ß DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT—DRAFT—DRAFTà

This is a preliminary document. The final will be provided at the Bidders’ Conference to be held on Monday, April 6^th, beginning at 10:30AM at the New York PSC on the 8^th Floor, in Hearing Room A.

RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS REGARDING THE INTERIM NUMBER POOLING ADMINISTRATOR REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ISSUED MARCH 3, 1998

RFP Requirements Section

1.  
2. Section 1.1.3 Vendor’s Information

• • "…However, the final pricing information of the successful Bidder may be made public during subsequent regulatory proceedings or orders."

  Please elaborate the conditions under which the LLC would anticipate it necessary or obligated to disclose the confidential pricing information. Can we assume that this information would be disclosed only under a New York PSC order? Will the LLC commit to notifying the winning bidder of a possible competitive pricing disclosure so that the winning bidder may ask the New York State regulatory agency for reconsideration?

  We note that several representatives of the New York PSC are included in the distribution. Are we to assume the pricing information (TAB 3) not be sent to them, if pricing information is not to be part of the public record?

  A. The contracting party is the LLC and all information will be requested to be proprietary. The Pricing Section is to be forwarded only to the Selection Committee, the members of which are not PSC employees. The Selection Committee members are: Mary Ensminger, Stephen Addicks, Fred Cederqvist, Jo Gallagher, Beth Gunter, Rochelle Jones, Leo Maese, Derek Noppenberger and Laura Pierpont.

2.  
3. Section 1.2 Impact of Federal Regulation and Legislation on this Procurement

• • " … The selection of the long term pooling administrator is currently anticipated to occur as early as second quarter 1999."

  Please clarify. Is the date based on the selection of a National Pooling Administrator, or the commencement of a service by a National Administrator?

  A. In preparing your response, remember that the proposal has a finite life and we are suggesting that the time frame could be as brief as early 1999.

3) Section 1.4.1 Proposal Submission

• There is a requirement to submit complete, hard copy proposals to eleven different, geographically-dispersed, locations.

  For the purpose of meeting the timely response requirement, would the LLC consider a minimum requirement of submission of the "Master Copy" to Mary Ensminger?

  A. Only the Master Copy that is being sent to Mary Ensminger will be used to determine that the deadline was met, which is 12 noon, April 13th. The other copies should be sent in order to be delivered to the recipients by or near the deadline. .

  ***NOTE*** This date may change based on discussions to be held on Monday 4/6/98

(There is no question numbered 4.)

5) Section 1.6.2 Tab Content

The pricing matrix cites a 2^nd Quarter 1998 start time, but the RFP award

recipient will not be notified until 5/22/98. When is pooling intended to

start?

When will eligible block pooling information be provided to the pooling

administrator to establish the pools?

• How many service providers will be participating in number pooling? Based on the participation level, how many NXXs are eligible for the pool?

1.  
2. ( The pooling will begin as soon as possible after the inventory is identified by the participating carriers. ( The eligible block pooling information will be provided to the Pooling Administrator not later than July 1, 1998. ( Initial activity will be only in the 212 NPA with uncontaminated 1000s blocks being contributed by the SPs from embedded NXXs. Approximately 18 NXXs are not yet assigned and may also be involved in the pooling, but no decision has been made.

6.  
7. Section 5.2 Required Enterprise Service

• This section is inconsistent with Section 2.0 which permits only the code holder to assign numbers in designated thousands blocks. In addition, Part 2 of the New York Interim Number Pooling Thousands Block (NXX) Assignment Guidelines is missing. Is it the same as Part 2 of the Central Office (NXX) Assignment Guidelines (INC 95-0407-008) or the ongoing modifications to that document currently underway at INC?

1.  
2. Forms associated with processes as outlined in the NY Interim Number Pooling Thousands Block Assignment Guidelines have not been developed as yet, including the Part 2 form which is Routing and Rating Information. These forms, however, will most likely be consistent with the CO Code Assignment Request and Confirmation forms in terms of structure. The data content will be modified to accommodate new information required to support Number Pooling.

7.  
8. Section 1, footnote 1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines states that National Guidelines will be used at such time that they are available . We anticipate that the National Guidelines would define the process to be implemented by the National PA. Would the LLC envision transitioning to the National PA at that time? When does the LLC expect National Guidelines to be available?

1.  
2. Transition from using state-specific interim number pooling guidelines to national guidelines will occur after the National Pooling Administrator is established and processes are developed consistent with National Number Pooling Guidelines.

8.  
9. Section 2.6.C of the NY Pooling Guidelines refers to a collective agreement among the pooling participants to provide authorization to the Pooling Administrator to obtain NXX resources. Has this agreement been developed, and if so can it be provided? If not, when is it anticipated that this agreement be developed?

1.  
2. At this time, no formal written agreement has been formulated.

9.  
10. Section 3.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – What is the definition of non-working numbering resources? What is the definition of a contaminated block eligible for pooling? What is the level of Contamination defined as making a thousands block eligible for pooling?

1.  
2. Non-working numbers are those numbers which are considered available for customer assignment as identified by the donating Code Holder. At initial implementation, we will be working with uncontaminated 1000s blocks; and we will apply the definition of eligible contaminated blocks at its availability.

10.  
11. Section 4.1.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines refers to applicant certification. Is the PA indemnified if the applicant falsely applies for and receives a block of numbers. Is this part of the collective agreement? How would a dispute of the eligibility of an applicant be contested?

1.  
2. The PA will not be responsible for actions taken in reliance upon an applicant’s false statements.

11.  
12. Section 5.1.D of the NY Pooling Guidelines - What is the level and type of work required here?

1.  
2. The level and type of work are yet to be defined.

12.  
13. Section 6.3.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - refers to the Request and Confirmation Form. No form was provided. Is one available?

1.  
2. Please refer to the response to Question #6.

13.  
14. Section 6.3.2 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - refers to an "application form". Is this form the same as the "Request and Confirmation Form" referred to Section 6.3.1? There are references in this form to a "per rate center, per switch" structure. Earlier references were to Service Provider per rate center. Which is correct? Can a thousands block be assigned across multiple switches for the same SP in the same rate center area?

1.  
2. The Application Form; Request and Confirmation Form; and Block Request Form are one in the same. Whereas an SP identifies a switch to which a block is assigned, the only requirement is that the block be used within the confines of a rate center.

14.  
15. Section 6.3.4 makes references to the Block Request Form. What is the type and size of data fields? Is this the same as application form referred to in 6.3.2? Is a copy available?

1.  
2. Please refer to the responses to Question 13 and Question 6.

15.  
16. Section 6.3.5 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - What is the process for refusing a thousands block assignment? How is it documented/confirmed? How many refusals is a service provider allowed, or can they select from the available pool of thousands blocks? How is that pool made available to service providers? What is the escalation process for contesting refusal?

1.  
2. The negotiating process outlined in the Guidelines in combination with the appeals resolution process would be used in the situation described in the question.

16.  
17. Section 6.3.6 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - Has there been agreement on the time frame for block

• assignments (3 months or 6 months)?

1.  
2. There has been no agreement reached regarding the time frame for block assignment (reference section 6.4.1). Section 6.3.6 specifies the period of time an SP may request a block in advance of the block "effective" date. This is still under discussion; however, agreement has been reached that an SP must certify 6 months to exhaust when applying for additional blocks for growth (see section 4.3).

17.  
18. Section 6.4.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - Has there been agreement on the time frame for block allocation (21 days or 42 calendar days)?

1.  
2. No agreement has been reached regarding time frame in Section 6.4.1.

18.  
19. Section 6.5.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - How will the PA be notified of any changes to Part 1? Who is liable if this has not been done?

1.  
2. The Block Holder is responsible for notifying the PA when changes to block assignments occur. This notification would be provided by submission of a new block request form, indicating changes where appropriate. The PA would not be liable for an SP’s failure to take action.

19.  
20. Section 6.6 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – How much time does a blockholder have to commence to start assigning TNs out of block before it is subject to reclamation/ What is the escalation process should reclamation be contested? Where is the NY Pooling Guidelines Part 4 form referenced in this section?

1.  
2. ( In the event of a reduction in forecasted demand, a blockholder would have to recertify the need for this assigned block in order to retain it in its unassigned state. ( Escalation of a contested block reclamation would be handled as outlined in Section 12 (Appeals). ( The Part 4 form is under development (Please refer to the response to Question 6.)

20.  
21. Section 6.7.2 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – There is a reference to block forecasts made to the PA on a form in the Appendix. No form was provided. Is one available? How periodic is this data to be provided (i.e. quarterly)?

1.  
2. The form is under development and the data would be provided semi-annually.

21.  
22. Section 6.7.3 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - How are initial vacant and contaminated blocks to be communicated between the SP and the PA? What is the interval for removing blocks from internal systems?

1.  
2. Only uncontaminated 1000s blocks are anticipated to be used initially and this information would be communicated in a letter.

22.  
23. Section 7.0 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - What reporting statuses are required? What is the format, content, and frequency requirement of these reports?

1.  
2. These reports, their format, contents and frequency would be developed by the PA based on industry requests and regulatory requirements.

23.  
24. Section 7.1.7 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - Has legal review by all SPs been performed for the authority of the PA to request NXX codes as an authorized agent?

1.  
2. Yes, however, modifications to the PA Guidelines and CO Code Administration Guidelines are required and pending.

24.  
25. Section 7.1.8 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - Who will input data into LERG? How does the LLC want the annual AOCN and the LERG update charge to be assigned? On what factual basis should the PA select an SP as the LERG Assignee? What is the dispute resolution process should this selection be contested?

1.  
2. The LERG data input responsibility is still outstanding. See Section 8.3.2 for the process for naming a LERG assignee and Section 12 for handling disputes.

25.  
26. Section 7.1.10 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - What are the block reclamation procedures? Is the authority to reclaim blocks part of the collective user agreement that is mentioned in Guidelines Attachment Section 2.6.C?

1.  
2. The reclamation procedures are described in Section 9.1.

26.  
27. Section 7.2.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - What format and content are required in the reports?

A. Please refer to the response to Question 22.

27.  
28. Section 7.3.2.D of the NY Pooling Guidelines - When is it anticipated that "the yet to be established process" be defined?

1.  
2. It is anticipated that the process for requesting additional CO codes from the CO code administrator will be consistent with the current CO code assignment guidelines.

28.  
29. Section 7.4.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Are we to assume that we are to propose the access methodology to be provided?

1.  
2. We anticipate a read-only access environment and that the PA would propose an appropriate access methodology.

29.  
30. Section 8.2.2 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Is it anticipated that this information go to the PA or to the NPAC. If to the PA, in what format?

1.  
2. Initially, only uncontaminated 1000s blocks will be contributed and the handling of individual numbers in contaminated blocks will be addressed in national guidelines.

30.  
31. Section 8.2.4 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Who provides the list of contaminated numbers?

1.  
2. Again, initially, only uncontaminated blocks will be contributed and assigned.

31.  
32. Section 8.3.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Can the selected LEC refuse to be a code holder? Is this process covered under the collective agreement?

1.  
2. See Section 12 (Appeals).

32.  
33. Section 9.2.2 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Is the form referred to in this section available?

1.  
2. The form has not yet been developed.

33.  
34. Section 9.2.5 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Is the form referred to in this section available? What format is the PA required to provide this data in?

1.  
2. The form has not yet been developed and the format is yet to be determined.

34.  
35. Section 11.1.B of the NY Pooling Guidelines - Please clarify reference to "Section ???"

1.  
2. The cross references to other sections in the guidelines will be updated when they are finalized.

35.  
36. Section 11.1.1 of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Is the Jeopardy TBUS form available?

1.  
2. The form has not yet been developed.

36.  
37. Section 11.1.1.G of the NY Pooling Guidelines – Please clarify reference to "Section ??8.5"

1.  
2. The cross references to other sections in the guidelines will be updated when they are finalized.

37.  
38. Section 11.2 5) of the NY Pooling Guidelines - Please clarify reference to "Section ?? "

1.  
2. The cross references to other sections in the guidelines will be updated when they are finalized.

38.  
39. Section 12.0 of the NY Pooling Guidelines - refers requests for modifications to the appeals process to "Section ?? " Is this service part of the collective agreement? Is the PA indemnified in the event of legal action?

1.  
2. The cross references to other sections in the guidelines will be updated when they are finalized. This service is part of the guidelines and the SPs agree to follow them as they participate in pooling.

39.  
40. The pricing table- "NY Interim Number Pooling Administrator RFP Pricing" - provides two pricing methods: Fixed Cost and Incremental Cost. Is it required to complete both portions or can/should a respondent complete only that portion of the chart relative to the respondent's preferred pricing methodology?

A. Yes, it is required to complete both portions of the chart.

40.  
41. Additionally, do lines 1-5 in the chart equate to the costs related to the components contained in Sections 1-5 of the RFP?

1.  
2. No, the lines identified as 1-5 do not correspond to the Sections of the RFP. You may have many more lines. The 5 indicated on the chart are there merely for example of a format.

41.  
42. The Incremental Cost portion of the chart utilizes the same quarterly columns as for the Fixed Cost portion. Is there an expectation that such quarterly figures are necessary for incremental costs that are already based on the quantity of 1000 block requests per quarter? If so, what is the necessity based on?

1.  
2. We anticipated, in developing the chart, that there would probably be variable costs associated with the number of requests per quarter. For example, there may be a different (perhaps higher) cost for requests for 10 1000s blocks per quarter, than requests for 10,000 1000s blocks per quarter; and that cost might also change (go down?) over time. We prepared a format so that all vendors could use similar factors and we could make a valid comparison among all proposals.

42.  
43. Page 13, under the title Functional and Technical Requirements, indicates that Tab 2 should include the information and format per Section 4. Was it intended that this should be Sections 3 and 4?

1.  
2. The original RFP contained a requirements checklist that was included in Section 4. We deleted the checklist but failed to delete any references to it in the text of the RFP.

43.  
44. Page 8, subparagraph 1.4.4, seems to state that the bidders must submit written answers to the requests from NECAC, LLC members that are asked during the presentation of proposals on May 1, 1998, on the same day (May 1, 1998), by 12 noon. Am I misunderstanding something or is the middle highlighted date in the last paragraph of 1.4.4 an incorrect date?

1.  
2. The requirement to provide written answers on May 1^st to the questions from the Selection Committee, is a correct reference. We plan to review the proposals and offer any questions or requests for clarification to the bidders by April 17^th. May 1^st is the date of the bidders’ presentations and we would like a copy of the answers to our April 17^th questions given to us on that day, as well.

44.  
45. What is the date by which the interim pooling administration function is to be activated?

1.  
2. The date that the interim pooling administration function is to be activated has currently been set as July 1, 1998.

ß DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT--DRAFT—DRAFT—DRAFTà