2 1 5S .WA S H I N G T O N SQ U A R E,SU I T E 2 0 0 LA N S I N G,MI C H I G A N 4 8 9 3 3 - 1 8 1 6 TE L E P H O N E: ( 5 1 7 )3 7 1 - 1 7 3 0 FA C S I M I L E: ( 5 1 7 )4 8 7 - 4 7 0 0 h t t p : / / w w w . d i c k i n s o n - w r i g h t . c o m JO H N M .DE M P S E Y j d e m p s e y @ d i c k i n s o n w r i g h t . c o m
February 18, 2003
C o u n s e l l o r s A t L a w DE T R O I T BL O O M F I E L D HI L L S LA N S I N G GR A N D RA P I D S AN N AR B O R WA S H I N G T O N, D . C .Via Hand Delivery
Ms. Dorothy Wideman
Executive Secretary
Michigan Public Service Commission
6545 Mercantile Way
Lansing, MI 48911
Re:
Ameritech Michigan's submission on performance
measurements, benchmarks, and reporting on compliance
with the October 2, 1998 Order in MPSC Case No. U-11654
Case No. U-11830
Dear Ms. Wideman:
Enclosed for filing regarding the above-captioned matter please find the original and 15
copies of the
Amendment to Joint Motion
and
Proof of Service
.
I am authorized to represent that XO Michigan does not object to the relief requested.
If you should have any questions, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
John M. Dempsey
JMD/mds
Enclosures
STATE OF MICHIGAN
BEFORE THE MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
Ameritech Michigan’s submission on performance )
measurements, benchmarks, and reporting in
)
compliance with the October 2, 1998 Order in
)
Case No. U-11830
MPSC Case No. U-11654.
)
)
AMENDMENT TO JOINT MOTION
Michigan Bell Telephone Company d/b/a SBC Ameritech Michigan (“SBC”), the CLEC
participants,
1the Michigan Attorney General (“AG”), and the Michigan Public Service
Commission Staff (“Staff”), (collectively, the “Parties”) jointly submit this Amendment to their
Joint Motion For Expedited Amendment of Prior Orders ("Joint Motion") filed in this docket on
January 17, 2003. That Joint Motion asked the Michigan Public Service Commission (“MPSC”)
to amend its Prior Orders issued
2in this proceeding to reflect and implement the modifications,
additions, and deletions regarding performance measurements and benchmarks agreed to by the
Parties to the Joint Motion during the first six- month performance measurements review. The
Parties have subsequently engaged in further collaborative discussions and have reached
1
The “CLEC participants” include the following: AT&T Communications, Inc., TCG
Detroit, MCIMetro Access Transmission Services, Inc., MCI WorldCom
Communications, Inc., and Brooks Fiber Communications of Michigan, Inc., and TDS
Metrocom.
2
On May 27, 1999 the Commission issued its initial Order in this case requiring
Ameritech to implement performance measures and standards. Since that time the
Commission has issued several orders amending the May 27, 1999 Order, including
orders entered on September 3, 1999, July 17, 2000, February 22, 2001, April 17, 2001,
July 11, 2001, July 25, 2001, December 20, 2001, and February 25, 2002 (the "Prior
Orders").
2
agreement on matters as set forth in the amended Schedule 2, Agreed-To Measurement
Changes
– 2002 Six-Month Review to this Amendment. The changes and updates include the following:
The implementation dates for three Performance Measures (“PMs”) need to be delayed
within the three- month schedule (PMs 1.2, 1.3 and 35.1) due to implementation complexities
recently identified by the parties. A fourth PM (PM 56) was originally misidentified as a "First
Month" PM, and should be categorized as a "Third Month" PM. The issue requiring a "Third
Month" implementation is the addition of EELs as a product disaggregation. All other UNE PMs
with the EELs disaggregation added were correctly scheduled as "Third Month" implementations
in the January 17, 2003 filing. The schedule for the remaining PMs remains unchanged, with the
first changes being implemented with February 2003 results and reporting on March 20, 2003.
WHEREFORE, the Parties respectfully request that the Commission act on this
Amendment and the Joint Motion, on an expedited basis, to amend the performance
measurements previously approved by the Commission's Prior Orders in this proceeding to
reflect and implement the modifications, additions, and deletions regarding performance
measurements and benchmarks agreed to by the parties as more fully detailed in this Amendment
and the Joint Motion.
3
Dated this 18
thday of February 2003.
Respectfully Submitted,
AMERITECH MICHIGAN
Craig Anderson (P28968)
444 Michigan Avenue, Room 1750
Detroit, MI 48226-2517
(313) 223-8033
and
DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
By:
John M. Dempsey (P30987)
William J. Champion III (P31934)
Attorneys for Ameritech Michigan
215 S. Washington Square, Suite 200
Lansing, MI 48933-1816
(517) 371-1730
Concurred in by:
MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION STAFF
AT&T COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
TCG DETROIT
MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION
SERVICES, INC., MCI WORLDCOM
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (F/K/A MFS
INTELENET OF MICHIGAN, INC.) AND
BROOKS FIBER COMMUNICATIONS OF
MICHIGAN, INC.
TDS METROCOM
021103 SBC/Ameritech
AMENDED SCHEDULE 2
Agreed-To Measurement Changes – 2002 Six-Month Review
PM Number and Name Planned
Implementation Date Is No Later Than X Results Month After Filing
where X = First, Second or Third
1.1 Average Response Time For Manual Loop Make-Up Information First
1.2 Accuracy Of Actual Loop Makeup Information Provided For DSL Orders (Reporting of PM 1.2 Suspended Upon Implementation of PM 1.3)
Third 1.3 Accuracy Of Actual Loop Makeup Information Provided For DSL Orders Third
2 Percent Responses Received Within “X” Seconds – OSS Interfaces Second
4 OSS Interface Availability First
5 Percent Firm Order Confirmations (FOCs) Returned Within “X” Hours/Days Third
5.2 Percent Of Unsolicited FOCs By Reason Code First
6 Average Time To Return FOC Third
7 Percent Mechanized Completions Returned Within One Hour Of Completion In Ordering Systems
First 7.1 Percent Mechanized Completions Returned Within One Day Of Work Completion First
8 Average Time To Return Mechanized Completions First
9 Percent Rejects First
10 Percent Mechanized Rejects Returned Within One Hour Of Receipt Of Reject In MOR (Note - Measure Title Also Changes To ‘Percent Rejects Returned Within “X” Hours’)
Third 10.1 Percent Mechanized Rejects Returned Within One Hour Of Receipt Of Order (This
Measure Deleted)
Third 10.2 Percent Manual Rejects Received Electronically And Returned Within Five Hours (This
Measure Deleted)
Third 10.3 Percent Manual Rejects Received Manually And Returned Within Five Hours (This
M easure Deleted)
Third
10.4 Percentage Of Orders Given Jeopardy Notices Second
11 Mean Time To Return Mechanized Rejects(Also Measure Title Changes To ‘Mean Time To Return Rejects’)
Third 11.1 Mean Time To Return Manual Rejects That Are Received Via An Electronic Interface
(This Measure Deleted)
Third 11.2 Mean Time To Return Manual Rejects That Are Received Through The Manual Process
(This Measure Deleted)
Third
12 Mechanized Provisioning Accuracy First
13 Order Process Percent Flow Through First
13.1 Total Order Process Percent Flow Through First
14 Billing Accuracy First
15 Percent Of Accurate And Complete Formatted Mechanized Bills Via EDI And BDT First
021103 SBC/Ameritech
Agreed-To Measurement Changes – 2002 Six-Month Review
PM Number and Name Planned
Implementation Date Is No Later Than X Results Month After Filing
where X = First, Second or Third
17 Billing Completeness Second
18 Billing Timeliness (Wholesale Bill) First
19 Daily Usage Feed Timeliness First
20 Unbillable Usage First
21.1 Average Time Placed On Hold At LSC First
22 Local Service Center (LSC) Grade Of Service (GOS) First
22.1 Mechanized Customer Production Support Center (MCPSC) Grade of Service (GOS) (New Measure)
First
24.1 Average Time Placed On Hold At LOC First
25 Local Operations Center (LOC) Grade Of Service (GOS) First
27 Mean Installation Interval First
28 Percent POTS/UNE-P Installations Completed Within The Customer-Requested Due Date
First
29 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Second
30 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Due To Lack Of Facilities Second 31 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Due To Lack Of
Facilities
First
32 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Second
33 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates > 30 Days Second
35 Percent Trouble Reports Within 30 Days (I-30) of Installation First
35.1 Percent UNE-P Trouble Reports On The Completion Date (New Measure) Third
37 Trouble Report Rate First
37.1 Trouble Report Rate Net of Installation and Repeat Reports First
38 Percent Missed Repair Commitments First
39 Receipt To Clear Duration First
40 Percent Out Of Service (OOS) < 24 Hours First
41 Percent Repeat Reports First
42 Percent No Access (Percent Of Trouble Reports With No Access) First
43 Average Installation Interval Second
44 Percent Specials Installations Completed Within Customer-Requested Due Date Second
45 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Second
46 Percent Trouble Reports Within 30 Days (I-30) Of Installation Third
47 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Due To Lack Of Facilities Second 48 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Due To Lack Of
Facilities
First
021103 SBC/Ameritech
Agreed-To Measurement Changes – 2002 Six-Month Review
PM Number and Name Planned
Implementation Date Is No Later Than X Results Month After Filing
where X = First, Second or Third
50 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates > 30 Days Second
52 Mean Time To Restore First
53 Percent Repeat Reports First
54 Failure Frequency First
54.1 Trouble Report Rate Net Of Installation And Repeat Reports Second
55 Average Installation Interval Third
55.1 Average Installation Interval – DSL (This Measure Deleted) Third
55.2 Average Installation Interval For Loop With LNP First
55.3 Percent DSL-Capable Loop Orders Requiring The Removal Of Load Coils And/Or Repeaters
First 56 Percent Installations Completed Within Customer-Requested Due Date Third 56.1 Percent Installations Completed Within Customer-Requested Due Date For Loop With
LNP
First
58 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Third
59 Percent Trouble Reports Within 30 Days (I-30) of Installation Third
60 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Due To Lack Of Facilities Third 61 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Due To Lack Of
Facilities
Third
62 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates Third
63 Percent SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates > 30 Days Third
65 Trouble Report Rate Third
65.1 Trouble Report Rate Net Of Installation And Repeat Reports Third
66 Percent Missed Repair Commitments First
67 Mean Time To Restore Third
68 Percent Out Of Service (OOS) > 24 Hours First
69 Percent Repeat Reports Third
70 Percentage Of Trunk Blockage (Call Blockage) First
70.1 Trunk Blockage Exclusions First
70.2 Percentage Of Trunk Blockage (Trunk Groups) First
71 Common Transport Trunk Group Blockage First
73 Percentage Installations Completed Within Customer Requested Due Dates – Interconnection Trunks
Second 74 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates – Interconnection
Trunks
Second 75 Percentage SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates > 30 Days – Interconnection
Trunks
Second
021103 SBC/Ameritech
Agreed-To Measurement Changes – 2002 Six-Month Review
PM Number and Name Planned
Implementation Date Is No Later Than X Results Month After Filing
where X = First, Second or Third 77 Average Trunk Restoration Interval For Service-Affecting Trunk Groups First
78 Average Interconnection Trunk Installation Interval Second
79 Directory Assistance Grade Of Service First
80 Directory Assistance Speed Of Answer First
81 Operator Services Grade Of Service First
82 Operator Services Speed Of Answer First
83 Percentage Of Calls Abandoned First
91 Percentage Of LNP Only Orders Within The Customer Requested Due Date Second 92 Percentage Of Time The Old Service Provider Releases The Subscription Prior To The
Expiration Of The Second 9 Hour (T2) Timer
First 93 Percentage Of Customer Accounts Restructured By The LNP Only Completion Date Second 95 Average Response Time For Non-Mechanized Rejects Returned With Complete And
Accurate Codes (This Measure Deleted)
Second
96 Percentage Pre-Mature Disconnects For LNP Orders First
97 Percentage Of Time SBC/Ameritech Applies The 10-digit Trigger Prior To The LNP Order Due Date
First 98 Percent LNP Trouble Reports Within 30 Days (I-30) of Installation Third 99 Average Delay Days for SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates (For Stand-Alone
LNP Orders)
Second
100 Average Time Of Out Of Service For LNP Conversions First
101 Percent Out Of Service < 60 minutes First
102 Average Time To Clear Errors (Facility-Based Providers) First
MI 6 Erred Customer Record Update Files Not Returned By Next Business Day (This Measure Deleted)
First 103 Percent Accuracy for 911 Database Updates (Facility-Based Providers) First
MI 7 Errors In Customer Record Update Files (This Measure Deleted) First
104 Average Time Required To Update 911 Database (Facility-Based Providers) First MI 8 Customer Record Update Files Not Updated By The Next Business Day (This Measure
Deleted)
First
104.1 The Average Time It Takes To Unlock The 911 Record Second
105 Percentage Of Requests Processed Within 35 Days First
106 Average Days Required To Process A Request First
107 Percentage SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Collocation Due Dates First
108 Average Delay Days For SBC/Ameritech-Caused Missed Due Dates First
109 Percent Of Requests Processed Within The Established Timelines First
110 Percentage Of Updates Completed Into The DA Database Within 72 Hours For Facility-Based CLECs
021103 SBC/Ameritech
Agreed-To Measurement Changes – 2002 Six-Month Review
PM Number and Name Planned
Implementation Date Is No Later Than X Results Month After Filing
where X = First, Second or Third 111 Average Update Interval For DA Database For Facility-Based CLECs First 112 Percentage DA Database Accuracy For Manual Updates For Facility-Based CLECs First 113 Percentage Of Electronic Updates That Flow-Through The Update Process Without
Manual Intervention
First
114 Percentage Of Premature Disconnects (Coordinated Cutovers) First
114.1 CHC/FDT LNP With Loop Provisioning Interval First
115 Percentage Of SBC/Ameritech-Caused Delayed Coordinated Cutovers First
115.1 Percent Provisioning Trouble Reports (PTR) Second
115.2 Mean Time To Restore – Provisioning Trouble Reports (PTR) First
117 Percent NNXs Loaded And Tested Prior To The LERG Effective Date First
118 Average Delay Days For NXX Loading And Testing First
119 Mean Time To Repair First
120 Percentage Of Requests Processed Within 30 Business Days First
121 Percentage Of Quotes Provided For Authorized BFRs Within 45 Business Days First 124 Timely Resolution Of Significant Software Failures Related With Releases (New
Measure)
Third
124.1 Test Environment Availability (New Measure) Third
MI 2 Percentage Of Orders Given Jeopardy Notices Within 24 Hours Of The Due Date Second MI 3 Coordinated Conversions Completed Within One Hour Of The Scheduled Time First
MI 4 Average Time To Provide A Collocation Arrangement First
MI 5 Structure Requests Completed Outside Of Interval First
MI 9 Percentage Missing FOCs First
MI 10 Percent Time-Out Transactions First
MI 11 Average Interface Outage Notification First
MI 12 Average Time To Clear Service Order Errors First
MI 13 Percent Mechanized Line Loss Notifications Returned Within One Day Of Work Completion
Second MI 13.1 Average Delay Days For Mechanized Line Loss Notifications (New Measure) Second MI 14 Percent Completion Notifications Returned Within “X” Hours Of Completion Of
Maintenance Trouble Ticket
Third
MI 15 Change Management Third
MI 16 Percentage Rejected Query Notices First
WI 1 Percent No Access – UNE Loops Provisioning First
WI 2 Percent No Access (Percent Of Trouble Reports With No Access) – UNE Loops First
WI 9 Percent Facility Modification Orders First
021103 SBC/Ameritech
Agreed-To Measurement Changes – 2002 Six-Month Review
PM Number and Name Planned
Implementation Date Is No Later Than X Results Month After Filing
where X = First, Second or Third CLEC WI 4 Accuracy Of Processing CLEC Corrections Based On Review Of Directory
Information (Issue L)
First CLEC WI 5 Percentage of Protectors Not Moved After Technician Visit (Issue O) First CLEC WI 6 FMOD Process: Percent Form A Received Within The Interval Ordered By The
Commission
First CLEC WI 7 FMOD Process: Percent Forms B,CD Received Within 72 Hours Of Form A First CLEC WI 8 FMOD Process - Form B: Percent Return FOC With New Due Date Within 24
Hours
First CLEC WI 9 FMOD Process - Form C: Percent Return Quote Within the Interval Ordered By
The Commission
First
CLEC WI 11 FMOD Process - Forms B,C,D: Percentage Of Due Dates Met First
IN 1 Percent Loop Acceptance Testing (LAT) Completed On Or Prior To The Completion Date
