticipants for taking time to attend the meeting, and indicated itsencouragement over the number of people in attendance.

Pacific Bell reviewed the agenda for the meeting (please see Attachment X),distributed on April 21, 1999, and indicated that it had received no additionalagenda items from the CLEC participants. CLECs were reminded andencouraged to bring additional agenda items to the attention of the group at anyappropriate time during the day’s discussions.

12-Month Development View Walk-Through

Pacific Bell reviewed the Developmental Plan for the next 12 months. Theattached copy incorporates updates and clarifications made to this documentduring the meeting.

Specific discussion was undertaken on the following items of interest:

1Q99/2Q99-LSR Ordering

CLECs asked if the enhancement regarding the mechanized process in the May1st Release included LASR/GUI. Further, they inquired whether thisenhancement would include delivering the ECCKT on the FOC. Pacific respondedthat the LASR GUI capability will be deployed in the Local Service Centers andCLECs should receive some mechanized rejects as quickly as early May. At thesame time, ECCKT information will be returned on the FOC mechanically.



AT&T inquired as to what notifications it would be receiving on a mechanizedbasis. Pacific Bell clarified that the capability to provide mechanized rejectswould be available with the phased implementation of LASR/GUI following theMay 1st Release and mechanized jeopardies for missed commitments and forfacilities would be available in the June 26th Release.

2Q99 – Pre-Ordering GUI

Discussion occurred regarding the addition in Verigate of the LPIC field to theAddress Verification screen. This change, originally scheduled for June 15th hasbeen moved up to May 7th by regulatory mandate. AT&T questioned thenomenclature “Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription”. Pacific Bell agreed that,due to the aforementioned regulatory decision, this nomenclature should nowdrop the word “Interstate”.

2Q99 – LSR Ordering

Responding to a Pacific Bell statement that it would begin to electronicallyenforce LNA edits that it has not previously, AT&T requested a list of those editsthat will now be enforced. Pacific Bell Action Item.

2Q99 – LSR Ordering GUI

Regarding the “Clear Forms Option” for LEX in the June 26th Release, Pacificclarified what “Clear Form Options” means: the customer’s ability to clear/deleteDL and DSR forms when the forms are optional. Pacific Bell indicated anAccessible Letter detailing the function would be forthcoming as the releaseneared. A specific date was not given.

2Q99 – Proprietary Order Interface (CESAR)

AT&T asked about the availability of Saturday due dates. This discussion wasdeferred until Joe Kieren of Pacific Bell could join us by conference bridge (pleasesee discussion below).

3Q99 – LSR Ordering (EDI/LEX)

Reference was made by Pacific Bell to Accessible Letter CLECCS 99-054, sent onApril 27, 1999, noting the release date for the listed enhancements as October 9,1999.



3Q99 – LSR Ordering GUI (LEX)

The CLECs questioned what Pacific Bell meant with the phrase “LEXReconciliation to match LSOR and LEX User Guide.” Pacific Bell responded thatthis was part of an on-going effort to ensure that the LEX “On-line” help isconsistent with the LSOR business rules.

3Q99 – Pre-Ordering [App to App] (DataGate)

MediaOne asked why Pacific Bell was adding the NXX and line-ranges. PacificBell responded that this was to enable the CLECs to see what numbers areavailable in a specific CLLI code. The CLEC asked if this was tied to a specificCLEC request. Pacific Bell responded that this was both an internal enhancementand a response to a customer request on the Southwestern side.

3Q99 – Pre-Ordering [App to App] (EDI/CORBA)

AT&T asked why CSI and Directory Assistance Listings were two separate items.Pacific referenced Accessible Letter CLECCS 99-052 that shows DA/DL is part ofthe customer service inquiry. However, the industry has addressed CSI andDirectory as two separate issues; resulting in three possible queries: CSI, CSIwith DA/DL, and DA/DL. The Accessible Letter schedules this enhancement forOctober 17, 1999.

3Q99 – Order Interface (Order Status)

AT&T reminded Pacific Bell of its commitment from the January 27, 1999 QCMPto have a design and development meeting for Order Status. Pacific BellAction Item. Pacific Bell is committed to having such a meeting approximately8 weeks prior to implementation (see Interface Change Management Process, p.15, #1, “Category Two (GUI) Process” for the Introduction of New Interfaces).This enhancement is targeted for the 3Q, but is yet to be confirmed.

1st Release 2000 LSR Ordering (EDI/LEX - Versioning)

AT&T Internet and Broadband Services asked for, and Pacific Bell provided, areview of the versioning discussion in this forum and apprised CLECs of thecurrent status of the issue. OBF is considering several possible “sunrise/sunset”scenarios: 60 day; 90 day; 9 month. OBF is soliciting proposals from itsmembers on versioning and is establishing subcommittees to investigate theissue.



1st Release 2000 LSR Ordering (EDI/LEX – LSOG4)

Pacific Bell stated that OBF released LSOG4 guidelines in mid-April. Pacific Bellwill call for a meeting with CLECs to assess what portions of LSOG4 should beprioritized for implementation. Pacific Bell Action Item.

Flexible Due Date

Joe Kieren of Pacific Bell joined the QCMP by conference bridge.

Standalone LNP

Saturday Due Dates will be offered as regular dates for standalone LNP requests.Saturdays will also be included in the calculation of the normal 3-day due dateinterval.

Loop with LNP

Due dates for Loop with LNP will be offered in 3 business days (not includingSaturday). The SORD release connected with this functionality is being tested onApril 28th. An Accessible Letter will be issued as soon as testing is successfullycompleted.

New Loops/FDD

For new loops, Saturday due dates are available if the FDD tables (available inDataGate and Verigate) provide for Saturday availability (FDD or 3-day,whichever is greater).

Pacific Bell clarified for AT&T that FDD does not apply to conversion activitybecause FDD relates to dispatch required requests.

DSL Ordering Requirements/Rejects

Belinda Green of Pacific Bell joined the QCMP by conference bridge.

Belinda discussed with the participants Pacific Bell’s desire to begin rejectingxDSL requests if the technology type is not identified in the “Remarks” section ofthe request. This proposal on the part of Pacific was discussed in Accessible



Letters as far back as October 1998. At that time, the inclusion of suchinformation in the “Remarks” field was optional. Pacific Bell would like to makethis entry a requirement on all requests for DSL technology, effective June 1,1999. This would constitute an exception to the Interface Change ManagementProcess. There was unanimous consent to this action by Pacific Bell.

Pacific Bell will issue an Accessible Letter immediately on this matter. PacificBell Action Item.

This issue/requirement will go away once specific NC codes per xDSL technologyare available. This is targeted by the time xDSL flow-through is available inOctober 1999.

Change Management Process Assessment/Evaluation

7-State Process Update

SBC/Pacific Bell shared the history behind the request for a 7-State-wideInterface Change Management Process. SBC/Pacific Bell indicated it had sharedthe 2-state model with the 5-state SWBT region. The CLECs in the SWBT regionhave expressed interest in moving to the California/Nevada model for theInterface Change Management Process. SBC stated that its long-range goal is tobring change management to a single 7-state process across its regions.

Various options were discussed to enable this. The participants concurred thatthey wanted to move to a seven state plan as quickly as possible. Cox Telcomsuggested that a Task Force be established to assess the various options andmake a recommendation in the next QCMP (July 28, 1999) regarding a pathforward.

Issues that need to be considered by the Task Force include: voting protocol inthe CMP OIS process; the handling of systems available only in one region; andthe logistics of meetings. Randall Lynch (SBC), Ron Peat (Pacific Bell), YvonneGamble (Cox Telcom), Pam Protheroe (AT&T), Steve Taff (Allegiance), TomRogers (GTE), an MCI/WorldCom representative, and John Gutierrez (MediaOne)volunteered to assemble as the initial Task Force.

SBC indicated that a QCMP is to be held in the 5-state region on May 11th andthis issue would be discussed and volunteers for the Task Force would berecruited. Pacific Bell Action Item.



SBC reiterated the importance of personal, face-to-face participation in the TaskForce meetings. Conference bridges have not, from past experience, worked inthese situations. There was concurrence from the participants and Task Forcemembers decided to alternate between Dallas and San Francisco for thenecessary meetings.

Accessible Letters

At this point in the meeting, AT&T asked Pacific Bell to look at its AccessibleLetter process and to revisit the need to have an Accessible Letter for each state.Many CLECs complained of duplicate Accessible Letters and asked if Pacific couldfind a way to issue Accessible Letters for combined regions when the AL isidentical.

Pacific Bell committed to revisit this issue with its Legal Department to ascertainwhether some consolidation can be achieved, despite the legal reasons forcommon letterheads, etc. Pacific Bell Action Item.

DataGate as Category Two

Discussion was undertaken regarding a potential move of the DataGatefunctionality from a CMP Category One item to a Category Two item. Pacific Bellreminded the participants that versioning is available on DataGate and a testsystem. This means that the timeframe for upgrading to a new release can becontrolled by the customers of the application.

Typically, system/coding changes to DataGate are simple enhancements tovalues, and not functional changes. It is a proprietary interface, outside ofindustry guidelines with a strong linkage to Verigate, which as a GUI has only a21-day notification requirement.

Pacific Bell’s proposal is to move DataGate to a Category Two item. SomeCLECs, particularly Allegiance, support the change to Category Two. Covadexpressed concern over shortening the coding window. Pacific clarified theavailability of versioning. Covad indicated it would like to converse with itsvendor before committing to the proposal.

Pacific Bell Action Item: Pacific Bell will organize a meeting with DataGateusers to work out the details of the language to support this change forDataGate from Category One to Category Two. This language will be broughtback to the QCMP on July 28th. If approved, it will be incorporated into the



Interface Change Management Process document. SBC will make this sameproposal in the 5-state QCMP meeting on May 11th, and a side-bar meeting willoccur later in May.

Please Note: During this discussion, COVAD made some significant pointsregarding its concern over address validation. A commitment was made to workthrough the Account Management team with COVAD to improve documentationon address validation.

Cleo Retirement

Pacific Bell commented that, heretofore, Cleo needs to be referred to by its morecorrect nomenclature of CESAR. Change management document needs toreflect this. Accessible Letters will be coming out the week ending April 30th,1999 announcing the retirement of CESAR within the next 18 months. Targetdate is 4Q2000 (October 30, 2000).

CLEC Interface Proposals/Recommendations

No new proposals were presented by the CLECs.

Pacific Bell Action Item Document

Pacific Bell walked through a document that it had created to track commitmentsmade at the last QCMP in January 1999 and those made in the various “side-bar”meetings since that time. There was general agreement with the status of theitems displayed on the document, although some upgrades were made (seeAttachments for the upgraded version). CLECs requested that when follow-upon items had taken place, but the item was not complete, that the documentshould reflect a “pending” status rather than a “completed” status. Pacific Bellagreed to accommodate this request. This document would thus appear at eachQCMP meeting; items will be removed as they are completed.

Flow-Through Matrix (formerly Page 35 of the Final Staff Report –FSR)

Pacific Bell inquired whether any CLECs had an opportunity to review the Flow-Through Matrix that had been distributed with the Accessible Letter announcingthe Final Agenda for the QCMP meeting. Few had had been able to accomplish



this. Therefore, Pacific reviewed the revised matrix and obtained input fromparticipants

Pacific Bell stated that the document was formerly known as “Page 35 from theCPUC’s Final Staff Report”. The document has been upgraded with CLEC inputand is attached as an Attachment. This document will now be put under changecontrol.

MCI/WorldCom raised the issue of flow-through of xDSL disconnects beingchanged from scheduled in October 1999 to “No Plans”. Pacific stated that dueto prioritization, xDSL disconnects (based on volumes provided by CLECs in theMarch 3, 1999 xDSL Flow-Through meeting) had been removed from theOctober Release.

Pacific Bell Action Item: Pacific Bell will reevaluate the prioritization ofadditional flow-through functionality of xDSL disconnects.*Note-Pacific has been able to clarify that flow-through of xDSL disconnects isscheduled for implementation in the June 26th Release, therefore negating theaction item.

MCI/WorldCom questioned the TBD (To Be Determined) implementation date forxDSL requests for loops > than 12,000 feet when the loop pre-qualification hadbeen performed. Pacific stated that we had been able to move this into theOctober 1999 release and would update the matrix accordingly. However, thiswas an incorrect statement by Pacific. Flow-through of loops over 12,000 feet isstill TBD.

Hunting Meeting

The CLECs also indicated that Pacific Bell PB should move ahead with theplanning for a side-bar meeting on “hunting” as suggested in the 1Q QCMPmeeting.

Partial Account Conversion

Pacific asked CLECs if they were prepared to provide scenarios and data forpartial account conversions, as requested at the Special CMP meeting onFebruary 11, 1999• (CLECC99-082, p.9 – “Pacific Bell is unable to quantify instances of partial migration.

Therefore, CLECs were asked to provide data on this issue. Pacific Bell requestedthe CLECs assist us in gathering data on the frequency of those scenarios. Pacificwould like to know if CLECs have a substantive amount of orders that involve partial



migration. CLECs agreed to provide Pacific Bell with scenarios from their experiencethat will help Pacific quantify the problem”)

This issue was an agenda item for the April 28th QCMP meeting. CLECsrequested more time to provide that information. It was agreed that the focusshould be on order types that would flow-through if not for the partial accountstatus. Pacific Bell would like both illustrative scenarios and estimated volumes.CLECs agreed to provide this data by May 14 through their Account Manager.Pacific Bell will establish a conference call for the week of May 17th to discusssubmissions, to be announced by Accessible Letter. Pacific Bell Action Item. Establish the conference call. The purpose of thiseffort is to identify partial account conversion scenarios and volumes andwhether there is any benefit to flow-through of partial account conversions. Revisions to the Interactive Change Management Control Process At the January 27, 1999 Quarterly Change Management Process meeting,participants discussed and agreed upon the need to adjust the Category Onetimelines. Discussion involved allowing 7 days for CLEC response to the ReleaseAnnouncement. Pacific would have up to 7 days for its response to comments,followed by the release of the Initial Requirements as soon as Day 14 + “X”,although the exact timing may vary according to comments received from theCLECs. Following release of Initial Requirements CLECs would have 21 days to commenton them. Pacific would have up to 14 days to respond to CLEC comments on theInitial Requirements. This would be followed by issuance of revised FinalRequirements on Day “X”, with an implementation date of 120 days, plus orminus 10 days. The testing window would begin 37 days prior to theimplementation date, and complete 7 days prior to implementation. The totaltimeline between Final Requirements and implementation was to be kept atapproximately 110-130 days. A Core Drafting Team appointed at the January 27 QCMP met on February 16 forthe purpose of formally adopting language within the CMP document itself. TheDrafting Team consisted of the following participants: • Ron Peat, Pacific Bell• Randall Lynch, SBC• Richard Bondi, MCI/WorldCom• Hollylynne Sullivan, MCI/WorldCom



• Yvonne Gamble, Cox Telcom• Sarah DeYoung, AT&T Pacific, on behalf of the Core Drafting Team, informed the participants at theApril 28th QCMP that the revision work had been accomplished and approved byall members of the “Team”. The revised “Interface Change ManagementProcess” document will be filed with the California Public Utilities Commission bymeans of a modification to the Joint Settlement Agreement previously filed onJanuary 20, 1999. The revised document will be served on interested parties bymeans of the modified filing with the CPUC. Next Quarterly Change Management Process (QCMP) meeting In closing, Pacific Bell confirmed that the date of the next Quarterly ChangeManagement Process meeting is July 28, 1999. Official notification of time andlocation will be distributed by Accessible Letter. Pacific also provided theimportant dates for submission of items to the July meeting agenda. Thosedates included the time frame for a preliminary agenda (with time and locationnotification) on July 7th, CLEC responses due on July 14th, and the distribution ofa Final Agenda on July 21st.



Summary of Action Items

2Q99 – LSR Ordering AT&T requested that Pacific Bell provide a list of those previously non-enforcedLNA edits that would now be electronically enforced.

3Q99 – Order Interface (Order Status) AT&T reminded Pacific Bell of its commitment from the January 27, 1999 QCMPto have a design and development meeting for Order Status. Pacific Bell iscommitted to having such a meeting approximately 8 weeks prior toimplementation (see Interface Change Management Process, p. 15, #1,“Category Two (GUI) Process” for the Introduction of New Interfaces). Thisenhancement is targeted for the 3Q, but is yet to be confirmed.

1st Release 2000 LSR Ordering (EDI/LEX – LSOG4) Pacific Bell stated that OBF released LSOG4 guidelines in mid-April. Pacific Bellwill call for a meeting with CLECs to assess what portions of LSOG4 should beprioritized for implementation.

DSL Ordering Requirements/Rejects Pacific Bell will issue an Accessible Letter immediately announcing that it willbegin on June 1, 1999 to reject xDSL requests if the technology type is notidentified in the “Remarks” section of the request. This constitutes an agreedupon exception to the Change Management Process.

7-State CMP Process

SBC/Pacific Bell indicated that a QCMP is to be held in the 5-state region on May11 and the issue of a 7-state wide Change Management Process will be discussedat that meeting and volunteers for the Task Force recruited.

Accessible Letters Pacific Bell committed to revisit the issue of potentially duplicate AccessibleLetters with its Legal Department to ascertain whether some consolidation canbe achieved.



DataGate as Category Two

Pacific Bell will organize a meeting with DataGate users to work out the details ofthe language to support an agreed upon change for DataGate from CMPCategory One to Category Two. This language will be brought back to the QCMPon July 28th. If approved, it will be incorporated into the Interface ChangeManagement Process document. SBC will make this same proposal in the 5-stateQCMP meeting on May 11th, and a side-bar meeting will occur later in May.

Partial Account Conversion Pacific Bell would like both illustrative scenarios and estimated volumes. CLECsagreed to provide illustrative scenarios and estimated volumes on partial accountconversion by May 14 through their Account Manager. Pacific Bell will establish aconference call for the week of May 17th to discuss submissions, to be announcedby Accessible Letter.

PB/NB 12-Month Development View Version 3.1

PB/NB’s Development Plan is subject to change and is not binding on PB/NB. PB/NB’s Development Plan reflects PB/NB’s intent to modify orenhance the OSS offered by PB/NB, as of the time that the Plan was prepared. Facts and circumstances upon which the Plan is based (e.g., LocalWholesale Customer demands, regulatory obligations) may change over time. Accordingly, PB/NB reserves the right to modify the Plan, in itssole discretion. In addition, PB/NB is sharing its Development Plan with Local Wholesale Customers in an effort to encourage meaningful discussions betweenPB/NB and Local Wholesale Customers regarding PB/NB’s perception of their needs or desires for future OSS modifications and enhancements.In some instances, such discussions may lead to changes in PB/NB’s Development Plan. Because PB/NB’s Development Plan is subject to change and is not binding on PB/NB, Local Wholesale Customers should not rely on theDevelopment Plan. The official notices disseminated by PB/NB announcing anticipated OSS modifications and enhancements reflect PB/NB’sactual plan.

C.V. PACIFIC BELL - “Final Minutes From April 28, 1999, Change

Management Process Meeting ” Page O-16 of 34

Change Log (5/10/99)

Quarter Interface Date ofChange

Enhancement Change

1Q LEX 4/21/99 Move Enhancements to a 5/1/99 date. Add Enhancements to 5/1/99:

• Improved Dialogue/Confirmation Box Titles• Improved Action Menu Options Arrangement• Improved Welcome Screen and Dialog Path for New LEX Users• LSOR Reconciliation• New Jeopardy Screen• Multiple Jeopardy Notifications per LSR

DataGate 4/21/99 Rename " SOSC Display to Service Availability" to "Table for SOSC Codes" Add Enhancements:

• CIC Service Availability Enhancement• TNA expanded to allow select preferred NPA code• Remove MISC data from CSR• QDT telephone structure for Address Validation

Add "Network Channel(NC)/Network Channel Interface(NCI) Functionality" from2Q

Verigate 4/21/99 Rename " SOSC Display to Service Availability" to "Table for SOSC Codes" Add Enhancements to 4/4/99:

• Network Channel(NC)/Network channel Interface(NCI) available• Error Code Messages Updated in CSR

Move "CFA (Connecting Facilities Assignment) information available" to 2Q Add "Network Channel(NC)/Network Channel Interface(NCI) Functionality" from2Q Change date for "Flexible Due Date – 2 wire loops" from 2/7/99 to 4/11/99

2Q EDI/LEX 4/21/99 Add "LNA Edits" Add "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription"

5/10/99 Change "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" to "IntraLATA Pre-Subscription"and date to 5/7/99

LEX 4/21/99 Add Functionality "Clear Forms Option" DataGate 4/21/99 Move " Network Channel(NC)/Network Channel Interface(NCI) Functionality" to

1Q Add "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" Add Functionality:

• Switch Type enhancement for Service Availability• USOC to SOSC translation

5/10/99 Change "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" to "IntraLATA Pre-Subscription"





and date to 5/7/99





Quarter Interface Date of

Change Enhancement Change

2Qcontinued

Verigate 4/21/99 Move " Network Channel(NC)/Network Channel Interface(NCI) Functionality" to1Q Add Functionality for 6/15:

• Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription• Address Verification screen changes:

• Add LPIC Field Add Functionality for 6/27:

• Switch Type enhancement for Service Availability• CSR Field Refinement• ADSL service indicator• USOC to SOSC translation• Add CLLI button to ToolBar• Address Verification screen changes:

• Add Retrieve CLLI Button Add "CFA (Connecting Facilities Assignment) information available" from 1Q

5/10/99 Change "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" to "IntraLATA Pre-Subscription"and date to5/7/99

ElectronicBonding

4/21/99 Remove "LSPOR Clean-Up"

CESAR 4/21/99 Add Functionality "Saturday Due Date" Starwriter 4/21/99 Add Functionality "Call Waiting Caller ID"

Add "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" 5/10/99 Change "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" to "IntraLATA Pre-Subscription"

and date to 5/7/99 SORD 4/21/99 Add "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" 5/10/99 Change "Interstate IntraLATA Pre-Subscription" to "IntraLATA Pre-Subscription"

and date to 5/7/99 POS 4/21/99 Add Functionality "Add Query by OCN" 3Q EDI/LEX 4/21/99 Add Functionality:

• xDSL Flow-Through• Nevada Bell Flow-Through• Nevada Bell Enhanced Ordering• Resale Listings Changes

5/10/99 Add “NP” to Nevada Bell Flow-Through Add Date of 10/9/99 Add Accessible Letter CLECCS 99-054





Quarter Interface Date of

Change Enhancement Change

3Qcontinued

LEX 4/21/99 Add Functionality:• Add Tabbing Structure• LEX Reconciliation to match LSOR and LEX User Guide

DataGate 4/21/99 Remove "LSPOR Address Verification Alignment" Add Functionality

• CLLI enhancement to include NXXs and Line Ranges• OS Enhancement• Add query by OCN for POS

EDI/CORBA 4/21/99 Change "EDI SSL3 Pre-Order (EDI 10) and CORBA Pre-Ordering (EDI 10)" to• CSI (Customer Service Inquiry)• Directory Listing/Directory Assistance (DL/DA)

5/10/99 Add Date of 10/17/99 and Accessible Letter CLECCS 99-052 Verigate 4/21/99 Remove "LSPOR Address Verification Alignment"

Add Functionality "CLLI enhancement to include NXXs and Line Ranges" Starwriter 4/21/99 Add "Access Reform" 1st Release2000

EDI/LEX 4/21/99 • LSOG 4 (EDI 9 and 10)• Versioning• Nevada Bell Flow-Through - Loop and Port Combo

DataGate 4/21/99 • Product/Feature Enhancement (to be determined) Verigate 4/21/99 • Product/Feature Enhancement (to be determined)

These items are to be scheduled:

• Eliminate VTE Requirement• Delete PONs over 2 Years Old





Release

Category

Interface

Date

Enhancement 1Q99 LSR Ordering EDI / LEX 4/10/99 • Loop New Connect Flow-Through

• DS1 Ordering and Flow-Through (New ConnectActivity Only)• Additional Edits (Accessible Letter CLECCS99-

016) 5/1/99 • Implement mechanized process to electronically

return previously manual reject reasons via the EDIand LEX interfaces• Include REFNUM in Error Message• Additional Edits (Accessible Letter CLECCS99-

017) LSR Ordering

GUI LEX 4/10/99 • PROCESSED Status for Resale

5/1/99 • Enhanced InBox Management Functionality:• Search Capability• Administrator Level for User Ids• Re-assign Function for Administrators• Inbox Sort• Cosmetic Changes to DL Window• New Data Entry Key• Improved Dialogue/Confirmation Box Titles• Improved Action Menu Options Arrangement• Improved Welcome Screen and Dialog Path for

New LEX Users• LSOR Reconciliation• New Jeopardy Screen• Multiple Jeopardy Notifications per LSR

Pre-Ordering(App to App)

DataGate 4/4/99 • Enhanced Facility Information to Dispatchfunctionality

• Network Channel(NC)/Network ChannelInterface(NCI) Functionality

• CIC Service Availability Enhancement• TNA expanded to allow select preferred NPA

code• Remove MISC data from CSR• QDT telephone structure for Address Validation





Release

Category

Interface

Date

Enhancement

• Table for SOSC Codes





Release

Category

Interface

Date

Enhancement 1Q

continued Pre-Ordering

GUI Verigate 4/4/99

• Enhanced Facility Information to Dispatchfunctionality

• Network Channel(NC)/Network channelInterface(NCI) available

• Error Code Messages Updated in CSR• Table of SOSC codes

4/11/99 • Flexible Due Date – 2 wire loops

2Q99 LSR Ordering EDI / LEX 5/7/99 • IntraLATA Pre-Subscription

6/26/99 • Implement mechanized process to electronicallyreturn previously manual jeopardy notifications viathe EDI and LEX interfaces• E911 and Listings on UNE LSR• Loop Disconnect Flow-Through• LNA edits• Additional Edits (see Accessible Letter)

LSR OrderingGUI

LEX 6/26/99 • Clear Forms Option

Pre-Ordering DataGate 5/7/99 • IntraLATA Pre-Subscription

(App to App) 6/27/99 Documentation Only:• State Limitation on Data Access based upon

OSS Agreement• Switch Type enhancement for Service

Availability• USOC to SOSC translation

Pre-OrderingGUI

Verigate 5/7/99 • Address Verification screen changes:• Add LPIC Field• IntraLATA Pre-Subscription

6/27/99 • State Limitation on Data Access based uponOSS Agreement

• CFA (Connecting Facilities Assignment)information available

• Switch Type enhancement for ServiceAvailability

• CSR Field Refinement• ADSL service indicator





Release

Category

Interface

Date

Enhancement

• USOC to SOSC translation• Add CLLI button to ToolBar• Address Verification screen changes:• Add Retrieve CLLI Button

2Q continued

ProprietaryOrder

Interface

CESAR 5/1/99 • Saturday Due Date

ProprietaryOrder

Interface

Starwriter

(CA only)

6/15/99(North)

6/17/99 (South)

• Call Waiting Caller ID

5/7/99 • IntraLATA Pre-Subscription

ProprietaryOrder

Interface

SORD 5/7/99 • IntraLATA Pre-Subscription

OrderInterface GUI

POS 6/27/99 • Add Query by OCN

3Q99 LSR Ordering EDI / LEX 10/9/99 • xDSL Flow-Through• Nevada Bell Flow-Through – Loop, Loop w/NP

& NP• Nevada Bell Enhanced Ordering• Resale Listings Changes• Additional Edits (Accessible Letter CLECCS

99-054) PlanningWindow

LSR OrderingGUI

LEX • Add Tabbing Structure• LEX Reconciliation to match LSOR and LEX

User Guide 10/1/99

to 10/20/99

Pre-Ordering(App to App)

DataGate • CLLI enhancement to include NXXs and LineRanges

• OS Enhancement• Add query by OCN for POS

EDI/CORBA 10/17/99 • CSI (Customer Service Inquiry) (AccessibleLetter CLECCS 99-052)

• Directory Listing/Directory Assistance (DL/DA)(Accessible Letter CLECCS 99-052)





Release

Category

Interface

Date

Enhancement

Pre-OrderingGUI

Verigate • CLLI enhancement to include NXXs and LineRanges

ProprietaryOrder

Interface

Starwriter

(CA only)

• New Product / Feature Enhancements• Access Reform





Release

Category

Interface

Date

Enhancement 3Q

continued

ProprietaryOrder

Interface

SORD • New Product / Feature Enhancements

ProprietaryOrder

Interface

CESAR • ASR Version 21

OrderInterface

GUI

Order Status • General Availability

4Q99 AllApplications

• Due to Y2K, a Release is not currently planned

1st

Release2000

LSR Ordering EDI / LEX • LSOG 4 (EDI 9 and 10)• Versioning• Nevada Bell Flow-Through - Loop and Port

Combo Pre-Ordering

(App to App) DataGate • Product/Feature Enhancement (to be

determined)

Pre-OrderingGUI

Verigate • Product/Feature Enhancement (to bedetermined)

Pacific/Nevada Bell Flow Through Plans - LEX/EDIRevised April 28, 1999

PB/NB’s Flow Through Plan is subject to change and is not binding on PB/NB. PB/NB’s Flow Through Plan reflects PB/NB’s intent to modify or enhance theOSS offered by PB/NB, as of the time that the Plan was prepared. Facts and circumstances upon which the Plan is based (e.g., Local Wholesale Customerdemands, regulatory obligations) may change over time. Accordingly, PB/NB reserves the right to modify the Plan, in its sole discretion.

In addition, PB/NB is sharing its Flow Through Plan with Local Wholesale Customers in an effort to encourage meaningful discussions between PB/NB andLocal Wholesale Customers regarding PB/NB’s perception of their needs or desires for future OSS modifications and enhancements. In some instances, suchdiscussions may lead to changes in PB/NB’ Flow Through Plans.

C.V.PACIFIC BELL - “Final Minutes From April 28, 1999, Change Management

Process Meeting ”Page O-26 of 34

Product Type(LSR REQTYP)

Expected ImplementationDate/Current Scope1

(LSR ACT.)

Exceptions

1. Loop & Port Combo:2 wire 8db basic analog loop withPOTS-like Port (REQ. M)

• Conversion as Specified (retail)(ACT. V): exists

• New Connect (ACT. N): exists• Change (ACT. C): exists• Disconnect (ACT D): exists• Outside Moves (ACT. T) - no

plans• Restores (ACT B) - no plans• Suspends (ACT S) - no plans• Record Changes (ACT R) - no

plans• Sourcing of VTE –TBD• Eliminate QDT as an exception -

6/99

• Flow Through ProjectThreshold:20

• Supplemental Orders• Hunting• Related Requests (RPONS)• Number Changes• Expedites• Changes to Number Referral

Services• Extended and split referrals• Changes to PIN for remote

access to call forwarding• Intercom Plus• Working Service on Prem.

(WSOP-valid value V)• CHC• QDT (when new service is

business)• VTE• Complex products (non-POTS)• Special conditions on existing

retail service

1 All existing and future flow through listed in this document are for Pacific Bell except where Nevada Bell is indicated.








(LSR ACT.)

Exceptions

2?? 2 wire Loop with (REQ. B) &without LNP* (REQ. A) Basic &Assured

• Conversion as Specified (ACT.V) (retail): exists

• Conversion as specified (ACT V)Nevada Bell (Basic) - 10/99

• New Connect (ACT. N) - 4/99• New Connect (ACT N) Nevada

Bell - 10/99• Disconnect (ACT. D) Basic &

Assured: - 6/99• Disconnect (ACT D) Nevada Bell

- TBD• Increase Flow-Through Project

Threshold Quantity to 40 (singleServing Wire Center, non-design)-10/99

• Changes (ACT. C) - no plans• Record Changes (ACT R) - no

plans• Interim fix for SPID problem –

exists

• Flow Through Project Threshold20 (multi-Serving Wire Center &requests with CFA)

• Flow Through Project Threshold41 (single Serving Wire Center,non-design) – 10/99

• Flow Through Project Threshold 7(Nevada Bell) – 10/99

• Supplemental orders• Related Requests (RPONS)• Expedites• Special conditions on existing

retail service• Conversion as Specified (ACT.

V) Nevada Bell (Assured) – 10/99

3. Directory Service Requests -Standalone (REQ. J) for UNE andLNP

• 6/99 (ACT. R) • No exceptions

4. xDSL capable 2 wire loop with(REQ. B) and without (REQ. A) LNP

• Conversion as specified (ACT. V)- 10/99

• New Connect (ACT. N) - 10/99• Disconnect (ACT. D): - 6/99• Change (ACT. C) - no plans• Record Changes (ACT R) - no

plans• Conversion as specified for retail

ADSL loops - TBD• Conversion as specified and New

Connect for loops > 12,000 ft.and Loop qualification has beenperformed (TRANS ID) - TBD

• Flow Through Project Threshold-10

• Supplemental orders• Related Requests (RPONS)• Expedites• Special conditions on existing

retail service• IDSL – 10/99• TRANS ID (pre-qualification) –

10/99








(LSR ACT.)

Exceptions

5. Stand Alone LNP* (REQ. C) • Conversion as specified: (ACT.V) exists

• Conversion as specified: (ACT V)- 10/99 (Nevada Bell)

• Interim fix for SPID problem –exists

• Flow Through Project Threshold -100 numbers

• Supplemental orders• Related Requests (RPONS)• Special conditions on existing

retail service• Complex products (non-POTS)

6. Resale Basic Exchange (POTSonly) (REQ. E)

• Conversion as is (ACT. W): existsConversion as specified (ACT.V): exists

• Change (ACT C): exists• New (ACT N): exists• Disconnect(ACT D): exists• Outside Moves (ACT T) - no

plans• Restores (ACT B) - no plans• Suspends (ACT S) - no plans• Record Changes (ACT R) - no

plans

• Flow-Through Project Threshold :20

• Supplemental Orders• Related Requests (RPONS)• Expedites• Hunting• Number Changes• Working Service on Prem.

(WSOP)• Consolidate/De-consolidate

account structure• IDDD Blocking• ROAR• Changes to Number Referral

Services• Changes to PIN for Remote

Access to Call Forwarding• Promotions• CHC• QDT (when new service is

business)• Complex products (non-POTS)• Special conditions on existing

retail service 7. 4 wire DS1 capable loop withoutLNP

• New Connect (ACT. N) - 4/99• Disconnect (ACT. D) - 6/99• Conversion as Specified (ACT.

V) - no plans• Changes (ACT. C) - no plans• Record Changes (ACT R) - no

plans

• Flow-Through Project Threshold :6 lines

• Supplements• Expedites• Related Orders








(LSR ACT.)

Exceptions

8. All other Complex Productsincluding: Resale PBX, Centrex,ISDN; Loop & Port Combo: 2 wireISDN capable loop & port; 2 wire loop& coin compatible port; 2 wire loop &Centrex capable port; 2 wire loop &PBX capable port, etc.

No Flow Through Plans

Definitions Expected Implementation Date/Current Scope:• “Conversion as is” conversion of an existing service from the current service provider to the ordering CLEC

with no changes.• “Conversion as Specified” conversion of an existing service from the current service provider to the ordering

CLEC, specifying the associated features and characteristics.• “Exists” flow through capability currently in place.• “No Flow Through Plans” Pacific has no plans for offering flow through. Exceptions: a known circumstance which prevents automatic flow through and requires manual processing.• “Project Quantity” represents the minimum number of lines which constitute a “project” which requires a

check for the availability of facilities prior to processing the order. Threshold for establishing due dates maybe different (see CLEC Handbook).

• “Supplemental Orders” are changes to an existing order. Special Conditions on Existing Retail Service that bring about exception handling. • Conversion of existing CLEC service where Pacific Bell is still the network service provider.• Pending Order• Hunting• Pending certification for ULTS, DDTP• Partial account conversion• Warm Line (ONA)• Gift Billing• Extended and Split Referrals






• “Hunting” is a service which routes a call to a customer’s other number when the number dialed is notavailable; includes non-hunt indicator.

• “Pending certification for ULTS, DDTP” means that a retail end user customer has asked for benefits underthe Universal Lifeline Telephone Service and/or Deaf and Disabled Telecommunications Program (now knowas Pacific Bell Accessibility Resources) and Pacific is waiting for certification confirming eligibility to bereturned by the customer.

• “Partial account conversion” means that an end user customer has chosen to have a CLEC provide some ofthe services it currently receives. . Consequently, part of the account is being converted to the CLEC, butnot all of the account (BTN level).

Prior Action Items From Quarterly CMP and Side-Bar Meetings2nd Quarter Change Management Meeting

April 28, 1999

C.V.PACIFIC BELL - “Final Minutes From April 28, 1999, Change Management Process Meeting ”

Page O-31 of 34

February 11, 1999 - Flow-Through Meeting

Number Action ItemOpen/

Closed/Pending

Comments

1 E911 Flow-Through Meeting (Maryliz De Jong to follow up to ensure that theconcept of flow-through is being used accurately in this meeting)

Closed Pacific Bell Change Management and E911 teamshave met to ensure their concept of flow-through isconsistent.

2 Upgrade Page 35 Thresholds of Projects (clarify what has been programmedinto the flow-through process)

Closed Flow-Through matrix has been updated and sentwith the Final Agenda for 4/28/99. See AccessibleLetter CLECC 99-129.

3 DSL Meeting on March 3, 1999 - Pacific will announce schedule for DS-1meeting during the week of March 22

Closed Conference Call on March 1, 1999.Accessible LetterCLECCS99-032

4 Clarify whether VTE is an exception; clarify time for Pacific Bell to sourcethe data

Open VTE is an Exception to Flow-Through. No currenttimeframe to source the data.

5 Compare DS-1 ordering requirements to LSR requirements Closed Conference Call on March 1, 1999.Accessible LetterCLECCS99-032

6 Pacific Bell agreed to explore the possibility of moving up the implementationof the SPID field from LSOG 4

Closed Explored possibility and found that the 1999releases are full. This is a high priority forimplementation when LSOG 4 is implemented inthe 1st Release of Year 2000.

7 PB to determine if current project number of “20” is hardcoded in EDI/LEXfield.

Pending 20 or more will exception to the LSC. A projecthandling will not apply unless there are over 40.

8 SPID meeting with AT&T (and MCI/Worldcom, if necessary) Closed Conference Call with AT&T on February 24, 1999stating that the internal SPID table will happen onApril 7, 1999

9 6-month data collection on EDI/LEX SUPPs Pending Data is still being collected


April 28, 1999


Page O-32 of 34

February 17, 1999 - Special CMP on 1999 Releases

Number Action Item Open/Closed/Pending

Comments

1 By Friday, February 19th, Pacific Bell will respond to participants regardingan anticipated date for the availability of an LSR template for a New Connectof DS-1 Capable Loops (flow-through), and a possible subsequent conferencecall for discussion. Pacific will validate that DS-1 Capable Loop NewConnect ordering rules are in alignment with OBF standards (CLECsindicated they would also validate this with their respective OBFRepresentatives).

Closed Conf Call on March 1, 1999.Accessible LetterCLECCS99-032

2 Pacific Bell will provide additional clarification to the CLECs on how andwhere the REFNUM information will be returned to the CLECs. Thisinformation will be provided to the CLECs through their respective AccountManager.

Closed See Accessible Letter CLECCS99-022

3 Pacific Bell agreed to host a conference call every Wednesday at noon(Pacific) until the ECCKT on the FOC issue is resolved. Pacific also agreedto clarify the LASR GUI functionality.

Closed See Accessible Letters CLECCS99-019 andCLECCS99-024


April 28, 1999


Page O-33 of 34

March 3, 1999 - CLEC Issues - Lack of GUI Integration


Comments

1 Pacific will review the business requirements for the End User Name field. Closed Pacific Bell has reviewed the business requirementsand has found that the LSOR is correct. EU Namerequirements vary by Activity, REQTYP andspecific conditions. If CLECs are experiencingrejects outside of the LSOR rules, these need to behandled on a case by case basis through the AccountManagers.

2 Pacific will review the business requirements for the End User ServiceAddress field.

Closed Pacific Bell has reviewed the business requirementsfor End User Service Address and has found that theLSOR is correct. Pacific Bell did find a coding erroraround the Change activity. A fix is scheduled withthe May 1st release. If CLECs are experiencingrejects outside of the LSOR rules, these need to behandled on a case by case basis through the AccountManagers.

3 Pacific Bell agreed that it needs to look into process improvements related tothe identification of SOSC codes required to request “features” on an LSR.

Pending Pacific Bell has Verigate and DataGate releases onApril 4 and June 27 addressing SOSC codes

4 Pacific Bell reaffirmed its willingness to work jointly with CLECs to come upwith a way to more effectively work with hunting information. Pacificindicated that it might be appropriate to jointly set up a proposal to OBF toresolve the issue.

Open Pacific intends to set up sidebar meeting regardingthis issue.

5 Pacific agreed to set up a meeting with AT&T to discuss the use of LEXtemplates, particularly for the End User form fields.

Closed4/28/99 – Per AT&T, meeting does not need tohappen


April 28, 1999


Page O-34 of 34

March 3, 1999 - xDSL Flow-Through Meeting


Comments

1 AT&T asked if pre-qualification is required on REQTYP A, ACT V, whenthe existing service is Pacific’s retail ADSL and discussed its concern aboutwhether or not such pre-qualification would be charged for. Pacific took asan “Action Item” to evaluate if pre-qualification is necessary for thisconversion activity scenario.

Closed In the March24th Conference Call, Pacific Bellstated that for ADSL to ADSL, pre-qualification isnot necessary.

2 If Pacific will rely on the pre-qualification done by the CLEC, what type ofindicator can be provided to Pacific so that the CLEC is not charged foranother K-1023 query and the request can qualify for flow-through rather thanexception to the LSC? Pacific Bell took as an “Action Item” to investigatethese items, including what additional information is needed (on the ServiceOrder) when the length of a loop exceeds 12K feet.

Pending In March 24th Conference Call, PB indicated it willrequire a Transaction ID (/TRANS ID) in theRemarks field to support F/T. This Transaction IDis a number assigned by Pacific Bell’s pre-qualification process.

5/11/99 – Pacific Bell will accept the TransactionID effective with the 10/9/99 Release. Flow-Through of these orders is to be determined.

3 Pacific Bell took as an “Action Item” to investigate what modifications itmight develop around its mechanized process to make sure that pre-qualifiedxDSL orders flow-through.

Pending In March 24th Conference Call, PB indicated it willrequire a Transaction ID (/TRANS ID) in theRemarks field to support F/T. This Transaction IDis a number assigned by Pacific Bell’s pre-qualification process.

5/11/99 – Pacific Bell will accept the TransactionID effective with the 10/9/99 Release. Flow-Through of these orders is to be determined.


April 28, 1999


Page O-35 of 34

March 24, 1999 - xDSL Flow-Through Conference Call


Comments

1 Covad questioned whether the pre-qualification process will include theverification of facilities or is this two separate processes. Pacific answeredthat if in the pre-qualification it is determined that facilities are not availableadditional checks would be performed. Pacific took an action item to providedocumentation on this process.

Pending Pacific Bell is developing a document addressingissue. Pre-qualification process will include afacilities check, as appropriate. An AccessibleLetter will be sent with the process documentattached.