I've got a lot of nitpicky stuff to add, most of which seems to me to be highly debatable, and one or two slightly more profound observations.
First off, I'm still a fan of the prologue. I even like this version better, though this is where most of the nitpicking happens.
You mention "a two-second journey from New York to Moscow". I think two cities beginning with the same letters would have fit much better. As it is, I expected some kind of explanation pertaining to the relevance of those two cities, politically or otherwise.
Directly after that, the "strange requests" lead to the birth. You could add one or two more examples of strange requests before mentioning that specific one (marriage on Everest or something equally silly), to make the transition to the next scene less abrupt. Maybe this part also needs an explanation of how the teleportation works, if it fits in there, plot-wise.
Once you reach the birth, your previously omniscient narrator suddenly has only very limited knowledge ("presumably the husband of the woman", etc), and then returns to omniscience.
The sky flashes, "no one ever tied it to the baby girl" - and why should they, I asked myself. Maybe here you should have further reinforced the general assumption that the flashing would be important sometime later on (mentioning that they happened at exactly the same time, for instance), otherwise it could just be judged an interesting coincidence and forgotten by the end of the next chapter.
"The Night the World Blew Up" doesn't sound to me like a name people (i.e. newspapers and other media) would adopt, escpecially as no actual blowing up of the world is involved. These things tend to have concise yet poetic names. Think "Black Friday", "V-Day" and the like.
Right, on to chapter one. In the prologue, you mention the date of the birth, then you mention that "over seven years later" something else happens. Chapter one then begins "17 years later". That adds up to 24.
"10 years and X days after World Blowing Up Day" would work. At that point I could still have done the math, and the first mention of Ashley's birthday isn't that far off.
A thing I don't like in general, not just in your submission, is emphasis through visual means, i.e. underlining, italicising and whatnot. Actually, I completely and totally despise that, because I think it disrupts the natural flow of reading. Mostly the emphasis is completely unnecessary, because it's readily apparent from the words themselves. If it isn't, then the words need changing. I did mention that all this would be highly debatable, didn't I?
I feel the need to throw in something positive again, so I'll state once again how much I liked the prologue, and that the excursion worked very much better than the two classroom scenes one after the other. There would still have been room between the two scenes for something unrelated to school, to show that Ashley has an actual life, but it wasn't as striking as in the previous version.
Another minor thing: the first mention of Kyle's name is a perfect point to insert a brief description of him (along the lines of "a bloke with purple hair").
After they talk about the Crashers in class, Rem says that it was a good "discussion". I stumbled over that word, because I personally wouldn't have called it that. It read as if the whole thing took maybe a minute or two, so I think you should let them talk a bit longer. Perfect place for an infodump, if you ask me.
I have one more. Someone mentioned above that they didn't get to know Ashley a lot. I partly agree. The major impression I had in two particular scenes was that the girl must be pretty dense. Walking on snow is better than walking on ice? Did she spend the last 17 years in sunnier climes, or why is this such a major discovery? The same goes for sitting down on ice and then being suprised at wet trousers. Those two scenes really made me question her intelligence, and they don't go very well with the somewhat more educated behaviour she displays shortly afterwards.
In retrospect, I seem to have gone for the "find lots of bad and little good"-approach. In my defense, I'll claim that good parts are naturally elusive because you breeze past them in reading. Anyway. Everything I didn't mention above obviously needs no fixing, and my overall impression is still similar to that of the previous version: I like it, give me more. Ideally combine the best of both drafts, and keep the prologue.
