I would like to now turn the call over to Ms. Jean Derrig. Please begin ma am.

Transcription

1 Verizon Internal March 8, 2005 Confirmation # Operator: Excuse me everyone, we will now begin the conference. All lines will be interactive during the conference. To prevent background noise please pick up your handset and press star, six. I would like to now turn the call over to Ms. Jean Derrig. Please begin ma am. Thank you. Good morning everyone, welcome to the East March, 2005 change management meeting. We have a very low turnout here in the room today, so we will quickly go around the room here and then I m going to ask for the CLECs to announce themselves first and then any Verizon personnel can announce themselves second. OK, and this is Jean Derrig. Julie Stewart: Linda Dorsey: Mike Rowley: Joe Stevens: Jan Kowalchik: Nicole Amosa: Joan Costello: This is Beth Cohen from Verizon. Julie Stewart from ATX. Linda Dorsey, PSC. Mike Rowley from New York PSC. Joe Stevens from Conversant. Jan Kowalchik, Verizon. Nicole Amosa, Verizon. Joan Costello, Verizon OK, that s all we have in the room. If the CLECs could start announcing themselves first that would be great. Good morning Jean, it s Mike Clancy from Covad Communications. I didn t feel like sharing germs today. All: Linda Lazarus: Matt Clark: Loriann Ercan: Thank you. Linda Lazarus (sp?) from Cablevision Lightpass. Matt Clark, Cavalier Telephone. Loriann Ercan, XO.

2 Pam Blagen: Brett Cameron: Bennie Almas: Annmarie Sturtz: Nancy Sanders: Teresa Castro: Diane Calvert: Melanie Desmarais: Jim McCluskey: Madison Berry: James Childress: James Childress: Dok Matthews: Pam Blagen (sp?), Crest Communications. Brett Cameron, Cavalier Telephone. Bennie Almas, Neustar. Annmarie Sturtz, ChoiceOne. Nancy Sanders, Comcast. Teresa Castro, Vartec. Diane Calvert, Wysor Telecom. Melanie Desmarais, CTC Communications. This is Jim McCluskey with Accenture. Madison Berry, CTSI. James Childress, Telecon. Excuse me, can you repeat that? James Childress, Telecon. Dok Matthews, Penn Telecom. Is someone talking in the background that we can hear? Can you please mute yourself. Gayle Gissendanner: Nick Bennet. Gayle Gissendanner, Cox Communications, and also Leo Dimidriates: This is Leo Dimidriates (sp?) from AT & T. Janice Ziegele: Carol Frike: with Sprint. who is out there? OK, any other CLECs out there? Janice Ziegele from Broadview. I don t know if you got me earlier or not, Carol Frike No I didn t, thanks Carol. OK, moving on to Verizon,

3 Stephen Cuttle: Maura Roche: Carol Yozzo: Sue Pistacchio: Nik Umrani: Paul Haven: Dan Duris: Dok Matthews: Stephen Cuttle. OK. Maura Roche from billing. Yes, anyone else? Carol Yozzo is here. Sue Pistacchio is here. Sue, OK. This is Nik Umrani. Paul Haven. Dan Duris. OK, anybody else? Sounds like we are missing Elliott and Peggy. And Lisa. Well I understand Peggy may be traveling but she is supposed to be on the call. I don t know where Elliott is and I don t know where Lisa is. Kelsey: Kelsey: Kelsey: Amy Blackman: so they are afraid to. Kelsey (Inaudible) Technologies is on the call. What was the name of your company again? (Inaudible) Technologies. One more time. Universe Technologies. OK, anyone else hasn t announced themselves? Amy Blackman, Talk America. OK, can everyone hear me OK? Someone is on mute

4 Jean you keep coming in loud and clear. OK, thank you. Speaker: I have one question. Was there any documentation hat we are going to walk through that had been distributed earlier? There is documentation out on the website or if you are on our distro will they have passed it to no. It s out on the website. You go to wholesale, verizon.com/wholesale and then go to OSS change, Interface Change Management and then you go to Upcoming Meetings. You will see this meeting listed and the documents should be attached there. Speaker: OK, thank you. OK, any other questions before we get started? All right, the first agenda topic is the CMP document. Last month we had some discussion and where we ended it last month, is my understanding, was Verizon was going to look at the LSOG section. We had put some proposals out there; due to discussion last month it was decided that maybe the entire section needed to be re-looked at and possible rewritten, as well as other outstanding topic was the Type 2 definition and, I believe, notification was covered, but around the whole Type 2 there s a couple of sections that were still outstanding. However after the meeting last week, last month, it is our understanding that the CLECs did get together and have some further discussion and the feedback we received was that the CLECs would like us to basically table the whole LSOG thing for now and deal with that in a future date and not deal with that subject right now, and I believe the second item that came out of that was the CLECs were going to put together a new write-up around the whole Type 2, which we did not receive. So really we were just going to do, just update and not really go much further into this topic today unless someone has a comment about where we stand on the document right now. I would have asked Peggy if she was OK with that but she is not here so. Peggy Rubino: Yes I m here. OK, there you are. We re all disappointed you re not here, but that s OK. So did I get that right Peggy? Peggy Rubino: Yes, actually I made a suggestion to the CLECs that they didn t like so the ball is definitely in our court to get back to you with some things, but I haven t heard any volunteers to write up what they actually do want,

5 so I don t know what to tell you. But it s in our court and we should be able to get back to you by next month with something. move on? OK, any other questions around this topic before we Moving on to our next favorite topic that will also be on the agenda for a while is the whole LSOG 5 sunset and 6 and 9, or 9 implementation. Carol I think we re going to hand this over to you to begin with. I think you re the most up to date. Carol Yozzo: OK, thank you and good morning everyone. Actually things are going pretty well. I knock on wood when I say that but as of the February release we saw a big jump in the LSOG 6 usage and kind of expected to see that because a lot of the EDI CLECs tend to do their LSOG updates during a CLEC impacting release. So we are actually now at about 66% EDI usage and a little over 80% LSI usage so we still have a ways to go with there s probably, I m going to say maybe 20, maybe even a few more, EDI CLECs that we need to pursue so we are in the process of doing that, but I was really pleased to see that big jump in usage. So apparently, and I haven t heard from any CLECs so I am assume that no one is having any problems if you re not contacting me. So are there any questions, and this is strictly on LSOG 5 sunset and the transition to LSOG 6. Are there any questions on that? Diane Calvert: Carol Yozzo: What was the percentage of LSI users? 80 I m sorry, what was the question? The percentage of LSI usage and I Carol Yozzo: LSI is 80 it s actually about 82. I thought you said LSOG 5, that s why I asked you to repeat that. Diane Calvert: Thank you. Carol Yozzo: And typically LSI tends to straddle the two releases, much more so than EDI does. Once a CLEC moves to the new LSOG in EDI they tend to shut down the old LSOG much quicker, whereas with LSI we tend to see, we see transaction volume continuing because of sups on existing transactions. So that is beginning to close down as well. So Carol, this is Gloria. What s the percentage right now of EDI CLECs that are on LSOG 6?

6 Carol Yozzo: It s about 66%. It s actually not so much the percentage of CLECs, because CLECs, because volumes vary so much from CLEC to CLEC. I look at it on the basis of volume, and all of our really large volume CLECs in EDI have moved over. Now I know that AT & T is still doing a little bit of LSOG 5 activity but overall volume is about two thirds, 66%. So then since you calculated based on that type of volume, is it safe to assume that the smaller CLECs that are doing transactions via EDI have not yet converted, so there s more CLECs that need to convert. Carol Yozzo: There are more CLECs that need to convert, and those are the ones that we are working with directly. Any CLECs that have started to convert or, you know, are showing 20, 40 or more percent activity I can kind of assume, or at least guess that if they ve just started activity then it might be taking off a little slowly but then what I m doing is tracking it on a monthly basis and doing a month by month comparison to see not only how it changes overall but to look at the various CLEC activity to see if that s changing and to look for any kind of hotspots that we need to follow up on. Dok Matthews: Carol, as a refresher could you give us the anticipated LSOG sunset and LSOG 9 start up dates please. Carol Yozzo: Right, LSOG 5 sunset is October 05 but keep in mind exactly what sunset means. That s when you can no longer do any activities in LSOG 5. We still have the issue of addressing the pipeline so we really need to back up from that October date and try to cut most, if not all, of the new activity in LSOG 5 prior to October. You know I m really kind of, well personally targeting two or three months lead time to get all the CLECs on to LSOG 6 and then we have to have a little bit of a buffer in there to finish the CLEC transition and to clean out the pipeline. So when I say October that s like the be-all and end-all date of LSOG 5. LSOG 9 comes in then and beyond that you will no longer be able to SUP or enter a new transaction in LSOG 5. If you have pending activity in LSOG 5 beyond that October date it may complete, it will complete assuming that you don t need to change anything but if you needed to change a due date for instance, you couldn t do it. So that s why we really want the CLECs to be aware and be prepared way ahead of the sunset date and not have to worry about anything that s pending. Dok Matthews: Carol Yozzo: OK, thank you ma am. Any other questions? Diane Calvert: This is Diane Calvert with Wysor Telecom. We received the gap analysis which is at, I understand, a very high level. When can we expect to see something more granular?

7 Carol Yozzo: That gap analysis is actually LSOG 6 to LSOG 9. Is that what you are referring to? Diane Calvert: Sue Pistacchio: then I can get into Yes. That s Carol are you done with the sunset piece Carol Yozzo: Right, I was going to turn it over to Sue for LSOG 9 implementation. Diane Calvert: Carol Yozzo: will wrap it up. OK, well go on then, thank you. If there are no other LSOG 5 sunset questions, then I OK, I just want to remind everyone there is an edit going in in June for the due date. We will not, after June we will not accept due dates after, with a due date beyond the October release date, as a reminder. Carol Yozzo: reminder. Carol Yozzo: Speaker: Thank you Jean, I forgot about that, that s a very good Right, its just part of our update every month. Right, thank you. What does that mean exactly? Carol Yozzo: It really means that effective with the June release, if you re putting in an LSOG 5 transaction it cannot have a due date later than the sunset. I just mentioned that we are looking at, or we will be looking at, the pipeline. Anything that s left in the pipeline after sunset that is due, anything that doesn t need to be touched will complete, but we want to cut that activity off. We really don t want to end up with a lot of pipeline transactions in LSOG 5 after the sunset. So in June if you are submitting an LSOG 5, a new or a SUP, and your due date is beyond sunset, it will be rejected back to you. Until June you re normal, I believe it s a one year due date, you can put in a due date up to the one year out, but right now all we can do is verbally tell you don t do it. In June we will have an edit that will prevent it. Diane Calvert: Will Verizon sort of reach out to possibly some of the CLECs who may have in flight LSOG 5s? Carol Yozzo: We will. We are going to be monitoring that but to do it now is really premature because new ones can be coming in. So once we get

8 that edit in then we will be able to pay attention to what s out there, let the CLECs know it s now early July, you ve got transactions out there that are due after sunset and if you need to do anything with them you are not going to be able to, so now is the chance to do something with them. So we will work the pipeline issues with the CLECs. Diane Calvert: Thank you. This is Gloria. Do you have a way of doing that edit to separate between 5 and 6 so that you would not apply it to 6? Carol Yozzo: It definitely will not apply to 6, yes. Because 6 will be, remain in effect after October, its only 5 that is being sunset. Any other questions? Sue Pistacchio: All right, from the LSOG 9 implementation point of view and the status of the initiative. Sue Pistacchio: Sue can you speak up a little please. I m sorry, can everybody hear me now? Yes you re better now. Sue Pistacchio: We did distribute the high level gap analysis which went out the end of February, and again it s just supposed to provide a high level analysis of the differences between 6 and 9. The next documentation that will come up is the 180 day notification on April 15 th. That will be the first draft of the LSOG 9 business rules. And again that date is April 15 th. From that point on we would be following the normal notification process for the LSOG 9 implementation, which the 73 day notification would be on August 4 th and the 45 would be on September 1 st. From an initiative point of view, if you take a look at the gap analysis that went out it gives you an idea of the initiatives that we have in play. There s approximately nine LSOG 9 initiatives that we are working towards, and the major (inaudible) of the new IS form. So the LSOG 9 initiative, as Jean had already announced, the LSOG 5 edit that s going in the June release, and will have the Phase 2 of the LSOG 5 sunset to go in the October release. And that s basically where we are with the milestones coming for the LSOG 9 implementation. Does anybody have any questions? Diane Calvert: In the gap analysis that you did provide, there are many fields where there are no comments. If you indicate on this gap analysis that you are going to add a field, or modify a field, or delete a field, how accurate is that moving forward. Is that pretty much carved in stone?

9 Sue Pistacchio: Diane Calvert: No it is not. OK. Sue Pistacchio: We have our initiatives are still in progress with this so even when we get to the 180 days it s still a draft document. Some things really don t get set in stone until you get down to about the 73 day document. Diane Calvert: Sue Pistacchio: Diane Calvert: OK. These are draft documents that are out there. Understood. Lisa Provenzo: And Sue this is Lisa. When we get toward the 73 day notification, are you going to hold a meeting to just kind of walk through it? We ve done this in the past. Sue Pistacchio: go over the changes. Lisa Provenzo: We can do that. Basically what we would, we d just Right. Sue Pistacchio: Again we can walk through the IS form. I think what I would ask is you know, what areas would the CLECs like to discuss, because historically LSOG implementations are mostly documentation. We ve highlighted different areas where we thought that there was more of an impact, so I think what I would want to see from the CLECs is more information on what areas they would like to discuss in more detail, because it really wouldn t be feasible to go through every single field change of the LSOG. So Sue, this is Gloria. That means you re not going to be able to put together the overview release documentation that you normally put together with all the initiatives? Sue Pistacchio: But when we do put together the overview it s at a high level and tells you what fields are changing. From an LSOG point of view it s not like I can list out every single field I m touching for LSOG, so it would be a high level summarization of what s going into each initiative. But aren t you, but aren t you going to be putting together the change we would want to make sure that we don t miss anything. Sue Pistacchio: That s in the gap analysis which goes by field by field of the different changes, so that in combination with the business rules that are

10 going out should provide you the information to let you know each field that we are touching. So are you doing the regular change log? Sue Pistacchio: There is no change log when we re implementing an LSOG because it s the first version. There is nothing to show it s changing from. Diane Calvert: Yes I see that. Will there be a more current document then, if not a change log with the original, what changes from 6 to 9? Will there are least be some sort of a change I don t know, something more granular. It s difficult to assess a level of effort without all of the factors. Sue Pistacchio: that are made. The gap analysis can be updated for any changes Sue isn t there, is there any way that when you go through your updates on your documentation that you can diff mark the individual pages for each field in the business rules? Because I found I have to tell you, I mean I don t know, I m sure other people might have had the same experience, going through and comparing exactly at the very, very detailed level what you re changing between one LSOG and the other LSOG is very, very tedious, and I believe that you folks have already done that. Sue Pistacchio: But we ve done it based on yes. But I mean we don t use page numbers, so I don t know where you would get to there because within these (inaudible) there are no page numbers so I don t know how you could do that. I m talking about diff marking the documents, like you re in Word and you diff mark them. Diane Calvert: Sue Pistacchio: Yes, just put change control on, exactly. I m not even sure what you re asking for. Well I think what Sue is saying is we don t really produce a Word version of the document anymore, its all in this web based application where you go in by field or by form. Is that what you re talking about Sue? Sue Pistacchio: Right. So it s not like we have a 20 or 200 page business rule document anymore that we can do, you know, the edit trail marks that you re asking for.

11 And that s why you produce the change log and I, you know, I understand that you re saying you re not changing anything and that s why you can t produce the change log, but that really is not too acceptable. Paul Haven: analysis. Sue I think you just offered to update the gap Sue Pistacchio: The gap analysis, it s the same thing as the change log. It s showing what the changes are. Paul Haven: Right. The gap analysis shows all the changes to each of the fields at a field level and I think Sue has already said that she will be keeping that up to date with, you know, future changes. It s not set in stone now but as it, if things change it will be documented in the gap analysis. So that I believe is where you can get the field level data that it sounds like you re looking for. OK, so that gap analysis would include, let s say you re modifying an edit. It s not a brand new field but you re modifying an edit. Sue Pistacchio: documentation. that granular. Sue Pistacchio: Diane Calvert: No but that would appear in the error message I m still confused. So the gap analysis is not really No it s not. It s not at all. Paul Haven: It contains all the business rules except for what is not in the business rules, which is the error messages today. I mean, so there is, so is there I presume go ahead Sue. Sue Pistacchio: Yes, I mean from an edit point of view I mean we re going to have new edits going in for the IS forms, but you know, we re not really changing a lot of the edits. That type of information will have a new LSOG 9 edit section in our error message documentation. Yes but what happens if you sometimes change valid entry notes? Sometimes your valid entry notes are important in terms of providing clarity on how you populate fields. Where would that be documented? Sue Pistacchio: We aren t indicating if we are changing valid entry notes (inaudible) business rules (inaudible).

12 Paul Haven: Sue you're cutting in and out. I don t know if it's you or if somebody, if somebody is on Sue Pistacchio: I keep hearing my phone breaking up because somebody is hitting something. Paul Haven: Right, and I don t know if you said you are or you are not and I m sure that other people didn t hear either, so if you could repeat that and if everybody can go on mute that s not talking. Sue Pistacchio: Our indication is we are changing valid entry notes so the gap analysis would need to be used (inaudible) function with the business rules so then you can compare what field notes are changing. On the gap analysis we didn t put all the froms and tos because then you would have a thousand page document. But we are indicating on the gap analysis if we are making changes to valid entry notes. OK, so when I ll just ask one more question to make sure I understand. So the gap analysis will include some type of a reference on any change that you re making. Sue Pistacchio: It doesn t include field number changes. We didn t include that, because we consider that documentation only. OK. Sue Pistacchio: But if we re changing our field notes or valid entry notes we are designating that and the expectation is you would need to use that in conjunction with the business rules which are coming out in about a month and a half to look to what the valid entry notes have changed to. OK, so someone would have to sit with basically three documents. Your gap, your LSOG 6, and your LSOG 9, and then do some type of stare and compare for then one, to determine OK, this change is going to impact my business or its not going to impact my business. Sue Pistacchio: Yes. OK. Sue Pistacchio: So the reasons why we come up with the document before the implementation. Diane Calvert: One more question please - Diane Calvert with Wysor. Looking at the gap analysis there s some fields that are indicated there would, we ve moved this field, it s moved to the IS form. Is the IS form going to

13 be available to us in the near future to tell us where it s going to be placed, these fields within the IS form? Sue Pistacchio: The IS form is a new form that s being built. So if you look at the gap analysis for the IS form section, it kind of gives you the layout of the IS form. More information on, you know, what s in the IS form can also be found at OBF. We do follow the industry standards, so the documentation on the forms and how they were created are there. Diane Calvert: OK. Sue Pistacchio: (Inaudible) come up with our business rules in April, you would see our business rules for the IS form, so it is going to be available you know, as part of LSOG 9 with the October release. Again our business rules will be available in April. Diane Calvert: OK. So with these as the launch pad I ve got the old OBF IS form that I can try and match up with what you ve got in your gap analysis. Sue Pistacchio: Yes. And Sue, I m sorry this is Gloria, one more question. The timeline, you said 73 days would be August 4 and 45 is September 1 st, so sometime after August 4 th is when we will, around August 4 th is when we will see the draft technical specs, especially if you are adding new fields. Sue Pistacchio: Yes. I didn t put the technical spec date down but it would be the traditional 66 day milestone. sooner? Sue Pistacchio: OK, so you don t anticipate producing that any That wasn t planned, no. OK, any other questions on LSOG? OK, moving on. Dan are you still out there, Mr. Duris? Dan? Dan Duris: Yes I m here. Sorry I was having trouble on mute. That s OK, moving on to our CABS consolidation agenda item. Dan will give an update. Dan Duris: Good morning everyone. As I think most of you know our next phase of our CABS consolidation is going to consist of the states of Pennsylvania and Delaware. Right now our target date for planning purposes for

14 the Pennsylvania and Delaware consolidation is April 30 th weekend, which means that you would see new bills, or you would see the bills for Pennsylvania and Delaware coming from CABS East rather that CABS South as of the May bills. Again that s a target date for planning purposes. We will be publishing an all users access letter on our website a month prior to the, you know the cut, and also as always my team is willing to do customer specific new BAN old BAN spread sheet. We can do that by ACNA for other than a ZZZ ACNA for any of you that have BANs using a ZZZ ACNA we would need you to have the CABS South BAN given to us and then we could tell you what the new CABS East BAN would be. You can request that or you can, you know, for any other questions you can contact me. My office telephone number is and my address is daniel.g.duris@verizon.com. Does anyone have any questions or concerns that I might be able to answer now? Brett Cameron: Telephones. Dan Duris: Brett Cameron: Dan Duris: Yes Dan, this is Brett Cameron from Cavalier Hi Brett. How you doing? OK. Brett Cameron: After the New Jersey conversion I raised some concerns with you offline and I know some are still under investigation, and just want to know if you re working on the parameters to correct those before you move into Delaware, Pennsylvania so it s not an ongoing issue. Dan Duris: And basically Brett, you know, each issue was a little different and I think I provided my response to the ones that we would look at changing and other ones that we probably were not going to change, and I m sorry I don t have that document in front of me, my reply, but I think you also had sent in a letter after that, that I believe is going to be addressed. Brett Cameron: Right, we actually put in a change, an official change control notice later on in this agenda that we are going to cover. Dan Duris: And I thought it was supposed to be in this meeting but I didn t see it in the agenda. Brett Cameron: Yes I see, it looks like it s yes, CO It s the first new Type 5 on the agenda Dan.

15 Dan Duris: Dan Duris: one? Dan Duris: guess? meeting, yes. Dan Duris: I m sorry, tell me again. It s the first what? Type 5 on the agenda under PWG section. Oh, they have multiple OCLs on the same BAN, that Right. OK, and so Steve is going to attempt to address that I We re hoping Steve will join us for that portion of the OK, very good. Does that answer your concerns? Brett Cameron: Yes, that was one of the major concerns we had but just some minor things like I kind of wrote to you in the was on the posting of the payment, when the payment is getting closer to these new CABS East BANs in New Jersey, we re not seeing the detail and we re seeing, let s like say if we made three or four payments due to advance (inaudible) we re only seeing one posting; we re not seeing that broken out and the posting date is omitted as well too. Didn t know if you had any feedback on why we re not seeing the level of detail on the posting side that we normally see with some of the former CABS South BANs. (Inaudible) Dan Duris: the posting of payments? Brett Cameron: Dan Duris: Can you mute please. I caught words about that, that it was issues around Right. I don t remember that in your letter. Brett Cameron: That was actually something we addressed outside the letter to you through the regular billing and collections group and they had referred us over to the OSS change interface. That s as recently as one or two weeks ago Dan. Dan Duris: OK, and I guess that s maybe why I m not familiar with it. I don t even think I saw that.

16 Brett Cameron: OK. I guess another one was the CSR section. You know how we get a summary bill A and the CSR section comes three weeks later. Dan Duris: Yes and we are definitely trying to address that. As a matter of fact I was on a call earlier today that I tried to address that. Wasn t very successful but we are, you know, the business part of Verizon is determined that we are going to get that fixed. Brett Cameron: OK. Dan Duris: You know, to me it s just not acceptable that the bills and CSRs are going out separately. Brett Cameron: your second issue. Brett Cameron: OK. And that s also addressed in the CR. I believe it s Yes. Dan Duris: And the only other thing I will say on that particular issue is that it has been the CABS East way that they have done paper bills and CSRs all along and that s why we are having a bit of an issue getting them to understand why we need to change that because, you know, that s how they ve always done it, but from our perspective its all part of the same document and we are going to do our best to get it changed to the way, you know, the Bells always did it, which is that they will be mailed together. Brett Cameron: And I think the last piece of information (inaudible) out there was really just around some use documents and billing disputes. We ve addressed that I think to you and also to the appropriate channels within the (inaudible) and Verizon too. Dan Duris: And I think we pretty much resolved those didn t we? Brett Cameron: Yes we filed and we haven t been getting any CICs back. We just kind of wanted to bring it to your attention so, you know, for what future (inaudible) over to CABS East that we wouldn t replicate that problem again. Dan Duris: I certainly hope not. That s one of the things we are testing, you know, in the meantime before this next consolidation so hopefully we will get those things worked out.

17 Brett Cameron: down to the new Type 5s. Dan Duris: Dan Duris: OK. Well I ll hold my other questions until we get Very good; any other questions? OK, thank you Dan. Thanks everyone, talk to you next month. OK. Well I think Cindy joined us. Cindy are you out there? Cindy? Cindy Vaughan are you out there? And Maura I know you re out there. Hopefully you have been patient and holding on. Maura? Maura Roche: I m on mute yes I m here. All right, Maura is here to talk about the grandfathering of the New York CABS Y38 billing account numbers. Maura Roche: Hello everybody, I hope everyone is well this morning. I really want to just give a high level view. I m sure that this, you know, people have read this and then just open it up for questions. Depending on the level of questions and the type of questions I get today, I ll put together further industry mailings. I m basically just looking to take a temperature check to feel how comfortable everybody is with this change. And you know, its not so comfortable then I will put out additional documentation that will make it as clear as mud. In November and December industry mailings would have went out relating to the New York Y38 BANs, OK. These were standard feature group D terminating BANS but they were considered 100% local, just the way they were set up. Of course, you know, that really no longer applies for many, many of our customers so what we did was try to get rid of these Y38s, and that s sort of a strong term, but move them over to what many have is a Y13 BAN, which is just your standard feature group D BAN in New York. I know in New England it s a Y65, it s a DO1 in different places in the South, but essentially it s the standard local interconnection billing account number. To that end we asked that no additional inward order activity be sent in on a Y38 that either, you know, customers use their existing Y13 BANs or they establish a new Y13 BAN. And of course any service order activity associated with this particular change would be waived, because obviously, you know, its something that is good for everybody. Additionally we did go on, we put out another letter that of course for many customers the factors on the Y38 BAN were not valid because they were all automatically set to percent local usage 100%. So we did go through, we really haven t heard back

18 from anyone, but we did go through and adjust those factors accordingly so that now anything that s left on the Y38 bill will bill with its appropriate factors based upon actual traffic. And that s it. Questions? Linda: Hi Maura, it s Linda from Cablevision Lightpass. (Inaudible) Linda: Maura Roche: I m OK, how are you? Fine thanks. Linda: Yes I do have a couple of questions. How are we going to continue to provision orders while this transition is going to happen on the accounts? Is there something Verizon can just do on a spin? Maura Roche: We weren t going to spin it and I actually looked at that, you know, quite a bit and I didn t want to go in and arbitrarily start spinning folks traffic, I mean and moving their stuff around. It was a little bit, you know, beyond what I should be doing. Additionally for those folks, and I believe Cablevision may be one of them, that already has both the Y38 and the Y13 accounts plus, you know, a variety of facility accounts, spinning them together was a tactical nightmare. So what you can do, and I mean I actually, we do have the (inaudible) team, we are ready for it today, if you wanted to add or augment your add new trunk loops, you can put them right on your Y13 if you have that. If you don t have a new Y13 by contacting your account manager and just explain, the account manager is supposed to be completely aware of what s going on here. So you re just supposed to contact your account manager and maybe you want to move your existing, you know, trunk loops with the associated CIC off your existing Y38s to another Y13, whether it be existing or new, and they will set it up. They will probably ask you for a letter of authorization, you ll get a project manager and a team leader going and we were hoping to do this all on a record order process, you know, and of course waiving any non-recurring charges because obviously this is a move that you know, we are all choosing to do. Linda: OK, and right now we have a new switch going in so we are ordering new trunk loops to this particular switch so we can put on the ASRs to use this Y13 account, but anything that we have on the Y38 we would want this to be converted over to the Y13 within a few days because we constantly have order activity on here. Maura Roche: And I m not sure if the time intervals for converting all of it. There s, it s truly not another, there needs to be coordination because

19 anything that we move I d rather be careful and spend an extra day. I know that s difficult to hear but we are going to do this, you know. Your account manager will do it, you need proper authorization and we re going to do it with record orders, you know, moving it off of one BAN and a record order to move it on the next BAN. They complete, because there s no like provisioning work quote/unquote. They will complete fairly quickly, and then the account manager will contact you and say we re ready, you can start to put your new (inaudible) switches up on the appropriate BAN. The only proviso that we do have, and I really want to get, I didn t know if I was making too much of it, if people already understood it, but I think I ll get another letter out, is that we don t want any partial moves because they wont work. Anything that s associated with a CIC code or what s, you know, what you may know it as the FID after, code after the AN FID, all of those trunks have to be moved en mass. We cannot have like those codes over two different ANs, because the billing won t work. And you know, that may be like as obvious as the nose on everyone s face and I m just like people are going duh, Maura, we know that, but I just wasn t sure and that s the one proviso until I can put out a letter stating that. You know, you can leave what you have on the Y38, you can add all your new stuff to the Y13, but if the stuff that you re going to add, if that s what would normally be associated with already established switches and trunks on the Y38, they have to be moved entirely over or the CIC code that you are using for the Y13 has to be associated with the new groups. OK. You can have multiple CIC codes on one BAN in a ladder but you can t have a CIC code itself on two different places. Linda: We only have one local CIC currently, with Verizon, and everything on that Y38 account has it. So I m not real concerned if we have to move over any new groups that we put in. New 26 codes, new trunk groups; we can put them on the new Y13 account, but we augment and do constant activity on all the trunk groups that we have on the Y38. Maura Roche: Linda: OK, is Helen Levine still your account manager? Yes. Maura Roche: OK. What we re going to have to do you don t have to do anything what we may want to do, let me restate, is kind of get a quick meeting together with just your account manager and discuss this because what we will want to do is make sure that you have a very seamless transition of all of those accounts that you will be augmenting off that Y38, so that what you ll do is you ll move you know, you ve only got the one local CIC so anything you re going to augment, if you move that off the Y38 you can we will put the CIC code on the Y13 and you can use it right away. If you add trunk groups on a different CIC code, like on the AN code that s sitting on your Y13, you can go in and do that now. I mean that s, there s nothing stopping you there. But I think

20 that maybe its best if we, you know, give it a few days and go in and actually look to see what you have and what you want to do, and then work it that way. Linda: Maura Roche: OK. Do you have my number still? Linda: Yes. When do you think that this is going to, when are you going to stop taking orders on the Y38 account? Maura Roche: We re going to, we should stop taking orders within the next week or so. We did give it a little bit of a grace period because I was concerned that I didn t perhaps, you know, put enough out there and that people did have questions, and I did have a feeling that maybe we should be, you know, give a little bit of a grace period, but I would suggest that anything that s not in in the next two weeks or so, you know, at least by the third week of March, is probably going to be too late. Linda: I m sure that s going to be a little hard to do with the volume of orders that we currently have in the systems and in line so I ll try to get to Howard today. Maura Roche: Get to Howard, see what I ll try to do is grab my methods person, you know, and maybe Linda maybe we needed a test case and you can be you re it, and walk it through because I also wanted to make sure that you know, even though I m on the outside of the billing end that as things came through that I kept close contact on them to make sure things were working, things were as simple as they seemed to be and no one had any problems. Linda: Maura Roche: Linda: Maura. OK, I ll touch base with Howard after the call. Thank you. Thank you. OK, any other questions for Maura? Right, thank you Maura Roche: OK, if anyone has any questions or finds that maybe they weren t aware of how this was going to impact them, by all means get back to the team and I will be glad to jump in. OK, thanks guys. Thank you. All right, moving on to Carol Yozzo and the end user listing project.

21 Cindy Vaughan: mine? This is Cindy Vaughan; can I jump back in and do Oh OK. Sorry Cindy, I forgot you came back in, yes you can. We will go back to Cindy with the migration of CAFÉ to the South replacing the EXACT. Cindy Vaughan: OK, first of all on the upcoming agendas we will call it ACCORD because that is the correct name for it. We re trying to get away with the CAFÉ name. OK. Cindy Vaughan: So that s ACCORD for Access Order (inaudible). The only really update I have from last month is the schedule has changed for implementation. It s now been moved July to where the first implementation is going to be October 15 th. That will be for New Jersey specials, and then we will follow the next month which would be let s see, November would be implementation for the other two regions, the Pennsylvania and the Maryland, Delaware regions, they will go together. And then the December/January timeframe we will convert switched. And these are still target dates? Cindy Vaughan: These are, yes but these are pretty much been sanctioned now. These are target dates but yes, we re still in the requirements refining, I mean for requirements finishing stages for specials and we re starting to switch tomorrow. So I do have one question. On the customer notification where we said 73 days, is it 73 business days or 73 calendar days? Calendar days. Cindy Vaughan: OK. So that s really the only update I have for you right now is that its been moved out until October timeframe for the first implementation and it will be a little bit more accelerated than we had (inaudible). We re still looking for it to all go in like the first week of January for all Cindy Vaughan: And that s for specials. Right, the October timeframe is specials. OK. This is Mike Clancy. The acronym is changing from CAFÉ to ACCORD. Is the actual interface changing at all?

22 Cindy Vaughan: Cindy Vaughan: Yes, south, well Will it be different from CAFÉ? No. OK. Thank you. Cindy Vaughan: You ll still send in an MDM and CSG and all that stuff. Those interfaces will still come through AVE or CSG. Cindy. Cindy Vaughan: OK, thanks. OK, any other questions for Cindy? OK, thank you OK, thanks a lot. Sorry for your technical trouble. OK, now moving back to Carol, end user listing. Carol Yozzo: OK, this is really just a recap of what I ve been saying I guess at least last month anyway. We are on target to start the data in a few weeks. We are planning towards the end of March to get converting a couple of beta CLECs and I actually have asked the betas, I haven t gotten confirmation back from them yet if they would come into the April change management meeting and do a readout. Carol Yozzo: that better? Carol you re fading a little, can you speak up. OK, maybe I wasn t right on the mouthpiece here. Is Yes. Carol Yozzo: OK. Let me repeat then, we are on target to begin the beta in New York and New England in a few weeks. The last week in March I think is the, when we will begin. There are two beta CLECs and I have asked, but I have not gotten confirmation back, whether they would come on the April change management call and give a readout. I don t expect that there will be a problem with that but I will confirm it. But just a reminder that this is the same conversion that we did in the southern states so you will follow the same processes in processing your listings as you do if you are doing business in Maryland, DC, Virginia, etc., and New Jersey, Pennsylvania. So we are just beginning the rollout now. There are I think in excess of a million listings and it is going to take several, this will span several months to convert all CLECs so as

23 we get ready to convert the next batch of CLECs two or three months out, we will start to contact the CLECs as they are getting ready to convert. So if you haven t been contacted then you re not up yet. But we are just beginning that process now. Any questions on end user listings? Carol Yozzo: Carol this is Gloria. Yes. Could you provide an update as to when you are planning or when you envision stopping to produce the ALI code spreadsheet. Carol Yozzo: Well right now we don t have an actual date, at least not that I know of on that. We are looking at the South because we have already done the conversion down there but before we can stop the ALI code spreadsheet we need to well two things. We need to clean up the duplicate listings that are out there and then we would run a cleanup of the remaining eligible listings for conversion. So my, I m going to estimate. If somebody has a better date than I have please step in, but it won t be before the end of this year, the fourth quarter of this year. OK. Carol Yozzo: And again that is just in the South. We can t do the North until we finish the North conversion. Now I ll add one thing. I don t know if any CLECs are getting the ALI code spreadsheet that don t want it. I d be interested in knowing that. It doesn t necessarily mean anything that we would stop sending it but I would like to know if there are CLECs that are not using it. And you can let me know via change management. OK, any other questions for Carol? OK, moving on to Sue with the FTP report migration, to give a quick update. Sue, Sue Pistacchio are you there? Sue Pistacchio: Yes I m here. Sorry about that. That s OK. We re on FTP report. Sue Pistacchio: I don t have anything to report on FTP. We are moving ahead with the implementation with the April release and I m working with Carol to reach out to the beta CLECs to get onboard for the beta trial so there s really nothing to report this week, this month. OK, any questions from audience?

24 This is Gloria, and I have sent in a note to Carol about the SRPT files being potentially stopped. notification report. I think that s our next agenda item. Oh, sorry. So that s a good sequay - Carol, on the provider Carol Yozzo: Right, and Gloria I am in the process of responding to you. I think I will address all your issues but let me just, let me start with (inaudible). Actually I don t have much to report either on provider notification but what is happening, one of the things that I did want to remind everyone is that in connection with the FTP server migration we are moving the LLR Prod version of the provider notification report, if you are currently receiving that via the FTP server that is being moved over to the web portal. However, if you are receiving the SRPT version of the line loss report, that will remain on the FTP server. Now and this goes along with my response to Gloria and I will send you the so that you will have, Gloria, so that you have it I guess the official written answer. The ultimate plan is to retire the SRPT report because technically these two reports are really one and the same. They, we recognize that right now they do not have the exact same content and I will explain that in a little more detail. The SRPT was established as an interim solution to line loss several years ago and it was never really intended, it was never intended to be a long term solution. The long term solution was to develop the LLR Prod version and then to retire the SRPT. Because of issues that we encountered with the LLR Prod we agreed to keep both versions up concurrently. We have some CLECs that use one, we have some CLECs that use the other and I suspect we have some CLECs that may look at both but I m not really sure. So what, we are working towards a retirement of that SRPT version and that s why we are not moving it over to the web portal. Now at this point a final retirement date has not been announced, it has not been committed to, but we need to get beyond some final issue resolutions with the LLR Prod, I should say confirmation of issue resolutions because we believe that the issues are resolved, we just need to confirm it and then we will start a transition process to make sure that any CLECs that are using the SRPT are transitioned over to the LLR Prod, and we will give a couple of months for this process to take place, so its not going to be an overnight thing that you have to move over. However, all that being said any CLEC that desires to or is even thinking about it casually, of moving to the LLR Prod should start doing that now, or should at least start thinking about it, particularly you know if you have system issues that, or systems changes that you need to make to look at a different file name. Those are the things you

25 should start considering now before we even make the formal announcement. So let me ask, are there any questions based on what I ve said already? Carol this is Elliott; I have some questions based on some of the April release stuff that was left out (inaudible). Do you want to handle those now or later? Carol Yozzo: Is it relative to provider notification as a whole or No, relative to the statement that the retrieval of the reports once they went to the new server would be automated rather than be sort of, if you will, GUI in and download. Carol Yozzo: Carol Yozzo: or This is really going back to FTP migration then, right. OK. Do you want, well Sue do you want to take questions Sue Pistacchio: No, he made a true statement. Once we do migrate over to the new portal, I ve been told with some I don t know exactly the type of software would be needed, would be available for full automation. Sue, could you get back to me on that, because I m always in favor of not having people in the middle of the process and it would be a big selling point in my company to spend the resource for the conversion if I could automate the process at the same time. Thank you. Carol Yozzo: OK, to get back to the provider notification topic, the only other thing left is that and this is really in response to Gloria s concern was on the retirement of the SRPT. I just want to make sure that we are not going to retire the SRPT until, let s see, well if any CLECs have a legitimate concern about the LLR Prod. And I do stress legitimate concern. We have been putting a lot of effort into making sure that the LLR Prod issues are either nonissues or have been resolved so this, once we get into this transition process if there are any remaining concerns with it we will address them, but we are planning on getting to the retirement of the SRPT this year. Let s put it that way, we don t have an exact date on it at this point. Any questions then? Gayle Gissendanner: Carol this is Gayle from Cox Communications. I have a question in regards to the LVR. Now this may need to go to Sue but how soon will that information be updated, able to pull off the web portal? Sue Pistacchio: The LVR? The LVR comes out in, I believe it s now I would need to check 90 days prior to the directory closing and it s retained I

26 believe it s for 60 days, but that information is listed on the web. I may not be giving correct information, but it comes out either 60 or 90 days prior to the closing of the book and is retained by the (inaudible) I can find out exactly for you but I know its (inaudible). Is that what you wanted to know? Gayle Gissendanner: That s part of it but if there is new information that, let s say we were to continue to key in orders and the information is going in weekly, if we go to pull up an LVR just to see the status of that particular listing. Sue Pistacchio: it s not updated. That is not (inaudible) of your book prior to closing, so Its, we re not changing the LVR process at all; all we are doing is changing where it goes. I do think there is the exception process where you can ask for an updated LVR. We re not changing the overall process, it s really just the location of where the report will be retrieved from. (Inaudible) Sue Pistacchio: Gayle Gissendanner: three months ago. I didn t hear the question. Yes, you were breaking up. (inaudible) LVR it s going to look just like it looked Sue Pistacchio: That s the intent of the LVR, yes, is being information. It s a snapshot. The other tools that you have available to you is the directory listing transaction and preorder and obviously your CSR, which tell you real-time what your listings are looking like. I would, the best source is the directory listing and preorder. Gayle Gissendanner: Yes we utilize those now a lot of times (inaudible) coming up so I thought the LVR (inaudible) easier to maneuver for us (inaudible) access is right (inaudible). I just want to restate to make it clear that currently the process for LVR is it is put out there X amount of business days prior to the close of the books, its either 30 or 90, I think it depends on region, and that gives the CLECs time to analyze it and get the corrections in before the books close. And they are only out on the server for 30 to 60 days for you to pull up. However I do believe there is an exception, I mean we will do that one time for each CLEC for each book, and I do believe there is an exception process and I believe its documented out on the website, that says if you want to an additional copy or a late or earlier version of your LVR you can call and get that and that version will be put out on the same portal and that s where you retrieve it. That s the same