**North American Numbering Council**

**Meeting Minutes**

**November 19-20, 2002 (Final)**

**I. Time and Place of Meeting.** The North American Numbering Council
held a meeting commencing at 9:00 a.m., at the Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street, S.W., TW-C305, Washington, D. C.

**II. List of Attendees.**

[Voting Council Members:]{.underline}

1\. Robert Atkinson Chairman

2\. Teresa Gaugler ALTS

3\. Pamela Connell AT&T

4\. Randy Sanders BellSouth

5\. Michael Altschul CTIA

6\. Maureen Flood CompTel

7\. Greg Pattenaude NARUC

8\. Peter Pescosolido NARUC

9\. Helen Mickiewicz NARUC

10\. Hon. Robert B. Nelson NARUC

11\. Joel Cheskis NASUCA

12\. Beth O'Donnell NCTA

13\. David Bench Nortel Networks

14\. John McHugh OPASTCO

15\. C. Courtney Jackson OUR

16\. Deborah Bell SBC Communications, Inc.

17\. Hoke Knox Sprint

18\. Michael O'Connor Verizon

19\. Karen Mulberry WorldCom

[Special Members (Non-voting):]{.underline}

John Manning NANPA

Jean-Paul Emard ATIS

[Commission Employees:]{.underline}

Sanford Williams, Designated Federal Officer (DFO)

Pam Slipakoff, Alternate DFO

Deborah Blue, Special Assistant to the DFO

Cheryl Callahan, Assistant Chief, Telecommunications Access Policy
Division

**III. Estimate of Public Attendance.** Approximately 37 members of the
public attended the meeting as observers.

**IV. Documents Introduced.**

(1) Agenda

(2) 2003 NANC Meeting Schedule

(3) NANPA Report to the NANC

(4) Status of Area Code Relief Exhausting within 36 Months

(5) Numbering Administration Oversight Working Group Report to the NANC

(6) Letter from Robert Atkinson to William Maher, Chief, Wireline
    Competition Bureau, regarding Grandfathered Wireless NXX Codes

(7) National Thousands Block Number Pooling Services

(8) INC Report to the NANC

(9) NANP Expansion/Number Optimization IMG Report to the NANC (Final
    Report)

(10) NANC IMG Review of Intermediate Numbers

(11) NANC IMG Review of Soft Dial Tone Numbers

(12) Memorandum to Robert Atkinson from the California Public Utilities
     Commission on Intermediate Numbers

(13) LNPA Working Group Status Report to the NANC

(14) Wireless Number Portability Operations Status Report to the NANC

(15) NANPA Fund Performance Status Report & Funds Projection

(16) VoIP Numbering Issues Report

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
V.  **Summary of the Meeting.**

**A.** [Announcements and Recent News.]{.underline} Chairman Atkinson
noted a change in the Agenda. He proposed that the VoIP item be moved
from new business and changed to Agenda Item number 15(a). Chairman
Atkinson noted the 2003 NANC meeting schedule and indicated that the
meetings are scheduled for one day every other month, from 9:00 AM to
5:00 PM.

**B. North American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA) Report to the
NANC.** John Manning, NANPA, provided the report to the Council.

[Central Office Code (CO) Activity Report.]{.underline} Mr. Manning
reported that the total number of assignments for the month of October
were 623 codes. The total assignments in the first ten months of 2002
were 6,700 codes. Net assignments were 3,222 codes. He noted that in
comparing the first ten months of 2002 with the same time period in
2001, assignments are down by 2,479 codes. The total returns in the
first ten months of 2002 were 3,298. Mr. Manning noted that in comparing
the 2002 returns with the same time period in 2001 (5,054), total
returns are down by 1,756 codes. He stated that there continues to be a
decline in the number of assignments. Mr. Manning further stated that
there is beginning to be a decline in the number of returns when
comparing 2002 to 2001. He noted that the decline occurred around
October 22, 2002 when wireless carriers in pooling NPAs were no longer
assigned CO Codes. Mr. Manning stated that in that timeframe, the number
of wireless service provider CO Code applications declined.

[NPA Relief Planning Status Report.]{.underline} Mr. Manning reviewed
the chart on the status of area code relief exhaust over the next 36
months, highlighting NPA codes that are expected to exhaust within the
next 12 months. He noted that the following four NPA codes are expected
to exhaust within the next 12 months: (1) 310 in California, (2) 909 in
California, (3) 616 in Michigan, and (4) 630 in Illinois. He stated that
NANPA does not anticipate a problem with NPA code 616 because a plan is
underway involving implementation of a split. NPA 630 has an overlay
planned. He pointed out that there is a very small quantity of codes
remaining in NPA codes 310 and 909. NPA code 310 is in rationing at 2
NXX codes every other month. The rationing level for NPA code 909 has
been reduced to 2 NXX codes per month. Michael O'Connor, Verizon,
remarked that, even if action were taken today, it would take a minimum
of one year to get area code relief completed in these 2 NPA's. Beth
O'Donnell questioned whether there is a supply of numbers with the
Pooling Administrator that will serve as a buffer. Mr. Manning responded
that as far as NANPA's inventory of codes, there are none to draw upon.
Helen Mickiewicz, NARUC, advised that there are numbers in the pools in
both NPAs 310 and 909 in California. Chairman Atkinson questioned
whether it is expected that California will run out of numbers. He
further questioned what is the current plan of the California PUC. Ms.
Mickiewicz stated that she could not answer his question. Chairman
Atkinson questioned who is responsible for solving this problem. Ms.
Mickiewicz responded that it is Loretta Lynch, President of the
California PUC. She advised that the industry has made efforts to make
the California PUC aware of the problem and of the need for a solution.

[Changes in NPA Exhaust Projections]{.underline}. Mr. Manning reported
that NANPA reviewed the forecast data made available by the Pooling
Administrator (PA) in September 2002 with regard to the demand for CO
codes with the implementation of wireless pooling. He stated that NANPA
did an analysis of several NPAs that were projected to exhaust within
the next three years to determine if adjustment in the forecasted
exhaust date is warranted. Mr. Manning advised that the PA only
reflected the impact of wireless pooling on its need for CO codes over
the next 12 months. He stated that based on the information from the PA
NANPA modified several NPA code exhaust projections. Mr. Manning
reported that NANPA published its initial analysis on October 18, 2002.
He indicated that a subsequent report on October 28, 2002 was published
that included two additional NPAs that changed exhaust dates. The most
recent report dated October 31, 2002 reflects the reduction in the
rationing level for all California NPAs in rationing to two NPA codes
per month. Ms. Mickiewicz gave an explanation for the reduction of
rationing to two NPA codes per month in every NPA in California. She
stated that the idea was to allow the rationing to continue while the
California PUC evaluated how things would proceed after pooling for
wireless carriers. Ms. Mickiewicz further stated that after 6 months, if
the California PUC finds that there is no real need to continue
rationing, they will consider eliminating it.

[NRUF Update -- Adding the Federal Registration Number (FRN) to Form
502]{.underline}. Mr. Manning reported that at the September 24, 2002
NANC meeting, NANPA informed the NANC that it had been directed by the
FCC to add an additional data element, the FRN to the NRUF Form 502. He
stated that the updated form would be used with the February 1, 2003
NRUF reporting cycle. Mr. Manning advised that NANPA has updated the
Form 502 Excel spreadsheet and added the FRN field to the "Company
Information" page. The field appears directly below the Service Provider
OCN field and directly above the Service Provider Type field. The FTP
file format has been updated as well. Mr. Manning cautioned the service
providers not to use the revised form until January 1, 2003, in
connection with the February 1, 2003 NRUF reporting cycle. He noted that
both the revised Form 502 and the FTP file formats will be posted to the
NANPA web site the week of November 18, 2002 and notification sent out
via the NRUF email distribution list.

[Carrier Identification Codes (CICs) for Switchless
Resellers]{.underline}. Mr. Manning reported that NANPA recently
received direction from the FCC regarding assigning Feature Group (FG) D
CICs to switchless resellers. He indicated that in accordance with the
guidelines and NANPA's interpretation of those guidelines, NANPA had not
been assigning CICs to carriers who did not show access and usage. Mr.
Manning stated that there has been a revision with regard to CICs and
their assignment. He reported that carriers do not have to purchase FG D
access in order to get a CIC. CICs can be assigned to switchless
resellers. Mr. Manning stated that in order to facilitate the
application process for switchless resellers, NANPA has provided, on its
web site, the following information: Submit a fully completed CIC
Application form to NANPA. In order for this application to be
processed, all appropriate fields on the form must be filled in. Provide
NANPA with documentation that validates their switchless reseller
status. The preferred document to verify this status would be one issued
by a state public utility commission. If the state commission in which
the applicant operates does not issue such documents, NANPA requires a
duly authorized officer of the applicant company to submit a certified
declaration attesting to the switchless reseller status of the
applicant. Mr. Manning stated that the INC addressed this issue at its
November 2002 meeting. He reported that INC Issue 392, Elimination of FG
D Access Requirement for Switchless Resellers is currently in initial
closure. The proposed resolution statement to this issue is the same as
the current direction NANPA has provided.

**C. Number Administration Oversight Working Group (NAOWG) Report.**
Karen Mulberry, WorldCom, presented the report to the Council.

[Report and Recommendation on the Pooling Administration System (PAS)
Forecasting Requirements]{.underline}. Ms. Mulberry reported that the
NAOWG investigated and analyzed requirements for PAS and for Forecasting
and came up with two critical threshold items: whether the guidelines or
the requirements intended to require PAS to create an environment where
block applicants would be denied resources, if the quantity of blocks
requested in a particular month exceeded the quantity of blocks
forecasted, and whether applicants should be required to submit a
replacement forecast before applying for additional blocks. Ms. Mulberry
stated that after the NAOWG's analysis, it was concluded that the PAS
design conflicts with stated requirements at the time of the issuance of
the contract. The NAOWG recommended that PAS should be modified to allow
applicants to be assigned thousands blocks if there is a sufficient
supply of blocks in the pool. Ms. Mulberry stated that according to the
guidelines and the requirements at the time that the contract was
initiated, applicants were not required to update their forecast even if
they were requesting more blocks than was forecasted for a particular
month.

Chairman Atkinson read the following statement from NeuStar regarding
the Pooling Administration System (PAS): "NeuStar, the Pooling
Administrator inventor of the FCC's PAS, respectfully declines to
comment on this report. We suggest that any perceived discrepancy
between the system and the guidelines be directed to Mr. Mark Oakey, who
has oversight of this contract as the FCC's Contracting Officer."
Chairman Atkinson stated that based on that response, the appropriate
thing for the NANC to do would be to forward this report and
recommendation to Mr. Oakey. Randy Sanders, BellSouth, questioned
whether the NANC will know the final outcome. Sanford Williams responded
that once Mr. Oakey has made a decision, Ms. Blue will disseminate the
answer to the NANC members. Chairman Atkinson will send a transmittal
letter to Mr. Oakey attaching the NAOWG report and requesting that he
advise the NANC of his decision. Deborah Bell, SBC, questioned whether,
during the interim, applications still will be rejected. Ms. Mulberry
responded that the working group did not propose an interim solution.
She advised that there is a process to go in and immediately update your
forecast and then go back and submit your application. Ms. Mulberry
commented that what should be an easy one step process is more of a two
or three step process. She explained that it does not prevent you from
getting your assignment, but it does require you to go in and update
your forecast before you can apply for an assignment. Ms. Mulberry
further explained that whatever you forecast in a month is the limit for
what you can be assigned.

[2002 NANPA Performance Survey, Cover Letter and Timeline]{.underline}.
Ms. Mulberry reported that the NAOWG modified the 2001 Survey to include
the Code Administration System (CAS). She stated that the NAOWG
solicited comments from NANPA and revised the survey accordingly. Ms.
Mulberry reviewed the final survey with the NANC. She advised that the
NAOWG would like to obtain NANC approval of the final survey. Ms.
Mulberry stated that the NAOWG would like to start the distribution
process for the final survey on November 22, 2002. She further stated
that the NANPA will post the survey on the NANPA web site and the
industry associations will distribute the survey to their membership.
Mr. Sanders inquired as to whether there have been any significant
changes to this survey. Ms. Mulberry responded that there have not been
significant changes from last year. The NANC approved the survey and
memo for distribution. Chairman Atkinson stated that he will offer a
plaque to the association with the best return level. The due date for
the completed survey is December 31, 2002. The NAOWG will present the
final report to the NANC on March 3, 2003.

[Status of 2002 NANPA Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)
Items]{.underline}. Ms. Mulberry stated that the NAOWG meets with NANPA
on a monthly basis to review the progress on PIP items. She reported
that there are seven PIP items noted by topic: PIP 1 -- Code
Administration System (CAS); PIP 2 -- NANPA Web Site; PIP 3 -- Code
Administration; PIP 4 -- Relief Planning; PIP 5 -- NRUF; PIP -- 6 --
Measurements; and PIP -- 7 General.

[Outstanding PA Change Order Review]{.underline}. Ms. Mulberry reported
that the NAOWG received direction from the FCC to begin reviewing the PA
Change Orders and provide proposed recommendations. She stated that the
NAOWG has completed its initial review of all of the outstanding Change
Orders. Ms. Mulberry indicated that the NAOWG is working on developing a
recommendation template. She stated that for particular Change Orders,
the NAOWG is composing questions for clarification, which will be
submitted to the FCC. Ms. Mulberry reported that the open Change Orders
are Change Orders 6 and 10-16. The NAOWG is working to finalize the
recommendations. The recommendations will be furnished to the FCC and
the NANC members will be copied. Ms. Mulberry stated that these
recommendations do not require NANC approval for communication to the
FCC. Chairman Atkinson proposed that the appropriate way to handle this
would be to get NANC consensus that the NANC does not want to get
involved in second-guessing and reviewing these Change Orders. There
were no objections from NANC members.

Ms. Mulberry reviewed the upcoming meeting schedule with the NANC
members. She advised that if anyone is interested in joining the NAOWG,
to please contact one of the Co-Chairs. All of the NAOWG meeting records
and documents are posted on the NANC Chair web site.

**Grandfathered NXX Codes.** Chairman Atkinson advised that on behalf of
the NANC, he had submitted the letter on Grandfathered Wireless NXX
Codes to the FCC on October 23, 2002. Ms. Mickiewicz stated that the
California PUC wrote a letter to the PA asking that any blocks in the
grandfathered codes not be put into the pools that are going in all area
codes but one in California. She indicated that the PA forwarded a copy
of the letter along with a cover letter to the FCC. Michael O'Connor,
Verizon, commented that Verizon has filed a petition, but the petition
has not yet been put out for public comment. He stated that it is his
understanding that in all states where grandfathered codes have been
donated, NeuStar will not be assigning those blocks until industry and
regulators can figure out what the right answer is. Barry Bishop,
NeuStar, agreed. Mr. Bishop stated that a similar letter was also
received from the New York PSC. He further stated that NeuStar informed
the FCC that it does not intend to act on these letters for now unless
directed otherwise by the FCC. Mr. O'Connor stated that it is his
understanding that the INC has an issue in initial closure, that may go
to final closure by the end of the week, which would modify the
guidelines so that these codes do not get assigned until regulators and
industry have a chance to decide on the best approach. He further stated
that once the INC guidelines are in effect, the PA and the NANPA must
abide by them unless directed by a regulatory agency to do otherwise.
Mr. Bishop responded that Mr. O'Connor is correct.

**D. Presentation by National Thousands-Block Pooling Administrator
(PA).** Barry Bishop, NeuStar, provided the report to the Council. Mr.
Bishop stated that since the implementation of the national rollout
began on January 4, 2002, there have been 64 First Implementation
Meetings (FIMs) for 97 NPAs (including overlays and splits in permissive
dialing). The FIMs for the 4^th^ Quarter of the rollout schedule were
completed on October 17, 2002. The schedule for the 5^th^ Quarter of the
rollout was posted on October 31, 2002. The FIMs for the 5^th^ Quarter
of the rollout will begin on December 4, 2002 and end on February 5,
2003.

Mr. Bishop provided an update on wireless pooling implementation. He
reported that intra-SP ports and donations were completed on November 1,
2002. Over 1900 blocks that were identified to the PA on August 15, 2002
as donations were taken back by service providers for various reasons
prior to November 1, 2002. Mr. Bishop reported that a list of the take
backs detailing the areas, number of blocks, service providers, and
reasons for the take back (where available) has been forwarded to the
FCC. A revised assessment was completed by the PA on November 15, 2002.
He indicated that the revised assessment shows that 12 states were
affected; 19 NPAs were affected; 23 Rate Centers were affected; 2065
blocks forecasted; 1453 blocks were donated; 77 NXX codes will need to
be opened; and prior to the take back, 17 NXX codes were needed at first
assessment. Mr. Bishop advised that the first date for wireless service
providers to apply for a block was November 4, 2002. He noted that a
little more than 1000 requests have been received, with the majority
being in California.

Mr. Bishop reported that no new Change Orders have been filed since
September 18, 2002. He reported on the outstanding Change Orders: Change
Order #6 -- CO NXX Issue #295 -- change to Selection Process of Code
Holder; Change Order #7 -- PAS Security; Change Order #10 -- LNPA Issue
#319 -- Intra-SP Porting for Rate Center Telephone Number
Administration; Change Order #11 -- CO/NXX Issue #195 -- Final Jeopardy
Procedures; Change Order #12 -- changes to the TBPAG identifying rules
within FCC 01-362; Change Order #13 -- Modification to User Profile
Application Appendix 5; Change Order #14 -- Modify Part 3 Form in TBPAG;
Change Order #15 -- Update MTE in COCAG; and Change Order #16 -- LNPA
Issue #335 -- AOCNs Performing Initial Thousand Block Entries into
BIRRDS.

Mr. Bishop reviewed with the NANC, the October and November 2002
Thousands Block Pooling Reports that were submitted to the FCC by the
PA. He reported that for the month of October 2002, of the 1623
applications that were processed, 1253 applications were approved; 155
applications were denied; and 215 applications were suspended. For the
month of November 2002, of the 1734 applications that were processed,
1243 applications were approved; 276 applications were denied; and 215
applications were suspended. Mr. Bishop reviewed with the NANC, the
October and November 2002 System Performance Reports that were submitted
to the FCC by the PA. He reported that for the month of October 2002,
the percent available was 99.99, with 719 hours and 2 seconds of
availability. There was one instance of unavailability for 58 seconds
due to an emergency patch that had to be put in the system. Mr. Bishop
reported that for the month of November 2002, the availability was 100%,
with 744 hours of availability.

Ms. Bell once again inquired as to whether, during the interim, it is
possible to configure something, with the current parameters of the PAS,
that would allow for providers not to experience a denial or rejection
of their applications. She had previously made this inquiry during the
presentation of the NAOWG Report. Mr. Bishop responded no. He explained
that the only thing that can be done would be to make a change to the
system.

After extensive discussion, it was again decided that the NAOWG would
transmit the PAS Forecasting Report to Mark Oakey, the FCC Contracting
Officer. The NAOWG will take a look at whether there is any feasibility
of "work arounds" other than to change the forecasts, but not spend a
lot of effort until we hear back from Mr. Oakey on whether the PAS is
going to change. Chairman Atkinson stated that if there is no change to
the PAS, then presumably, there might be a more intense effort on other
"work arounds".

**Sanford Williams gave an update on the new NANPA Contract.** Mr.
Williams stated that the NANPA Procurement is temporarily on hold. The
FCC issued an RFP and received some questions that need to be addressed.
Once those questions are addressed, the procurement will be back on
schedule. Arrangements have been made with the current NANPA to remain
in place until a new NANPA is named.

**E. Contamination Threshold IMG -- (Petition of the California Public
Utilities Commission and the People of the State of California for
Waiver of the Federal Communications Commission's Contamination
Threshold Rule).** Beth O'Donnell stated that the IMG met four times
since the FCC issued its call for comments. She reported that the IMG
settled on a few assumptions and a few agreements. Ms. O'Donnell stated
that they only looked at California and that they were not going to be
assessing the implications of this nationwide. The IMG settled on
figures that were supplied by the California PUC in its Petition. The
IMG also noted an updated figure provided by NeuStar -- that there will
be 7,000 codes as of July that would have from 11-25% contamination, and
thus be implicated by the Petition for Waiver. An updated figure in
November was a little more than 6,200 codes. Ms. O'Donnell advised that
the IMG is operating on the assumption that they are not doing a cost
analysis, and not weighing the costs against the benefits because they
are doing an analysis of the technical viability, not necessarily the
cost issues involved. She indicated that the IMG did reach two
agreements overall, but not formally. The IMG agreed, in general, that
most things are technically feasible. They took another look at
technical viability, not technical feasibility. The IMG reviewed the
definitions of technically feasibility versus viability. They put
together a list of what contributed to technical viability. The IMG also
agreed that they were not going to go through each of these points and
get to whether or not the attribute led them to a finding on the
technical viability. Ms. O'Donnell stated that the IMG drafted the
report to say that technical viability is very subjective, and that the
FCC will be supplied information by individual carriers. The report
recommends that the FCC use this report and assess the technical
viability based on information from other carriers. Ms. O'Donnell
indicated that it is an actual analysis of technical viability for the
NANC to put forward to the FCC.

After extensive discussion, Chairman Atkinson stated that the IMG
proposal is an incomplete success. He pointed out that the deadline for
providing NANC's findings to the FCC is December 13, 2002. It was
decided that the NANC needed more information to understand the major
views in order to reach a consensus. Chairman Atkinson proposed that the
IMG make one more effort to produce a recommended or proposed finding.
The IMG will prepare proposed NANC findings no later than December 6,
2002. A conference call will be scheduled for December 11, 2002.
Chairman Atkinson advised that he will circulate to the NANC, a proposed
letter for filing to the FCC by December 10 for discussion on the
December 11, 2002 conference call.

**F. Industry Numbering Committee (INC) Report.** David Bench, INC
Moderator, presented the report to the Council. Mr. Bench announced that
this will be his last INC report as INC Moderator. He introduced Ms.
Dana Smith as the new INC Moderator and Mr. Ken Havens as the new
Assistant INC Moderator.

Mr. Bench reviewed the INC meeting schedule with the NANC. He reported
on Grandfathered Wireless NXX Codes. Mr. Bench stated that the INC added
text to the Thousands-Block Pooling Guidelines to direct the PA to set
aside those blocks from wireless grandfathered NXXs that were donated to
the pool. The PA cannot assign these blocks to SPs until regulatory
authorities provide direction on how to handle these unique numbering
resources.

Mr. Bench reported on the CIC Workshop. He stated that the INC agreed to
set aside FG D CIC 0911 so it would be unavailable for assignment to any
entity. Mr. Bench pointed out that in the foreseeable future, it could
potentially be designated for emergency use. He noted that this
non-assignable code was requested by NANPA. Mr. Bench reviewed the
Committee Issue Summary and relevant INC web sites with the NANC.

**G. NANP Expansion/Numbering Optimization IMG (NENO).** Penn Pfautz,
AT&T, presented the report to the Council. Mr. Pfautz announced that
this is the final report of the NANP Expansion/Numbering Optimization
IMG. He stated that the NENO took a set of measures that had been
discussed at the NANC Optimization Measures and tried to assess those
along with plans for NANP Expansion. Basically, the NENO focused on a
set of 10 of those measures. They set aside and did not do further
analysis on some because they seemed to lack definition, and it was
determined that they were not NANP Exhaust deferral measures. Mr. Pfautz
stated that the NENO took the 10 measures and agreed on a basic
description. They wanted to document the availability, the constraints
on the availability of these measures, the projected impact on the life
of the NANP, costs, and other considerations. Mr. Pfautz reviewed the
cost and benefit analysis summary. He stated that the NENO could not
come up with absolute dollar costs. Mr. Pfautz further stated that no
one really knows, and even if they did, they probably would not disclose
what it would cost their company to implement these things. He advised
that the NENO agreed on a relative cost approach where they would come
up with some relative ranking of the costs of the different measures.
Mr. Pfautz emphasized that you can not compare the costs across
categories, only within. He indicated that since thousands-block number
pooling has been included, it may give some idea of what the costs are
in terms of dollars and, potentially, can be a rough reference point
when dealing with these numbers. Mr. Pfautz noted that, in general, any
of the NRO measures are less costly than expanding the NANP. He reviewed
the chart which summarized the quantitative analysis of the benefits.

Mr. Pfautz stated that the data suggests avenues that may be worth
further investigation, but the NENO agrees that more extensive analysis
should precede any decision to implement any of these measures. He
indicated that the data are suggestive, but not conclusive. Mr. Pfautz
stated that the NENO does not make any kind of implementation
recommendation. He stated that he hoped that this report would provide
some guidance as to what measures should be investigated further if it
were to be concluded that more NRO measures needed to be implemented.
Mr. Pfautz noted that there are other measures that the NENO did not
fully examine because they came too late in the process. Over time,
these conclusions may need to be re-examined as the environment changes
and as technology evolves.

Mr. Pfautz thanked all of the Co-Chairs and NENO members, and the NANPA.

Chairman Atkinson indicated that he is looking for some mechanism that
will keep this report alive and improving without being burdensome. He
stated that the sense of crisis has gone away, but nevertheless, maybe
it could come back as quickly as it went away. Chairman Atkinson
questioned whether there is any further work that should be done by this
IMG or another IMG.

After extensive discussion, it was decided that the NENO will draft a
transmittal letter (no more than 3 pages) to the FCC and outline what
the report is, the reasons why this report is important - noting some of
the key issues, what should be done with the report, and note any
proposed recommendations.

**H. Report of the NANC Intermediate Numbering/Soft Dial Tone (IN/SDT)
IMG.** Deborah Bell, SBC, presented the report to the Council. Ms. Bell
reported that the IN/SDT IMG made some modifications in their
recommendations that were presented at the September NANC meeting. She
stated that the following definition of intermediate numbers remains the
same: [Intermediate Numbers]{.underline} are included in numbers
assigned by the national administrator (NANPA or PA) to a carrier (Party
A) that in turn establishes a secondary inventory of numbers dedicated
for use by another entity (Party B) responsible for the assignment of
the numbers to end-user customers. Therefore, the numbers are not
available to Party A for assignment to its end-user customers.

Ms. Bell reviewed the following modifications with the Council. NRUF -
In support of the revised definition above, the following are the
impacts to NRUF and any recommended changes: Party A would continue to
document any intermediate number blocks on NRUF. Party A would continue
to identify Party B in the notes/Assignee field. If Party B does not
have an OCN, continue to enter the entity name. The change is: If Party
B has an OCN, enter only the OCN and not the entity name. This direction
is accomplished via a change to NANPA's NRUF Job Aid. The NRUF
calculation that automatically excludes INs should remain as is. Once
the FCC clarifies the definition of Intermediate Numbers, monitor two
cycles of NRUF reports to determine the quantity of INs in the industry.
This will give an idea of the scope of the issue. Only then should
consideration be given to establishing a percentage threshold of INs in
a SP's inventory that warrants further examination by regulators.

Utilization Calculation on INC MTE Worksheet -- Ms. Bell stated that the
IMG suggests two alternatives and prefers Alternative A. The
modification to Alternative A is: For the purpose of calculating
utilization on the MTE worksheet, Intermediate Numbers should be treated
the same as Assigned Numbers. The SP receiving the resource directly
from NANPA designates in internal systems that these TNs are NOT
available for assignment to its end-user customers and are NOT available
for its own internal use. Change is needed on the INC MTE worksheet.
Change would be needed to the NRUF so that Intermediate Numbers remains
a separate category but the embedded NRUF calculation will require
modification. Change to the utilization calculation -- the numbering
resource utilization level shall be calculated by dividing all assigned
numbers and intermediate numbers by the total numbering resources in the
applicant's inventory and multiplying the result by 100. Numbering
resources activated in the Local Exchange Routing Guide (LERG) within
the preceding 90 days of reporting utilization levels may be excluded
from the utilization calculation.

The modification to Alternative B is: Intermediate Numbers remains a
standalone category and is specifically itemized as being removed from
the denominator of the utilization formula. Change would be needed on
the INC MTE worksheet. No change is needed on the NRUF. Change to the
utilization calculation -- the numbering resource utilization level
shall be calculated by dividing all assigned numbers by the total
numbering resources in the applicant's inventory minus the intermediate
numbers and multiplying the result by 100. Numbering resource activated
in the Local Exchange Routing Guide (LERG) within the preceding 90 days
of reporting utilization levels may be excluded from the utilization
calculation.

Ms. Mickiewicz reviewed proposed revisions from the California Public
Utilities Commission (CPUC) to the IN/SDT IMG's recommendations.
Chairman Atkinson suggested that the IN/SDT IMG and the CPUC have a
quick conference call for further discussion to settle their
differences. The final text should be emailed to the NANC members.
Chairman Atkinson will provide a cover letter to the FCC to initiate an
NPRM. He stated that if the differences can not be settled, the
word-smithing can be done during the comment phase on the NPRM.

Ms. Bell reported on the IN/SDT IMG's review of Soft Dial Tone Numbers.
She stated that concerns over the potential impact of Soft Dial Tone
(SDT) Numbers was also discussed at the May and July 2002 NANC meetings.
SDT Numbers generally are used to satisfy a legislative or regulatory
mandate to provide 911 emergency access on all residential lines. Local
exchange carriers (LECs) who provide dial tone at a location where phone
service has been suspended or disconnected are obligated, in some
jurisdictions, to provide restricted dialing ability to enable contract
with 911 operators. SDT is sometimes referred to as a warm dial tone or
quick dial tone.

Ms. Bell stated that the IN/SDT's goal was to present findings and
possible recommendations to the NANC. She further stated that although
SDT may not presently be causing the problem when qualifying for
utilization threshold, as the threshold continues to rise, so does the
potential for a problem. This is a proactive approach to present a case
for the NANC to evaluate.

Ms. Bell reported that after hours of discussion, the IN/SDT IMG agreed
that the following points capture the main concerns: SDT Numbers are not
available for assignment by the carrier as long as these numbers provide
Soft-Dial Tone service. SDT Numbers are "working in the PSTN" by virtue
of providing commission-ordered out-dial capability for emergency
service. Carriers are unable to provision SDT service without consuming
telephone numbers, switching capacity and terminations, and local
telephone facilities. Since SDT Numbers are not included in the
numerator of the utilization calculation, this affects a carrier's
ability to obtain additional numbering resources. SDT Numbers limit the
carrier's ability to achieve utilization thresholds.

The IN/SDT IMG recommends that the FCC allow numbers associated with
Soft-Dial Tone obligations to be categorized as "assigned" numbers. Such
a definition would be appropriate since the FCC defines "A number in
soft dial tone as a number temporarily assigned to line equipment and
facilities which permits restricted dialing. The FCC should direct NANPA
and the PA to inform carriers that Soft-Dial Tone Numbers should be
deemed a sub-category of assigned numbers when calculating utilization
levels. No change is needed to the format of the current utilization
calculation on the INC MTE worksheet.

Mr. Bench pointed out that there is no mention in the report that a
telephone number is not needed for Soft-Dial Tone, a warm line, or to
out-dial. Ms. Bell stated that recognition was given to that fact in the
report, by stating "usually" rather than 100 percent. Mr. Bench
suggested that numbers associated with Soft-Dial Tone be used instead of
Soft-Dial Tone Numbers because these classifications are mutually
exclusive.

After extensive discussion, it was agreed that the IN/SDT IMG will
consider the CPUC's comments on Soft-Dial Tone on the same conference
call considering the CPUC's comments on Intermediate Numbers. Chairman
Atkinson asked the NANC members to email editorial comments to Ms. Bell.
He advised that no NPRM is required. He advised that it the IMG has
composed a recommendation that the FCC direct NANPA and the PA to
implement the recommendations.

**I. Local Number Portability Report (LNPA).** Gary Sacra, Verizon,
presented the report to the Council. Mr. Sacra stated that Release 3.2
is progressing. He advised that Release 3.2 contains Change Orders that
have a higher priority of improvements to the data recovery process,
edits to prevent the input of erroneous porting data, and the ability to
change NXX code ownership in NPAC without taking ported customers
temporarily out of service. Mr. Sacra advised that the latter Change
Order, even though it is part of NPAC Release 3.2, will not actually go
into production until some months after Release 3.2 is implemented. In
order to ensure that Service Providers and their vendors have sufficient
time to complete Release 3.2 turn-up testing, the LNPA has recommended
to NAPM that 2 weeks be added to the Service Provider Individual Turn-up
Testing interval (March 4, 2003 -- April 25, 2003). In addition, the
LNPA is recommends that NAPM add 1 week to the Service Provider Group
and Performance Testing interval (April 28, 2003 -- May 14, 2003). The
first Region will go into production with NPAC Release 3.2 on May 19,
2003. Subsequently, the additional regions will be rolled out. This
recommendation will be discussed at the November NAPM meeting. Mr. Sacra
reported that the LNPA Working Group is continuing ongoing discussions
of ways to improve porting performance. The LNPA agreed to form an
architecture planning team to identify future direction and
functionality. Discussions will include ways to enhance the existing
CMIP protocol in order to improve performance. Mr. Sacra explained that
the CMIP protocol is the protocol that is used for the interfaces
between NPAC and SOA and between NPAC and the LSMS. In addition the
group is going to investigate possible alternatives to CMIP protocol.
The group will also discuss possible changes to the current association
abort strategy. The architecture planning team will begin meeting in
January 2003. Mr. Sacra reviewed the PIM report with the Council.

[Wireless Number Portability Operations (WNPO) Report to the
NANC.]{.underline} Mr. Sacra reported that with the advent of number
pooling and number portability, telemarketers will no longer be able to
identify wireline numbers based on NPA-NXX. Contributions regarding this
issue were discussed. Wireless service providers are concerned that
their customers will start receiving telemarketing calls because the
telemarketer can not distinguish wireless and wireline telephone
numbers. By law, telemarketers are not supposed to call wireless
telephone numbers. In a pooling or porting environment there will be a
potential impact from telemarketers after November 24, 2002 on the
wireless customer.

The matrix containing wireless specific parameters was updated. The
hours for the Long Business Days were discussed. There were changes to
the effective dates for the test beds and production system. A request
to implement these changes was sent to the NAPM LLC. A proposed update
to the Guidelines for Type 1 Number Migration was discussed. This update
involved the provision of SS7 functionality on Type 1 trunks. The update
was approved with a modification to some of the language. An issue
regarding extended permissive dialing periods for NPA splits was
discussed. It was agreed that because wireless and wireline service
providers will be sharing codes in the pooling/porting environment, the
end date for permissive dialing for area code splits must be the same
date for both wireless and wireline service providers. Several
contributions regarding the JIP (Jurisdiction Information Parameter)
were discussed. Concern was expressed that there may be large numbers of
pooled blocks activated over the next month or two because in some
areas, wireless service providers have not been able to obtain new codes
in order to maintain a six month inventory of numbers. Information
provided by the PA indicated that a revised Pool Assessment Report would
be published and distributed in the near future.

Mr. Sacra reported that there is no new entrant testing occurring at
this time. Work is underway on Release 3.2. There are a total of 35
wireless service providers who have completed NDAs, applications, and
inter-connection plans as of the end of October. A total of 7 wireless
service providers or service bureaus have completed new entrant testing.
NeuStar also reported that there are currently 154,826 wireless
intra-service provider ports that have been complete. WNPO requested
that NeuStar also provide a similar report for November wireless
intra-service provider ports since it is recognized that not all work
was completed by October 31, 2002.

A report was presented by the National Emergency Number Association
(NENA) representative. NENA is in the process of forming a technical
working group to identify issues related to call blocking and emergency
service numbers, and how to resolve those issues. There is a study group
under the Emergency Services Interconnect Forum (ESIF) working an issue
to determine what is to be delivered to the PSAP on a 911 call that will
be used as a possible call-back number from an uninitialized phone.
Lessons learned and problems identified during inter-carrier testing
were discussed. Resolutions for all problems relating to inter-carrier
testing of calls to emergency service have been identified. There are no
unresolved problems at this time.

The WTSC reported that by November 24, 2002, inter-carrier testing will
have been completed in eight MSAs. Seven wireless service providers and
three wireline service providers will have participated in inter-carrier
testing in at least one of those MSAs.

Mr. O'Connor indicated that there are some area codes that are in
extended permissive dialing from which blocks may be donated. He stated
that those blocks should not be assigned until the extended permissive
period is done. Mr. Sacra agreed. After a brief discussion, it was
decided that the PA will take care of the problem. Mr. Bishop stated
that NeuStar will be working with the WNPO and make the FCC, the NANC
and the states aware of the outcome. He further stated that, NeuStar
will bring in contributions to the INC for the guidelines if it is
appropriate.

**J. NBANC Report.** John Ricker, NBANC, presented the report to the
Council. Mr. Ricker reported that as of October 31, 2002, the current
fund balance is \$11.4 Million. The projected receivables for 2002-2003
are \$3.67 Million from monthly contributors. Payments to NeuStar for
NANPA and CO Code Administration - \$1.76 Million for the 5^th^ funding
year; Remaining \$3.66 Million. Payments to NeuStar for Pooling
Administrator -- June 2001 - \$3.28 Million; July 2002 - \$584 Thousand;
Remaining - \$616 Thousand. Payments to NeuStar for Pooling
Administrator for 2002-2003 - \$640 Thousand; Remaining - \$2.4 Million.
Payments to NANPA Auditor -- Year to date - \$177 Thousand; Remaining -
\$523 Thousand. Payments for COCUS Replacement - \$203 Thousand;
Remaining - \$203 Thousand; Payments to Mitre Corp. -- September 15,
2002 Letter Contract for PA procurement and NANPA equitable adjustment;
Year to date - \$1,670.82 for PA; Year to date - \$360.36 for NANPA.
February 6, 2002 Contract for NANPA procurement - \$288 Thousand; Year
to date - \$145 Thousand; Remaining - \$143 Thousand. Payments to NECA
for NBANC's operation for 2002-2003 -- Year to date - \$104 Thousand;
Remaining - \$247 Thousand. Payments for Board Expenses for 2002-2003 --
Year to date - \$3,004; Remaining - \$21,996. Payments to External
Auditor, Withum Smith & Brown, Auditor of 2001-2002 Operations - \$29
Thousand; Remaining \$28,680.

Mr. Ricker advised that the audit report for NBANC was clean. He noted
that on October 29, 2002, NBANC submitted its first quarterly report,
which cover the period July 1, 2002 through September 30, 2002. Mr.
Ricker further noted that on November 5, 2002, NBANC submitted the
Delinquency Summary Report, as well as a listing of all of the carriers
that have not yet complied with their requirement to contribute. Mr.
Ricker advised that NBANC will now be reviewed by the FCC's external
auditor.

**K. Report on VOIP Numbering Issues.** Randy Sanders, BellSouth**,**
presented the report to the Council. Mr. Sanders reported that the
purpose of the Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) paper is to make the
people that are doing numbering (the NANC, the FCC, and the State
Commission) aware, from a numbering perspective only, of the impact of
VoIP. He advised that it is not intended to be all-inclusive. Mr.
Sanders stated that once other experts get involved, they will find
other things that should be considered for the national numbering plan.

Mr. Sanders stated that there are several companies that offer VoIP
service. He pointed out that some companies go so far as to say that it
is a complete substitution for local service. He stated that some of the
issues implicated are number porting, 911, i.e., some of the things that
local service providers have to do, and that how they will use
technology to accomplish this is something they will have to work on.
Mr. Sanders stated that, for a fixed fee, you can get your own personal
number that you can take with you or keep for the rest of your life, get
unlimited calling, and various other features. Service providers offer
the possibility of having multiple numbers assigned to you. The numbers
do not have to be numbers from the geographic NPA where you reside.
There are no country boundaries. With this type of technology, the
telephone number that you get does not necessarily have to be assigned
in the United States.

Mr. Sanders reviewed some examples of VoIP service that were discovered
on the Internet. Example one: VoIP providers do not obtain numbers
directly from NANPA. They obtain numbers from LECs that have received
numbers from NANPA. Today, the LEC service provider that provides the
number to VoIP providers must report these numbers on NRUF as
"Intermediate" numbers. The VoIP provider in turn re-assigns these
numbers to their VoIP customers. Example two: A second VoIP service
provider allows a customer to get a personal number based on the area
code of the customer's choice. Also, each account includes voicemail
that can be accessed from a telephone or from the web. This particular
VoIP service provider advertises that customers can select any available
area code from a list provided by the service provider, no matter where
they live in the world.

Mr. Sanders reviewed some excerpts from industry guidelines established
by the Industry Numbering Committee (INC) which identified numbering
issues with VoIP type service.

Mr. Sanders indicated that there are jurisdictional issues. He stated
that neither country, state, county, nor local municipality boundaries
are defined. Mr. Sanders opined that the idea of administering this
system will have to be re-thought.

Ms. O'Donnell questioned why these numbers are any different than any
other intermediate number. She further questioned why a technology that
is using intermediate numbers is being singled out, and why does
anything have to be changed. Mr. Sanders in turn questioned how
forecasts can be made in a particular NPA if it is not known where the
end users are. Ms. O'Donnell questioned why that mattered. Chairman
Atkinson commented that the NANC should be thinking more broadly. He
further commented that the NANC should keep the Big Picture in mind, and
think about the changes that VoIP will have on the whole system that has
evolved over the prior 100 or so years for telephone numbers, i.e., what
they are, how they are assigned, and what they do. Maureen Flood,
CompTel, opined that it might be premature to engage in a lot of work on
these issues. Ms. Mickiewicz questioned whether it is necessary to do
anything about it. Ms. Mulberry suggested that the NANC should look at
the efficiencies of the process. She stated that it could have some
value and could tie into some of the work that NENO and others have been
doing. Courtney Jackson, OUR, stated that there are countries in the
Caribbean that have settlement rate issues. He indicated that some of
the scenarios that were mentioned in the VoIP paper will have serious
consequences for the settlement rate regime in those countries. Chairman
Atkinson stated that that is a legitimate issue for a country to make,
but it is not within the purview of the NANC. Chairman Atkinson
questioned whether the NANC should continue to look at the potential
impact of VoIP on the North American Numbering Plan.

After extensive discussion, Chairman Atkinson proposed that the NANC
members who think that there is an important role for the NANC on the
VoIP issue, should draft some proposed charters for any further work or
working groups on the subject and circulate it before the January NANC
meeting. He requested that the NANC members give their thoughts on
things that the NANC should be doing pursuant to the NANC Charter
relating to new technologies such as VoIP.

**L. Approval of Meeting Minutes.** Minutes of the September 24-25, 2002
NANC meeting will be approved electronically in order to give the NANC
members time to review them.

**M. Public Participation.** None.

**Next Meeting: January 22, 2003**

**November 19-20, 2002**

# NANC Meeting

**Action Items and Decisions Reached:**

1.  NANC Chairman to prepare letter to transmit NAOWG's "Analysis and
    Report on Pooling Administration System (PAS) Forecasting
    Requirements."

2.  NAOWG will consider feasibility of "work-arounds" so carriers can
    obtain number blocks if their request exceeds their PAS forecast.

3.  Contamination Level IMG to prepare proposed NANC "findings" not
    later than December 6. NANC Chair to provide Members with draft of a
    proposed FCC filing by December 10. NANC conference call to discuss
    and approve a filing with the FCC on December 11.

4.  Intermediate Numbers/Soft Dialtone IMG will consider California
    PUC's comments on Intermediate Numbers and forward a final report to
    the NANC Chairman, who will forward the report to the FCC with a
    recommendation that the FCC issue an NPRM to seek comment on
    recommendations. At the same time, the IMG will also consider the
    California PUC's comments on the Soft Dialtone recommendations and
    forward a final report to the NANC Chairman, who will then forward
    the report to the FCC with the recommendation that the FCC instruct
    the NANPA and the PA to implement the recommendations.