Home Page > Utility Regulation > Telecommunications > Competitive Interests Forum > Competitive Topics Forum 04/23/03
Competitive Topics Forum
04/23/03
The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Topic P-3 (10 digit translations) was the first
item discussed.
BellSouth indicated that the 5-ESS and DMS-100 switches had the 10-digit trigger
capability and that other switches (1AE, EWSD, etc.) might have it also. BellSouth
will report back on its progress at the August Forum. In regard to the second part
of this Topic dealing with delivery of CNAM, XO indicated that there was no recurring
pattern of this problem and this portion of the Topic could be closed.
In regard to Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), BellSouth indicated
that at the next meeting, it will report back on a time frame for the mechanization
process.
David Christian with Verizon reported on the progress of the work group developing
rules for Topic PO-1 (End user migration). He indicated that the group last met
on April 9 and will meet again on April 30. A current major issue of discussion
deals with directory listings. He will continue reporting back at future meetings.
David suggested that a process for going forward would be to present the rule at
a Forum meeting for a vote and then to file for rulemaking or some other type of
petition.
During the discussion on Topic PO-1, a question was raised about whether the topic
of line loss notification was part of an existing issue. Stan Greer with BellSouth
is going to check the current issues and report back at the next meeting.
On Topic O-4 (Mechanized order capability), Collette Davis with Covad described
an interim process ( effective April 15) that BellSouth had developed that would
allow the CLEC to put comments in the Remarks section of an order preauthorizing
the removal of load coils and bridge taps. This interim solution will be addressed
in 2004 in the change control process for a permanent fix. On the broader issue
of initially mechanizing ordering for new products, the participants agreed this
was a broader issue that could not be resolved in the Forum and that specific examples
could be raised as they occur. This Topic was closed.
On Topic PO-2 (Pending facilities), there was considerable discussion on what types
of situations might result in a need for a lack of facilities (lack of fiber, need
for a line card, etc.) which might result in cancellation or delay of an order.
CLECs indicated a desire for a definition of the term "construction needed" and
a more specific reason versus a broad statement. Participants were unsure whether
BellSouth's "construction needed" term was the same as Verizon's "no build" term.
A question was raised of what had become of BellSouth's former "pending facilities"
group. At the next Forum, BellSouth was asked to see if it could provide more specific
information to CLECs about what construction is needed to fulfill and order and
its policy of when it does or does not do construction to fill an order.
On Topic O-10 (Single point of contact for LENS problems), the Forum discussed an
issue raised by Allegiance concerning Web documentation for the SL-1 product information
package. Needed information was scattered between the product information package
and pre-ordering and ordering documents. Covad indicated a similar problem with
the UCL-ND product. BellSouth indicated that some of the needed information was
generic in nature rather than specifically related to an individual product. Allegiance
suggest the possibility that material could be hyperlinked from specific product
information to generic information. Bob Buerrose with Allegiance will pursue the
hyperlink possibility and the possible inclusion of that in the change control process.
Topic MKT-1 (Winback) & MKT-2 (Marketing practices) were left in monitor status
while the Georgia PSC considered a code of conduct there and while the key customer
tariff was being addressed in Florida.
On Topic B-3 (EMI records show local as access), BellSouth has proposed a solution
to ITC Deltacom to resolve an issue regarding direct trunking and ITC may take the
proposal to OBF. ALECs inquired about whether BellSouth provided any compensation
to ITC and whether there would be compensation for other ALECs. BellSouth and ITC
will report back at a future meeting.
On Topic O-12 (LCSC E-mail process for manual order notices), BellSouth indicated
instances where jeopardy notices would be sent back manually even though the LSR
was received electronically. ALECs indicated that their interconnection agreements
called for electronic replies, not manual and asked when they could expect the process
to be mechanized. BellSouth is to provide an update at the next Forum.
On Topic R-2 (Escalation procedure for after-hours repairs), KMC indicated the Topic
could be closed.
The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for May 22, 2003 at 10:30 a.m.