2007 CLOSED CUF ISSUES
Table of Contents:
# 85 CNR Process
#91: E911 Updates
# 96 Maintenance Dispatch Out Process Change
#103 Reduce Repeated Truck Rolls
#105 Vendor Meet Billing Issue
#107 FTTP/Two LSRs......
#109 Jeopardy for Incorrect NC/NCI Codes – No Conditioning Required......
#110 NC/NCI Codes Required on Line Share to Line Split Orders......
#111 DSL Port Intervals......
#112 UNE-L Maintenance Tickets......
#113 Smart Jack Installations
OPERATIONAL SUMMIT ISSUES/DISCUSSION TOPICS
#1 Reducing the Rate of Failures on Cut-Thru Orders......
#2 On New Installations, Verizon Does Not Always Connect the Inside Wire to the NID......
#3 Joint Acceptance Testing Not Always Completed......
#4 Expand the Process for NODR Billing for Wholesale Advantage......
# 85CNR Process
CLEC SUBMITTING ISSUE SHOULD COMPLETE ITEMS 1 through 8. (Item 9 is optional):
1. / CLEC NAME: / Z-Tel Communications, Inc.2. / INTERNAL CONTACT & PHONE NUMBER: / Peggy Rubino (813) 233-4628
3. / SUBMISSION DATE: / September 15, 2004
4. / SELECT PRODUCT(S) THIS ISSUE AFFECTS: (Double-click on box(es) to mark)
Collocation / Line-Sharing / Special Access (FCC Tariff)
DSL / Line-Splitting / UNE-Loop
Interconnection/IXC / LNP / UNE-Platform
Interconnection/Switched Access / Resale / UNE Specials/IOF (Local Tariffs)
OTHER (Please Specify):
5. / SELECT THE ISSUE CATEGORY:
Pre-Order (Record Verification)
Ordering (Process)
Provisioning (Process) / Billing (Process)
Maintenance and/or Repair (Process) / Ancillary Services (OS/DA/DL, etc.)
Other General Issue
6. / SELECTSTATE(S) WHERE ISSUE OCCURS:
Connecticut / Maryland / New Jersey / Rhode Island / Washington, DC
Delaware / Massachusetts / New York / Vermont / West Virginia
Maine / New Hampshire / Pennsylvania / Virginia / Entire Footprint
7. / DESCRIBE THE ISSUE:
At the August CMP meetings (East and West), Verizon introduced C04-1461 to make contact information required rather than optional to minimize repeat dispatches. The CLECs generally supported this request with the caveat that a process be developed to ensure that calls are actually made to the contact number prior to Verizon declaring a no access or customer not ready condition. The process should include some confirmation provided to Verizon by the CLEC that the customer or premises is unavailable, and ideally that confirmation would flow to the wholesale bills to reduce the number of disputes regarding this issue.
8. / PROVIDE EXAMPLE(S):
9. / IF CLEC HAS PROPOSED RESOLUTION, PLEASE DESCRIBE:
Covad and Verizon have an agreement under which Covad will provide a confirmation number when it is unable to reach the customer to arrange access. A similar process could be used for other CLECs.
CUF REVIEW DATE: 5/11/05
- Issue Accepted? Yes / No – If “No”, give reason: .
- Assigned Issue # 85 and Entitled: CNR Process .
- Other CLECs Supporting Issue: Mettel .
- Issue Closed: 5/9/07
- Agree to Disagree
GENERAL MEETING MINUTES –
5/9/2007– It was agreed to close this issue. This issue is aligned with Operations Summit Issues #2 and #3, which were closed 5/9/07. See Discussion Topics.
3/14/2007– Covered under Discussion Topics.
12/13/2006– Covered under Discussion Topics.
9/13/2006– Covered under Discussion Topics.
7/12/2006– Covered under Discussion Topics.
5/10/2006 – No new updates were reported from the March meeting except that Tom Delaney had received some data from a few CLECs and was working with those companies individually. Verizon is still in need of more examples from the other CLECs but the expectation is there will more data now available to the CLECs with the addition of TT data on the BDT effective April 16, 2006 in the East.
3/15/2006 - Included as part of Discussion Topics.
1/11/2006 – Tom Delaney reported that Elliot Goldberg (Mettel) provided him with a copy of the FCC order regarding Carrier-to-Carrier measurements. According to the order the Commission recommended that CLECs and Verizon work together to design a process that will benefit all with regard to CNRs. Mettel feels that the Commission is requesting that Verizon work with the CLEC to determine how Verizon would handle CNRs.
11/9/2005 – Tom Delaney advised that he has received samples from Elliot Goldberg (Mettel) and has advised all that he will hold internal discussions and provide feedback at the next CUF session. the process of reviewing them. He will reach out to Elliot to discuss further following his research and review.
9/13/2005 – Tom Delaney explained that the issue is a serialization process for POTS lines. Verizon does not do this with POTS. Tom advised that the technician will attempt to call the contact listed on the LSR. He further explained that in the Retail side of the house, the technician will leave a card. CLECs requested that the Verizon technician call them when they are at the premise. Tom advised that our process is for Technicians to attempt to call. Mettel argued that the Verizon Technicians do not call and as a result, Mettel is getting billed for No Access. Verizon asked Mettel for samples of when the Verizon Technician did not follow the process so that appropriate investigation can be performed
7/13/05 – Zina Beverly, sitting in for Tom Delaney, reported that Tom is still reviewing the process and does not have additional information to offer at this time. Zina requested that the issue remain open until Tom’s return.
5/11/05 - Tom Delaney reported that Verizon will not change existing process. Mettel asked if Verizon would object to having the Vz Technician contact the CLEC and provide the CLEC Service Order or Repair Ticket numbers. Tom informed all that he will research and provide feedback at the next CUF meeting.
3/7/05 – VZ’s wholesale CNR process is in parity with retail. Mettel expressed concern though about being billed for CNRs that they did not believe were CNRs. VZ agreed to leave issue open awaiting additional review by VZ senior management.
1/12/05 – Preliminarily, VZ is not able to implement serial number process (this is part of the process that has been set up for DSL) for voice. Retail voice does not have a CNR process so it may not be appropriate to establish a CNR process for wholesale voice. Tom to ensure VZ senior level agreement on this position.
11/10/04 – This issue is being addressed by a VZ internal team. Tom Delaney expects a readout in approximately 4 weeks. Readout will be sent as soon as it is available.
9/15 – A CNR process is followed on DSL, but not on POTS, UNE-P, etc. CLECs specified that they would like this process for provisioning and maintenance. Tom Delaney has submitted the CUF’s request for this process to be implemented on POTS, UNE-P, etc to a VZ team that is looking a process changes that will reduce unproductive dispatches. Tom will interface between the internal team and the CUF.
#91: E911 Updates
CLEC SUBMITTING ISSUE SHOULD COMPLETE ITEMS 1 through 8. (Item 9 is optional):
1. / CLEC NAME: / MCI2. / INTERNAL CONTACT & PHONE NUMBER: / Lissa Provenzo 703-749-7334
3. / SUBMISSION DATE: / 3/2/05
4. / SELECT PRODUCT(S) THIS ISSUE AFFECTS: (Double-click on box(es) to mark)
Collocation / Line-Sharing / Special Access (FCC Tariff)
DSL / Line-Splitting / UNE-Loop
Interconnection/IXC / LNP / UNE-Platform
Interconnection/Switched Access / Resale / UNE Specials/IOF (Local Tariffs)
OTHER (Please Specify):
5. / SELECT THE ISSUE CATEGORY:
Pre-Order (Record Verification)
Ordering (Process)
Provisioning (Process) / Billing (Process)
Maintenance and/or Repair (Process) / Ancillary Services (OS/DA/DL, etc.)
Other General Issue
6. / SELECTSTATE(S) WHERE ISSUE OCCURS:
Connecticut / Maryland / New Jersey / Rhode Island / Washington, DC
Delaware / Massachusetts / New York / Vermont / West Virginia
Maine / New Hampshire / Pennsylvania / Virginia / Entire Footprint
7. / DESCRIBE THE ISSUE:
To improve the current process to update E911 discrepancies or update street address that has been renumbered.
Current process is to send a Move order to correct the E911 or renumbered street address discrepancies, which interfere with the customer service.
Steven Cuttle and the NMC requested this go to the CUF. The NMC has been requesting this for over a year to the policy procedure SMEs at Verizon.
8. / PROVIDE EXAMPLE(S):
9. / IF CLEC HAS PROPOSED RESOLUTION, PLEASE DESCRIBE:
Create a process that allows updates without sending a Move order to VZ
CUF REVIEW DATE: 3/7/05
10.Issue Accepted? Yes / No – If “No”, give reason: .
11.Assigned Issue # 91 and Entitled: E911 Updates.
12.Other CLECs Supporting Issue: AT&T, RNK, Broadview
13.Issue Closed: _7/11/07______
14.Agree to Disagree:
GENERAL MEETING MINUTES –
7/11/07 - The initiative to provide CLECs the ability to submit an LSR for a Records order (ACT = R) requesting an E911 service address update was completed in June, and there are no open issues. Two email notifications were sent to the carrier community and the information was also posted on the VPS Web Site. It was agreed to close this issue.
5/9/07- The initiative for this issue is scheduled for the June 2007 release. In addition the manual process for updating addresses in the West will still be available until October 2007.
3/14/07– Margaret Detch reported that the initiative for this issue is still scheduled for the June 2007 release.
12/13/2006—Peter Bahr reported that an initiative is scheduled for the June 2007 release for record orders to be issued by the CLECs for UNE-P and Resale address updates. He also encouraged the CLECs to update the Customer Profile Database with contact names as Verizon will be contacting the CLECs when a 911 call is made and an address discrepancy is found. This issue will remain in the CUF until the initiative is completed.
9/13/2006—Verizon has nothing new to report and continues to work on developing a footprint wide solution. Verizon hopes to have feedback for the long term process by the December CUF meeting.
7/12/2006—Verizon is continuing to work on developing a footprint wide process, however, Verizon has not yet been able to identify an efficient and cost effective automated solution. The current trial that is underway in the South Region is a very manual process and does not have internal buy-in to be deployed footprint wide.
5/10/2006 – The original trial is continuing in the Verizon South region, however, a workable process that could be deployed footprint wide has not been identified. The trial model involves a number of manual handoffs, which is not supportable on a larger scale. The internal Verizon team continues to work with impacted groups in VZ to identify a plan that will work across the footprint. The CLEC sub team will be reconvened when VZ has a workable plan to present.
3/15/2006 – Rosemary Hernandez advised that the trial is continuing in the South. However, it will not be rolled out in other States unless there is agreement from the operations centers. Meetings are underway with the operations centers in an effort to create a method for E-911 address discrepancy corrections. Another sub committee meeting will be held when more information is known about the trial in the South or further roll out of the process.
1/11/2006 – Beth Cohen reported the trial is continuing. The Local Service Provider Form has been updated to include the CLEC’s E-911 Contact information. Trinsic requested that a subcommittee meeting be scheduled since one has not taken place for some time. Beth advised that Rosemary Hernández will set one up and notify the Subcommittee team prior to the next CUF session.
11/9/2005- Rosemary Hernandez advised that the subcommittee meetings continue to take place. Per the last meeting, the trial in the South continues to run smoothly and CLECs have provided feedback to the subcommittee team of their satisfaction with the trial. Rosemary advised that PLM is still in the data gathering phase and will not be opening the trial to other states pending further review. In addition, Rosemary mentioned that the Profile Management team is now looking at modifying the Local Services Profile form to add a field whereby the CLEC may enter E-911 contact information.
9/13/2005 - Rosemary Hernández reported that the trial is ongoing and progressing very well. CLECs that have tried the new process have commented that it is an improvement over the previous process. Kathy Rysak discussed the trial and the form being used in place of the LSR. She also mentioned that the trial is solely for E-911 address discrepancies. Any other type of address discrepancy would need to follow the normal business rules procedures. The trial has been extended as additional data needs to be gathered to determine if expanding to other Verizon states should take place. Kathy advised that she will report on progress at the next CUF session.
7/13/2005 - Rosemary Hernández reported that there have been on going meetings with a CLEC subgroup and Verizon E-911 PLM to discuss the address discrepancy issue. Peter Bahr and Kathy Rysak provided information regarding a trial that Verizon was willing to partake in with several interested CLECs. The trial consisted of providing E-911 PLM with a form to correct address discrepancies vs. issuing LSRs to accomplish the same. The trial will only target the MidAtlantic states at this time. Kathy advised that part of the trial was to get "good" contact information from the CLECs and provided a list of CLECs which she needs contact information from. The new form to correct address discrepancies will be included with the minutes. Rosemary has reached out to the Profile Management Team to inquire as to whether it would be possible to update the Local Service Profile Form to include E-911 CLEC contact information and will provide an update at the next CUF meeting. This issue will remain open until all States are included.
# 96 Maintenance Dispatch Out Process Change
CLEC SUBMITTING ISSUE SHOULD COMPLETE ITEMS 1 through 8. (Item 9 is optional):
1. / CLEC NAME: / Trinsic Communications, Inc.2. / INTERNAL CONTACT & PHONE NUMBER: / Peggy Rubino (813) 233-4628
3. / SUBMISSION DATE: / June 28, 2005
4. / SELECT PRODUCT(S) THIS ISSUE AFFECTS: (Double-click on box(es) to mark)
Collocation / Line-Sharing / Special Access (FCC Tariff)
DSL / Line-Splitting / UNE-Loop
Interconnection/IXC / LNP / UNE-Platform
Interconnection/Switched Access / Resale / UNE Specials/IOF (Local Tariffs)
OTHER (Please Specify):
5. / SELECT THE ISSUE CATEGORY:
Pre-Order (Record Verification)
Ordering (Process)
Provisioning (Process) / Billing (Process)
Maintenance and/or Repair (Process) / Ancillary Services (OS/DA/DL, etc.)
Other General Issue
6. / SELECTSTATE(S) WHERE ISSUE OCCURS:
Connecticut / Maryland / New Jersey / Rhode Island / Washington, DC
Delaware / Massachusetts / New York / Vermont / West Virginia
Maine / New Hampshire / Pennsylvania / Virginia / Entire Footprint
7. / DESCRIBE THE ISSUE:Verizon is closing out DPO trouble tickets as Test OK without dispatching out and without contacting the CLECs prior to closing.
8. / PROVIDE EXAMPLE(S):
PAD3409862, NYB487165, MDCH468869, NYB0548764
9. / IF CLEC HAS PROPOSED RESOLUTION, PLEASE DESCRIBE:
VZ should dispatch out on trouble tickets opened by the CLEC as DPO, or contact the CLEC to discuss test results if the CLEC is dispatching incorrectly.
CUF REVIEW DATE: 7/13/2005
- Issue Accepted? Yes / No – If “No”, give reason: .
- Assigned Issue # 96 and Entitled: Maintenance Dispatch Out Process Change.
- Other CLECs Supporting Issue: Mettel, MCI .
- Issue Closed: 5/7/07
- Issue Moved to Another Forum: ______
- Agree to Disagree
GENERAL MEETING MINUTES –
5/9/07- During the March CUF meeting,Verizon kept this issue open for Peggy Rubino of Trinsic to check with her operations people. Peggy did not have any additional input. Cathy Gorman moved to close this issue, and Peggy Rubino agreed.
3/14/07– Tom Delaney reported that he reviewed this issue with Bruce Nugent and there are no general issues with the front end close out process. He moved to close the issue. Peggy Rubino of Trinsic requested that this issue remain open until she checks with her operations people. Verizon agreed to do so.
12/13/2006– Verizon reported that one CLEC sent in trouble ticket information on a Wholesale Advantage customer. Tom Delaney reported that the front end close out rate is approximately 85% with no new trouble tickets received. Only 15% of tickets that are closed out in the front end come in for testing. He confirmed that Verizon does have an automated system that calls customers to advise them when tickets are closed and that the process was reviewed on the RCMC process review call held previously during the year. He will check with Bruce Nugent to see if any CLECs havegone to him.
9/13/2006 – On July 19th, a conference call was held to review the RCMC process. This issue is being left open to continue to monitor the scrubbing process to ensure that tickets are not closed inappropriately.
7/12/2006 – A conference call was scheduled to review the RCMC process on July 19 at 3PM ET. Notification will be sent via the CUF Mailbox.
5/10/2006 – The CLECs would like to set up a meeting to review the process flows, originally distributed in November of 2004 to the community, with the East RCMC and West VRCC. Tom explained that there is a restructuring effort underway by Verizon to combine the two groups into one Maintenance center handling the footprint. He agreed to contact Peggy Rubino to coordinate a meeting between the CLECs and the RCMC before the next CUF meeting. Tom also advised that any CLEC interested in reviewing their data tickets should contact him to set up a meeting.
3/15/2006 – Tom Delaney still has the action to meet with the CLECs on this topic.
1/11/2006 – Tom Delaney advised that he had not had time to meet with the CLEC participants but will schedule a meeting before the next CUF session.
11/9/2005 – Tom Delaney advised that he had a general call on Friday Nov. 4th, with Peggy Rubino, Trinsic and other CLECs. He’s received a request for additional sessions from other CLECs. Mettel requested a chart to use as a guide. Tom advised that Verizon is in the process of developing one. Additional details will be provided at the next CUF session.
9/13/2005 - Peggy Rubino advised that the RCMC is closing tickets without contacting Trinsic and requested to see the Verizon written process that would describe when the tickets should be closed. Tom Delaney offered to hold a CLEC specific meeting to review the overall process and/or individual meetings with CLECs about their specific tickets. Interested CLECs should contact Tom or Rosemary so meetings with the appropriate Verizon subject matter experts can be arranged.