## DA 99-2696

# December 3, 1999

Lawrence G. Malone

General Counsel

New York State Department of Public Service

Three Empire State Plaza

Albany, NY 12223-1350

Re: [914 Area Code Split]{.underline}

Dear Mr. Malone:

This letter responds to the State of New York Department of Public
Service's (NYDPS) November 18, 1999 request that the Federal
Communications Commission direct the North American Numbering Plan
Administrator (NANPA) to release a new area code to provide relief for
the 914 numbering plan area (NPA).[^1] For reasons discussed below, by
copy of this letter, we direct the NANPA to release the requested NPA
code as soon as practical.

In an Opinion and Order issued on November 4, 1999, the NYDPS ordered
implementation of a two-way geographic split of the existing 914 NPA
along county boundaries. Because the relief plan would result in the
splitting of certain rate centers between the old and the new NPAs,
however, the NANPA determined that releasing the requested code would
violate the industry's numbering assignment guidelines.[^2]
Consequently, the NANPA sought direction from the North American
Numbering Council (NANC) prior to acting on the request for a new NPA.
On November 16, 1999, the NANC forwarded to the Chief of the Common
Carrier Bureau its recommendation that the NANPA not release the
requested code.[^3] On November 18, 1999, the NANPA informed the NYDPS
that its request for a new area code had been denied.[^4] The NYDPS
responded with the instant request the same day.

The New York plan, by dividing rate centers, requires existing carriers
to obtain duplicate central office (CO) codes in each NPA in order to
continue to serve existing customers in each half of the rate center
without requiring those customers to change their seven-digit telephone
number. This aspect of the plan violates the industry's numbering
assignment guidelines. However, the NYDPS's plan to divide the 914 area
code will split only five rate centers. The NYDPS estimates that the
division of these five rate centers will necessitate the duplication of
only ten to twenty CO codes, representing less than three percent of the
additional CO code resources being created by the relief plan.
Accordingly, on these facts, we believe that a departure from the
industry guidelines is warranted.

We further find that granting New York's request is in the public
interest since the area code relief plan was developed based on
extensive input from the industry and from consumers affected by the
decision, which balanced a number of public interest goals.[^5] Growth
rates in both the existing and new code are such that, although carriers
would need numbers in both parts of split rate centers to provide
service, utilization of the numbers would be high. The NYDPS is taking
additional steps to conserve numbers in the 914 area, including
initiating a proceeding to consider rate center consolidation and
implementing thousands-block number pooling within the 914 area code and
the new code.[^6] The NYDPS already has sought and received additional
authority from the Commission to conduct trials in number pooling and
other number conservation measures.[^7]

Based on the foregoing, the Bureau directs the release of a new NPA code
under these specific circumstances to implement the NYDPS's area code
relief plan for the 914 NPA. However, in doing so based on this factual
showing, we in no way imply that the states are free not to follow the
industry guidelines concerning the splitting of rate centers in other
cases. The Bureau urges state commissions to conform to the industry
guidelines and to avoid adopting area code splits that do not follow
rate center boundaries, as far as practical. We also understand,
however, that as states consolidate rate centers it may become
increasingly difficult to avoid rate center splits altogether. As we
have previously stated, we intend to review carefully and critically any
future area code relief plans that are clearly outside the industry
guidelines.[^8] At the same time, we commend

the NYDPS for its commitment to use the additional delegated authority
that has received to explore other number conservation measures in these
and other NPAs.

Sincerely,

. Lawrence E. Strickling

Chief, Common Carrier Bureau

cc: Ronald R. Conners, Director, North American Numbering Plan
Administration

John Hoffman, Chair, NANC

Penny Rubin, NYDPS

[^1]: Letter from Lawrence G. Malone, General Counsel, NYDPS, to
    Lawrence E. Strickling, Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, dated Nov. 18,
    1999 (NYDPS Letter).

[^2]: *See* NPA Code Relief Planning & Notification Guidelines, INC
    97-0404-016, §§ 2.11 and 6.1, Aug. 30, 1999.

[^3]: Memorandum from John Hoffman, NANC Chair, to Larry Strickling,
    Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, dated Nov. 16, 1999.

[^4]: *See* Letter from Ronald R. Conners, Director-North American
    Numbering Plan Administration, Lockheed Martin IMS, to Debra Renner,
    Acting Secretary, NYDPS, dated Nov. 18, 1999.

[^5]: NYDPS Letter at 1-2.

[^6]: *Id.* at 2.

[^7]: New York State Department of Public Service Petition for
    Additional Delegated Authority to Implement Number Conservation
    Measures, *Order*, CC Docket No. 96-98, FCC 99-247, NSD File No.
    L-99-21 (rel. Sep. 15, 1999).

[^8]: Letter from Yog R. Varma, Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau, to
    Hon. Sheila Lumpe, Chair, Missouri Public Utility Commission, dated
    Dec. 28, 1998 (directing the release of a new NPA for the geographic
    split of the 314 NPA that did not conform to industry guidelines
    because of a significant disparity in the projected lives of the old
    and new codes) at 2.