Florida 9-1-1 Database Conference

Florida 9-1-1 Database Group

July 27 & 28, 2000

July 27, 2000

The meeting was called to order on July 27, 2000. Joe McCluan, Seminole CountyEmergency Management Manager, gave a welcome address. Introductions weremade. A list of each attendee is attached to these minutes.

The meeting this day addressed the process each Telephone Company uses toprocess service orders to install telephone service and how that process affects theCounty’s Master Street Address Guide (MSAG) database.

Several Telephone Companies made presentations.


The presentation was a video that tracked the service order flow from start tofinish. This video was extremely informative and easy to understand. BellSouth provided an updated escalation list for each of their Counties.

They announced that they are in the process of updating and rewriting theprocedures for 9-1-1. These procedures will be rolled out at the South Florida9-1-1 Coordinator’s Meeting in October. The procedures are being rewrittento better define the duties of the Telephone Company and the duties of theCounties.

It was suggested that it would be a good idea to allow each County and theStatewide 9-1-1 Coordinator’s office (Mr. Martin) to review the revisedprocedures to determine if they meet the requirements of the State of Florida9-1-1 Plan and the requirements of each County.

It was requested that BellSouth find out about d-mark information and howthat location information is being used for coin service or any other service. Who is responsible for the accuracy of that information if a coin companyonly uses the address of the d-mark site instead of the location of the phone?BellSouth took this as an action item and will report back.

Representatives from SCC, BellSouth’s database contractor, discussed 9-1-1Net and the steps used to process data. They indicated that they only dodata and are not interested in many of the other types of errors that areencountered as a result of a 9-1-1 call. The 9-1-1Net program only indicatescertain types of errors, although, SCC is considering adding additional errortypes.

The current error types SCC uses are: Record Not Found, incorrect address,and misroute. The Database Group indicated that other types of errors arelogged and tracked for resolution by each 9-1-1 Database Manager for variousreasons. Furthermore, the other types of errors were logged and processedthrough the AFIGs at Jacksonville and Fort Lauderdale before SCC took overthis function.

BellSouth advised that when they outsourced the database function to SCCthe Counties should never have been told that things would not change withregard to the way the Counties conducted their daily business. They advisedthat things always change. The Database Group commented that thingsshould not change every time SCC changes a County’s analyst or SCC getsa new manager for their Database Group.


They indicated in their presentation that they process service orders much thesame way as BellSouth. They indicated that the presentation by BellSouthwas extremely well done and accurate.

They process all database functions in-house. They have not, at this time,outsourced the MSAG update functions. They indicated that their systemupdates the ALI and Tn database every 30 minutes. This process allows formore accuracy in the records.


They advised their records are updated in-house – they have not outsourcedthat function. They also advised that the service order process is much thesame as the other Local Carriers. Their records are updated every 4 hours.

Time Warner

They process records via SCC and use MSAG data much the same as otherLocal Carriers.


They process records via SCC and use MSAG data much the same as otherLocal Carriers.

It was determined that each telephone company processes service orders using theirStreet Address Guide (SAG) database. These databases contain all sorts of data-such as SLIC Hut locations, provisioning information, and other data that is onlyused by the telephone company. Most of this information is, according to thetelephone companies, not 9-1-1 affective. These databases also contain theaddressing data derived from billing information provided over the years bytelephone customers. The telephone companies advised that their SAG databasewould never match the County’s MSAG databases. It was also determined thatremoving inaccurate information from the SAG databases is nearly impossible.

Local Carriers agreed that even though records are only validated against theCounty’s MSAG at the end of the process, errors found at that point are correctedonce the County is contacted and valid information is provided. They all makecorrections daily – some once a day and other several times a day. It is their opinionthat this process meets the requirements of the State Plan.

Most of the Alternate Local Exchange Carriers (ALECs) are provided [sold] a copy ofeach County’s MSAG database per a service agreement with the Local TelephoneCompany or their database group. Updates are provided on a quarterly basis. TheALECs are required to verify their service orders against the County’s MSAGdatabase prior to processing the service order through the Local TelephoneCompany. Only one of the ALECs in attendance, Intermedia, validates service ordersagainst the County’s MSAG database at the start of the service order process.

The Local Telephone Companies were asked how they were allowed to sell CountyMSAG databases to the ALECs since those databases are the property of theCounties. Many of the Counties wanted to know why they were not being reimburseda portion of the proceeds from the sale of their MSAG database. The LocalTelephone Companies were also asked why they do not appear to be using the samestandards for service order verification against MSAG that they require from theALECs. The Local Telephone Companies provided no comments related to thesequestions.

It was suggested that Counties could make their MSAG database available directlyto the ALECs. This information would be more accurate since the Local TelephoneCompanies are only providing updates quarterly. This information could be put ona County’s web site making this information available to the ALECs at no charge.

Some Carriers do not seem to have a problem with Record Not Found (RNF) andothers do. This could be due to the difference in updating several times a day versesonly once a day. Another possibility could be that outdated MSAG information isbeing used by ALECs further compounded by the process of locking and unlockingof records NOT being accomplished in a timely manner.

It was mentioned that many people dial 9-1-1 while the service order is stillprocessing. These calls result in Record Not Found at the Public Safety AnsweringPoint (PSAP). The Database Group is aware of the time frame required for TelephoneCompanies to provide service to the customer; however, the Group feels that somedetermination needs to be made as to when that time starts. Is it when the order istaken or when the order falls out at the time of MSAG verification? It is the opinionof the Database Group that there should be uniformity with regard to this time frame. If MSAG is checked at the start of the service order process and the address is notvalid corrections could be made and the service order process uninterrupted andcomplete well within the required time frame. It is the Telephone Companies’ opinionthat they have 72 hours after an order is requested and the time frame is onlyapplicable from the time an order falls out at the time of MSAG verification. Itappears that this will be an action item for some time.

BellSouth, GTE, Sprint, Time Warner, Winstar, and Intermedia were thanked for theirpresentations and participation. Each presentation was both informative andeducational.

Nelson Green gave an update of the status of the State Database StandardCommittee. He reiterated the importance of having a central person in charge of alladdressing and MSAG data. This person would, or should, have the authority tonotify each Telephone Carrier of errors and provide correct data that would becorrected in the Telephone Carrier’s records in the field for the 9-1-1 service address. The County’s 9-1-1 Coordinator should appoint this person unless each County’sBoard of County Commissioners has already designated an Addressing Authority intheir County.

In the past the customer has been relied on to contact the Telephone Company tocorrect information in their customer service records. It is apparent due tocontinuous and recurring errors that the customer doesn’t always correct thisinformation and even if they do the old invalid information remains in the TelephoneCompany’s SAG database. In some instances the Database Manager’s were led tobelieve that some Local Carriers’ database group could correct these records. Correcting only the Tn records does not resolve the problem! The invalid addresscontinues to repopulate again and again until the customer corrects the informationin the Telephone Company’s business records. The Addressing Authority wouldhave the authority to correct this information to help eliminate the recurring 9-1-1address errors.

Nelson also discussed the need for accuracy measurements and how they relate tothe 9-1-1 systems (Systems 3, 4, & 5) that are in use by many Counties and are beinglooked at by many other Counties.

Nelson strongly suggested that this Database Group keep an eye on Senate Bill 800.

The Group requested that each Local Carrier provide a list of acronyms and theirdefinitions so that everyone will know what they are talking about. Many of theacronyms are not included in the NENA list. For example, what is SME?

Barbara Thronburg, Chairperson of the NENA 9-1-1 Database MaintenanceCommittee, gave an overview of her committee’s progress from a NENA perspective.

Delaine Arnold, Chairman of the NENA Standards Committee, provided informationon what that committee is working on and asked if anyone is interested in servingon this committee. Anyone interested should contact her.

Both of these committees are looking at standards that will affect 9-1-1 in the future. If database manager’s want a voice in what is going to happen they need to becomeas involved as possible on these committees.

A poll was taken and the majority of those in attendance are NENA members.

BellSouth, GTE, and Plant Equipment provided an overview of their respective PBXdatabase systems. Each has a unique and slightly different approach tomanagement of these types of databases. It appears that the Local Carriers andvendors are working on systems that, in some instances, will work on existing trunksand will not require special trunking to accomplish providing an actual address andlocation information of callers using a PBX system. Each of these systems providesthe Counties something to think about if the FCC determines that PBX systems needto provide accurate location information for 9-1-1 calls made from these systems.

The Database Group thanked each of these groups for their presentations and input.

July 28, 2000 Business Meeting

Discussions provided several action items. Due to time limitations some items werenot discussed.

1) Each County will be asked to submit any Ordinances or Interlocal Agreementsregarding addressing and database management.

a) A list is to be compiled to provide agencies that do not have Ordinancesor Interlocal Agreements and those agencies that are in the process ofimplementing 9-1-1 a check list of things that other Counties have foundwere necessary to maintain addressing data and manage their respective9-1-1 systems. This list should assist in providing some uniformitystatewide with regard to these types of agreements and ordinances.

2) Each County will be asked to submit a copy of their ledger and inquiry forms. The Group would like to determine if it is possible to develop forms with someuniformity since, in the future, each County may be dealing with severalTelephone Companies.

a) Several forms will be developed for each County to review at the nextDatabase Group meeting in January 2001. Since it will do no good todevelop a form for the Telephone Companies to use without their input arequest will be made to each Telephone Company asking for a person tocontact concerning this effort. The Telephone Companies will becontacted for their input and comments and the final documents will beprovided for final review. This should be a concerted effort on the part ofall Database Managers.

3) A NENA committee is working on standards for GIS data and mapping formats. This Group should look at this from the perspective of the State of Florida.

4) A poll was taken to determine how many Counties allow changes to their MSAGdatabase without authorization, ledger back-up, or the Database Manager’sapproval. A show of hands indicated that no one allows changes withoutauthorization.

a) It would be well advised for each County to verify that information with theservice provider of their database to ensure that MSAG changes are NOTbeing made without authorization. There may be some misconception ormisunderstanding by the service providers regarding this issue.

b) Brevard County has a procedure used to compare MSAG data on amonthly basis. This process identifies any changes made during themonth and then each change is checked for accuracy and authorization. If anyone would like a copy of that procedure they should contact SharonCamp. Sharon’s e-mail address is [email protected].

5) Ringmasters and off-premise extensions were discussed since some Countiesare finding some ringmasters that are not all located at the same location. Thishas caused confusion regarding the exact location of the call.

a) The Local Carriers were asked if anyone explain to the customer that theexact address information would not display if the ringmaster is installedlike an off-premise extension (if that is possible). The Local Carriersadvised that the service representatives DO NOT explain this at the timethe service order is implemented.

b) It was suggested that the Local Carriers determine if it is possible forservice representatives to have a checklist to go through prior toprocessing orders of this type. The checklist would ensure that theservice representative would explain possible 9-1-1 display problems thatdifferent types of service could cause and that it could cause problems for9-1-1 response.

6) Sharon Camp advised that Brevard County has experienced some slamming. Research has determined that AOL is selling Internet services at a reduced costand in the process they are changing the customer’s local service to “TheOther Telephone Company.” Most of the customer’s are unaware that theirservice has been changed and wonder why they receive a disconnect noticeand final bill from the service provider they thought they had. If a 9-1-1 call ismade the PSAP get a Record Not Found (RNF). If the number is called-back itis a live line; however, SCC’s records indicate that Tn is disconnected and hasno information available and no pending service orders. It is apparent that thelock and unlock mechanisms do not seem to work on these numbers in atimely manner. Sharon has found this to be a problem with many of the ALECsand reseller’s records.

a) If you do not already check RNFs to determining if the service provide isan ALEC or reseller you may want to start. The telephone customer or yourdatabase person should be able to give you that information.

There were several agenda items that are important; however, there was not enoughtime to discuss them.

1) BSSDI Systems. What are they and how do they work?

2) Time frame for Local Carriers to correct errors from Inquiry Requests. Thisshould also define what constitutes a completed Inquiry Request.

3) Time frame for completion of MSAG changes.

Included in meeting handout folders are procedures and forms to use to complainto the Public Service Commission and the FCC. Also included is a form developedto advise the Statewide 9-1-1 Coordinator, Mr. Martin, of problems experience byCounties. It is important for Mr. Martin to know what is going on at the County level. He can help get County concerns to the attention of the proper people and canusually get things resolved that a County is having difficulty getting resolved throughnormal procedures. This paper trail means a lot when getting these concernsforwarded.

If anyone is having problems they cannot seem to get resolved through normalprocedures, they should file a complaint and ask for assistance in resolving theissue. That is what these agencies are there for. If they do not know there is aproblem they cannot take appropriate steps to eliminate it. WE NEED TO BE MOREVOCAL!! Most of these forms can be found on-line at each agency’s web site.

It is also important for Database Managers to know who their County lobbyists areand the procedure to approach them with our issues. Other organizations that arehelpful are: The League of Cities, The League of Counties, The Sheriff’s Association,and The Florida Association of Counties. NENA also has a lot of information on theirweb site – check it out. Check around and see what’s out there in your County.

A representative from Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office attended the meeting. Theyare in the process of implementing 9-1-1. If anyone is near that area and can offersupport or be available to answer any questions they might have, please give GraceThomas a call. [She does not have e-mail yet.]

Mark Adler, Palm Beach County, graciously volunteered to host the next Florida 9-1-1Database Group conference. The date of the conference is scheduled for January25 & 26, 2001. Please mark your calendars. Hope to see everyone there.

Election for new chairperson was held and Sharon Camp, Brevard County was re-elected.

If anyone has any comments or corrections to these minutes please contact SharonCamp. If you have anything you would like to see discussed at the next conferenceplease contact Sharon Camp. Sharon’s e-mail address is[email protected].

Let’s keep learning and asking questions.

Below, in bold, is additional information regarding the action items from theDatabase Conference.

7) Each County was asked to submit any Ordinances or Interlocal Agreementsregarding addressing and database management.

b) Sharon Camp has asked Ira Pyles, Hillsboro County, to compile this list. Attendees were asked to forward this information to Mr. Pyles. His e-mailaddress is [email protected].

8) Each County was asked to submit a copy of their ledger and inquiry forms. The Group would like to determine if it is possible to develop forms with someuniformity since, in the future, each County may be dealing with severalTelephone Companies.

a) Francie Sherwood, Indian River County, will coordinate this action item. Francie’s e-mail address is [email protected].

9) A NENA committee is working on standards for GIS data and mappingformats. This Group should look at this from the perspective of the State ofFlorida.

a) Sharon Camp will try to determine who is on the NENA committee and will tryto get a copy of what they are working on.

b) Sharon Camp has asked Leigh Barfield, Madison County, and Rikki Haring,Orange County, to assist in this endeavor. If anyone is involved with GIS andmapping, please contact Leigh. Leigh’s e-mail address is [email protected].

There were several agenda items that are important; however, there was notenough time to discuss them.

4) BSSDI Systems. What are they and how do they work?

a) Marion County has this system; therefore, Sharon Camp has asked them toaddress this at the next meeting. Anyone else that has this system is encouragedto provide input.

5) Time frame for Local Carriers to correct errors from Inquiry Requests. Thisshould also define what constitutes a completed Inquiry Request.

a) Sharon Camp has asked Santa Rosa County to address this issue at the nextmeeting.

6) Time frame for completion of MSAG changes.

a) Sharon Camp has asked Volusia County to address this issue at the next meeting.