Home > Telecoms > Industry Groups > NTS Focus Group > Notes of meetings > NTS Focus Group - 18t

09|03|05

NTS Focus Group - 18th November 2004 - 2.00 pm Ofcom

Meeting Notes & Actions

Agenda item (1) - Introductions

Attendance:

Colin Scott	THUS (Chair)
Nicola McKenna	THUS
Caroline Wallace	Ofcom
Geoff Brighton	Ofcom
Clive Hillier	Ofcom
Robindhra Mangtani	Ofcom
Anne McCardle	MCI
Dave Simpson	Easynet
Catherine Joyce	Interconnect Communications
Jonathan Hart	Interconnect Communications
Toby Higho	Centrica
Ray Copeland	Opera Telecom
Paul Bonafin	IV Response
Andy Martin	IV Response
Debbie Mulloy	NTL
Tim Stephens	C&W
Karen Wray	C&W
Andrew Wileman	Telewest
Fabienne Dischamps	Band-X
Helen Morgan	Energis
Becky Hewlett	Energis
Kath Embleton	BT
Kevin Young	BT
Alex Cheetham	BT
Nancy Scott-Picton	BT
Rob Day	BT
Colin Nyhan	BT
Nancy Saunders	Kingston
Lesa Green	Kingston
Mike Barford	Tiscali

Agenda item (2): NTS Policy Option Consultation - Presentation from Interconnect Communications on the NTS billing study findings

Caroline Wallace introduced Interconnect Communications (ICC) who have conducted a billing study on NTS. Ofcom said that the full (non-confidential) ICC report would be circulated to Focus Group members shortly, and published on Ofcom’s web site. Ofcom said the scope of the project wasn’t new to Focus Group members as the terms of reference for the work was circulated to Focus Group members several months ago.

Interconnect Communications provided an overview of the project and their findings (a copy of the presentation will be distributed to NTS FG members). ICC said that the majority of issues identified related to wholesale systems and fewer issues had been identified with retail systems. The report concluded that operator specific payments were impossible, however finer tariff granularity is feasible from a billing point of view.

Any comments on the report should be directed to Clive Hillier (Clive.Hillier@ofcom.org.uk).

NTS FG Members asked a series of Questions:

Q	Nancy Saunders asked if the £39k of ongoing annual costs would be greater if individual number granularity was implemented?
A	Interconnect Communications said the biggest variable affecting the £39k figure for annual costs would be the number of times per year when prices would change.

Q	Tim Stephens asked if the £39k assumed a large batch of changes, rather than a small number?
A	Interconnect Communications said the estimate assumed a number of price changes.

Q	Andrew Wileman asked if Interconnect Communications considered other options for operator specific charging - including using approximate values?
A	Interconnect Communications said no alternatives based on approximations were considered since this was beyond the scope of the work.

Q	Debbie Mulloy asked what input BT had in determining the timescales?
A	Interconnect Communications said that BT had an input, but the figures published in the report were based on an ICC estimate. ICC said it had extensive experience in IT system changes and the length of time required to make the changes shouldn’t be underestimated. ICC said that given the variables and uncertainties, BT didn’t disagree with the timescales.

Q	Tim Stephens asked what process did ICC go through to come up with the time estimates?
A	ICC said that the standard billing change process was walked through. More details on this research are contained within the confidential annex supplied to Ofcom.

Q	Tim Stephens asked if the process and not the system within Wholesale Billing (given the limited changes required within the retail systems) was the cause of most of the time requirement?
A	ICC said the Wholesale System was older and therefore much harder to update (as it would hit operating limits fairly early on in the project).

Q	Colin Nyhan asked if ICC factored in Licence Costs as one of the cost variables?
A	ICC said that licence costs weren’t included as they didn’t believe it was appropriate to include them (and they had no visibility of BT’s commercial arrangements with its suppliers). ICC said that there would be no more additional CDRs to process, so it wasn’t sure how relevant this issue was.

Q	Dave Simpson asked if Ofcom were happy with the results?
A	Caroline Wallace said she wasn’t aware of any additional work that could have been carried out. Caroline said she felt that the report was very helpful and it established that the industry was unlikely to encounter a sudden billing showstopper over the implementation of Option 2. Clive Hillier added that he believed the work had been carried out as rigorously as possible short of conducting a full feasibility study.

Q	Mike Barford said he wasn’t so concerned about the costs but the timescales. Saving time is the key issue. Following the meeting with BT at Gatwick on the 12 th of November BT had agreed to come back with options which may help to accelerate the implementation of Option 2.
A	ICC said that with the correct budget, priorities and business case you could attempt to shorten the timescales (this is ICC’s view - not BT’s). ICC said they weren’t sure when the project would start.

Q	Fabienne Dischamps asked if the option of less than 1K routing was included within the report
A	Caroline Wallace said that routing wasn’t within the scope of the project - rather ICC’s work looked at tariffing at different number block granularities.

Q	Fabienne Dischamps asked what would happen if a number block reached capacity ?
A	Caroline Wallace said rules on number allocation could be revisited.

Q	Tim Stephens asked if a phased approach was possible?
A	ICC said almost everything can be done in phases and that different people would be working on the retail and wholesales sides of the development.

Q	IVR Response asked how many price points were being considered?
A	Caroline Wallace said that was part of the consultation, individual number tariffing might be ideal from some service providers’ point of view, but this would be more costly.

Q	IVR Response said individual number tariffing would be bad for consumers as it would reduce tariff transparency
A	Caroline Wallace said there was a trade off in relation to granularity of tariffing between consumer information and competition.

Q	Mike Barford said any help with improving the transparency over the time required for the project would be helpful.
A	Caroline Wallace said that from past experience in relation to another product, a workshop may be helpful so that developers could sit down and discuss the issues surrounding billing implementation.

Agenda item (3): NTS Call Termination Market Review

Caroline Wallace invited questions on the recently published Market Review Document.

Q	Alex Cheetham asked which of the EC’s Markets did the NTS Call Termination market review fit into.
A	Caroline Wallace said that she couldn’t add much to what has been said to BT recently. Ofcom are meeting with the Commission during December and have provided them every opportunity to input to Ofcom’s thinking. Ofcom have a view of which market this sits within, but Ofcom would not disclose this at this stage as it did not want to pre-empt the Commission’s input. Ofcom would provide an update to the NTS Focus Group once Ofcom had discussed with the Commission.

Q	Dave Simpson asked if Ofcom had received any feedback from consumers?
A	Geoff Brighton said that Ofcom had received a number of responses from consumers (+ some questions from MPs).

Q	Nancy Saunders asked what their particular concerns were?
A	Geoff Brighton said that most questions / responses related to the cost of dialling some NTS number (inc. 0870). Some believe they shouldn’t be charged until they had actually been taken off hold by particular call centres.

Q	Alex Cheetham asked if there was more uncertainty over evaluating option 3?
A	Caroline Wallace said the big difficulty over implementing Option 3 was the issue of identifying ECS and Non-ECS. This distinction is easy to draw in theory, but difficult in practice (eg. NON ECS and ECS using the same number). Geoff Brighton added that this was all subject to the consultation and that no final decisions had been taken.

Agenda Item (4) - NTS Retail Uplift

Ofcom said that a Statement on the issue would be published before Christmas. The delay was caused by using 03/04 data rather than 02/03, so some the numbers may differ from those published previously. If the numbers change materially then Ofcom would have to re-consult (Ofcom’s lawyers would take a view on this).

NB: Since the meeting it has become apparent that the revised 2003/04 data requested from BT by Ofcom will not be available until early January. As a result the Statement and possible re-consultation will not be published until later in January 2005.

Alex Cheetham asked how this topic relates to the NTS review? Geoff Brighton said that the Retail Uplift review had been signalled for some time and that the charge would apply equally to the existing and new NTS regimes. Caroline Wallace added that every option required the principle of a retail uplift. Alex Cheetham said she believed the issues should be synchronised (as the new regime may impose additional retail costs on BT - eg. increased customer service costs). Ofcom said that it was not convinced of this argument . Mike Barford said BT would not be aware of any changes to retail costs for some considerable time after the new regime was implemented. Ofcom has subsequently agreed to carry out sensitivity tests on the potential effects of a significant increase in the volume of customer service calls on the level of the charge.

Dave Simpson asked which starting figure would be used for the retail uplift. Geoff Brighton said the current value would be considered the start point.

Agenda Item (5) - INCA / CLI for NTS

Ofcom said that the final direction had now been published with revised dates allowing for more time to enable the project to be implemented (and avoiding a cut-over during the festive holiday period), although the industry was free to implement CLI billing earlier than this.

Debbie Mulloy asked if BT had started the work on implementation? BT said that work had now commenced.

Agenda Item (6) - Revised INCA/CLI billing proposal

BT circulated a paper detailing the latest specification for INCA / CLI billing development. The document contains a change from previous versions in that BT now has the ability to accurately identify non-BT originated calls. This gives BT more details to reclassify traffic more accurately.

Colin Scott asked if there was still an issue identifying other operator ranges imported to BT? Colin Nyhan said a problem still existed with numbers imported by BT.

New Action #P/1: All Focus Group Members to get comments on the INCA/CLI billing document to Colin Rochester (colin.rochester@bt.com) by the 23rd of December.

Agenda Item (7) - Timetable for changes to PoC counts

Kevin Young (BT) explained links reversal had made it harder to identify NTS routes and that the current rules for agreeing a date for revising an operator’s PoC count weren’t specific enough. BT was seeking to clarify the situation by linking the PoC change to the submission of Routing Plans DMA (not the ACO). This change would only cover new PoCs not existing.

Colin Scott that THUS had no issue with the proposal given that the industry will be moving to CLI billing in the near future. Energis also said it wasn’t opposed to the move.

MCI asked if the required by date posted on the DMA (rather than the actual implementation date) would be used? BT said that the required by date would be taken.

Dave Simpson said he had concerns as this would impact on operators taking Easynet’s 3 rd Party CSI offering, as there would be a significant time lag between the ACO and the DMA from being submitted. Band-X also said this would cause some operators (with fewer PoCs) problems and Band-X wouldn’t support the move. Dave Simpson asked for BT to continue with current arrangement until the move to CLI billing.

The Focus Group couldn’t reach agreement over this proposal and BT was invited to address the concerns raised at a future date. Operators with specific concerns were asked to feed them back to BT directly (Kevin Young).

Agenda item (8): Review of Outstanding Actions

#K/2 :	All operators to provide feedback to Becky Hewlett on questions 1 -3 below relating to the application of the ‘squirreling’ option for distributing the minimum call fee: What interest arrangements should cover the over-recovered amount prior to it being distributed to operators? What was an appropriate trigger level amount for the money to be distributed to operators? What date should this new arrangement commence from?
	Becky Hewlett said that majority of operators would like this issue sorted as soon as possible and as such wanted the long and short duration mechanism extended to 0844 and 0871 (as developing a billing platform to the minimum POLO would take more time). Operators expressed a desire to get this implemented quickly and not to prolong BT’s over-recovery on these call types. Action # K/2 Closed. New Action: #P/2 : BT to come back to the Focus Group with timescales for implementing the long/short mechanism on 0844 and 0871.
#M/1	BT to discuss the issue of an industry technical workshop on NTS INCA/CLI billing internally and let operators know if one will be held.
	Action # M/1 Closed - BT agreed to hold a workshop on INCA / CLI billing. New Action # P/3: BT to confirm the date / location of the INCA/CLI billing workshop.
# N/1	All operators to contact Colin Scott if they are interested in joining a conference on the issue of PPP double counting in NTS.
	Action # N/1 Closed: Colin said that BT had now organised a series of PPP discussions with operators. Interested operators should participate directly in these discussions.
# O/1	BT to confirm if it is applying both the APC and the TWIX in cases where a calls is exported to a recipient and if so - is this compliant with the regulatory framework applicable to number portability?
	Carried Forward
# O/2	Colin Scott to add the issue of NGNP for BT imports and the minimum call fee to the next NTS FG Agenda.
	Carried Forward. Following BT’s response to Action #N/2 at the Focus Group in October it has been identified that the current commercial arrangements for NGNP aren’t accessible to many Focus Group members (as some terminating operators would be faced with a situation where they would pay out more to BT than they receive in revenue when interaccounting for exported NTS numbers).

Agenda item (9) - Any Other Business

Colin Scott said that ICSTIS had contacted him requesting an invite to the next focus group meeting. Under the current ToR ICSTIS can’t become members, however ICTSTIS representatives could be asked along as visitors. Colin said ICSTIS were also keen to discuss the issue of content regulation on 08 (including the hosting of adult services on 08 number ranges). Focus Group members thought this would be useful and agreed to invite ICSTIS to the January meeting to discuss the issue.

Mike Barford said he hoped BT would provide the information on a possible speedier billing system implementation for Option 2 shortly (as agreed at the meeting at Gatwick). Alex Cheetham said that the information gathering was too big a task to complete for today’s meeting and that BT would endeavour to come back with some information as soon as it could.

Becky Hewlett raised the issue of BT updating the CPL without signed pricing letters (+ the issue of the CPL not containing retrospective rates). New Action # P/4: Colin Scott agreed to put the issue of changes to the CPL / treatment of retrospective rates in the CPL on the agenda for the next meeting.

The Focus Group agree the following meeting dates for 2005:

(Every six weeks commencing on Thursday the 13th of January - 2pm @ Ofcom)

13th January
24th February
7th April
19th May
30th June
11th August
15th September
27th October
8th December

Geoff Brighton agreed to book a meeting room at Ofcom to accommodate the meeting on the above dates.

Date of Next Meeting :

Thursday 13th January 2005 - 2.15pm Ofcom - Riverside House, London

Summary of New and Outstanding Actions:

# O/1	BT to confirm if it is applying both the APC and the TWIX in cases where a calls is exported to a recipient and if so - is this compliant with the regulatory framework applicable to number portability
# O/2	Colin Scott to add the issue of NGNP for BT imports and the minimum call fee to the next NTS FG Agenda.
#P/1:	All Focus Group Members to get comments on the INCA/CLI billing document to Colin Rochester by the 23 rd of December.
#P/2 :	BT to come back to the Focus Group with timescales for implementing the long/short mechanism on 0844 and 0871.
#P/3:	BT to confirm the date / location of the INCA/CLI billing workshop.
# P/4:	Colin Scott agreed to put the issue of changes to the CPL / treatment of retrospective rates in the CPL on the agenda for the next meeting.