exv10w3w2



 

Exhibit 10.3.2






	

amendment OF Solicitation/modification of contract
1. CONTRACT ID CODE
Page
1 of 1
2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ.
NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)
0006 02/17/2009

00001



6. ISSUED BY No Invoice Information 445 12th St., SW, Washington, DC 20564



CODE



9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO. 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)



7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE



8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and Zip Code)



Neustar, Inc.



10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO. CON07000005 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)



46000 Center Oak Plaza



Sterling, VA 20166



CODE *



FACILITY CODE



11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS



The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified
for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended



Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the
solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:



(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging
receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer



submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the
solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE
PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY
RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an
offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or
letter, provided each
telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is
received prior to the opening hour and date specified.



12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA
(If required) No Funding
Information



13. THIS ITEM
ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF
CONTRACTS/ORDERS IT MODIFIES THE
CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM
14.



CHECK ONE



A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14
ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO IN ITEM 10A.



B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as
changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY
OF FAR 43.103(b).



C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:



D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and
authority)
FAR 1.6, “Authority of the Contracting
Officer”
E. IMPORTANT: Contractor | X | is not, is required to sign this
document and return copies to the issuing office.



14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including
solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.) The purpose of this modification is to accept
and incorporate Change Order Proposal (COP) Numbers 5, 6, and 7. COP #5 serves to address changes
to the Thousand-Block Pooling Administration Guidelines to assure that over-contaminated blocks are
not returned to the Pooling Administrator. COP #5 is accepted as submitted at a price of
$33,837.00. COP #6 serves to address requests from service providers to the National Pooling
Administrator for enhancements to the Pooling Administration System (PAS). COP #6 is accepted as
submitted at a price of $18,188.00. COP #7 serves to adress changes to the Thousands-Block Pooling
Administration Guidelines that will enable carriers to submit requests for mass modification of
block information for 50 or more records. COP #7 is accepted as submitted at a price of $14,987.00.
Copies of the three (3) COPs are attached. Funding will be via NANP and will be paid by FCC Billing
& Collection Agent, Welch, LLP.



Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A,
as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.



15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)



15C. DATE SIGNED



15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR



(Signature of person authorized to sign)



16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) Anthony Wimbush


16B.
United States of America


BY /s/ Anthony S. Wimbush


(Signature of contracting officer)


16C. DATE SIGNED
02/17/2009



NSN 7540-01-152-8070 PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE



STANDARD FORM 30 (REV 10-83)
Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR)
53 243







 









 










National Pooling Administration




Contract #CON07000005 Change




Order Proposal #5




(INC
Issue #602 — Checking returned block in the NPAC)




November 21, 2008




			
	 	 	 
	NeuStar, Inc.
	 	46000 Center Oak Plaza

Sterling VA, 20166






 









 






			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #5 — Checking Returned Blocks in NPAC
	 	November 21, 2008






Table of Contents




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	1

	 	Introduction
	 	 	3	 
	2

	 	Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Issue
	 	 	4	 
	3

	 	Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Resolution
	 	 	4	 
	4

	 	The Proposed Solution
	 	 	5	 
	5

	 	Assumptions and Risks
	 	 	6	 
	6

	 	Cost
	 	 	6	 
	7

	 	Conclusion
	 	 	6	 






			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-ii-







 












 





			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #5 — Checking Returned Blocks in NPAC
	 	November 21, 2008






1 Introduction



1.1 Purpose and Scope



In accordance with NeuStar’s National Pooling Administration contract1 and our constant
effort to provide the best support and value to both the FCC and the telecommunications industry,
NeuStar, as the National Pooling Administrator (PA), hereby submits this change order proposal to
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for approval. This change order complies with the
contractual requirements set forth in Clause C.1 of the CONTRACT FOR POOLING ADMINISTRATION
SERVICES FOR THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, effective August 15, 2007, which reads as
follows at Section 2.5.4:





2.5.4 Modifications of Guidelines




The PA shall participate in the development and modification of guidelines and procedures,
which may or may not affect the performance of the PA functions. These changes may come
from regulatory directives and/or industry-initiated modifications to guidelines. In
addition, new guidelines may be developed as appropriate to comply with regulatory
directives. The PA shall implement any changes determined to be consistent with regulatory
directives.




The PA shall:




	 	•	 	Provide, in real time, technical guidance to ensure processes and
procedures are effective in meeting the goals of the change.
	 
	 	•	 	Provide issues and contributions, and be prepared to discuss at INC
meetings how the proposed change promotes numbering policy and/or benefits the NANP and
how the change will affect the PA’s duties, obligations and accountability.
	 
	 	•	 	Assess and share in real time (i.e., during discussion) the cost
implications and
administrative impact of the change upon the PA’s duties and responsibilities in
sufficient detail as needed by the INC.






When the INC places any changes to its guidelines in final closure, the PA shall submit an
assessment regarding the impact of scope of work, time and costs to the INC, the NANC and
the FCC within 15 calendar days. The PA shall post changes in procedures on its web site
prior to the change taking effect.




Specifically, the PA shall:




	 	•	 	Notify all interested parties when guidelines have changed.
	 
	 	•	 	Interpret guideline changes and impact upon processes.
	 
	 	•	 	Identify implementation date or effective date.
	 
	 	•	 	Provide notification of new forms or tools that may be required.
	 
	 	•	 	Identify a Single Point of Contact (SPOC) within the PA to answer questions.






The NANC shall be consulted at the FCC’s discretion regarding the suggested implementation
date to determine the likely impact on service provider processes and





 




			
	1	 	FCC Contract Number CON07000005





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-3-






 









 






			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #5 — Checking Returned Blocks in NPAC
	 	November 21, 2008







systems (i.e., whether it would be unduly burdensome or would unfairly disadvantage any
service provider or group of service providers per the PA’s obligations and NANP
administrative principles). The PA shall also seek input on implementation dates from
service providers that log in to PAS and vendors that interface with PAS.



2 Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Issue



As a result of concerns raised by the industry regarding the increase in over-contaminated blocks
in the industry pool, the PA brought in an issue to address the situation. The INC issue statement
is reproduced below:





INC Issue Statement:




The PA has recently been made aware of a number of returned blocks for which the
contamination level was incorrect on the Part 1A, and the blocks were actually
over 10% contaminated. This has been causing additional work for both the SP who
has been assigned the over-contaminated block, and the PA. Not only must the
correct contamination level be determined, but in many cases the block must be
exchanged for a new block that is not over-contaminated.



3 Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Resolution



On November 7, 2008, the INC placed Issue 602 — Checking Returned Blocks in NPAC into final
closure, with the following language:



Resolution from INC:



The following text changes were made to TBPAG Sections 9.1.5 and 9.2.7:





	9.1.5	 	In cases where the block holder is exiting the market and voluntarily returns a
block indicating that it with is over 10% contamination contaminated (101 TNs
or more), the SP shall state in the remarks field of the Part 1A that it is exiting the
market. The PA shall request an ad hoc report from the NPAC, generated during off-peak hours,
that identifies the SPs and associated quantities of ported TNs in the returned block. This
information shall assist the PA in re-allocating the block, if TNs ported to other SPs are
found within the NPA-NXX-X block. The PA may use these reports to provide each potential block
holder with the total number of ported TNs it has, number of SPs with ported TNs, and the
total number of ported TNs overall.
	 
	 	 	If the block being returned by the SP is over 10% contaminated and the SP does not indicate
it is exiting the market, the PA shall deny the return.
	 
	9.2.7	 	In cases where pooled blocks are voluntarily returned with over 10% contamination,
the SF mustshall state in the remarks field of the Part 1A that they areit is exiting the
market. the Tthe PA shall request an ad hoc report from NPAC within 7 calendar
days





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-4-






 









 






			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #5 — Checking Returned Blocks in NPAC
	 	November 21, 2008







of providing a Part 3 suspend to the block holder. Blocks may only be voluntarily returned
with over 10% contamination when the SP is exiting the market (see Section 9.1.5).




If the block being returned by the SP is over 10% contaminated and the SP does not indicate
it is exiting the market, the PA shall deny the return.




If the only active or pending LNP ports on the block are intra-service provider ports
(ISPs), the PA shall, within 7 calendar days of receiving the ad hoc report from the NPAC,
process a Part 3 denial. The PA shall provide on the Part 3 the reason for the denial.





 




			
	***	 	Unedited text omitted from 9.2.7





4 The Proposed Solution



The National Pooling Administrator has determined that the amendments to the TBPAG will affect the
day-to-day pooling operations and the Pooling Administration System (PAS). The PA will now be
required to check the porting information in the NPAC for all block returns. This will necessitate
internal changes to PAS relating to how the PA processes block returns. As a result of our
assessment, we developed the following proposed solution to address the changes that the INC
recommended, in a cost-effective and efficient manner.



All returned blocks will be suspended until the weekly report is received from the NPAC showing the
contamination level of those blocks. Based upon the content of the report, the individual pooling
administrators will determine if the block return request can be approved, if it should be denied,
or if an email needs to be sent to the SPs that have ported TNs out of the block(s) advising them
that the block is being returned and asking them to take assignment of the block. PAS will track
whether an email has been sent and the types of emails that have been sent, and will also
automatically update the block contamination information at the time the PA approves the block
return.



After the changes have been implemented in PAS, the PA will perform another manual one-time scrub
of all available blocks in PAS by comparing the data against the NPAC database to determine the
correct contamination status of each available block.2 Based on the findings, the PA
will contact each related service provider where it is determined that there is a discrepancy
between PAS and NPAC andas well as for any blocks
that are a returned block is
over-contaminated, perform the work necessary to re-allocate those blocks, and make the appropriate
updates in PAS.



User manuals will be updated as appropriate.






 




			
	2	 	The PA performed such a one-times scrub in June 2006, as discussed in Change Order 41
LNPA WG 24 and
CO/NXX Issue #364 — “Modfiication to Procedures for Code Holder/LERG Assignee Exit” in the
previous contract.





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-5-






 









 






			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #5 — Checking Returned Blocks in NPAC
	 	November 21, 2008






5 Assumptions and Risks



Part of the Pooling Administrator’s assessment of this change order is to identify the associated
assumptions and consider the risks that can have an impact on our operations.



Assumptions:



1 Both the INC and the NOWG agree that the block contamination levels in PAS and the
NPAC should be cross-referenced in conjunction with the other activities identified in this
Change Order proposal, to assure that the information in PAS is accurate.



2. This proposed solution will alter the way we process block returns, and will also impact
our day-to-day operations because it will take a significant amount of staff time to: (1) do the
initial comparison of the NPAC and PAS data regarding block contamination levels, (2) send
notifications to the appropriate service providers to clarify discrepancies and request
re-allocation, and (3) administer the responses from the industry to actually get the block status
updated or re-assigned. Because of staffing constraints under this contract, we anticipate that the
process will take longer than the first NPAC scrub, conducted in 2006.



This change order affects both the system and our day-to-day operations.




6 Cost



In developing this proposal, we considered the costs associated with implementing the proposed
solution, including the resources required to complete discrete milestones on a timeline for
implementation. The timeline includes preparation, development, testing, proper documentation
updates, monitoring, and execution of the solution.



The cost of modifying the system to conform to the changes to the TBPAG will be $33,837.00.




7 Conclusion



This change order proposal presents a viable solution that addresses the amendments to the TBPAG
and is consistent with the terms of our contract. We respectfully request that the FCC review and
approve this change order.




			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-6-







 











 










National Pooling Administration




Contract #CON07000005




Change Order Proposal #6




(User-Proposed Enhancements to PAS)




December 18, 2008




      



			
	NeuStar, Inc.
	 	46000 Center Oak Plaza
	 
	 	Sterling VA, 20166






 









 






			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #6 — User Enhancements to PAS
	 	December 18, 2008






Table of Contents




	 	 	 	 	 	 
	1

	 	Introduction
	 	 	3
	2

	 	Users’ Proposed Enhancements
	 	 	3
	3

	 	The Proposed Solution
	 	 	4
	4

	 	Assumptions and Risks
	 	 	5
	5

	 	Cost
	 	 	5
	6

	 	Conclusion
	 	 	5






			
	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-ii-






 









 






			
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #6 — User Enhancements to PAS
	 	December 18, 2008






1 Introduction




1.1 Purpose and Scope



In accordance with NeuStar’s National Pooling Administration contract1 and our constant
effort to provide the best support and value to both the FCC and the telecommunications industry,
NeuStar, as the National Pooling Administrator (PA), hereby submits this change order proposal to
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for approval. This change order complies with the
contractual requirements set forth in Clause C.1 of the CONTRACT FOR POOLING ADMINISTRATION
SERVICES FOR THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, effective August 15, 2007.




2 Users’ Proposed Enhancements



Users of the Pooling Administration System (PAS) sometimes suggest changes to either our
administrative process or to PAS. This change order consists of several requests from both service
provider users of PAS and NOWG members to enhance the functionalities of PAS. The following four
(4) items describe the enhancements that the users are requesting:





	 	1.	 	Service provider users and service provider consultant users have the capability in
PAS to save their new block requests for a period of 30 calendar days. After 30 calendar days,
PAS automatically purges the previously saved request. It has been requested that the
users also have the ability to delete their previously saved requests in PAS prior to this
30-day timeframe.
	 
	 	2.	 	Service providers need to know if the blocks they have been assigned are from codes
that are also assigned to the same OCN and same switch of the block. To determine this
information today, they must go to the Part 1B form in PAS. To assist the user, it has
been requested that this information also be provided in the Part 3 response for new block
assignments.
	 
	 	3.	 	Service provider users and service provider consultant users may enter only one
switch on the Part 1/Part 1A screens in PAS today. However, the users have indicated that they
have a need to enter multiple switches on new block requests and new code requests. It
has been requested that PAS be modified to allow for multiple switches to be entered for
new block requests and new code requests.
	 
	 	4.	 	Service provider users and service provider consultant users occasionally have the
need to withdraw a request that they have submitted in PAS. Today, they can do this only by
contacting the PA. It has been requested that the capability to withdraw a request be
provided to the user in PAS.







 




			
	1	 	FCC Contract Number CON07000005





			
	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-3-







 











 





			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #6 — User Enhancements to PAS
	 	December 18, 2008






3 The Proposed Solution



The National Pooling Administrator has reviewed the users’ proposals from both their operational
and technical perspectives. As a result of our assessment, we propose the following cost-effective
and efficient solutions to address the changes that the users requested.





	 	1.	 	The Saved Block Request List in PAS will be modified to add a checkbox to allow the
user
to delete a previously saved new block request.
	 
	 	2.	 	When the PA processes and approves a request for a new block,
PAS will verify whether the OCN and switch for the block are the same as the OCN and switch for the code. If the
OCN and switch for the block match the OCN and switch for the code, then PAS will add
standard language to the remarks section of the Part 3 form to notify the user.
	 
	 	3.	 	PAS will be modified:






	 	a.	 	to allow the user to enter multiple switches on one request when the
user is
requesting multiple blocks or a new code (full NXX for LRN or full NXX for pool
replenishment);
	 
	 	b.	 	to allow the user to view the multiple switches on the viewable
Part 1/Part 1A
forms; and
	 
	 	c.	 	to allow the user to view the multiple switches on the Part 3 viewable
screen, and have the multiple switches information on the Part 3 response.






	 	4.	 	PAS will be modified to allow a user to withdraw a pending request in PAS. This can be accomplished only if the PA has not processed the request. PAS will verify that the
request has not been processed, that the tracking number is valid, and that the user is
authorized to withdraw the request. If all criteria are met, PAS will automatically create a
Part 3 withdrawal, and will remove the work item from the PA’s work item list.




The user manuals will be updated as appropriate and user training will be conducted on the
changes.




			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-4-






 









 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #6 — User Enhancements to PAS
	 	December 18, 2008






4 Assumptions and Risks



Part of the Pooling Administrator’s assessment of this change order is to identify the associated
assumptions and consider the risks that can have an impact on our operations.



This change order affects only the system, and would have no impact on our day-to-day
operations.




5 Cost



In developing this proposal, we considered the costs associated with implementing the proposed
solution, including the resources required to complete discrete milestones on a timeline for
implementation. The timeline includes preparation, development, testing, proper documentation
updates, monitoring, and execution of the solution.



The cost of modifying the system to implement these changes to the PAS will be $18,188.00.




6 Conclusion



This change order proposal presents viable solutions that address the requests made by users of PAS
and is consistent with the terms of our contract. We respectfully request that the FCC review and
approve this change order.




			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2008
	 	-5-






 









 











National Pooling Administration




Contract #CON07000005




Change Order Proposal #7




(INC Issue #592 — Changes to the TBPAG and COCAG for Mass

Update Modifications)




January 10,
2009




			
	 	 	 
	NeuStar, Inc.
	 	46000 Center Oak Plaza

Sterling VA, 20166






 









 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods
	 	January 10, 2009






Table of Contents




	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	1

	 	Introduction
	 	 	3	 
	2

	 	Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Issue
	 	 	4	 
	3

	 	Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Resolution
	 	 	4	 
	4

	 	The Proposed Solution
	 	 	7	 
	5

	 	Assumptions and Risks
	 	 	8	 
	6

	 	Cost
	 	 	8	 
	7

	 	Conclusion
	 	 	8	 






			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-ii-







 











 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods	 	January 10, 2009





1 Introduction




1.1 Purpose and Scope



In accordance with NeuStar’s National Pooling Administration contract1 and our constant
effort to provide the best support and value to both the FCC and the telecommunications industry,
NeuStar, as the National Pooling Administrator (PA), hereby submits this change order proposal to
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for approval. This change order complies with the
contractual requirements set forth in Clause C.1 of the CONTRACT FOR POOLING ADMINISTRATION
SERVICES FOR THE FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION, effective August 15, 2007, which reads as
follows at Section 2.5.4:




           2.5.4 Modifications of Guidelines





	 	 	The PA shall participate in the development and modification of guidelines and procedures,
which may or may not affect the performance of the PA functions. These changes may come
from regulatory directives and/or industry-initiated modifications to guidelines. In
addition, new guidelines may be developed as appropriate to comply with regulatory
directives. The PA shall implement any changes determined to be consistent with regulatory
directives.
	 
	 	 	The PA shall:






	 	•	 	Provide, in real time, technical guidance to ensure processes and
procedures are
effective in meeting the goals of the change.
	 
	 	•	 	Provide issues and contributions, and be prepared to discuss at INC
meetings how

the proposed change promotes numbering policy and/or benefits the NANP and
how the change will affect the PA’s duties, obligations and accountability.
	 
	 	•	 	Assess and share in real time (i.e., during discussion) the cost
implications and

administrative impact of the change upon the PA’s duties and responsibilities in
sufficient detail as needed by the INC.






	 	 	When the INC places any changes to its guidelines in final closure, the PA shall submit an
assessment regarding the impact of scope of work, time and costs to the INC, the NANC and
the FCC within 15 calendar days. The PA shall post changes in procedures on its web site
prior to the change taking effect.
	 
	 	 	Specifically, the PA shall:






	 	•	 	Notify all interested parties when guidelines have changed.
	 
	 	•	 	Interpret guideline changes and impact upon processes.
	 
	 	•	 	Identify implementation date or effective date.
	 
	 	•	 	Provide notification of new forms or tools that may be required.
	 
	 	•	 	Identify a Single Point of Contact (SPOC) within the PA to answer questions.






	 	 	The NANC shall be consulted at the FCC’s discretion regarding the suggested implementation
date to determine the likely impact on service provider processes and







 




			
	1	 	FCC Contract Number CON07000005





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-3-






 









 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods	 	January 10, 2009







	 	 	systems (i.e., whether it would be unduly burdensome or would unfairly disadvantage any
service provider or group of service providers per the PA’s obligations and NANP
administrative principles). The PA shall also seek input on implementation dates from
service providers that log in to PAS and vendors that interface with PAS.





2 Issue Statement



To facilitate customer convenience during the initial national pooling contract, the Pooling
Administrator pro-actively developed a process to enable service providers to use an Excel
spreadsheet to submit large numbers of records that required modifications. The process
necessitated manual involvement at the system engineering level. The mass modify process was not
required by the contract or the industry guidelines, but decreased the number of manual entries
that any service provider had to perform when, for example, making large numbers of OCN or
switch/POI changes. The Pooling Administrator’s process applied when carriers were modifying more
than 100 records.



In recent months, service providers indicated a desire to submit mass modifications of less than
100 records. As a result, an issue was brought to the Industry Numbering Committee (INC) to address
the situation. The INC issue statement is reproduced below:




          INC
Issue Statement:





	 	 	When SP’s have to modify multiple LRN’s, switching or tandem information at one
time, each individual record has to be updated separately. Allowing mass
modifications on multiple records will decrease the amount of manual work on the
SP and also reduce the chances for entering incorrect information.





3 Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Resolution



On
January 2, 2009, the INC placed Issue 592— Changes to the TBPAG and COCAG for Mass Update
Modifications into final closure, with the following language:




Resolution from INC:
 

The following changes were made to the TBPAG and COCAG:




TBPAG
Sections 4.1 and 8.5.1:




           4.1 Code Holder Responsibilities





	 	 	A Central Office (CO) Code Holder is an assignee of an NXX code which was
allocated by the CO Code Administrator. When an NXX Code becomes pooled, the
Code Holder becomes the LERG Assignee.






	 	a)	 	identify eligible thousands-blocks for donation to the industry
inventory pool upon initial establishment of the industry inventory pool
pursuant to Section 7.2.5;





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-4-






 









 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods	 	January 10, 2009







	 	b)	 	make required updates to BIRRDS with the switch information as
appropriate (i.e., ongoing switching entity/POI changes) after creation of
the
Block Code record (BCD), for their assigned thousands-blocks within
pooled NXX codes (See Section 8.5.2) and;
	 
	 	c)	 	submit changes or disconnects for pooled NXXs to the PA. Changes or
disconnects for non-pooled NXXs in a pooling rate center should be sent to
NANPA, unless the PA received the original request for the non-pooled
NXX.
	 
	 	d)	 	If there are 50 or more codes that need modifications on
intra-company
OCN changes, switching entity/POI changes, or tandem modifications, a
mass modification spreadsheet can be sent to NANPA. Contact NANPA for
the most recent spreadsheet.
	 
	 	e)	 	confirm, prior to donating the thousands-block to the industry inventory
pool, that:






	 	1)	 	all unavailable TNs within contaminated thousands-blocks
have been

intra-service provider ported;
	 
	 	2)	 	the associated NPA/NXX is currently available for call
routing, is
flagged as LNP capable in the LERG Routing Guide and the NPAC, and
the NPA-NXX query triggers are applied in all switches and reflected in
the appropriate network databases (e.g., STP routing tables);
	 
	 	3)	 	the NXX-assigned switch is currently LNP-capable and will
process

terminating traffic appropriately; and
	 
	 	4)	 	interconnection facilities have been established
between the NXX-

assigned switch and other interconnecting networks.






	 	f)	 	become a LERG Assignee at the Block Donation Date (see Section 7.1).






	 	 	An entire NXX code dedicated for a single customer’s use may be classified as a
non-pooled code at the discretion of the SP. The SP will be considered the CO
Code Holder by leaving the pool indicator field blank in Section 1.5 of the CO
Code Part 1. In addition, the SP should write “Non-pooled code for dedicated
customer” in Section 1.7 of the Part 1.






	8.5	 	Ongoing Administration of Allocated Thousands-Blocks and Notification of LERG
Routing Guide Changes
	 
	8.5.1	 	The information associated with a thousands-block assignment or
thousands-block(s) being retained may change over time. The PA must be notified of
an OCN, Switch ID or Block Effective Date change for thousand-blocks which have
already been assigned. The requested changes should be submitted via the
Thousands-Block Application Forms, Part 1A, and when necessary, the Part 1B. For
data integrity reasons, the PA must be informed of these types of changes to





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-5-






 









 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods	 	January 10, 2009







	 	 	ensure that the record of the entity responsible for the thousands-block and the data
associated with the thousands-block is accurate.
	 
	 	 	If there are 50 or more blocks that need to be modified for intra-company OCN
changes, switching entity/POI changes, or Part 1B modifications, a mass
modification spreadsheet can be sent to the PA. Contact the PA for the most
recent spreadsheet.
	 
	 	 	Note: Mass modifications only update data in PAS. SPs are responsible for all
updates to BIRRDS, NPAC and any other affected systems or databases.





COCAG:




           6.3.1 Information Changes





	 	 	The information associated with a code assignment may change over time. Such changes may
occur, for example, because of the transfer of a code to a different company. The CO
Code Administrator must be notified of any changes to the information in Part 1 of the
CO Code (NXX) Assignment Request Form. This includes changes such as, but not limited
to, the tandem homing arrangement, OCN, switching entity/POI and rate center. For OCN
changes due to merger/acquisition, the SP must so state on the Part 1 form. If the
applicant is requesting multiple changes, the applicant should indicate all requested
changes in Section l.4 of the Part 1 form.
	 
	 	 	SPs that change the rate center for a previously assigned NXX that has not been
activated shall be required to first demonstrate the need for the NXX in the new rate
center. For this change, SPs must first supply a new CO Code Assignment Months to
Exhaust Certification Worksheet — TN Level to the CO Code Administrator prior to making
any changes to BIRRDS for the affected NXX code. Accordingly, the CO Code
Administrator(s) must be informed of these changes to ensure that an accurate record of
the code holder/ LERG Routing Guide assignee responsible for the code and the data
associated with the code is maintained so as not to jeopardize data integrity. The CO
Code Administrator shall verify the retention of the NXX codes using the Months to
Exhaust Certification Worksheet — TN Level prior to changes being made to the rate center
in the TRA databases.
	 
	 	 	If there are 50 or more codes that need modifications on intra-company OCN changes,
switching entity/POI changes, or tandem modifications, a mass modification spreadsheet
can be sent to NANPA. Contact NANPA for the most recent spreadsheet.
	 
	 	 	Note: Mass modifications only update data in NAS. SPs are responsible for all
updates to BIRRDS, NPAC and any other affected systems or databases.





			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-6-







 











 





			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods	 	January 10, 2009







	 	 	SPs that wish to move CO codes from one rate center to another must submit a Part
1 to the CO Code Administrator. Upon receipt of the Part 1 for an NXX that has
been activated, the CO Code Administrator will request that the NPAC produce an ad
hoc report, generated during off-peak hours, that identifies the SPs and
associated quantities of ported TNs or pending ports within the code(s). The CO
Code Administrator will not request an ad hoc report if the SP is requesting a
rate center change for a code that has not reached its LERG Routing Guide
effective date.
	 
	 	 	If the report shows that there are ported TNs or pending ports, then the CO Code
Administrator will issue a Part 3 Denial to the applicant. If the report shows that
there are no ported TNs or pending ports, then the CO Code Administrator will issue a
Part 3 Acceptance to the applicant with instructions to the Applicant to immediately
remove the NXX from the NPAC to ensure that no porting occurs between the time the ad
hoc report was produced and the effective date of the rate center change. On the
effective date of the rate center change, the Applicant must immediately add the NXX to
the NPAC to ensure that porting can resume.





4 The Proposed Solution



The National Pooling Administrator has determined that the amendments to the TBPAG will affect the
Pooling Administration System (PAS).



The minimum number of records that can be submitted as a mass modify has been dropped from 100
modifications to 50 modifications. Also, as a result of the changes made to the guidelines, the PA
will now need to accept mass modifications for Part 1B modifications



The
current Excel spreadsheet used for mass modifies will be augmented to include all Part 1B
fields. For any mass modifications to the fields on the Part 1B form, the information will be
updated only in the PAS database and the Part 1B form will not be sent to the NPAC. Since these
mass modify submissions will only update PAS, updates to BIRRDS, NPAC, or any other affected system
or database are the responsibility of the service provider. Therefore, the PA is adding a
disclaimer statement both to the mass modification spreadsheet and to the remarks section of the
Part 3 form, to ensure that users understand that the only database being updated is PAS.



A new tool will be added to PAS to allow the PA to upload the spreadsheets into the system
automatically.



Mass modifications for non-pooled and pooled codes will continue to go directly to NANPA; however
since both pooled and non-pooled code information is maintained in PAS, a new tool will be added to
PAS to allow the PA to update the PAS code table after the mass modification is processed
successfully in NAS.



User manuals will be updated as appropriate.




			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-7-






 









 






			
	 	 	 
	Nat’l PAS — Change Order #7 — Changes to the TBPAG and COGAG for Mass Mods
	 	January 10, 2009






5 Assumptions and Risks



Part of the Pooling Administrator’s assessment of this change order is to identify the associated
assumptions and consider the risks that can have an impact on our operations.



Assumptions:





	 	1.	 	The decrease in the minimum number of records permitted under the mass modify process will increase the number of mass modifies that are submitted.
	 
	 	2.	 	This will impact our day-to-day operations, in that any errors in the mass
modify spreadsheets require research on the part of the pooling administrators.





6 Cost



In developing this proposal, we considered the costs associated with implementing the proposed
solution, including the resources required to complete discrete milestones on a timeline for
implementation. The timeline includes preparation, development, testing, proper documentation
updates, monitoring, and execution of the solution.



The cost of modifying the system to conform to the changes to the TBPAG will be $14,987.00.




7 Conclusion



This change order proposal presents a viable solution that addresses the amendments to the TBPAG
and is consistent with the terms of our contract. We respectfully request that the FCC review and
approve this change order.




			
	 	 	 
	© NeuStar, Inc. 2009
	 	-8-