My Florida Florida Public Service Commission
Quick Search:   Advanced Search


Site Map
Interactive Site Map Close
Site Map | Site Index
Home Page > Site Index > Competitive Interests Forum

Telecommunications Competitive Interset Forum

Next Meeting - Februrary 19, 2004

November 20, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum
11/20/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Updates were provided on several Topics.

Topic B-3 (EMI records show local as access)was the first item discussed. BellSouth indicated that ITC needed to take the lead on this topic at the OBF; BellSouth and ITC will discuss.

On Topic O-10 (Single point of contact for EELs problems), Bob Buerosse with Allegiance indicated that BellSouth's web site was improved and needed information was now easier to locate and this topic could now be closed.

Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), Topic EEL-3 (Credits for EEL conversions), Topic O-12 (LCSC E-mail process for manual order notices), Topic P-3 (10 digit translations), Topic P-4 (Number reassignments) and Topic PO-2 (Pending facilities) were discussed briefly but there was no change in their status.

Open issues on Topic PO-1 (End user migration) were discussed at length. Discussion on Issue 1 (ILEC provision of CSR information for CLEC customers) continued to center on legal implications of CPNI and Florida statutory confidentiality provisions. Positions on this issue are generally split with the LECs on one side and the CLECs on the other about what customer service information should be made available to the acquiring local provider. No resolution was reached. Issue 2 (Indication on CSR of termination liability) is supported by a single CLEC and the issue remains unresolved. Issue 3 (Time frame for providing circuit ID information), and Issue 4 (Reducing time for returning a confirmation from 2 to 1 day one year for CLECs after rule becomes effective) were closed with an agreement that the circuit ID should be provided at the same time as the customer service record.

The next meeting of the Forum will be a teleconference scheduled for Monday, December 15, 2003 at 1:00 to 2:30 p.m. The purpose of the teleconference will be to discuss how to proceed with a draft rule on End User Migration (Topic PO-1).

October 9, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum
10/9/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Updates were provided on several Topics.

Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates) was the first item discussed. Stan Greer with BellSouth indicated that the original plan developed was too costly and a less expensive approach is being developed by Bell.

On Topic B-3 (EMI records show local as access), ITC DeltaCom indicated that BellSouth was going to be taking the lead at OBF to attempt to find a solution.

Topic O-12 (LCSC E-mail process for manual order notices) is an issue in terms of how orders are responded to; the ALECs generally prefer that fax orders be responded to by fax and E-mail orders by E-mail. BellSouth indicated that a software fix (Release 17) would address this issue in August, 2004 and that in the meantime, beginning January, 2004, jeopardy notices would be posted on the BellSouth Web site.

In regard to Topic P-3 (10 digit translations), BellSouth indicated that it would provide a schedule for rolling this into an OSS project.

Topic P-4 (Number reassignments) was closed at the August 28, 2003 meeting but Sharon Norris indicated she would check with Denise Bergen to see if she could determine how this issue was resolved; Sharon will report back to the next meeting.

On Topic PO-2 (Pending facilities), BellSouth is working on an abbreviated categorization system for identifying the work needed when an order shows that facilities are pending. Stan Greer indicated that this issue may be impacted by the Triennial Review Order at the FCC.

Topic UNE-4 (Terminology between Resale & UNE-P) was closed. This issue has resolved itself at a business level over time.

Open issues on Topic PO-1 (End user migration) were discussed at length. Discussion on Issue 1 (ILEC provision of CSR information for CLEC customers) centered on legal implications of CPNI and Florida statutory confidentiality provisions as well as differentiating between customers being provided service by resale/UNE-P versus facilities. On Issue 2 (Indication on CSR of termination liability), there was discussion on whether a simple yes/no flag could be on the record or whether information about the termination date and charges could be included. Also discussed was whether information could be provided on a Web site rather than the CSR. Another option discussed was to just provide the contract information on customer (or carrier) request. On Issue 3 (Provision of circuit ID information), participants discussed differentiating between resale/UNE-P and facilities-based customers. A need was identified for making clear that this issue deals only with voice grade service. AT&T will review its position on this issue to see if it continues to want to pursue it. A subissue was proposed by Network Telephone to clarify how to deal with situations where more than one telephone service is being provided over a single line. Discussion on Issue 4 (Reduce time for returning a confirmation from 2 to 1 day one year for CLECs after rule becomes effective) dealt with the need to develop a rule requirement for CLECs in line with the Metrics requirements for the LECs, recognizing that each LEC's Metric requirement is different. Topic PO-1 will be discussed further at the next meeting of the Forum. For the next meeting of the Forum, participants are to review the Open Issues list for Topic PO-1as well as the rule itself and provide updated comments on both to Richard Tudor by November 13, 2004.

The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for Thursday, November 20, 2003 at 10:30 a.m. Updates are to be provided at the meeting on the above Topics with the majority of discussion on Topic PO-2 (End user migration).

August 28, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

08/28/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Updates were provided on the following Topics.

Topic B-4 (Line loss notification process) was initiated by both Allegiance and WorldCom. At the July 17, 2003 meeting, Allegiance indicated that the issue could be closed. At the August 28 meeting, WorldCom also indicated that this was no longer an issue for them and could be closed.

Topic EEL-3 (Credits for EEL conversions) has not yet been addressed by the Forum; this Topic may be impacted by the FCC's Triennial Review.

In regard to Topic P-3 (10 digit translations), BellSouth indicated that this issue did not have a quick fix and would look into the possibility of developing a project on this topic.

Topic P-4 (Number reassignments) was closed at the August 28, 2003 meeting but Sharon Norris indicated she would check with Denise Berger to see if she could determine how this issue was resolved; Sharon will report back to the next meeting.

Discussion on Topic PO-1 (End user migration) was led by David Christian with Verizon. He discussed how the industry team had worked to develop a draft rule and provided a list of open issues that had not yet been resolved. The draft rule and open issues were briefly discussed and Forum participants are to file comments by September 29 with Richard Tudor on their positions on the open issues.

The next meeting for the Forum was set for October 9, 2003 at 10:30 am. At that meeting there will be brief updates on other open Topics with the majority of the meeting spent on discussion of Topic PO-2 - End User Migration.

July 17, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

07/17/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Discussion began with a review of some of the Topics to determine some priority for addressing them with the determination made as follows:

Topic B-4 (Line loss notification process) - Allegiance indicated it could be closed but MCI will report back at a future meeting on its position.

Topic DSL-2 (ADSL product availability) - FDN indicated it should be left open.

Topic EEL-3 (Credits for EEL conversions) - XO is to check for examples and report back at the August Forum meeting.

Topic O-9 (Line sharing ordered via LENS) - Covad indicated it could be closed.

Topic O-8 (Line sharing ordering and provisioning) - left open.

Topic P-4 (Number reassignments) - left open; issue to be discussed at the August meeting.

Topic O-7 (Single customer interface) - closed.

Topic P-6 (Lack of provisioning parity for loops) - left open.

Topic P-8 (Customers served via remote facilities) - left open.

Topic R-5 (Provisioning of unbundled copper loop - nondesign) - left open.

Topic R-6 (Sunset Tester) - left open.

Topic DSL-4 (Cooperative testing on IDSL and ISDN loops) - left open.

Topic UNE-3 (Move orders for UNE-P sent manually) - closed.

Topic UNE-4 (Terminology confusion between resale and UNE-P) - left open.

Topic DSL-5 (Assignment of DSL lines to billing telephone number) - closed.

Topic MGT-2 (Performance measures for complex orders) - left open.

On Topic O-12 (LCSC email process for manual orders) - Stan Greer with BellSouth indicated that this would be addressed in a future software release and he will update the Forum on a schedule at the September meeting.

On Topic B-1 (Delays in billing new contract rates) - BellSouth indicated it was planning for resolving by the end of 2003 and would report back at the September meeting.

On Topic PO-1 (End user migration) - Sharon Norris with AT&T reported on the progress of the team working on developing a proposed rule. Several meetings have been held and Sharon identified some of the outstanding issues still to be resolved. The team plans to bring a draft of the rule to the August meeting.

On Topic O-10 (Single point of contact for LENS problems), Allegiance will discuss at the September meeting.

Topic B-3 (EMI records show local as access) will also be discussed at the September meeting.

On Topic PO-2 (Pending facilities), BellSouth will explore how it might be able to provide more detailed information on the type of facilities or construction needed to complete an order and will report back at the September meeting.

On Topic P-3 (10 digit translations) - Stan Greer indicated that no quick fix could be identified and this would have to be addressed as a major project. It was unclear whether this project should go through the change control process or not. Stan will report back at the August meeting.

There was discussion of whether the telecommunications bill passed by the 2003 Florida legislature would impact any of the Forum's Topic. Since the legislation dealt with retail issues, it did not appear that there would be any impact by the legislation on the Forum's Topics.

The next meeting was scheduled for August 28, 2003 at 10:30 am. Major item of discussion will be Topic PO-1 with updates on Topics B-4, EEL-3, P-4, and P-3.

May 22, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

05/22/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Topic PO-2 (Pending facilities) was the first item discussed. Participants agreed there was no specific definition of "construction" and requested that the LECs see if at least some general statement of what type of construction is needed on an order could be provided.

In regard to Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), BellSouth indicated that the goal was to implement expedited procedures by the end of 2003 and BellSouth would report on progress every two months until implemented.

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 next call of the work group was set for May 30 and that legal staff would also be discussing how to best present a draft rule to the Commission.

On Topic O-10 (Single point of contact for LENS problems), Allegiance indicated that it was looking at what product offerings it would like to see have a better description for ordering through LENS. Allegiance continues to believe that the additional description can be accomplished through hyperlinks to product guides and will update the Forum at its next meeting as to what products should have hyperlinks.

On Topic B-3 (EMI records show local as access), BellSouth and ITC indicated they did not have any new information but that Bell was working on a possible approach to present to the OBF.

On Topic O-12 (LCSC E-mail process for manual order notices), BellSouth indicated it did not yet have a time frame for making a change but would report back at the June Forum.

The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for July 17, 2003 at 10:30 a.m. In addition to updates on outstanding issues, the Forum will discuss priorities of all outstanding issues.

April 23, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

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.

March 19, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

03/19/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Topic P-3 (10 digit translations) was the first item discussed. Participants indicated that how 10 digit triggers are set may vary between switch types. BellSouth will check each of its switch types to see if there is a difference. XO is to check and see if it is still having problems.

In regard to Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), BellSouth indicated that it was in the process of finalizing a funding source for its project. At the next meeting, it will report back on a time frame for the mechanization process. In regard to the idea that there are a large number of USOCs added after a product is introduced, Stan indicated that in some cases carriers ask for additional features after a product is introduced and those new features are given a USOC.

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 March 13 and they were looking at processes in Texas and New Hampshire. He will continue reporting back at future meetings.

On Topic O-4 (Mechanized order capability) Stan Greer corrected a previous statement and indicated that orders do not fall out of the automatic process because of jack issues. He also indicated that there was a low number of UNE T-1 orders that might be affected by this. Covad is to report back at a future meeting on what activity there is on this issue in the Line Sharing Forum.

Topic EEL-1 (EELs) involves two areas. In regard to the conversion of EELs, the Forum agreed that the parties are at an impasse on this issue. In regard to EEL audits, it was agreed that the Forum should wait until after the FCC triennial order before proceeding further on this issue in the Forum.

Topics EEL-2 (Maintenance and repair at equity for EELs and access circuits) was determined to be at impasse.

On Topic PO-2 (Pending facilities), BellSouth indicated that it was continuing to review specific examples provided by ITC from the December and January time periods; ITC indicated that the problem appears to have diminished. In addition, BellSouth was continuing to check examples from XO. BellSouth was asked to provide at the April meeting an understanding of what was included in the term "construction needed".

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 package. Allegiance indicated that there was information missing on the Web site that was needed for ordering. BellSouth will review the Web site information and discuss at the April meeting.

On Topic B-3 (EMI records show local as access), BellSouth and ITC indicated that their subject matter experts were continuing to work together on this issue and they would report back at the April meeting.

Topic O-12 (LCSC E-mail process for manual order notices) is an issue in terms of how orders are responded to; the ALECs generally prefer that fax orders be responded to by fax and E-mail orders by E-mail. BellSouth will work with Covad to identify examples of the concern.

Topic O-6 (Problem with removal of local freezes) was closed because Allegiance indicated it was no longer having problems in this area.

Topic R-1 (Extended outages) was closed; BellSouth and KMC are at impasse on this issue. BellSouth is unable to identify a pattern that might cause problems of defective facilities or repeat troubles and indicates that the problems for the ALECs are no worse than for their own retail operations.

Topic R-2 (Escalation procedure for after-hours repairs) was left open awaiting input from KMC as to any recent specific examples of problems in this area. The Topic will be left open for further discussion before closing.

The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for April 23, 2003 at 10:30 a.m.

Feburary 26, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum
02/26/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. The first item discussed was Topic EEL-1 (Conversion of special access circuits to EELs). This topic deals with whether LECs are required to convert special access circuits to EELs; if so, this would have to be done at TELRIC pricing. BellSouth contends that they are not required to provide this service and therefore, it can provide it but at market pricing levels. AT&T expressed a concern that the change is treated as two separate orders even though the same facility is used and, as a result, there may be a period of time out of service for the customer. This issue is a topic in a Florida DeltaCom arbitration case and is a topic in an Alabama case. This issue may also be impacted by the FCC's triennial order. The issue is currently at impasse before the Forum.

A second aspect of Topic EEL-1 relates to concerns of excessive BellSouth auditing of ALECs. PSC staff agreed to discuss this topic offline with XO.

Topic EEL-2 (Maintenance and Repair at Parity for EELS and Special Circuits). Bell indicated that the level of service for EELs was like that for retail service but that there was no benchmark for Special Access. However, a benchmark is being considered in the Commission's 6 month performance reviews.

Regarding Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), BellSouth indicated that is was still working on the contract with the vendor that will be doing the work.

On Topic PO-1 (End User Migration Process), David Christian with Verizon gave an update of the working group's progress and indicated they would meet again on March 5. David handed out a current working draft of the rule.

Stan Greer with BellSouth provided an update on Topic O-4 (Mechanization of Ordering for New Products). He indicated that for the UNE-T1 product some orders would fall out of the mechanical process because of an issue relating to the jack. In the change control process (CR 0813), a work-around solution is being developed. Bell will bring back to a later meeting a proposed time frame for the C.P. change.

On Topic PO-2 (Pending Facilities), Stan Greer reviewed examples provided by DeltaCom. He also indicated that he would check on examples of concern provided by XO. He also indicated that he would check on when in the process BellSouth checks to see if facilities are available; there may be a different answer for POTS service and high capacity service. Cheryl Haynes with Nuvox asked if there was a definition for "new construction" and BellSouth will also check on that.

Topic B-3 (EMI Records Show Local as Access) was initially raised by ITC. BellSouth indicated that this issue had been raised (OBF 1764) before and the decision was made that the problem was resulted in a small number of errors. Therefore, the decision was made to not attempt an expensive change. This matter will be discussed further at a future meeting when ITC is present.

On Topic R-1 (Extended Outages) and Topic R-2 (Escalation Procedures for After-Hours Repairs), Wayne Tubaugh with BellSouth described BellSouth's process for provisioning service. Stan Greer indicated that examples of repeat trouble reports provided by KMC indicated no pattern of problems.

The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on March 19, 2003. Items to be discussed include Topics EEL-1, EEL-2, B-1, PO-1, )-4, PO-2, B-3, R-1, R-2, O-6, O-10, O-12, and P-3.

January 29, 2003 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

01/29/03

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. The first item discussed was Topic O-4 (Mechanized Ordering of New Products). It was confirmed that as of 12/29/02, ordering for UCL-ND (Unbundled Copper Loop - Non-Design) is fully mechanized. In regard to UNE-T1, Stan Greer is to provide an update on mechanization. Concerning ULM (Unbundled Loop Modification), there was discussion about the possibility of BellSouth automatically conditioning loops. BellSouth suggested that the line-sharing forum might be a good place to raise this issue on ULM; Covad indicate that it might be possible to develop a work-around solution in the forum. Covad expressed concern about BellSouth not pushing mechanization of ordering of a product up front.

Topic EEL-1 (Conversion of special access circuits to EELs) was discussed next. XO indicated they would have a conference call the following week on this issue. XO and BellSouth will report back at the next meeting.

Topic EEL-2 (Maintenance and Repair at Parity for EELS and Special Circuits) was discussed and BellSouth is going to check to see if there are different levels of service provided and will report back to the Forum.

Regarding Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), BellSouth indicated that funding for modifying the process was approved by its management. There was some question about whether the proposed time frame was 17 calendar days or business days. BellSouth will check on that and also on an implementation date.

On Topic R-1 (Extended Outages), BellSouth indicated that it has had discussions with KMC on this topic and agreed to make a presentation at the next meeting on how defective circuits are identified and treated.

Topic R-2 (Escalation Procedures for After-Hours Repairs) was discussed. BellSouth agreed that as a part of its presentation on Topic R-1 at the next meeting that it would include Topic R-2 as a part of that presentation.

Topics DSL-1 ("No trouble found" Repair Reports) was closed after a discussion by Sprint of how its system now works. KMC and Sprint plan to meet on the following week (2/19/03) and will discuss this further then. However, the Forum agreed that DSL-1 could be closed with any remaining matters covered in Topics R-1.

On Topic PO-1 (End User Migration Process) David Christian indicated that four conference calls had been held and that the work group was taking the document that had been developed based on a similar New York document and was being reduced in size to something that could be incorporated into the Florida PSC rules. David will provide another progress report at the February FCTF meeting.

Next discussed was Topic O-3 (Access to Pending Service Order Requests). ITC indicated that this request had been escalated in the change control process and had been rejected. There was discussion about the options of pursuing this issue at the FPSC as a declaratory ruling request or some other approach. It was also suggested that even if the receiving ALEC could not cancel the pending service order, it might be helpful if the ALEC could at least know with whom the order is pending. The Forum agreed that this matter was at impasse and the Topic was closed at the Forum level.

Topic B-3 (EMI Records Show Local as Access) was discussed and it was indicated that BellSouth and ITC were still holding off-line discussions on this Topic.

On Topic PO-2 (Pending Facilities) ITC provided some examples reflecting its concern; BellSouth will report back on its review of those examples.

The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on February 26, 2003.

December 11, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

12/11/02

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. Verizon provided an update on the group working on Topic PO-1 (End User Migration). Subgroups have been established to review various provision of the New York order on this topic and those groups are currently meeting and plan to provide a status report to the Forum in February or March.

Topic EEL-1 (Conversion of special access circuits to EELs) was discussed next. BellSouth indicated that audits to determine the amount of local traffic were done after a conversion occurred and that one-third of carriers have audits in progress. BellSouth is to provide the web address for criteria for the spreadsheet used to order conversions of 15 or more circuits. XO is to contact BellSouth to discuss current problems associated with this topic.

Regarding Topic B-1 (Delays for billing new contract rates), BellSouth indicated that funding for modifying the process would be reviewed by BellSouth management on December 18. Status will be updated at the January Forum meeting.

On Topic O-4 (Mechanized ordering of products), it was decided to leave this topic open with BellSouth and Covad getting together to determine if there was an impasse on this issue.

Topic DSL-1 ("No trouble found" Repair Reports) was discussed. It is possible that what is left to be discussed in this issue can be addressed as a part of Topic R-1. Parties are going to review the issue to see if this one can be closed. Prior to the meeting, Network Telephone had already indicated that it was not experiencing the problem currently. Concern was expressed that Sprint did not contact ALEC for agreement that the trouble no longer existed before it is closed; Sprint is going to check on its policy of concurrence with the ALEC before closing a trouble report.

Regarding Topic P-1 (E911 Tandem to End Office Homing), ITC DeltaCom indicated in a 12/10/02 E-mail that it had worked out a process with BellSouth to obtain needed routing information from BellSouth on a per NPA-NXX, per request basis. The Topic was closed.

On Topic R-1 (Extended Outages), BellSouth indicated that it had met with KMC the day before and was meeting again on December 16 to discuss example trouble reports. Parties will report back at a later meeting.

Topic R-2 (Escalation Procedures for After-Hours Repairs) was discussed. BellSouth distributed Web pages from its Web site which deal with its escalation process. KMC expressed concerns that sometimes the person that would handle a repair under the escalation process may not always be available. BellSouth and KMC plan to meet on December 16 to discuss further and will report back at a future meeting.

On December 9, 2002, AT&T indicated in an E-mail that it was not currently experiencing problems with Topic UNE-1 (Provisioning and Repair Conflicts on New Service) and recommended that the Topic be closed. At the Forum, BellSouth indicated they now had an 800# that could be called to resolve any such conflicts between provisioning and repair.

Following up on the November Forum meeting discussion on Topic O-3 (Pending Service Orders), it was decided that a determination would be made as to whether ITC had escalated this issue in the change control process and, if so, what action was taken there. An update on this matter will be provided at the January Forum.

The next meeting of the Forum was scheduled for January 29, 2003 at 10:30 a.m.

November 6, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

11/06/02

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. The first issue discussed was O-3 which deals with the ALEC ability to be aware of service orders pending at the customer's current telephone provider when that customer wants to transfer to an ALEC. There were concerns about whether the pending order should be viewable as well as whether any pending service order could be deleted. There was discussion of changes pending in the change control process that might alleviate or resolve the issue. However, concerns included whether the ALEC would be able to see enough detail about the pending service order and when any changes in the ordering system would occur. Discussion also dealt with the issue of whether the pending service order information should be accessible to another company or whether it was customer proprietary information that should be kept confidential. The discussion ended with a suggestion that the change control option CR127 should be further pursued with a request that the proposed change be expedited from its current anticipated implementation date of June 2003.

Topic B-1 which deals with delays in billing new contract rates was discussed next. There are two time periods involved in implementing new contract rates. The first period is the time between a Commission decision and submitting a proposed contract change to the ALEC; the second period is from the date of signature until implementation. BellSouth indicated that

it planned to have a proposal on how to shorten that time frame and the cost of making those changes ready to propose internally by the end of the year. Updates on that effort will be provided at a future meeting.

Topic PO-1 deals with end-user migration of individual customers from an ALEC to another ALEC or to a LEC. Verizon will coordinate development of a team of subject matter experts to analyze this issue and bring back a report at a future meeting.

Topic MGT-1 deals with mass migration of customers after a local company goes out of business. There is a separate Commission staff workshop planned on disconnection of service rules and it was agreed that this topic would be better addressed there than in the Forum.

On Topic B-2 (Self-help), BellSouth provided its written position on the subject of Self-help and Topic B-2 was closed.

Regarding Topics MKT-1 (Win back) and MKT-2 (Marketing practices), it was reported that there had been no action on this topic (code of conduct) in Georgia and that this matter may be addressed in the Florida Commission's Key Customer Tariff promotion docket.

On Topic O-2, AT&T reported that changes to the change control process had been made by BellSouth based on a decision by the Georgia Commission. The topic will remain in monitor status.

On Topic O-4 (mechanized ordering of new products), BellSouth agreed to check with Covad on how the Forum could proceed on this topic.

The meeting was closed with a discussion of topics needing to be addressed next. The next meeting was scheduled for 10:30 a.m. on December 11, 2002.

October 9, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

10/9/02

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. The first item of discussion was a matter involving BellSouth and XO in the area of self-help. The two companies are going to pursue this between themselves in an attempt to resolve without needing to be discussed at the Forum.

The meeting was primarily devoted to a discussion of the Mass Migration document which Verizon had drafted based on a document that was being used to deal with discontinuance of service in New York. There was considerable discussion of the document and issues relating to discontinuance of service (Forum Topic MGT-1). While there was not consensus on how the document should read, Verizon agreed to make a presentation at the FPSC staff rule workshop on discontinuance of service scheduled for October 16, 2002 based on discussions at the Forum meeting. Verizon agreed to redraft the document and recirculate it by the following Friday. Forum participants were invited to participate in the FPSC staff rule workshop on October 16, 2002.

The next meeting of the Forum was tentatively set for November 6, 2002.

August 21, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

8/21/02

The meeting began at 10:30 a.m. with discussion of a briefing to update the Commissioners on the activities of the Forum. The briefing would take place at an Internal Affairs meeting. There was discussion on what form the presentation would take and whether companies would like to make presentations. Agreement was reached that the FPSC staff should prepare a brief written summary of Forum activities and then companies could make oral presentations if they chose to do so.

Topics PO-1 (End User Migration Process) and MGT-1 (ALEC Exit Strategy) were discussed simultaneously. Documents that were prepared by Verizon based on materials from New York served as the focus for discussion of the topics. Recognizing that an undocketed rule workshop on similar issues was scheduled by Florida PSC staff for October 16, 2002, the decision was made to prepare something based on the Verizon materials for discussion at the rule workshop. David Christian with Verizon agreed to coordinate a subgroup to modify the Verizon materials based on comments from the Forum participants and then to use those modified documents as a resource for the PSC staff rule workshop. There was some discussion of major areas of concern with the materials and David asked that Forum participants submit to him their comments by September 20, 2002. He would then work with a subgroup to prepare something for the October 16 workshop. He asked that along with comments on the document, the Forum participants provide the name of a person who would work on the subgroup.

In regard to topics MKT-1 (Winback campaign) and MKT-2 (Marketing Practices) , BellSouth reported that an ALEC representative was currently reviewing a Code of Conduct paper that had been presented in Georgia. That paper deals with marketing issues such as not disparaging a competitor to a customer. When that has been finalized, BellSouth will distribute copies to the commission staff.

Concerning Topic B-2 (Self-help), BellSouth indicated that the FCC had suspended its proposed tariff on deposits.

Concerning Topic B-1 (Delays Billing New Contract Rates), Stan Greer with BellSouth indicated that he would provide a status report on how BellSouth is dealing with that topic. On Topic O-2 (Change Control) parties filed comments on that in Georgia in July; next step is a staff recommendation there.

Participants discussed planning for two upcoming meetings. The first would be around September 18 to receive updates on several pending Topics and the other will be in October prior to the FPSC staff workshop on the customer migration rule.

July 18, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Topics Forum

7/18/02

The Forum utilized the Active Issues List, Issues Status at a Glance Document and the Tracking Tool for specific issues dated July 12, 2002 to guide discussion for the meeting. It was noted that Issue B-5 relating to Double Billing would be closed for now since there had been no recent experience with that problem.

The first item discussed was Issue B-1 which relates to Delays For Billing New Contract Rates . BellSouth representative Chris Boltz discussed reasons why BellSouth will not begin billing rates under new agreements any sooner than 30 days from execution of a new agreement. She indicated that there had been several major UNE orders in BellSouth's area recently and that there had been a lot of agreements and amendments and this workload prevented BellSouth from implementing new rates in a shorter timeframe. There was discussion concerning the possibility of true-ups and the steps involved in going from a Commission vote on changes to the point where the agreement's rates start to be billed. BellSouth indicated that it was looking into possible changes and would report back on: (a) the possibility of implementing rates and then making subsequent true-ups, (b) the timeframe between a Commission order and the submission of a proposed agreement to an ALEC (Step 1), (c) the timeframe between the execution (signing) of an agreement and the effective date of the new agreement (Step2), (d) contract language setting out the 30 day implementation timeframe, and (e) the name of and members of the BellSouth team looking at this issue.

In discussing Issue MGT-1 which deals with ALEC Exit Strategy (mass migration) and PO-1 which deals with an End User Migration Process , representatives of Verizon described three documents. Two of the documents were primarily New York Commission documents that Verizon modified to reflect Florida language - (a) Mass Migration Guidelines and (b) End User Migration Guidelines. The third document was a copy of FCC Rule No. 64.1120(e) which deals with transfer of a customer base from one carrier to another. FPSC staff mentioned that staff was in the process of drafting a rule dealing with situations where a company exits the market. The two modified NY documents presented by Verizon will be discussed by Forum participants at the next Forum meeting. Participants are to review and identify major issues in the documents.

In regard to Issues MKT-1 Winback Campaigns and MKT-2 Marketing Practices, BellSouth reported that the Georgia PSC was releasing a draft code of conduct within the next week.

Discussions on Issue B-2 Self-Help included discussions of requests for deposits and the correct definition for Self-Help.

Issues O-1 PMAP Data Integrity, O-2 CCP Release Packaging, and O-3 Access to Pending Service Order Requests are to remain in monitor status.

In regard to Issue R-1 Extended Outages, there was discussion concerning the resolution of specific instances of outages versus systemic causes for extended outages and how to prevent those in the future. Representatives of BellSouth and KMC will discuss off-line.

The next meeting for the Forum was tentatively set for August 21, 2002 at 10:30 am. Likely matters for discussion at that meeting will include Issues O-4, PO-1 and MGT-1, B-1, MKT-1 and MKT-2 including the Georgia code of conduct and BellSouth contract language concerning deposits.

June 18, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Telephone Competitive Topics Forum

6/18/02

The meeting opened at 10:30 a.m. Richard Tudor asked the Process Committee for an update.

Michelle Robinson of Verizon explained minor changes made to the Expedited Resolution Process and that there had been further discussion regarding "Buy In". She said they had met with the PSC General Counsel and that he had three questions:

  • Can the prehearing officer deny a motion to dismiss - so that it would not need to go to agenda?
  • Can the process for day 21 be clarified?
  • Is too much time allowed for interveners to file testimony?

Martha Brown asked if staff would file any testimony at the same time as the interveners. Michelle said she thought that would be a good time if staff were to file testimony.

Richard Tudor asked for clarification of day 21, where both Motion to Dismiss and Answer to the complaint were to be filed the same day. Tracy Hatch stated that the Answer should be filed whether there was a Motion to Dismiss or not.

It was agreed that in Day 1 of the Docket Schedule, the line: "Copy served by hand, electronically or by fax to parties and staff, as well as all parties requesting notice pursuant to the collaborative process." should be revised to something like: "Copy served by hand, electronically or by fax to parties and staff, and as a matter of courtesy, Commission staff will notify Collaborative participants on the e-mail list".

Regarding Day 48, it was agreed this provision should additionally state that the Prehearing Officer has the discretion to deny a Motion to Dismiss without going to Agenda.

Regarding Day 71, Prehearing Statements, it was agreed that this could be moved closer to Day 101, Prehearing Conference - say to Day 90.

Regarding Day 115 it is stated that: "The hearing will be recessed for a period of time announced from the bench during which time staff will meet to craft an oral recommendation." It was discussed that the Commissioners might want something in writing as well, either briefs or a recommendation. It is also stated that: "Hearing is reconvened for presentation of oral recommendation and bench decision." It was felt that "possible bench decision" might be better. Greg Shafer suggested to leave it as it is.

In the document "Florida Collaborative Process Team Ideas", under II. Options if Issue Resolved, Item B, Martha suggested that this could be shown on the P.C. website.

Jay Bradbury, of AT&T suggested that a point e) be added under IV. Website regarding linkage to ILEC websites of any CLEC notification letters.

There was discussion regarding clarification on when impasse is reached. It was decided that the team should go back and talk about possible ways to define the term.

The team will revise the document and get together with Beth Keating and Beth Salak to get their input and then present it to the Chairman at a Collaborative meeting especially for that purpose.

Stan Greer of BellSouth explained the Issues Tables done by the Issues Committee. Once understood, all agreed that the system used was good and thanked the Issues Committee for their hard work.

Discussion began as to which issues should be discussed at the next meeting. The following was decided:

Issues In Monitor Status. Status updates will be furnished by the following:

  • 94, 79 - ITC
  • 22 - Jay Bradbury
  • 58/64/64A/60/61/172/14/13-A, B, C, D/178/185 Nancy Sims (related to current activity in Georgia)
Specific examples to be provided:
  • 4 - By Allegiance
Issues to be discussed at the next meeting:
  • 7 - Up for discussion
  • 5 - Up for discussion. Stan Greer will draft his understanding of "Self Help"
  • 24- Up for discussion. Stan Greer wants specifics.
The next meeting is to be held on July 18 (or July 17 as an alternative), 2002 at 10:30 a.m.

May 16, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items (PDF file size = 8KB)

April 24, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items (PDF file size = 9KB)

February 28, 2002 Meeting Summary & Action Items (PDF file size = 7KB)

Commitments and Action Items from 11/15/01 Competitive Issues Forum(PDF file size = 7KB)

October 9, 2001 Meeting Summary & Action Items

Competitive Interests Forum
October 9, 2001
Meeting Summary

The Competitive Interests Forum met on October 9, 2001, from 10:00 AM until 4:00 PM. The meeting was the first to address substantive subjects, and it was well-attended. Previous meetings were held on August 28, September 11, and September 25 to establish procedures and develop a list of topics for discussion. At the October 9 meeting, BellSouth, Verizon and Sprint provided presentations on their billing, billing dispute and collection processes, with other participants asking questions and describing problems encountered. At the participants' suggestion BellSouth agreed to include the Web site location for submitting billing dispute forms on the form itself. The participants also agreed that another session on billing would be necessary to provide responses to the action items listed below and to explore resolution of the problems raised. On procedure, the participants agreed that action items should be recorded as they were identified during the course of discussions, future Forum sessions should be scheduled as far in advance as possible, and some topics would probably require two-day sessions. The staff agreed to post Forum information, including a contact list, meeting notes, and schedules of future meetings, on the Commission's Web site as soon as possible.


Action Items from October 9, 2001 Competitive Issues Forum

CLECs - Disputes
  • Provide specific examples of "self help" problems.
  • Provide examples of Channel Termination billing problems, specifically double billing problems.
VERIZON - Billing
  • Explain process of automated "out collection" process for returning DUF.
BELLSOUTH - Collection
  • Aging reports - can access to electronic version be accommodated?
  • Terms of collection - 60 day cycle, what if any accommodations can be made?
Billing
  • Is billing part of change control process?
  • Report to CLECs on "hold file" and other pending bills.
  • Flagging of held orders to ensure migrated customers not SNIPed.
  • Quality Assurance on LSRs & ASRs, what measures are taken to assure accuracy?
Disputes
  • Explain process intervals and/or internal benchmarks - status.
  • Pre-screening standards for rejecting/denying disputes.
  • E-mail address for filing BAR forms.
  • Time frame for updating contract rates in billing system.
  • Evaluate communication between Disputes and Collections groups.
  • Reports management for disputes; # of rejects.
  • Credit or denial - 3rd option - Coordination on collections and disputes.
  • Credits for disputes/where are they accounted for on bill?
  • Usage w/o ANI - why does it happen?

Suggested Topics For Telecommunications Competitive Topics Forum

Contact List

Telecommunications Competitve Interest Forum Participants

Company Name & Title E-Mail Address Mailing Address Telephone Fax

Wiggins, Patrick K. patrick@wiggins.org



Hoffman, Ken ken@reuphlaw.com


Allegiance Telecom, Inc. Buerrose, Bob LEC Account Mgr. Bob.Buerrosse@allegiancetelecom.com
407-464-7076 407-899-5317
Allegiance Telecom, Inc. Morton J. Posner
Regulatory Counsel
morton.posner@algx.com Allegiance Telecom, Inc. 1150 Connecticut Ave., NW
Suite 205
Washington, DC 20036
202-464-6109
202-296-9583
ALLTEL Eudy, Harriet harriet.eudy@alltel.com ALLTEL

ALLTEL Thomas, Stephen stephen.thomas@alltel.com ALLTEL 850-847-4032
ALLTEL Wahlen, Jeff jwahlen@ausley.com ALLTEL

AT&T Endres, Jim endres@att.com


Association of Communications Enterprises (ASCENT) Isar, Andrew Regulatory Consultant aisar@millerisar.com
Website: www.millerisar.com
7901 Skansie Avenue
Suite 240
Gig Harbor, WA 98335
253-851-6700 253-851-6474
AT&T Lamoureux, Jim Senior Attorney - Law and Government Affairs jlamoureux@att.com 1200 Peachtree Street, NE
Suite 8100
Atlanta, GA 30309
404-810-4196 404-877-7648
AT&T Merritt, Rhonda rpmerritt@att.com
850-425-6342
AT&T Mock, Shirley M smock@att.com
850-425-6313
AT&T Riley, Lisa
Docket Manager
lisariley@att.com 1200 Peachtree Street, NE
Suite 8100
Atlanta, GA 30309
404-810-7812 404-877-7648
AugLink Communication & FISPA Pennington, James Sr. jdp@aug.com AugLink Communication & FISPA 904-824-1660
BellSouth Criser, Marshal marshall.criser@bellsouth.com BellSouth

BellSouth Follensbee, Greg greg.follensbee@bellsouth.com BellSouth 404-927-7198
BellSouth Garvin, Margaret User Group Director margaret.garvin@bridge.bellsouth.com BellSouth 770-936-3750
BellSouth Greer, Stan stan.greer@bellsouth.com BellSouth 850-224-5139
BellSouth
Morton, Claude claude.p.morton@bridge.bellsouth.com BellSouth 205-977-0157
BellSouth Sims, Nancy nancy.sims@bellsouth.com BellSouth

COVAD Communications Allen, Tom Vice President
ILEC Relations
tallen@covad.com
Mobile
678-984-2417

COVAD Communications Boone, Cathy
Senior counsel
cboone@covad.com
678-222-3466
Cell:
678-984-0219
678-320-0004
COVAD Communications Davis, Colette
Director
ILEC Relations
codavis@covad.com
770-998-2112
Mobile:
404-734-7982

espire Horton, Doc nhorton@lawfla.com


FCTA Gross, Michael A. mgross@fcta.com


Florida Digital Feil, Matthew mfeil@floridadigital.net

Greenberg Traurig Law Firm/Terremark Worldwide/FISPA Gallagher, Laura gallagherl@gtlaw.com
850-425-8554
ITC^DeltaCom Edwards, Nanette Nedwards@itcdeltacom.com ITC^DeltaCom
4092 S. Memorial Parkway
Huntsville, AL 35802


ITC^DeltaCom Wooten, Leigh Ann
Regulatory Manager
Lwooten@itcdeltacom.com ITC^DeltaCom
4092 S. Memorial Parkway
Huntsville, AL 35802
256-382-7090 256-382-3969
Katz, Kutter, Haigler, Alderman, Bryant & Yon, P.A. Pellegrini, Charles J. cjpellegrini@katzlaw.com Katz, Kutter, Haigler, Alderman, Bryant & Yon, P.A.
106 E. College Avenue, 12th Fl.
Tallahassee, Florida 32301
850-577-6755 850-224-0402
Kean Miller Polozola, Gordon gordon.polozola@keanmiller.com


KFWGroup Gold, Heather hgold@thekdwgroup.com


KMC Telecom McLaughlin, John jmclau@kmctelecom.com
678-985-6262
Cell:
770-331-9400
678-985-6213-
KMR Law/BellSouth Marks, John JohnM@KMRLaw.com


McWhirter Reeves - FCCA/XO Florida, Inc./KMC Telecommunications Kaufman, Vicki Gordon vkaufman@mac-law.com
850-222-2525 850-222-5606
My Florida Mason, Carolyn carolyn.mason@myflorida.com

Network Telephone Corp. Kopytchak, Kyle kyle.kopytchak@networktelephone.com Network Telephone Corp. 850-469-9904 Ext. 1250
Network Telephone Corp. McMahan, Brent
Vice President - Regulatory & Governmental Affairs
Brent.McMahan@networktelephone.net Network Telephone Corp.
815 S. Palafox St.
Pensacola, FL 32501
850-465-1744 850-432-0218
Network Telephone Corp. Nelson, Wendell wendell.nelson@networktelephone.net Network Telephone Corp. 850-465.1711
Network Telephone Corp. Ring, Margaret Margaret.Ring@networktelephone.net Network Telephone Corp.
815 S. Palafox St.
Pensacola, FL 32501


New South Reese, Lori lreese@newsouth.com


Nuvox Russell, Bo brussell@nuvox.com


PSC Brown, Martha Associate General Counsel mbrown@psc.state.fl.us Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
850-413-6187 850-413-6188
PSC Butler, Melinda
Assistant to
Chairman Jacobs
mbutler@psc.state.fl.us Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
850-413-6034 850-413-6035
PSC Shafer, Greg
Chief, Policy Analysis
gshafer@psc.state.fl.us Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
850-413-6958 850-413-6959
PSC Tudor, Richard
Assistant Director - Economic Regulation
rtudor@psc.state.fl.us Florida Public Service Commission
2540 Shumard Oak Blvd.
Tallahassee, FL 32399
850-413-6516 850-413-6517
Sprint Masterton, Susan susan.masterton@mail.sprint.com


Sprint Poag, Ben ben.poag@mail.sprint.com
850-599-1027
Sprint Rehwinkel, Charles charles.j.rehwinkel@mail.sprint.com
850-847-0244
Supra Telecom Audu, Johathan jonathan.audu@stis.com Supra Telecom 850-402-0510
Supra Telecom Shelfer, Ann ashelfer@stis.com


Talk America McComb, Frances francie@talk.com


Talk America Thomas, Sharon sthomas@talk.com
407-313-1353
Time Warner Telecom of FL Camechis, Karen karen@penningtonlawfirm.com
850-222-3533
Time Warner Telecom of FL Dafoe, Rachelle rachelle-dafoe@twtelecom.com Time Warner Telecom of FL 303-871-8153
Time Warner Telecom of FL Marek, Carolyn carolyn.marek@TWTelecom.com


Verizon Caswell, Kim kimberly.caswell@verizon.com
813-483-2617
Verizon Christian, David david.christian@verizon.com
850-224-3963
Verizon Robinson, Michelle michelle.robinson@verizon.com
813-483-2526
WorldCom Hanley, Zenell
Executive Secretary
Law & Public Policy
zenell.hanley@wcom.com WorldCom
6 Concourse Parkway, Ste 3200
Atlanta, GA 30328


WorldCom Lichtenberg, Sherry sherry.lichtenberg@wcom.com
703-341-6597
Pager:
888-266-9278

WorldCom McNulty, Donna donna.mcnulty@wcom.com
850-422-1254
WorldCom Melson, Rick rmelson@hgss.com


WorldCom Sulmonetti, Brian brian.sulmonetti@wcom.com WorldCom
6 Concourse Parkway, Ste 3200
Atlanta, GA 30328


XO Espinoza, Cheryl cheryl.a.espinoza@xo.com


XO Shaffer, Dana dana.shaffer@xo.com


Z-Tel Communications, Inc Jones, Jackie jjones@Z-TEL.com
813-233-4738
Z-Tel Communications, Inc Rubino, Peggy D
Regional Vice-President Industry Policy
Prubino@Z-TEL.com
813-233-4628