VERIZON. Moderator: Stephen Cuttle December 12, :00 a.m. CT

Transcription

1 Page 1 VERIZON December 12, :00 a.m. CT Operator: Good day everyone and welcome to today's Verizon Change Management meeting. As a reminder, today's conference is being recorded. Today's conference will be interactive and all lines will be open for the duration. We ask that you use a mute button when not speaking to help cut down on background noise. Also if you need to step away from today's call, please do not place your line on hold as doing say may seep music into the entire conference. And at this time for opening remarks, I would like to turn the conference over to your host, Mr. Stephen Cuttle. Please go ahead, sir. Stephen Cuttle: Thank you, Kim and good morning everyone. Welcome to Verizon. This is our December 2006 Change Management meeting. We'll start off by doing a roll, as we always do, and I'll ask the folks that at are here in New York with us to identify yourselves, please. (Amy Webb): (Amy Webb), ((inaudible)) Linda Maxwell: Linda Maxwell, Verizon.

2 Page 2 (Shelly Tamsel): (Shelly Tamsel), ((inaudible)) Communications. (Shelly Pascoe with One communications) ((inaudible)): ((inaudible)) (Joyce Stewart): (Joyce Stewart), ACS. (Patti Julie): (Patti Julie), Verizon. (Lisa Lafru): (Lisa Lafru) of Verizon. (Margaret Thatch): (Margaret Thatch), Verizon. ((inaudible)): ((inaudible)), New York ((inaudible)). (Chad Edward): (Chad Edwards), ((inaudible)). (Beth Cohen): (Beth Cohen), Verizon. Stephen Cuttle: Thank you. And now I would ask that the ((inaudible)) that are on the conference crews, if you could identify yourselves please. (Lori Ann Burke): Hi. This is (Lori Ann Burke) at (Integra). Terri Mansir: Terri Manser, AT&T Texas. (Sarah Schwartz): (Sarah Schwartz), AT&T California.

3 Page 3 (Mary Halpin): (Mary Halpin), AT&T. Gloria Velez: Gloria Velez, AT&T New Jersey. Leo Dimitriadis: Hi. Leo Dimitriadis, AT&T Consumer, in New Jersey. (Carol Wright): (Carol Wright). Madison Barry: Madison Barry, CCSI. Dianne Friend: Dianne Friend, Comcast. Jim Kagele: Jim Kagele, Comcast. Kim Isaacs: Kim Isaacs, Eschelon. Annelyn Aficial: Annelyn Aficial, CGI. (Lawi Enshenaweza): (Lawi Enshenaweza), New Star. Dok Mathews: Dok Mathews, Penn Telcom. (Ryan): ((inaudible)) Ryan, (Wintel). John Guzman: John Guzman with Synchronoss. Stephen Cuttle: Anyone else?

4 Page 4 Todd Murphy: Todd Murphy, U.S. (Lec). Erica Johnson: Erica Johnson, Time Warner. Stephen Cuttle: Anyone? OK. We will get started. Turn your attention to the agenda for today. And before we start, Kim, sorry, I'm hearing a little feedback from my end. How is it for the rest of the folks? Female: I can hear it just slightly. Stephen Cuttle: OK. I'll turn down my volume (in case) that helps. OK, first item for the agenda is special projects, and I wanted to provide a read out on a single ((inaudible)) transition activities that have taken place since our last meeting in November. I just wanted to start out by saying that we are now monitoring (LSR) activity in (Elsod 9), and I just wanted to kick it off with just providing, you know, a few statistics on information that we've captured for November as far as those customers in the community that are utilizing (Elsod 9). Basically, we have approximately 509 (PCNAs) that are active, and of that number, we have approximately 84 (PCNAs) are using, are being submitted with (Elsod 9). Of that 84 number, 12 are utilized through (EDI) interface, and then 72 are being utilized by (Clex) using (Web delete). So just to give you an idea of where we're starting, the transition, basically we sent out the notification, the 6-month notification for route change management on the 21st of November. In addition we continue, we wanted to get a wider distribution to make sure that we captured all the customers in the community that impacted, that might be not be subscribing to change management.

5 Page 5 So we sent out that same notice via an industry letter on the 29th of November, and we also have sent out that same notification to our customer contacts we've identified both for those folks that were using (Web delete) and those using (EDI) and that notification just went out this past Friday. So that's sort of our first communications list, if you will. We're going to have ongoing communication. I know (Joanne Sespa's) team, who I'm partnering with, has been reaching out to those of you who are utilizing ((inaudible)) to encourage the move over to 9. My team, in particular (Patti Julie), who is here with us today in New York, will be overseeing the customer outreach of the (Clex) using (Web delete), so we're actually planning on starting to use direct outreach via and phone calls with the (Clex) we've identified for (Web delete). So that will be starting, just so you all know. Also, from last month we had sent out the (Elsod) timeline, and we did actually post that to the website, that we were going to have that done by the end of the day, back at our change management meeting, and we were able to do that, so it's currently in the meeting section of the change management website. But we're also going to add a link to that on the (Elsod) transition page. (Patti's) actually working with our web team and that will be launched to be in place by the end of this month. In addition, I just want to bring to your attention, for those customers that have specific questions about (Elsod) transition, my team is managing the customer-transition mailbox. I think many of you might have been familiar with that, utilizing that, working with (Carol Yozo) and her folks at the time.

6 Page 6 We are now monitoring that customer.transition.planning@verizon.com mailbox, so for those questions specific to your (Elsod) transition, I would ask you and your teams to, you know, send to that ((inaudible)). If it's something that my team can't answer, or something more specific to (EDI), it will be working directly with (Joanne Sespa) and her group in funneling those s and information to them. But again, I just want to encourage you, if you have specific questions, we're here to try to help, help to transition you over as efficiently and as painlessly as possible. So that's, again, make sure if you have questions about that to send those through that mailbox. I'm trying to keep them separated from the regular (CNT) s that we're getting. Female: (Steve), can you repeat that address again? Stephen Cuttle: Certainly. It's customer.transition.planning@verizon.com. That's also actually listed on the partner solutions website, if you click on, even from the home page, if you click on the icon that talks about transition, it's at the very bottom of that page. You can find it there as well. Female: Thank you. Stephen Cuttle: You're welcome. In addition, just a final update on what I wanted to report out on. You will be seeing, hopefully by the end of this month, you'll be seeing help box on certain areas of the website, which will be sort of a reminder about (Elsod) transition and it will contain a link to the actual (Elsod) transition page. We're actually going to place a ((inaudible)) with that information on the change management site, the business rules section, as well as the ordering (Elsod) services section. So this will be a reminder to where that information will be. And also, I know Bobbie ((inaudible)), I just want to-we did have an action to update the (Elsod) 6 to 9 gap analysis, and Bobbie and her

7 Page 7 team are actually working on that. I think we're still on target to have that live on the web by the end of the month, Bobbie. Is that correct? Bobbie Dodson: Yes. We're almost done. The rest is basically completed and we're almost done with the ((inaudible)). Stephen Cuttle: OK, so that will definitely, that should be live on the web as well by the end of the month certainly. Gloria Velez: And Bobbie, for the West, I thought I remember seeing an . This is Gloria Velez. That you sent out maybe 2, 3 weeks ago? That the material was already available? Bobbie Dodson: No. I didn't send anything out. Gloria Velez: I thought I had seen, so for the West, the material's not out yet? Bobbie Dodson: No, ma'am. Gloria Velez: OK, thank you. Bobbie Dodson: You're welcome. Stephen Cuttle: OK. That's basically the read-out that I had to provide this morning. I'll first open it up to any questions. Terri Mansir: Stephen, this is Terri Mansir. I've just been getting some questions. Has Verizon made their filings, I guess in California and I don't know what other state, changing the language, the red-lined language to the OSS document?

8 Page 8 Stephen Cuttle: Yes, we have that actually. Terri Mansir: You did make your filing? Stephen Cuttle: Yes, that's correct. Terri Mansir: OK, that's what I needed to know. Thank you. Stephen Cuttle: You're welcome. Any other questions? OK, we'll be reporting out, reporting out on this at the next meeting. This will be an ongoing topic, obviously, as we get closer to transition. And as I said, we'll be reaching out to many of your companies, either via (EDI), which (Joanne's) team have already started on or ((inaudible)), as we continue through the process. (Beth Cohen): This is (Beth Cohen). Just to, Terri, to your question about the filings, it was made some time ago, only, the requirement is only in California. It is the only state, at this point, that we have to do that with. Terri Mansir: OK, that's fine. I had just received some questions from California, and I thought in the previous discussions you'd said there was one other state you needed to make that filing in. (Beth Cohen): We thought there was also, but in checking, there wasn't. Terri Mansir: OK.

9 Page 9 (Beth Cohen): The timeline about change management requirements in that state, which was Indiana, had expired some time ago, so there was no requirement to file there as well. Terri Mansir: OK, I'll let them know what this is, then. Stephen Cuttle: OK. Thanks, Beth. Moving on, we'll go into the departmental discussion. And we'll lead off with Cathy Ham this morning, who will provide a read-out on training and website enhancements and a website enhancement notification actually did go out yesterday. Cathy, I'll turn it over to you. Cathy Ham: Thank you, Stephen. Good morning. And as Stephen indicated, my plan today is to review recent updates and enhancements that have been made to the Verizon Partner Solutions website. The handout that Stephen referenced was sent out yesterday and it's dated December 11th, and I'll just provide an overview of that document. For local updates, we have added the single (Elsod) timeline to the (CMP) homepage. It's in the archives with the November meeting materials. Also, for a local content, we have added a new multimedia recording for wholesale advantage new entrance, and that's available on the local training page. We have made a lot of updates to the contact us section. We're actually in the process of doing some routine maintenance, so there were a number of operational updates made this month. For access content, we have added new content for our (Sonnet) family of products. Specifically we have a new order guide, a new order sample, and an updated solution page for the Verizon optical networking products. That's an ethernet point-topoint (Sonnet) service. Also available for access customers on the training page, some of the upcoming workshops that we have. This week, on Thursday, we're doing a (V-tech) customer form. The purpose of this

10 form is for (V-tech) users to come and have an opportunity to interface with the system VERIZON Page 10 development team. We talked a little bit of (V-tech) functionality. We'll be talking about the December release for (V-tech), so that's scheduled this Thursday, the 14th, and registration is available on the training page. We will be doing the last of our (Sonnet) workshops in January of We're in the process of creating our schedule for 2007, so the specific date for that in January will be available soon. And the last item that I have concerns a multimedia recording that's been added to the training page for access customers for dedicated ((inaudible)) ring service. Does anyone have any questions? Stephen Cuttle: OK, well, thank you Cathy. Cathy Ham: Thanks. Stephen Cuttle: Moving on. (Joanne Depka). Female: Stephen? Stephen Cuttle: Yes? Female: Sorry, this is ((inaudible)). Can I just as Cathy a quick question? Stephen Cuttle: Sure.

11 Page 11 Female: In September, Verizon sent out a notification that in December the (CPSS2) will have a new section to allow companies to submit authorizations for third-party lender. At the time, I did send an to ((inaudible)) (Watson) and asked a few questions and she mentioned that Verizon is going to have a training. I just wonder is that scheduled. Stephen Cuttle: I think that would be something that probably the conductivity team would be managing separately. I don't know if that's been scheduled, and I can certainly touch base with (Tatiana), as well as coordinate that with Cathy if need be. Personally, I don't know off hand. I don't know if anyone on the call, the Verizon folks, are aware of that. Cathy Ham: Stephen, as far as taking over responsibility for the local section of the website, I wasn't managing the local area of the website back in September, so I'm not familiar with that, but that doesn't mean that there hasn't been some contact between the conductivity team and mine and I'll be glad to follow up on that. Female: Thank you. Cathy Ham: I know of no specific plans for anything this month. Stephen Cuttle: OK, I appreciate that, Cathy. So, we'll take that back and get back to you ((inaudible)) wants more information. Female: Thank you. Stephen Cuttle: You're welcome. OK, if there aren't any other questions on ((inaudible)) web documentation. Paul Haven: Stephen?

12 Page 12 Stephen Cuttle: Yes? Paul Haven: I know a little bit about what was just being discussed. My understanding was, there were going to be some tutorials put out on the web. I'm not sure what the date would be when they go out there. That's what I think we can try and find that out. But I think it's shortly, it's very shortly if they're not out there already. Stephen Cuttle: OK. Thanks, Paul. That's good information. Paul Haven: Yes. Stephen Cuttle: Run that down. (Beth Cohen): This is (Beth), and I would just like to make a plug for people to make sure that you and you tell your folks within your companies to use the contact us on the website, because there have been a lot of changes, especially in the operational areas of the business. So, if they're using something that they've printed out, it's probably not up to date, and because there's been a lot of changes within Verizon. Stephen Cuttle: Thank you, (Beth). OK, I think, (Joanne), we're ready for you to do a read out on the (CTE). (Joanne Sespa): OK. Thanks, Stephen. As Stephen mentioned before as far as the conversion to (Elsod 9), of course we're asking all of the (EDI) ((inaudible)) to please firm up their plans as quickly as possible; get with us if we don't

13 Page 13 hear from you. We will be reaching out to you to work with you to get you converted over to (Elsod 9). We have moved several over and continue to test with vendors as well as (Clex) at this stage in the game. As far as the rest of the updates, where (CTE) is concerned, we do have the February release coming up. Timelines have been sent out, and I just want to go over a couple of dates between now and the next change management meeting, that are very important to those who plan on (testing). For the West, intentions to test with us are due next Monday, December 18th. Final test plans for the West are due to us on January 2nd, and testing will begin on January 15th for the West. For the East, intentions to test are due to us on 12/26. Final test plan on January 8th, and testing begins, for the East, on January 22nd. Anyone have any questions? Concerns? OK, I'll turn it back to you, Stephen. Thank you. Stephen Cuttle: Thank you, (Joanne). Female: Is that for the (Elsod) or is that a February ((inaudible)). (Joanne Sespa): That is for the February release. You can also, you know, do the testing for the (Elsod) migration in the same timeframe if you would like. Female: Thank you. (Joanne Sespa): Yes.

14 Page 14 Stephen Cuttle: OK, thank you, (Joanne). Moving on to the partner solutions customer care update by (Kevin Curran). Are you on this morning? OK, (Joan), if you can reach out to Kevin, we'll swing back on this. (Joan Costello). OK, moving on, we'll go to the next item on the agenda. Paul Haven: Stephen? Sorry to interrupt again. I have an answer to the previous question about the tutorial for the certificates. Stephen Cuttle: OK, very good. Paul Haven: They should be online no later than Monday of next week. Some time this weekend. No later than Monday. Stephen Cuttle: Very good. Thank you, Paul. Paul Haven: Yes. Stephen Cuttle: OK. ((inaudible)) control items by release. There basically have been three changes to the items by release documents from last month's meeting. Bring to your attention on page one, the initiative, (CO5-1852), line (split) to line (split) change, voice provided key data, provider ((inaudible)) now shows committed for the February release. That's on page one of the document.

15 Page 15 And then on page two of the document, the two initiatives listed on that page, (CO6-1127) and (CO5-1910), those also now show committed for the February 2007 release. That's the extent of the changes to the items by release documents since we last ((inaudible)) in November. Just open it up. Are there any questions? Gloria Velez: I have a question. This is Gloria Velez. When do you plan to do the overview conference call for the February release for both East and West? Stephen Cuttle: We actually, the West release overview, that's going to be scheduled for this week, Gloria. We should be getting a notification out, hopefully by close of business today. And I believe we're set to have that call on either Thursday or Friday. I have to confirm with Doug and Bobbie, but the West release will be this week and then the East release overview, they'll be separate, that will be held a week from this Thursday. And we will be getting notifications out with those tapes, and the call-in information. Gloria Velez: OK, so we're talking about the 14th/15th and 21st? Stephen Cuttle: That's correct. Gloria Velez: OK, thank you. Stephen Cuttle: You're welcome. Are there any other questions on the (IDR)? OK. Thank you. Moving on, we'll go to the prioritization working group. We actually have three change requests to review today. One is a type 5 that had been submitted by Gloria Velez from AT&T and that is on page 7 of the document, in the meeting materials. CR number C and

16 the title of the change request is Modify the (SAR) response return telephone numbers individually. So I will turn t his over to Gloria to represent the community. VERIZON Page 16 Gloria Velez: OK, thank you, Stephen. This is for the Wes, and basically, we're asking that Verizon modify the (SAR) response so that when you have telephone numbers that are in a range, and you did not specify the range on the service-order form, whether it's resale or port, that we would request that Verizon return them back individually. We have had problems over the last 6 months, and we have them on several trouble tickets out there where we've sent in a very small order, let's say there's five or six lines, two of the lines happen to be in a consecutive range and the other three are not, and when Verizon returns back the (SAR), we would get one occurrence for the two numbers that are a range, and then three occurrences for the other ((inaudible)) that are not in the range. We've also had occasion where we'll do an order to augment a ((inaudible)) group, and there's just one line on the order, and the existing accounts had two numbers that are in a range. Well, Verizon is sending back on the (SAR) those numbers that were on the existing accounts, that were not involved in the augment order that we sent out. I understand, in talking with Verizon, that they intentionally did this when the community went to combining the (SAR) 3 and the (SAR) 4, and they said that the ((inaudible)) were in favor of doing this. To me, I don't understand because normal order processing is that if you send, however you send in your phone numbers, if you do them individually or you send in a range, one would expect that the subsequent responses would follow that format. And interestingly enough, when they send back today the (LSC) or a (jeopardy), those responses are sent back to match how we sent the ((inaudible)) on the order. It's just the (SAR) that is different.

17 Page 17 (Sarah Schwartz): Can I ask a question? Gloria Velez: Sure. (Sarah Schwartz): This is Sarah in California. Is your vision not, say for example, we have an ((inaudible)) 100 lines that we would get a separate, and there are no problems with it, it goes in fine, that we would get a separate (SAR) for each one of those lines? Gloria Velez: No. My envision would be, if you sent them in individually, telephone numbers one to 100 has one occurrence, then I would expect Verizon to send back that one occurrence. (Sarah Schwartz): For one (SAR)? Gloria Velez: One... (Sarah Schwartz): I'm not sure what you mean by occurrence. And maybe it's? Gloria Velez: Individual (L-nums). (Sarah Schwartz): OK. Gloria Velez: Like I'll send in 5 (L-nums) for telephone numbers one, two, three, four, and five. And Verizon on the (SAR) would send back one (L-num) for the phone numbers one to five. (Sarah Schwartz): So you want them to match it however you send it in? Gloria Velez: Yes.

18 Page 18 (Sarah Schwartz): OK, thank you. Stephen Cuttle: Gloria, did you have more to add before I open it up to other questions? Gloria Velez: No, I think I'm finished. Thank you. Stephen Cuttle: You're welcome. I'll just open it up to questions from everyone else on the call about this one. (Beth Cohen): Gloria, it's (Beth Cohen). I know there was awhile back, we had some very in-depth discussions about changing the (SAR) and does this change now go back to some of those previous discussions that we had, I guess it was about a year and a half, two years ago? Gloria Velez: If you're recollecting the CR that I had put in where we had requested that Verizon send back on the (SAR TNs) that were only associated with the service order that we sent in, if that's what you're referring to, this would not change it. I understand, in talking with Bobbie, that Verizon would work this CR and that CR together. (Beth Cohen): So, what is it, though, that will change on the (SAR) with this request? Gloria Velez: For example, in my five-line scenario, I send you (L-nums) one, two, three, four, five, on my (LSR) representing phone numbers one, two, three, four, five, and I would expect the (SAR) to have (L-nums) one, two, three, four, five, representing phone numbers one, two, three, four, five. And I would also, yes, that's what I would expect. (Beth Cohen): OK, and today you get one through five.

19 Page 19 Gloria Velez: One through five. And I understand that you do that because of (alley) codes, but in some of the examples that I looked at, I didn't see that the (alley) code was different. I understand in talking with Bobbie that you're doing it; you range it when the (alley) code is the same. And I said to her, "Well, give me back the (alley) code, if the (alley) code is the same," which in many of the examples the (alley) code was the same, but it had no data, because you send back just the hyphen in the (alley)-code field, even though you don't even send the (alley) on to directory form. So your logic treats the hyphen as the same throughout all the phone numbers. Then send me back, with that (L-num), the (alley) code. (Beth Cohen): I guess, I'm trying to understand if the information that you're requesting back with the (PR) is different from the information from what you're currently getting. Gloria Velez: No. (Beth Cohen): It's just in a different format. Gloria Velez: I wouldn't call it a different format. I guess you're not familiar with (L-nums). If I, if I send you individual phone numbers, maybe I can phrase it this way, maybe you can treat the way that you send back the phone numbers on the SAR the exact same way you treat it on an (LSD) and a (jeopardy). It's the data that's different is the actual phone number. (Beth Cohen): So the data is different?

20 Page 20 Gloria Velez: Yes, if you want to look at it and say the phone number, yes, it has to be different because you're sending me back an (L-num) that would have phone number hyphen, And I would want you to send back (L-num) , then the next occurrence or the next (L-num) would be (L-num) 2, phone number (Beth Cohen): OK. So that's what I was trying to understand. It does sound like there is additional data that you're looking for. Gloria Velez: No. No. It's not I don't view it as additional data. (Beth Cohen): I was going to ask if Bobbie can help out here. Bobbie Dodson: Yes, this is Bobbie. In some instances we send back the (L-nums) and ((inaudible)) in what we call a range, so we will group them together. In other words, we'll says it's one, two, three, four through one, two, three, eight, and we will return those back in what we call a range. And what Gloria is asking for is that unless they ask for that on the (L-SAR) coming in, that she would like them returned back individually, in other words, one, two, three, four coming back on an (L-num) and one, two three, five; one, two, three, six; one, two, three, seven; and one, two, three, eight, all coming back individually instead of as a single line on a range. (Beth Cohen): OK, thank you. Gloria Velez: And it would make sense that you would treat all your responses when it came to organizing your data the same way. You're organizing the data differently on a (SAR) than you do on your (LSD) and your (jeopardy). Stephen Cuttle: OK. Any other final questions before we rate this? OK. We'll start out with a rating. AT&T California, Texas?

21 Page 21 Female: It needs to start with (Legacy) and come... Stephen Cuttle: Oh, yes, I'm sorry. My apologies. AT&T (Legacy), excuse me. Female: Five. Stephen Cuttle: AT&T California, Texas. Female: Three. Stephen Cuttle: Yes. (CGI)? ((inaudible)) Stephen Cuttle: Comcast? Male: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: Eschelon? Female: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: (One) Communications? ((inaudible)) Stephen Cuttle: (Pen Telecom)?

22 Page 22 Male: We'll pass, Stephen. Stephen Cuttle: ((inaudible))? Female: Did you say ((inaudible))? Stephen Cuttle: I said (Sprint). U.S. Sprint. Female: Four. Stephen Cuttle: OK, thank you. Time Warner? Female: Two. Stephen Cuttle: ((inaudible))? Female: Two. Stephen Cuttle: U.S. ((inaudible)). Male: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: XO. Female: Four. Stephen Cuttle: (Cavalier)?

23 Page 23 Male: ((inaudible)). Stephen Cuttle: (EPSI)? Female: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: ((inaudible)) Telecom? Female: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: Did I miss anyone else? Female: Broadview. Stephen Cuttle: OK? Female: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: I'm sorry, what was the rating? Female: Pass. Stephen Cuttle: OK. Good morning, (Janet). (Janet): Didn't you hear me before?

24 Page 24 Stephen Cuttle: I didn't hear you before, surprisingly. Anyone? Here it's the holidays. All in fun. Anyone else? Female: (ATC). Stephen Cuttle: And your rating? Female: Four. Stephen Cuttle: Thank you. Anyone else? Gloria Velez: Stephen, this is Gloria. I should have asked you, because I put on here on the systems why ((inaudible)) (EDI). I'm assuming that the way that it is, the way that I described it is functioning the same way, whether the transaction comes to you via ((inaudible)) or (EDI). Is that correct? Stephen Cuttle: Bobbie, I don't know that answer. Bobbie Dodson: I believe that is correct. Gloria Velez: OK, thank you. Stephen Cuttle: Thank you. Sheila Harris: Stephen, hi, this is Sheila Harris ((inaudible)) and we'll all pass. Stephen Cuttle: OK, thank you. OK, anyone else before we move on to the next type 4? OK, thank you.

25 Page 25 Starting on page 11 of the (PWG), we have a type 4 that is C The title is Modify Subfield Usage to reduce manual intervention and we have Doug Tomlinson on this morning to present this one. Good morning, Doug. Doug Tomlinson: Good morning. Thank you, Stephen. The purpose of this initiative is to establish new up-front edits to the reject and (LSR). If we get a ((inaudible)) request that is either on the same date that's confirmed as the due date, or after the date. This initiative will also reject upfront any (LSRs) that come in as a supplemental request, if we have not previously confirmed that the order was actually written. This will involve all product types with the exception of (loops) with local number portability and local number portability those who have a separate process that's covered. Are there any questions on this? Kim Isaacs: This is Kim Isaacs from Eschelon. Stephen Cuttle: Kim, can I ask you just to hold for one second. Kim Isaacs: Sure. Stephen Cuttle: Kim, the operator, could you, someone's clicking or typing. Could you please put your phone on mute? Thank you. Kim Isaacs, you can continue. Thanks for that. Male: May I ask what prompted this particular change request?

26 Page 26 Doug Tomlinson: Well, what's been occurring is, when we get a ((inaudible)) that comes in either on or after the due date, a lot of times the provisioning work has already been completed and in most cases the order is automated, which will go ahead and update the customer service record. However, the actual provisioning changes are already done, so it creates an out-of-synch condition which, down the road, could create a (jeopardy) when you're submitting a change to that account and it doesn't match what the actual records are in the switch. Also, what we're doing is matching our current ((inaudible)) process on the use of the ((inaudible)) field. Kim Isaacs: And this is Kim Isaacs. What do you do, it says loop and loop with number portability are excluded. Doug Tomlinson: Right. Kim Isaacs: OK. What do you do if you need to cancel an order on a due date or push it out on the due date? If you can't submit the ((inaudible)) but you don't want the order to go? Doug Tomlinson: You would actually have to call in and speak to the center in that case, because there are... Kim Isaacs: How do you? How would you call in? I mean? Female: It's near to impossible to call in. Kim Isaacs: Right. Doug Tomlinson: When you call into the voice portal, you don't have the option to speak to an associate?

27 Page 27 Kim Isaacs: Not really. I mean, you can find a way if you go through the prompt like, say someone's out of service, you can find a way in, but there isn't prompt for, you know, last-minute changes, and you need to, you know, press 0 to talk to somebody type of thing. Male: Or you can sit on the line for 2 hours. Stephen Cuttle: This probably would be an opportunity, an escalation by how it would have to be handled? Doug Tomlinson: That's correct. Female: You can't call in an escalation unless you've answered a ticket, which can take hours and hours to be answered. Female: Right. Female: Before we roll this out, we have to have a ((inaudible)) process to change the, you know, to have, to be able to ((inaudible)) an order on the due date. I mean, what you have available to us right now isn't going to work. Doug Tomlinson: OK, let me follow up on the process on exactly how you would reach them. Stephen Cuttle: Doug? Doug Tomlinson: Yes, Stephen.

28 Page 28 Stephen Cuttle: This is a question. I know this is a West-only (report). Does the process exist in the East, or no? Doug Tomlinson: I'll follow up how the East process works. I do know that in the East, though, we do not allow the changes on the same day. Male: We do get those kind of rejects on the East. When you say the (subfield), are you referring to the (subfield) that indicates a one, two, or three? Doug Tomlinson: Correct; the supplemental field on the (LSR). Male: OK. Female: You're saying you don't allow ((inaudible)) on the East? What happens on the East if somebody wants to cancel the order or move the due date out on the due date? Doug Tomlinson: I will follow up with the process for the East on the actual due date. Because that's what we would be mirroring in the West as well, but I'm understanding, in this case, that you cannot reach an associate when you call into the voice portal. Female: Not in a timely manner. Male: So the current date is the date before the confirmed due date? That would be acceptable to use as a subfield in that case? Doug Tomlinson: Yes. Male: Meaning that we would be able to perform a due-date sub?

29 Page 29 Doug Tomlinson: Correct. Male: An ordering change or supplement as well as a cancellation. Doug Tomlinson: Correct. For instance, if the confirmation was 12/13 and you're submitting a supplemental (LSR) today, you'll be fine, but if the current or the confirmed date is the 12th, and you're trying to submit it today on the 12th, that's overlooking that it will reject back. Male: So on the current date, the order hasn't completed, what are we to expect, if the order hasn't completed on the confirmed due date or let's say days after the confirmed due date? Doug Tomlinson: The information provided was, calling into the (NMC), so I'll need to reverify that process for you, if you're feeling it's not working. Male: I agree with the other folks' assessment that we probably need to take a closer look at the various scenarios that this can impact. (Sarah Schwartz): This is (Sarah), in AT&T California. I was also wondering how this would impact, say you issue your (LSR) today, your customer calls back a couple of hours from now and says, "Oh, I forgot, I wanted to add this number. I want to ((inaudible)) this number." Just a last-minute change but it's, you know, the due date's not any time soon. Would this also say that we couldn't (sup) that (LSR) until we had received an (LSC) and then issue a (sup)? Doug Tomlinson: Correct. (Sarah Schwartz): OK, so it would prevent us from making changes based on customer issues until we have that (LSC).

30 Page 30 Doug Tomlinson: Until the confirmation, or in the case where they call in, you can just resubmit the (LSR) without the (sup) field being populated, with the changes, just with the new version, and what will occur in the back end is the previous (LSR) will be retired and the new (LSR) will overlay it. (Sarah Schwartz): OK. Thanks. Doug Tomlinson: Yes. Male: You also stated that you'll confirm with Verizon East that you indeed have the same rules at this time. Will you be able to confirm that and send that out to the distribution? Doug Tomlinson: We do have the same rules. What I'll do is confirm what the process is and ensure that we're matching that in the West, and that will be sent out through the distribution. Male: Thank you. Doug Tomlinson: Yes. Gloria Velez: And Doug, this is Gloria Velez. On the sentence here where you talk about, the subfield will no longer be valid if the confirmation has not been received, today you have that rule. Are you saying that you didn't carry that rule over in (Elsod 9)? Doug Tomlinson: No, the rule exists today. We're putting edits in place to enforce it. Currently, there are no edits to stop the (LSR) from coming in without, or excuse me, a supplemental (LSR) coming in with, in a case where there's no response or standard confirmation. Gloria Velez: I thought...

31 Page 31 Doug Tomlinson: The rules have always been out there. You are correct. Gloria Velez: Yes, I know the rules, but I thought I have seen some enforcement of it, especially when we had problems where this rule, there's a caveat to the rule about (uni-p), brand new lines, and you have the (res-id) starting with a certain character. I think it's the P or the N. You have a rule, I think, on that scenario where you require the subfield to be populated, even though you haven't gotten the confirmation. Male: And that's when we have, I believe, an address validation or reservation in the back end that would still apply. It's only a case where... Gloria Velez: So I think it needs to be a little bit clear here, because you do have a caveat. Male: Yes. Gloria Velez: It's not black and white here. Doug Tomlinson: In this initial? No. We will have the details out with the notification write up, the more detailed description of how we'll modify the existing usage note from the field. Terri Mansir: Doug, this is Terri. Help me understand. With this initiative, then, you could prohibit us from (supping our order). But Verizon could still get the order even after a (SAR) or a ((inaudible)) update has been sent. Is that correct? Doug Tomlinson: I'm sorry. I missed the Verizon piece.

32 Page 32 Terri Mansir: You can still ((inaudible)) the order, even though a (SAR) has been sent or a firm order commitment date has been received. Doug Tomlinson: That's correct, because a lot of times it's further down the road that we find a condition that would warrant a (jeopardy). Terri Mansir: OK, then help me understand how that's a level playing field. Doug Tomlinson: In terms of restricted the (sup) on the due date? Terri Mansir: Yes. I mean, you can tell me, here's my due date. You can (jeop) it, but you're telling me it's my customer ((inaudible)) with one additional change. I can't do that. I'm not seeing that as level. Kim Isaacs: And this is Kim Isaacs. I would echo that. You could send us a star and tell us the order's complete and then send us a (jeop) saying, "no it's not." And then our records are out of synch. Doug Tomlinson: If you get a case where a (jeop) comes back after we sent a star, we need to follow up on that. That should not be occurring. Because once we send a star, that means the order has been completed and all work is done. Female: That happens. Terri Mansir: Yes, but we know that's not always the case. (Lori Ann Burke): Yes, I was going to say, this is Lori with (Integra). Doug Tomlinson: I understand.

33 Page 33 Male: And let us know when that occurrence happens and we'll investigate. Terri Mansir: We do. Female: I mean, who will investigate, because we report those to the (NMC) quite frequently. (Lori Ann Burke): This is Lori with (Integra). I would agree with Kim on that. Yes, you open a ticket. Then they end up supposedly canceling that, and then ((inaudible)) with the actual due date, and yes, it's a nightmare to track. (Jeannie): This is (Jeannie) with ((inaudible)) Telecom. I fully agree as well. Male: ((inaudible)) should be able to give you all kinds of examples of that. Male: The escalation team of the (NMC) or are we talking what opens through the (PFCC). Male: It usually goes to escalation. My understanding is, there's Verizon tracks all the escalations and does kind of a root cause on them anyway. I would think that you would very well aware of those. Doug Tomlinson: OK, well I can check with the escalation team to see, to give us conditions where we're (jeoping) after we send out a star. Female: You might want to look at conditions where you send a star and you actually haven't done your work either.

34 Page 34 Male: Now, the star doesn't actually get generated until the service order's been completed in the backend system, and that generally occurs once all provisioning work is done, so how often are you seeing that? Female: A couple of times a month. Terri Mansir: Yes, more often than we want. Female: A couple of times a month we'll get a star, we'll go out there to do a cross connect only to find that the techs didn't finish their work or something wasn't done in the central office. Female: OK and I hope that you are indeed raising those as the exceptions that they become through the ticket process. You know, that, yes, unfortunately, that will happen, happens within Verizon retail as well. But you know, again, those are the exceptions that have to be worked through the exception process. And if the exception process is, you know, and they do, they look at, you know, tickets that they get to see if there are trends, and when they get large volumes as trends, those are then addressed differently. But yes, we do have, you know, sometimes techs go out there and they will do the work and they'll say that they did the work and they'll fax in or do their check-backs with the central office and say, "OK, complete," only to find out, no it's not. Female: I mean, you're saying we need to bring those to your attention. If we're bringing those to the ((inaudible)) and the ((inaudible)) has all that information, what more do we need to do to get these issues addressed.

35 Page 35 Female: I'm not saying that there's anything more you need to do. If they are appropriately, you know, entered as tickets that we can look at and there's, you know, there are teams that look at trends of tickets to see where there are multiple tickets for the same kind of problem, and when those get large, those get addressed in a very different way internally within Verizon, to try to stop that from happening. I'm not saying that there is something else, at the moment, that you can do. You can certainly use the escalation process. And I would say, yes, it occurs. It is not occurring in any significant volume that is, as far as I'm aware, where you know, there are either specific techs, maybe, who are at fault here. If that's happening, it is happening on a, you know, case-by-case basis where people are monitoring the tickets that are coming and they're seeing perhaps there is a tech or a region where there is some problem, and they're going to go to the field organization and they're going to say, "Hey, we have this issue, and you need to address this." So the tickets are what's going to drive that. Stephen Cuttle: Are there any more questions with this one? Female: Sounds like we need to take it back. Stephen Cuttle: I think it sounds like, Doug, if we have some action item stuck on, that we need to take the ((inaudible)) before we actually present this one. I think this one we should defer. Doug Tomlinson: OK. And I have noted reconfirm the East process, and if it is a change on the due date, how can we get them into an associate, because apparently we're not able to reach them

36 Page 36 today. And right now I understand that to do an escalation is very cumbersome because we need to open a trouble ticket beforehand. A couple of other side-action items that I also have to look into is the cases where we're (jeoping) after we send a star and also cases where a star is generated but the order was not worked. Gloria Velez: And Doug, if I just may ask once more, since this is only for 9, are you telling me that in 6, relative to populating the subfield prior to a confirmation, you are invoking that rule? Doug Tomlinson: This is actually targeting (Elsod 9) because it's in June of Gloria Velez: No, but in 6 today. Doug Tomlinson: 6 today we do not have the edits either, and if you do receive any rejects back they are manually rejected out of the center. Gloria Velez: Oh, maybe that's what I'm seeing. OK. Doug Tomlinson: Right. Gloria Velez: OK, thank you. Doug Tomlinson: Yes. Stephen Cuttle: OK, Doug, I think you've captured the actions we've noted. And we'll ((inaudible)) this one if some additional information put together for the community.

37 Page 37 Moving on, the other type 4, which Doug is going to present is on page 14 of the document. And it's initiative number CO60793, and the title is No List Edit Modification. So Doug you have the floor once again. Doug Tomlinson: Thank you, Stephen. You all might recall when we had the edit-change request that we pulled out of October, this is just to reintroduce the change request. What we're doing with this initiative is putting edit modifications in place, number one, to stop a condition where we receive an in-bound (LSR) that would create what we call a no-list condition. A no-list condition is a case where there's no appearance in the directory, no appearance in directory assistance, there's nothing at all for a directory listing. When we review the tariffs on this, when we're looking at an account, if we want an account to be nonpublished, it has to actually be specified nonpublished or in a case where it's listed, it has to be published for a ((inaudible)) line. Two things we're doing with this is, the first thing we're doing is, if you're doing the conversion on an account, and the existing listing status shows a no-list, you'll be required to send a (DL) form outlining what that listing should be. If the account does have a current listing, or excuse me, a valid listing on it, on that conversion, you would still be able to use the as-is values in terms of that conversion is considered. OK, the second piece, again, is to rework the edits on the (ELT) field as well as the ((inaudible)) field, to stop an existing condition where you can, in effect, put in a change ((inaudible)) on an existing account to create that no-list condition. Are there any questions on this?

38 Page 38 Leo Dimitriadis: Yes, this is Leo Dimitriadis. So you're saying that, how are you going to perform that edit? Are you going to do (CSI) to determine whether directory listing is on the account in order to make a no-list determination? Doug Tomlinson: Yes. Yes. When the (LSR) comes in with the, it's only going to occur if it's a case where you're asking either for an (ELT) or an ((inaudible)) value to stay as is. Then the edits will take a list at the existing (CSR) and if it's got a valid listing, then no issue. If there is a no-list or an invalid listing on the account, it will reject back advising you do need to submit the (DL) form. Leo Dimitriadis: OK, thank you. Doug Tomlinson: yes. Female: Can you please tell me exactly the nomenclature that's on the (CSI) that represents this term, no list? Doug Tomlinson: It has a listing status of no-list, actually N-O-space-L-I-S-T, and there are no directory lines whatsoever appearing. So in the case, if you pull the (CSR) or (CSI) in an account that has it, you know how it shows you pub or nonpub and then it gives you the directory line. In this case, it would say no-list. There would be absolutely no directory lines at all appearing. Female: Doug, is this leading up to a nonpub charge? Doug Tomlinson: It will be a nonpub charge if the decision is that the end-user wants to be nonpub, yes. Female: So if the user currently is nonpub, then you're requiring us to submit the (DL) form to indicate that?

39 Page 39 Doug Tomlinson: No. If they're currently nonpub, then you can submit the (DL) form as an as-is, and it will carry over as nonpub, because nonpub does fill the appropriate (tear-up) charge. Female: But why do we have to submit the (DL) form? Why can't we just do, you know, (ELT) equal to, you know, keep listing as-is. Doug Tomlinson: The only reason you would need to submit the (DL) form is if the existing account currently is what's called a no-list status. Female: OK, so maybe, I'm confused with this term no-list and nonpub. Doug Tomlinson: OK, nonpub means nonpublished, OK, so there's an appropriate tariff charge if they're nonpublished. No-list is something that's used, say, for a coin phone that doesn't apply or doesn't qualify for a listing. But in the case of a ((inaudible)) service, a voice line, it either needs to be published or nonpublished. OK? And the only time you would be required, on a conversion, to provide the (DL) form is if the existing account has a current no-list status, meaning no valid listing at all is appearing. Female: OK, so previously, when you talked about nonpub, you tied it to the (DL) form and that's what made me ask for clarification. Doug Tomlinson: Oh, OK. I believe I said if the account existing today is no-list, and the intent is that the end-user wants it to be nonpub, then you would need to submit the (DL) form to say it's nonpub. Female: Oh, OK, because then you're changing. That makes sense to me. Doug Tomlinson: Right. You'll only be required to submit the (DL) form if the existing (CSI) shows an invalid listing for that voice line.

40 Page 40 Female: OK, and I also was under the understanding, I know in the East it works this way, that every retail account that has a (BTN), you have to have some type of listing treatment. Doug Tomlinson: Exactly. Female: OK. Is that statement true for the West? Doug Tomlinson: It's true across the footprint. Female: OK, so then your examples about this no list would only, if it's true, that it would only apply to a coin. Doug Tomlinson: Well, there's certain coins, certain loop accounts on the back end that would apply to that. You don't need to worry about whether or not to tell us it's no list. It just happens in our back end like a loop. Like if we do a loop account, it's going to be billed to the no list, because it does not qualify for a listing. If you want a listing with it, you submit the separate ((inaudible)). Female: So when it comes to retail, though, when you talk about those loop accounts, that's not retail. Doug Tomlinson: No, and this issue doesn't exist in retail. Female: OK. Female: So is this nonlist or no-list status basically an invalid status that's on the current (CSI) today ((inaudible))? Doug Tomlinson: Yes.

41 Page 41 Female: And if so, what you're trying to do, then, is just clean up the listing piece of these accounts to make sure that they are either listed or nonpub? Doug Tomlinson: Correct. Male: Why would you have, in the documentation, listed identifying the primary area as wholesale advantage, and resale? Doug Tomlinson: That's pretty much the accounts we have voice on, (Uni-T). Male: Yes. Doug Tomlinson: Old, (Uni-T), so and then it would be resell business, resell residence. Male: When we pull the (CSI) there could be accounts that may be no list, right? Doug Tomlinson: Again, if you're going to pull a (CSI) for a loop, you will see the loop as no list, which is valid, but that's not something you would ask for. That's how we designed it in the back end. Male: OK. So for all practical purposes, if we're doing resale to wholesale advantage or resale to resale, that situation wouldn't exist, right? Doug Tomlinson: Correct. Male: Or shouldn't theoretically, but we may not account for it.