**^Before\ the^**

**Federal Communications Commission**

**Washington, D.C. 20554**

+----------------------------+---------+---------------------------+
| ^In\ the\ Matter\ of^      | **^)^** | ^CC\ Docket\ No.\ 99-200^ |
|                            |         |                           |
| ^Numberin                  | **^)^** | ^CC\ Docket\ No.\ 96-98^  |
| g\ Resource\ Optimization^ |         |                           |
|                            | **^)^** | ^NSD-L-01-113^            |
| ^Implement                 |         |                           |
| ation\ of\ the\ Local\ Com | **^)^** | ^NSD-L-01-147^            |
| petition\ Provisions\ of\  |         |                           |
| the\ Telecommunications\ ^ | **^)^** |                           |
|                            |         |                           |
| ^Act\ of\ 1996^            | **^)^** |                           |
|                            |         |                           |
| ^                          | **^)^** |                           |
| Petition\ of\ Representati |         |                           |
| ve\ Keith\ R.\ McCall\ and | **^)^** |                           |
| \ Members\ of\ the\ Northe |         |                           |
| ast\ Delegation\ of\ the\  | **^)^** |                           |
| Pennsylvania\ House\ of\ R |         |                           |
| epresentatives\ Requesting | **^)^** |                           |
| \ that\ Additional\ Author |         |                           |
| ity\ be\ Delegated\ to\ th | **^)^** |                           |
| e\ Pennsylvania\ Public\ U |         |                           |
| tility\ Commission\ to\ Im | **^)^** |                           |
| plement\ Additional\ Numbe |         |                           |
| r\ Conservation\ Measures^ | **^)^** |                           |
|                            |         |                           |
| ^Peti                      | **^)^** |                           |
| tion\ of\ the\ Louisiana\  |         |                           |
| Public\ Service\ Commissio | **^)^** |                           |
| n\ for\ Expedited\ Decisio |         |                           |
| n\ for\ Additional\ Delega | **^)^** |                           |
| ted\ Authority\ to\ Implem |         |                           |
| ent\ Number\ Conservation\ | **^)^** |                           |
|  Measures\ Regarding\ 318^ |         |                           |
|                            | **^)^** |                           |
|                            |         |                           |
|                            | **^)^** |                           |
|                            |         |                           |
|                            | **^)^** |                           |
+----------------------------+---------+---------------------------+

# ^[OrDEr]{.smallcaps}^

**Adopted: December 21, 2001 Released: December 28, 2001 **

By the Common Carrier Bureau:

I.  **^[introduction]{.smallcaps}^**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
I.  This Order addresses the petitions for additional delegated
    authority to implement numbering resource optimization strategies
    filed by Representative Keith R. McCall and Members of the Northeast
    Delegation of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives on behalf of
    the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (Pennsylvania
    Commission)[^1] and by the Louisiana Public Service Commission
    (Louisiana Commission).[^2]

II. ^In\ this\ Order,\ we\ conditionally\ grant\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ the\ authority\ to\ institute\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ in\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ area\ codes.\ The\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ for\ these\ numbering\ plan\ areas\ (NPA)\ must\ be\ initiated\ prior\ to\ the\ commencement\ of\ national\ pooling,\ which\ is\ currently\ scheduled\ for\ March\ 2002.^[^3]^\ These\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ must\ also\ conform\ to\ the\ national\ framework\ as\ articulated\ in\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ Orders^*^.^[^4]^\ We\ also\ grant\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ the\ authority\ to\ (1)\ maintain\ NXX\ code\ rationing\ procedures\ for\ six\ months\ following\ area\ code\ relief;\ and\ (2)\ hear\ and\ address\ claims\ by\ carriers\ in\ need\ of\ NXX\ codes\ outside\ of\ the\ rationing\ process.^[^5]^\ ^

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
I.  **^[background]{.smallcaps}^**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
I.  Congress granted the FCC plenary jurisdiction over numbering
    administration.[^6] Section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of
    1934, as amended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1996 Act),
    allows the FCC to delegate to state commissions or other entities
    all or any portion of its jurisdiction over numbering
    administration.[^7] On September 28, 1998, the FCC released the
    *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*, in which it delegated authority to
    state commissions to order NXX code rationing in conjunction with
    area code relief decisions, in the absence of industry
    consensus.[^8] In that Order, the FCC also encouraged state
    commissions to seek further limited delegations of authority to
    implement number conservation measures.[^9] In September 1999, the
    FCC addressed five petitions from state commissions seeking
    delegations of authority to implement number conservation
    measures,[^10] and, in November 1999, the Bureau addressed five
    similar petitions from state commissions under delegated
    authority.[^11]

II. ^In\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ the\ FCC\ delegated\ to\ the\ Bureau\ the\ authority\ to\ rule\ on\ state\ petitions\ for\ additional\ delegation\ of\ numbering\ authority\ when\ no\ new\ issues\ are\ raised.^[^12]^\ In\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^\ and\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ Second\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ the\ FCC\ adopted\ a\ number\ of\ administrative\ and\ technical\ measures\ to\ allow\ it\ to\ monitor\ more\ closely\ the\ way\ numbering\ resources\ are\ used\ within\ the\ North\ American\ Numbering\ Plan\ (NANP)\ as\ well\ as\ to\ promote\ more\ efficient\ use\ of\ NANP\ numbering\ resources.\ In\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ the\ FCC\ recognized\ that\ state\ commissions\ may\ be\ able\ to\ resolve\ certain\ issues\ more\ quickly\ and\ decisively\ than\ the\ industry\ through\ a\ consensus\ process.\ Thus,\ the\ FCC\ granted\ authority\ to\ state\ commissions\ to,\ among\ other\ things,\ order\ the\ North\ American\ Numbering\ Plan\ Administrator\ (NANPA),\ after\ an\ investigation,\ to\ reclaim\ carriers'\ NXX\ codes\ not\ activated\ within\ the\ permitted\ time\ period.^[^13]

III. ^The\ Bureau\ subsequently\ released\ orders\ on\ July\ 20,\ 2000,\ February\ 14,\ 2001,\ March\ 14,\ 2001,\ August\ 23,\ 2001,\ and\ October\ 24,\ 2001\ addressing\ fifteen\ state\ commissions'\ petitions,\ four\ state\ commissions'\ petitions,\ seven\ state\ commissions'\ petitions,\ three\ state\ commissions'\ petitions,\ and\ three\ state\ commissions'\ petitions\ respectively,\ for\ additional\ delegated\ authority.^[^14]^\ To\ the\ extent\ the\ requests\ in\ the\ instant\ petitions\ raise\ no\ new\ issues,\ the\ Bureau\ exercises\ its\ delegated\ authority\ to\ address\ these\ petitions\ herein.^

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
I.  **^[discussion]{.smallcaps}^**

**Thousands-Block Number Pooling Authority **

1.  Thousands-block number pooling involves the allocation of blocks of
    1,000 sequential telephone numbers within the same central office
    code or NXX code[^15] to different service providers. In the
    *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*, the FCC recognized that state
    thousands-block number pooling trials could aid in developing
    national pooling implementation, architecture and administrative
    standards.[^16] In the *Numbering Resource Optimization Notice*, the
    FCC concluded that thousands-block number pooling is an important
    numbering resource optimization strategy, essential to extending the
    life of the NANP.[^17] As a result, in prior state delegation
    orders, the FCC granted state commissions the authority to implement
    thousands-block number pooling trials.[^18]

^\ ^**^1.^^\ ^^Conditions\ and\ Safeguards^**

1.  ^\ \ A\ grant\ of\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ authority\ is\ subject\ to\ the\ conditions\ and\ safeguards\ enumerated\ by\ the\ FCC\ in\ the\ ^*^Pennsylvania\ Numbering\ Order^*^,\ previous\ state\ delegation\ orders,\ and\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ which\ sets\ forth\ the\ national\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ framework.^[^19]^\ For\ instance,\ the\ FCC\ requires\ that\ the\ state\ commission,\ to\ the\ extent\ it\ has\ not\ already\ done\ so,\ prepare\ an\ NPA\ relief\ plan\ that\ may\ be\ adopted\ by\ the\ state\ commission\ when\ numbering\ resources\ in\ an\ NPA\ are\ in\ imminent\ danger\ of\ being\ exhausted.^[^20]^\ The\ FCC\ also\ requires\ the\ state\ commission\ to\ first\ implement\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ in\ a\ single\ metropolitan\ statistical\ area\ (MSA),\ and\ expand\ pooling\ to\ another\ MSA\ only\ after\ pooling\ has\ been\ fully\ implemented\ in\ the\ initial\ MSA\ and\ carriers\ have\ had\ sufficient\ time\ to\ make\ the\ necessary\ adjustments\ for\ pooling,\ such\ as\ modifying\ their\ databases\ and\ upgrading\ their\ switch\ software.\ In\ addition,\ the\ state\ commission\ must\ implement\ its\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ before\ the\ commencement\ of\ national\ pooling,\ which\ is\ currently\ scheduled\ for\ March\ 2002.^[^21]^\ ^

2.  ^We\ also\ reiterate\ that\ only\ those\ carriers\ that\ have\ implemented\ permanent\ local\ number\ portability\ (LNP)\ shall\ be\ subject\ to\ state-mandated\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials.^[^22]^\ Wireline\ carriers\ outside\ the\ top\ 100\ MSAs\ are\ only\ required\ to\ implement\ LNP\ if\ requested\ by\ another\ carrier\ subject\ to\ the\ requirements\ established\ by\ the\ FCC.^[^23]^\ \ Within\ areas\ that\ are\ subject\ to\ a\ pooling\ trial,\ non-LNP-\ capable\ carriers\ shall\ have\ the\ same\ access\ to\ numbering\ resources\ after\ pooling\ is\ implemented\ that\ they\ had\ prior\ to\ the\ implementation\ of\ pooling\ (^*^i.e.^*^,\ non-LNP\ capable\ carriers\ shall\ continue\ to\ be\ able\ to\ obtain\ full\ NXX\ codes).^[^24]

3.  ^We\ direct\ the\ state\ commission\ to\ conduct\ its\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ in\ accordance\ with\ industry-adopted\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ guidelines\ to\ the\ extent\ that\ the\ guidelines\ are\ not\ in\ conflict\ with\ the\ FCC's\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ Orders^*^.^[^25]^\ We\ also\ direct\ the\ state\ commission\ to\ ensure\ that\ adequate\ transition\ time\ is\ provided\ for\ carriers\ to\ adjust\ their\ switches\ and\ administrative\ systems\ prior\ to\ commencing\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling.^

^\ ^**^2.^^\ ^^Cost\ Recovery\ ^**

1.  ^\ \ As\ we\ have\ repeatedly\ stated\ when\ discussing\ pooling\ trials,\ state\ commissions\ conducting\ pooling\ trials\ must\ develop\ a\ cost\ recovery\ mechanism\ for\ the\ joint\ and\ carrier-specific\ costs\ of\ implementing\ and\ administering\ pooling\ trials.^[^26]^\ Cost\ recovery\ for\ national\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ will\ be\ under\ the\ national\ cost\ recovery\ plan\ when\ it\ becomes\ effective\ and\ we\ described\ this\ national\ plan\ in\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ Third\ Report\ and\ Order^*^.^[^27]

2.  ^\ \ In\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ the\ FCC\ concluded\ that\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ is\ a\ numbering\ administration\ function,\ and\ that\ section\ 251(e)(2)\ authorizes\ the\ FCC\ to\ provide\ the\ distribution\ and\ recovery\ mechanisms\ for\ the\ interstate\ and\ intrastate\ costs\ of\ number\ pooling.^[^28]^\ The\ FCC\ determined\ in\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^\ that\ section\ 251(e)(2)\ requires\ all\ carriers\ to\ bear\ the\ shared\ costs\ of\ number\ pooling\ on\ a\ competitively\ neutral\ basis.^[^29]^\ In\ exercising\ its\ delegated\ authority,\ the\ state\ commission\ must\ also\ ensure\ that\ costs\ of\ number\ pooling\ are\ recovered\ in\ a\ competitively\ neutral\ manner.^[^30]^\ \ We\ encourage\ the\ state\ commission\ to\ refer\ to\ the\ cost\ recovery\ methodology\ from\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ Third\ Report\ and\ Order^*[^31]*^\ ^*^for\ further\ guidance\ as\ to\ how\ a\ competitively\ neutral\ cost\ recovery\ mechanism\ may\ be\ established.\ In\ general,\ a\ competitively\ neutral\ cost\ recovery\ mechanism\ meets\ two\ criteria,\ as\ we\ have\ discussed\ in\ our\ prior\ orders.^[^32]^\ First,\ "a\ 'competitively\ neutral'\ cost\ recovery\ mechanism\ should\ not\ give\ one\ service\ provider\ an\ appreciable,\ incremental\ cost\ advantage\ over\ another\ service\ provider,\ when\ competing\ for\ a\ specific\ subscriber."\ Second,\ the\ cost\ recovery\ mechanism\ "should\ not\ have\ a\ disparate\ effect\ on\ the\ ability\ of\ competing\ service\ providers\ to\ earn\ normal\ returns\ on\ their\ investments."^[^33]

**^\ ^^3.^^\ ^^Pennsylvania\ Petition\ for\ Thousands-Block\ Number\ Pooling\ Authority^**

1.  ^To\ ensure\ that\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ is\ implemented\ in\ areas\ where\ it\ has\ the\ potential\ to\ be\ most\ beneficial,\ the\ FCC\ requires\ state\ commissions\ to\ demonstrate\ that\ certain\ conditions\ are\ satisfied\ in\ their\ states\ before\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ authority\ will\ be\ delegated\ to\ them.\ In\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ the\ FCC\ directed\ state\ commissions\ seeking\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ authority\ to\ demonstrate\ that:\ 1)\ an\ NPA\ in\ its\ state\ is\ in\ jeopardy;\ 2)\ the\ NPA\ in\ question\ has\ a\ remaining\ life\ span\ of\ at\ least\ a\ year;\ and\ 3)\ that\ the\ NPA\ is\ in\ one\ of\ the\ largest\ 100\ MSAs,\ or\ alternatively,\ the\ majority\ of\ wireline\ carriers\ in\ the\ NPA\ are\ LNP-capable.\ The\ FCC\ recognized,\ however,\ that\ there\ may\ be\ "special\ circumstances"\ in\ which\ pooling\ would\ be\ beneficial\ in\ NPAs\ that\ do\ not\ meet\ all\ of\ the\ above\ criteria,\ and\ stated\ that\ it\ may\ authorize\ pooling\ in\ such\ an\ NPA\ upon\ a\ satisfactory\ showing\ by\ a\ state\ commission\ of\ special\ circumstances.^[^34]

2.  ^The\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ requests\ authority\ to\ implement\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ in\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ NPAs.^[^35]^\ The\ Pennsylvania\ Commission's\ filings\ demonstrate\ that\ although\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ NPAs\ have\ a\ remaining\ life\ span\ of\ at\ least\ a\ year\ and\ encompass\ top\ 100\ MSAs,\ neither\ the\ 570\ NPA\ nor\ the\ 717\ NPA\ is\ currently\ in\ jeopardy.^[^36]^\ \ In\ addition,\ on\ August\ 9,\ 2001,\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ adopted\ an\ order\ to\ implement\ voluntary\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ in\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ NPAs\ on\ February\ 28,\ 2002\ and\ March\ 14,\ 2002,\ respectively.^[^37]

3.  ^The\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ argues,\ based\ on\ the\ following\ data,\ that\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ would\ extend\ the\ life\ of\ the\ 570\ NPA.\ For\ example,\ the\ NANPA\ data\ revealed\ that,\ as\ of\ April\ 2001,\ 2,080,000\ numbers\ were\ still\ available\ for\ assignment\ and\ that\ 62%\ of\ the\ telephone\ numbers\ in\ the\ 584\ NXX\ codes\ already\ assigned\ to\ carriers\ were\ still\ available\ for\ use\ by\ customers.^[^38]^\ The\ NANPA\ data\ also\ indicated\ that,\ based\ on\ current\ population\ estimates,\ carriers\ could\ assign\ at\ least\ four\ telephone\ numbers\ to\ each\ person\ located\ within\ the\ 570\ NPA.^[^39]^\ Further,\ the\ NANPA\ NXX\ code\ utilization\ data\ indicated\ that\ a\ potentially\ large\ number\ of\ unassigned\ NXX\ codes\ could\ be\ used\ for\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling.^[^40]^\ ^

4.  ^The\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ also\ argues\ that\ "special\ circumstances"\ exist\ to\ merit\ a\ grant\ of\ authority\ to\ convert\ the\ planned\ voluntary\ pooling\ trial\ into\ a\ mandatory\ pooling\ trial\ in\ the\ 717\ NPA.^[^41]^\ Based\ on\ its\ previous\ experience\ with\ other\ NPAs\ that\ had\ large\ amounts\ of\ stranded\ numbers,\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ believes\ that\ the\ 3.4\ million\ numbers\ in\ the\ 717\ NPA\ that\ are\ stranded\ in\ carriers'\ inventories\ could\ be\ assigned\ through\ pooling.^[^42]^\ To\ illustrate\ this,\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ points\ out\ that,\ in\ April\ 2001,\ the\ overall\ utilization\ rate\ in\ the\ 610/484/835\ NPAs\ was\ 57%,\ and\ carriers\ began\ donating\ a\ total\ of\ 3.2\ million\ numbers\ for\ pooling\ in\ those\ NPAs.^[^43]^\ As\ a\ result\ of\ those\ donations,\ only\ two\ NXX\ codes\ need\ to\ be\ assigned\ between\ April\ 2001\ and\ July\ 2002.^[^44]^\ With\ an\ average\ utilization\ rate\ of\ 44%\ in\ the\ 717\ NPA,\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ expects\ similar\ success\ with\ pooling\ in\ the\ 717\ NPA.^[^45]^\ ^

5.  ^The\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ further\ explains\ that\ the\ 717\ NPA\ has\ a\ large\ number\ of\ rate\ centers\ and\ a\ steady\ demand\ for\ NXX\ codes,\ which\ could\ lead\ to\ premature\ exhaust\ of\ the\ 717\ NPA\ without\ pooling.^[^46]^\ For\ example,\ as\ of\ October\ 2001,\ the\ 717\ NPA\ only\ had\ 177\ NXX\ codes\ remaining\ for\ assignment.^[^47]^\ If\ two\ additional\ carriers\ requested\ numbers\ in\ each\ of\ the\ 717\ NPA's\ 108\ rate\ centers,\ totaling\ 216\ NXX\ codes,\ then\ a\ new\ area\ code\ would\ need\ to\ be\ opened.^[^48]

6.  ^Finally,\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ contends\ that,\ if\ the\ voluntary\ pooling\ trial\ is\ not\ transformed\ into\ a\ mandatory\ pooling\ trial\ in\ the\ 717\ NPA,\ then\ the\ effectiveness\ of\ the\ pooling\ trial\ may\ be\ diminished\ because\ new\ carriers\ operating\ in\ the\ 717\ NPA\ could\ decline\ to\ participate\ in\ the\ voluntary\ pooling\ trial.^[^49]

7.  ^We\ agree\ that\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ would\ lead\ to\ more\ efficient\ use\ of\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ NPAs,\ particularly\ given\ the\ significant\ amount\ of\ unused\ and\ stranded\ numbering\ resources\ in\ these\ NPAs.\ Further,\ the\ successful\ planning\ of\ voluntary\ pooling\ trials\ in\ these\ NPAs\ demonstrates\ a\ need\ for,\ and\ a\ readiness\ by\ industry\ to\ participate\ in,\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials.^[^50]^\ Thus,\ we\ grant\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ the\ authority\ to\ implement\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ in\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ NPAs\ subject\ to\ the\ conditions\ and\ safeguards\ referenced\ above.\ This\ grant\ of\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ authority\ extends\ to\ any\ new\ area\ code(s)\ implemented\ to\ relieve\ all\ NPAs\ in\ which\ pooling\ is\ taking\ place.\ Also,\ because\ the\ voluntary\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ for\ the\ 570\ and\ 717\ NPAs\ are\ scheduled\ for\ implementation\ prior\ to\ March\ 15,\ 2002,\ we\ direct\ the\ NANPA\ to\ establish\ those\ trials\ as\ mandatory\ pools\ under\ the\ national\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ program.^

8.  ^\ ^**^\ ^**^We\ disagree\ with\ the\ Cellular\ Telecommunications\ and\ Internet\ Association's\ (CTIA)\ comments\ that\ the\ grant\ of\ delegated\ pooling\ authority\ to\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission\ will\ interfere\ with\ national\ numbering\ conservation\ efforts.^[^51]^\ \ As\ discussed\ in\ the\ ^*^Numbering\ Resource\ Optimization\ First\ Report\ and\ Order^*^,\ state\ commissions\ must\ conform\ their\ thousands-blocks\ number\ pooling\ trials\ to\ the\ national\ framework\ to\ minimize\ additional\ costs\ and\ confusion\ that\ stem\ from\ differing\ regulatory\ requirements.^[^52]^\ This\ requirement,\ we\ believe,\ will\ likely\ facilitate\ a\ quicker,\ easier\ transition\ to\ the\ national\ Pooling\ Administrator\ in\ these\ area\ codes.\ As\ a\ result,\ state\ residents\ will\ be\ able\ to\ realize\ the\ benefits\ of\ pooling\ as\ soon\ as\ possible.^

9.  ^\ \ We\ further\ disagree\ with\ the\ CTIA's\ contention\ that\ "\[g\]iven\ the\ FCC's\ decision\ that\ states\ must\ have\ conformed\ all\ aspects\ of\ their\ pooling\ trials\ with\ Federal\ requirements\ by\ April\ 8,\ 2001,\ there\ is\ no\ need\ to\ make\ further\ grants\ of\ interim\ authority\ to\ states\ to\ merely\ follow\ Federal\ requirements\ established\ by\ the\ ^*^NRO\ Order^*^."^[^53]^\ This\ deadline\ was\ established\ for\ states\ that\ had\ already\ implemented\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ and,\ therefore,\ is\ not\ relevant\ for\ deciding\ whether\ additional\ states\ should\ continue\ to\ receive\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ authority.\ The\ CTIA\ also\ opposes\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission's\ request\ to\ require\ non-LNP-capable\ carriers\ to\ participate\ in\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling.^[^54]^\ We\ decline\ to\ consider\ the\ CTIA's\ comments\ on\ this\ matter\ because\ we\ find\ no\ request\ for\ this\ authority\ in\ the\ petition\ of\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Commission.^

## ^B.\ Authority\ to\ Hear\ and\ Address\ Claims\ from\ Carriers\ Outside\ of\ the\ Area\ Code\ Rationing\ Process\ ^

1.  The Louisiana Commission petitions for authority to respond to
    requests from individual carriers seeking to obtain NXX codes
    outside of the rationing process.[^55] In prior orders, the FCC has
    granted state commissions the authority to hear and address claims
    from carriers seeking NXX codes outside of the rationing
    process.[^56] We similarly grant the Louisiana Commission the
    authority to hear and address such claims.[^57]

2.  ^\ \ If\ requested,\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ may\ hear\ and\ address\ claims\ of\ carriers\ stating\ that\ they\ do\ not,\ or\ in\ the\ near\ future\ will\ not,\ have\ sufficient\ numbering\ resources\ to\ serve\ customers\ if\ they\ cannot\ obtain\ additional\ numbering\ resources,\ or\ that\ they\ are\ using\ or\ will\ have\ to\ use\ extraordinary\ and\ unreasonably\ costly\ measures\ to\ provide\ service.\ This\ grant\ of\ authority\ further\ empowers\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ to\ direct\ the\ NANPA\ to\ assign\ an\ NXX\ code\ to\ a\ carrier\ outside\ the\ rationing\ plan\ currently\ in\ place\ in\ an\ area\ code,\ based\ on\ a\ determination\ that\ such\ relief\ is\ necessary.\ We\ also\ grant\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ the\ authority\ to\ request\ whatever\ information\ it\ deems\ necessary\ to\ evaluate\ a\ carrier's\ request\ for\ additional\ numbering\ resources\ outside\ the\ rationing\ process.\ This\ information\ may\ include\ the\ carrier's\ business\ plan,\ customer\ requests\ for\ new\ service\ that\ the\ carrier\ cannot\ fill\ or\ has\ denied\ because\ of\ its\ lack\ of\ numbering\ resources,\ historical\ information\ on\ the\ carrier's\ growth\ rate,\ and\ information\ on\ any\ extraordinary\ steps\ the\ carrier\ is\ taking\ or\ may\ have\ to\ take\ to\ provide\ service.\ Further,\ although\ we\ delegate\ to\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ the\ authority\ to\ request\ and\ evaluate\ this\ information,\ such\ information\ shall\ be\ deemed\ confidential\ and\ shall\ not\ be\ released\ to\ any\ entity\ other\ than\ the\ NANPA,\ other\ state\ government\ agencies,\ the\ FCC,\ or\ the\ Bureau\ without\ the\ concurrence\ of\ the\ carrier\ submitting\ the\ information.^[^58]^\ ^

## ^C.\ Maintenance\ of\ Rationing\ Procedures\ for\ Six\ Months\ Following\ Area\ Code\ Relief\ ^

1.  The Louisiana Commission also requests the authority to maintain
    pre-NPA relief NXX code rationing measures for six months following
    implementation of area code relief to prevent an excessive number of
    requests for NXX codes.[^59] In prior orders, the FCC granted
    similar authority to state commissions.[^60] The FCC reasoned that a
    continuation of rationing after area code relief neither contradicts
    the *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*,[^61] as the requisite area code
    relief has been implemented, nor has the potential---in contrast to
    rationing prior to area code relief---to forestall area code relief
    indefinitely. Accordingly, we grant the Louisiana Commission the
    authority to order a continuation of any rationing plan in place
    prior to area code relief for six months following implementation of
    area code relief.

2.  ^Where\ area\ code\ relief\ takes\ place\ in\ the\ form\ of\ an\ area\ code\ split,\ we\ grant\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ the\ authority\ to\ direct\ that\ whatever\ rationing\ plan\ was\ in\ place\ prior\ to\ area\ code\ relief\ continue\ to\ be\ applied\ in\ both\ the\ newly\ implemented\ area\ code\ and\ the\ relieved\ area\ code\ for\ a\ period\ of\ up\ to\ six\ months\ following\ the\ date\ of\ implementation\ of\ area\ code\ relief.^[^62]^\ Correspondingly,\ if\ the\ area\ code\ relief\ is\ in\ the\ form\ of\ an\ all-services\ overlay,\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission\ may\ direct\ that\ the\ pre-existing\ rationing\ plan\ be\ applied\ to\ each\ area\ code\ (overlay\ code\ and\ relieved\ code)\ for\ a\ period\ of\ six\ months\ following\ the\ date\ of\ implementation\ of\ area\ code\ relief.\ Whether\ the\ rationing\ plan\ in\ place\ prior\ to\ relief\ was\ an\ industry\ consensus\ plan,\ or\ whether\ it\ was\ a\ state\ commission-ordered\ plan,\ only\ those\ terms\ in\ place\ prior\ to\ area\ code\ relief\ may\ remain\ in\ place\ following\ area\ code\ relief.\ The\ Louisiana\ Commission\ may\ order\ a\ continuation\ of\ rationing\ for\ up\ to\ six\ months,\ but\ neither\ the\ state\ commission\ nor\ the\ telecommunications\ industry\ participants\ in\ a\ consensus\ plan\ may\ alter\ the\ terms\ of\ the\ rationing\ plan.\ We\ find\ this\ limitation\ appropriate\ to\ prevent\ a\ potentially\ contentious\ re-opening\ of\ the\ terms\ of\ a\ previously\ settled\ NXX\ code\ rationing\ plan,\ resulting\ in\ uncertainty\ and\ a\ drain\ on\ resources.^

3.  ^BellSouth\ opposes\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission's\ request\ to\ continue\ rationing\ procedures\ for\ up\ to\ six\ months\ following\ area\ code\ relief.^[^63]^\ In\ particular,\ BellSouth\ argues\ that\ this\ rationing\ request\ should\ be\ denied\ because\ the\ FCC\ has\ stated\ that\ rationing\ should\ only\ occur\ when\ an\ area\ code\ will\ exhaust\ before\ area\ code\ relief\ may\ be\ implemented.^[^64]^\ We\ disagree.\ The\ FCC\ opposes\ ^*^long\ term^*^\ rationing\ because\ it\ threatens\ competition\ and,\ as\ stated\ in\ prior\ state\ delegation\ orders,^[^65]^\ the\ Louisiana\ Commission's\ request\ involves\ rationing\ on\ a\ short-term\ basis.\ BellSouth\ also\ claims\ that\ a\ grant\ of\ this\ type\ of\ request\ will\ cause\ pent-up\ demand.\ We\ believe,\ however,\ that\ the\ ability\ of\ carriers\ to\ request\ numbering\ resources\ outside\ of\ the\ rationing\ process\ should\ alleviate\ any\ concerns\ about\ pent-up\ demand\ during\ rationing.^

**^IV.\ CONCLUSION\ AND\ ORDERING\ CLAUSE^**

1.  **^We\ ^**^are\ mindful\ of\ the\ costs,\ confusion,\ and\ inconvenience\ that\ frequent\ area\ code\ changes\ can\ impose\ on\ consumers.\ \ The\ authority\ we\ have\ herein\ delegated\ to\ the\ above\ state\ commissions,\ we\ hope,\ will\ provide\ them\ the\ tools\ they\ need\ to\ address\ their\ states'\ concerns\ about\ numbering\ resource\ exhaust.\ For\ example,\ the\ authority\ to\ order\ thousands-block\ number\ pooling\ trials\ allows\ a\ state\ commission\ to\ address\ inefficiencies\ on\ the\ supply\ side\ of\ the\ telephone\ number\ assignment\ regime\ by\ ordering\ that\ LNP-capable\ carriers\ receive\ smaller\ blocks\ of\ numbers\ than\ they\ receive\ now.\ We\ are\ encouraged\ by\ the\ state\ commissions'\ willingness\ to\ work\ with\ the\ FCC\ and\ the\ Bureau\ to\ achieve\ national\ numbering\ resource\ optimization\ goals.^

2.  ^Accordingly,\ pursuant\ to\ sections\ 1,\ 4(i),\ and\ 251\ of\ the\ Communications\ Act\ of\ 1934,\ as\ amended,\ 47\ U.S.C.\ §§\ 151,\ 154(i),\ and\ 251,\ and\ pursuant\ to\ sections\ 0.91,\ 0.291,\ 1.1\ and\ 52.9(b)\ of\ the\ Commission's\ Rules,\ 47\ C.F.R.\ §§\ 0.91,\ 0.291,\ 1.1\ and\ 52.9(b),\ IT\ IS\ ORDERED\ that\ the\ Petition\ of\ Representative\ Keith\ R.\ McCall\ and\ Members\ of\ the\ Northeast\ Delegation\ of\ the\ Pennsylvania\ House\ of\ Representatives\ Requesting\ that\ Additional\ Authority\ be\ Delegated\ to\ the\ Pennsylvania\ Public\ Utility\ Commission\ to\ Implement\ Additional\ Number\ Conservation\ Measures\ is\ GRANTED\ to\ the\ extent\ described\ herein;\ and\ the\ Petition\ of\ the\ Louisiana\ Public\ Service\ Commission\ for\ Expedited\ Decision\ for\ Additional\ Delegated\ Authority\ to\ Implement\ Number\ Conservation\ Measures\ Regarding\ 318\ is\ GRANTED\ to\ the\ extent\ described\ herein.\ ^

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

^Jeffrey\ J.\ Carlisle^

Senior Deputy Bureau Chief,

Common Carrier Bureau

[^1]: * Petition of Representative Keith R. McCall and Members of the
    Northeast Delegation of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives
    Requesting that Additional Authority be Delegated to the
    Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission to Implement Additional
    Number Conservation Measures*, filed June 11, 2001 (Pennsylvania
    Commission Petition). For the purpose of convenience, we will refer
    to the Petitioner as the Pennsylvania Commission and not
    Representative McCall.

[^2]: *Petition of the Louisiana Public Service Commission for Expedited
    Decision for Additional Delegated Authority to Implement Number
    Conservation Measures Regarding Area Code 318, Common Carrier Docket
    99-200* (dated Aug. 21, 2001; filed Aug. 22, 2001) (Louisiana
    Commission Petition).

[^3]: *See* *Federal Communications Commission's Common Carrier Bureau
    Selects NeuStar, Inc. as National Thousands-Block Number Pooling
    Administrator*, Press Release (rel. June 18, 2001) (*Pooling
    Administrator Press Release*). In its comments, the Pennsylvania
    Commission states that it has initiated implementation of voluntary
    thousands-block number pooling trials in the 570 and 717 NPAs, and
    asks the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to clarify that
    these voluntary trials will become mandatory pools under the
    national thousands-block number pooling program. Pennsylvania
    Commission Comments at 1. Pooling trials that have commenced prior
    to March 2002 will be transitioned into the national pooling program
    by that time. *See* *Numbering Resource Optimization*, Report and
    Order and Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 15 FCC Rcd at 7574,
    7647, para. 161 (2000) (*Numbering Resource Optimization First
    Report and Order*).

[^4]: *See generally, Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and
    Order*, 15 FCC Rcd 7574; *Numbering Resource Optimization Second
    Report and Order*, 16 FCC Rcd 306 (2000); *Numbering Resource
    Optimization, *Third Report and Order and Second Order on
    Reconsideration in CC Docket No. 96-98 and CC Docket No. 99-200, FCC
    01-362** **(rel. Dec. 28,** **2001) (*Numbering Resource
    Optimization Third Report and Order*).

[^5]: As discussed in the *October 2001 Public Notice*, we decline to
    address the Louisiana Commission's request for delegated authority
    to implement a state thousands-block number pooling trial, and
    dismiss as moot the Louisiana Commission's request for authority to:
    (1) order the return of unused and reserved NXX codes or NXX codes
    obtained in contravention of industry guidelines; (2) enforce the
    number utilization reporting requirements; and (3) require number
    utilization and forecast reports from carriers. The Louisiana
    Commission also requested that the 318 NPA be given priority status
    on the national rollout schedule. *See Common Carrier Bureau Seeks
    Comment on the Petitions of Representative Keith R. McCall and Other
    Pennsylvania State Representatives and the Louisiana Public Service
    Commission Requesting Delegated Authority to Implement Number
    Conservation Measures and Common Carrier Bureau Declines to Address
    the Remaining Requests of the Georgia Public Service Commission, the
    Kentucky Public Service Commission and the Louisiana Public Service
    Commission for Delegated Authority to Implement Number Conservation
    Measures*, Public Notice, DA 01-2174 (rel. Oct. 9, 2001) (*October
    2001 Public Notice*).

[^6]: 47 U.S.C. § 251(e).

[^7]: *Id. *at § 251(e)(1).

[^8]: *Petition for Declaratory Ruling and Request for Expedited Action
    on the July 15, 1997 Order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility
    Commission Regarding Area Codes 412, 610, 215, and 717*, Memorandum
    Opinion and Order and Order on Reconsideration, 13 FCC Rcd 19009,
    19025 (1998) (*Pennsylvania Numbering Order*); *see also Numbering
    Resource Optimization Second Report and Order *at 341-43, paras.
    76-80 (addressing petitions for clarification and reconsideration
    that were filed in response to the *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*).

[^9]: *Id. *at 19030.

[^10]: *See California Public Utilities Commission Petition for
    Delegation of Additional Authority Pertaining to Area Code Relief
    and NXX Code Conservation Measures*, Order*, *14 FCC Rcd 17485
    (1999) (*California Delegation Order*); *Florida Public Service
    Commission Petition for Expedited Decision for Grant of Authority to
    Implement Number Conservation Measures*, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 17506
    (1999) (*Florida Delegation Order*); *Massachusetts Department of
    Telecommunications and Energy Petition for Waiver of Section 52.19
    to Implement Various Area Code Conservation Methods in the 508, 617,
    781, and 978 Area Codes*, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 17447 (1999)
    (*Massachusetts Delegation Order*); *New York State Department of
    Public Service Petition for Additional Delegated Authority to
    Implement Number Conservation Measures*, Order, 14 FCC Rcd 17467
    (1999); *Maine Public Utilities Commission Petition for Additional
    Delegated Authority to Implement Number Conservation Measures*,
    Order, 14 FCC Rcd 16440 (1999).

[^11]: *See* *Connecticut Department of Public Utility Control Petition
    for Delegation of Additional Authority to Implement Area Code
    Conservation Measures*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 1240 (1999) (*Connecticut
    Delegation Order*); *New Hampshire Public Utilities Commission's
    Petition for Additional Delegated Authority to Implement Number
    Optimization Measures in the 603 Area Code*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 1252
    (1999); *Petition of the Ohio Public Utilities Commission for
    Delegation of Additional Authority to Implement Number Conservation
    Measures*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 1268 (1999); *Petition of the Public
    Utility Commission of Texas for Expedited Decision for Authority to
    Implement Number Conservation Measures*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 1285
    (1999); *Petition of the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin for
    Delegation of Additional Authority to Implement Number Conservation
    Measures*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 1299 (1999) (*Wisconsin Delegation
    Order*). Although these orders granted the state commissions interim
    authority to institute many of the optimization measures they
    requested in their petitions, they did so subject to the caveat that
    the grants were to be superseded by national number conservation
    measures adopted in the FCC's *Numbering Resource Optimization*
    proceeding. *See, e.g.,California Delegation Order, *14 FCC Rcd at
    17486; *Connecticut Delegation Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 1240-41; *see
    also Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15 FCC
    Rcd at 7581.

[^12]: *Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15 FCC
    Rcd at 7651-52; *see also* *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*, 13 FCC
    Rcd at 19030-31.

[^13]: *Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15 FCC
    Rcd at 7680-82.

[^14]: *Numbering Resource Optimization*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd 23371 (2000)
    (*July 2000 Delegation Order*); *Numbering Resource Optimization*,
    Order, 16 FCC Rcd 3479 (2001) (*February 2001 Delegation Order*);
    *Numbering Resource Optimization*, Order, 16 FCC Rcd 5474 (2001)
    (*March 2001 Delegation Order*); *Numbering Resource Optimization*,
    Order, 16 FCC Rcd 15842 (2001) (*August 2001 Delegation Order*);
    *Numbering Resource Optimization*, Order, 16 FCC Rcd 18862 (2001)
    (*October 2001 Delegation Order*).

[^15]: "Central office code" or "NXX code" refers to the second three
    digits (also called digits D-E-F) of a ten-digit telephone number in
    the form NPA-NXX-XXXX, where N represents any one of the numbers 2
    through 9 and X represents any one of the numbers 0 through 9. 47
    C.F.R. § 52.7(c).

[^16]: *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*, 13 FCC Rcd at 19027.

[^17]: *Numbering Resource Optimization Notice*, 14 FCC Rcd at 10383-84.

[^18]: *See, e.g., Numbering Resource Optimization*, Order, 15 FCC Rcd
    23371 (2000).

[^19]: *Pennsylvania Numbering Order*, 13 FCC Rcd* *at 19029-30; *see
    also July 2000 Delegation Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 23377-82, paras. 10,
    11, 13-22.

[^20]: Lack of numbering resources should never prevent carriers from
    providing service to prospective customers. Thus, this criterion
    attempts to ensure that carriers continue to have numbering
    resources available to them in the event that a pooling trial fails
    to alleviate the need for area code relief. In Illinois, the
    Illinois Commission recognized that a "back-up plan" was necessary
    because the pooling solution had not been completely developed or
    tested. Thus, the Illinois Commission decided that an all-services
    overlay would supersede the pooling trial in the event that the NXXs
    in the 847 NPA were depleted.

[^21]: *See Pooling Administrator Press Release*.

[^22]: Wireless carriers, for example, are not required to implement LNP
    until November 24, 2002. *See Cellular Telecommunications Industry
    Association's Petition for Forbearance From Commercial Mobile Radio
    Services Number Portability Obligations and Telephone Number
    Portability*, Memorandum Opinion and Order, 14 FCC Rcd 3092, 3116
    (1999).

[^23]: *See* 47 C.F.R. § 52.23(b)-(c).

[^24]: *California Delegation Order*, 14 FCC Rcd at 17493.

[^25]: Thousands-Block Number (NXX-X) Pooling Administration Guidelines,
    Draft (INC 99-0127-023) (rev. Jan. 2001). This document is available
    at \<\>.

[^26]: *See, e.g.*, *February 2001 Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at
    3487; *March 2001 Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 5483; *August
    2001 Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 15850; *October 2001
    Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 18869.

[^27]: *Numbering Resource Optimization Third Report and Order* at paras
    24-46.

[^28]: *Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15 FCC
    Rcd* *at 7663-64.

[^29]: *Id. *at 7664-65.

[^30]: 47 U.S.C. § 251(e)(2).

[^31]: *See Numbering Resource Optimization Third Report and Order* at
    paras. 24-46.

[^32]: *See, e.g.*, *March 2001 Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 5484;
    *August 2001 Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 15850-15851; *October
    2001 Delegation Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 18869-18870.

[^33]: *Telephone Number Portability Order*, 14 FCC Rcd at 16478 (citing
    *Telephone Number Portability*, First Report and Order and Further
    Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 11 FCC Rcd 8352, 8420-21 (1996));
    *see also* *Number Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15
    FCC Rcd at 7665.

[^34]: *Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order* at 7652.

[^35]: *See* Pennsylvania Commission Petition at 1; *see also*
    Pennsylvania Commission Reply Comments at 9-12.

[^36]: Pennsylvania Commission Reply Comments at 10. The 570 and 717
    NPAs are projected to exhaust in the fourth and second quarters of
    2003, respectively. *Id.* The 570 NPA encompasses the
    Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton and Scranton-Wilkes-Barre-Hazleton MSAs
    and the 717 NPA encompasses the Harrisburg-Lebanon-Carlisle and
    Lancaster MSAs. *Id.* *See also *Pennsylvania Commission Petition at
    14.

[^37]: Pennsylvania Commission Comments at 3. Most of the LNP-capable
    providers operating in the 570 and 717 NPAs signed a petition
    agreeing to participate fully in the voluntary pooling trials. *Id.*
    at 5-6. These providers also agreed to follow industry guidelines on
    pooling and use the same LNP cost model being used for
    Pennsylvania's mandatory pooling trials. *Id.* at 6. In addition, we
    note that the Pennsylvania Office of Consumer Advocate (Pennsylvania
    Consumer Advocate) and Representative McCall suggested that we
    should, for the time being, decline to address the mandatory pooling
    request in the Pennsylvania Commission Petition because plans for
    voluntary pooling trials had already been initiated by the
    Pennsylvania Commission. *See *Pennsylvania Consumer Advocate
    Comments at 2-3; *see also *Comments of Representative Keith R.
    McCall at 5. We are inclined, however, to proceed with deciding the
    merits of this petition, particularly because the Pennsylvania
    Commission, in its reply comments, specifically requested a decision
    even though plans for voluntary pooling trials have already been set
    in motion. *See* Pennsylvania Commission Reply Comments at 7.

[^38]: Pennsylvania Commission Petition at 10.

[^39]: *Id.* at 11.

[^40]: * Id*.

[^41]: *See generally, Supplement of the Pennsylvania Public Utility
    Commission* (filed November 21, 2001) (Pennsylvania Commission
    Supplement).

[^42]: *Id.* at 7. As of October 2001, the NANPA had assigned 615 NXX
    codes and only 44% of the numbers from those codes are in use. *Id.*
    at 6. *See also id.* at 7, n.14.

[^43]: *Id.* at 5.

[^44]: * Id.*

[^45]: *Id.* at 6, n.11.

[^46]: *Id.* at 7.

[^47]: *Id.* at 8.

[^48]: *Id.*

[^49]: Pennsylvania Commission Reply Comments at 12.

[^50]: *See* *generally*, Pennsylvania Commission Comments; Pennsylvania
    Commission Reply Comments; Pennsylvania Commission Supplement.

[^51]: *See *CTIA Comments at 3.

[^52]: *See Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15
    FCC Rcd at 7651.

[^53]: CTIA Comments at 4. We note that the FCC required states to
    conform all aspects of their pooling trials within three months
    after the *Numbering Resource Optimization Second Report and Order*
    was published in the Federal Register. *See* *Numbering Resource
    Optimization Second Report and Order*, 16 FCC Rcd at 328, para. 46.
    The date of publication was February 8, 2001, making the deadline
    for conformance well past April 8, 2001.

[^54]: CTIA Comments at 2, 5-7.

[^55]: Louisiana Commission Petition at 13.

[^56]: *See*, *e.g.*,* California Delegation Order*, 14 FCC Rcd at
    17500-01; *Massachusetts Delegation Order*, 14 FCC Rcd at 17462-63.

[^57]: BellSouth also supports a grant of this request, arguing that
    this type of authority is needed if rationing is taking place.
    BellSouth Comments at 5.

[^58]: *See Numbering Resource Optimization First Report and Order*, 15
    FCC Rcd at 7605-09.

[^59]: Louisiana Commission Petition at 1.

[^60]: *See*,* e.g.*,* Florida Delegation Order*, 14 FCC Rcd at
    17517-18; *Massachusetts Delegation Order*, 14 FCC Rcd at 17458-59;
    *Wisconsin Delegation Order*, 15 FCC Rcd at 1310-11.

[^61]: The *Pennsylvania Numbering Order* stated that state commission
    implementation of number conservation measures could not be used "as
    substitutes for area code relief or to avoid making difficult and
    potentially unpopular decisions on area code relief." *See
    Pennsylvania Numbering Order*, 13 FCC Rcd at 19027.

[^62]: The "NPA relief date" is defined in the NPA Code Relief Planning
    and Notification Guidelines as the date by which the NPA is
    introduced and routing of normal commercial traffic begins. NPA Code
    Relief Planning and Notification Guidelines at 14.0. This document
    is available at \<http://www.atis.org\>.

[^63]: BellSouth Comments at 4.

[^64]: *Id.*

[^65]: *See, e.g.*, *Numbering Resource Optimization*, Order, 16 FCC Rcd
    at 15842, para. 42 (2001); *Numbering Resource Optimization*, Order,
    16 FCC Rcd at 18875, para. 28 (2001).