********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect or Word to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************
Before the
               Federal Communications Commission
                     Washington, D.C. 20554
     
     
In the Matter of

Petition of the Public Service Commission of
Wisconsin for Delegation of Additional
Authority to Implement Number Conservation
Measures
)
)
)
)
)


CC Docket No. 96-98
NSD File No. L-99-64


                             ORDER


Adopted: November 30, 1999
Released: November 30, 1999


By the Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau:

                      I.INTRODUCTION
  1.      This order responds to the September 13, 1999, Petition of the Public Service
  Commission of Wisconsin (Wisconsin Commission) for Delegation of Additional Authority to
  Implement Number Conservation Measures (Petition).  We herein conditionally grant the
  Wisconsin Commission the authority to set NXX code allocation standards; reclaim unused
  and reserved NXX codes, and thousand-number blocks within those codes; investigate and
  order the return of reserved and protected NXX codes; require sequential number assignment;
  require the submission of utilization and forecast information; audit carriers' use of numbering
  resources; maintain rationing procedures for six months following area code relief; and
  institute thousands-block pooling trials.  We deny the Wisconsin Commission's request for
  authority to implement unassigned number porting.  At this time, we decline to reach the
  Wisconsin Commission's request to adopt number rationing plans prior to reaching area code
  relief decisions and the authority to require carriers to assign numbers from an NXX code to
  end users within six months of receiving the code.
  2.       Many of the measures proposed in the Petition are also examined in a Notice of
  Proposed Rulemaking that the Commission released earlier this year.  Although we grant the
  Wisconsin Commission interim authority to institute many of the optimization measures in the
  Petition, we do so subject to the caveat that this grant will be superseded by forthcoming
  decisions in the Numbering Resource Optimization proceeding that will establish national
  guidelines, standards, and procedures for numbering optimization.  This limited grant of
  delegated authority should not be construed as a prejudgment of any of the measures on
  which the Commission has sought public comment in the Numbering Resource Optimization
  Notice.

                      III.BACKGROUND
  4.      Congress granted the Commission plenary jurisdiction over numbering issues.  Section
  251(e)(1) of the Act also allows the Commission to delegate to state commissions all or any
  portion of its jurisdiction over numbering administration.   The Commission's regulations
  generally require that numbering administration: (1) facilitate entry into the
  telecommunications marketplace by making telecommunications resources available on an
  efficient and timely basis to telecommunications carriers; (2) not unduly favor or disfavor any
  particular industry segment or group of telecommunications consumers; and (3) not unduly
  favor one telecommunications technology over another.  Further, our regulations specify that,
  if the Commission delegates any telecommunications numbering administration functions to
  any state, the states must perform the functions in a manner consistent with these general
  requirements.
  5.      On September 28, 1998, the Commission released the Pennsylvania Numbering
  Order delegating additional authority to state commissions to order NXX code rationing in
  conjunction with area code relief decisions, in the absence of industry consensus.  The order
  further approved a mandatory thousands-block number pooling trial in Illinois.  The order
  provided that state utility commissions could order voluntary pooling trials, but in view of the
  Commission's efforts to develop national pooling standards, we declined to delegate to state
  commissions the general authority to order mandatory number pooling.   The Pennsylvania
  Numbering Order, however, encouraged state commissions to seek further limited delegations
  of authority to implement other innovative number conservation methods prior to
  implementing number conservation plans.
  6.      In September 1999, the Commission addressed five similar petitions from state
  utility commissions.  The Commission, in those five orders, addressed all of the issues raised
  in the instant Petition.  The instant Petition raises no new issues, and therefore, pursuant to the
  authority delegated to the Common Carrier Bureau (Bureau) in the Pennsylvania Numbering
  Order, we address the Petition herein.
  7.      In its Petition, the Wisconsin Commission requests that it be granted the authority
  to: (1) enforce current standards for number allocation, or to set and enforce new standards;
  (2) order efficient number use practices within NXX codes; (3) order the return of unused and
  reserved NXX codes and thousand-number blocks within those codes; (4) order number
  utilization and forecasting reporting, and audit such reporting; (5) investigate and order
  unassigned number porting; (6) investigate and order additional rationing measures; and (7)
  implement thousands-block number pooling.  The Wisconsin Commission states that it
  requests this additional authority to conserve numbers without anticompetitive consequences
  and without favoring one type of provider or technology over another.  The Wisconsin
  Commission also states that it is keenly aware of the need to act quickly to avoid the
  escalation of area code difficulties already being experienced in Wisconsin, and the explosion
  of those which loom on the horizon.  On August 12, 1999, the Petition was placed on Public
  Notice for public comment.
                      VIII.DISCUSSION
  9.      We recognize that Wisconsin has undergone area code relief several times in recent
  years, and that the life expectancies for Wisconsin area codes appear to be steadily
  decreasing.  To empower the Wisconsin Commission to take steps to make number
  utilization more efficient, we herein grant significant additional authority to the Wisconsin
  Commission.  In some instances, we are granting the Wisconsin Commission authority that
  goes beyond the parameters outlined in the Pennsylvania Numbering Order, because we find
  such grant to be appropriate in light of the specific circumstances in Wisconsin.
  10.          Congress granted the Commission exclusive jurisdiction over those portions of the
  North American Numbering Plan (NANP) that relate to the United States, and directed that
  the Commission administer the NANP in a manner which assures that numbering resources
  are available on an equitable basis.  The Commission was also granted the authority to
  delegate this jurisdiction to state utility commissions.  Thus, while we grant authority below to
  the Wisconsin Commission to engage in various matters related to administration of the
  NANP in Wisconsin, we require the Wisconsin Commission to abide by the same general
  requirements that the Commission has imposed on the numbering administrator.  Thus, the
  Wisconsin Commission, to the extent it acts under the authority delegated herein, must ensure
  that numbers are made available on an equitable basis; that numbering resources are made
  available on an efficient and timely basis; that whatever policies the Wisconsin Commission
  institutes with regard to numbering administration not unduly favor or disfavor any particular
  telecommunications industry segment or group of telecommunications consumers; and that
  the Wisconsin Commission not unduly favor one telecommunications technology over
  another.
  11.          The grants of authority herein are not intended to allow the Wisconsin Commission to
  engage in number conservation measures to the exclusion of, or as a substitute for,
  unavoidable and timely area code relief.  While we are giving the Wisconsin Commission
  tools that may prolong the lives of existing area codes, the Wisconsin Commission continues
  to bear the obligation of implementing area code relief when necessary, and we expect the
  Wisconsin Commission to fulfill this obligation in a timely manner.  Under no circumstances
  should consumers be precluded from receiving telecommunications services of their choice
  from providers of their choice for a want of numbering resources.  For consumers to benefit
  from the competition envisioned by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, it is imperative that
  competitors in the telecommunications marketplace face as few barriers to entry as possible.
  12.          Several commenting parties argue that the Petition should be granted in its entirety
  on the basis that state utility commissions require greater authority to implement number
  conservation measures in order to rectify the causes of area code exhaust.  Other parties
  suggest that the Petition be denied on the basis that number conservation measures must be
  developed at the national level, and that the Petition does not provide an adequate basis on
  which to grant the requested delegations of authority.
  13.          Setting NXX code allocation standards.  The Wisconsin Commission seeks authority
  to enforce the NXX code allocation standards already embodied in the CO Code Assignment
  Guidelines' as well as to set additional NXX code allocation standards.  As an example of
  the former, the Wisconsin Commission requests authority to enforce the CO Code Assignment
  Guidelines requirements that a requesting carrier be certified to provide service in an area and
  that a forecasted need for a new NXX be demonstrated in a months-to-exhaust report. 
  Because we find that delegating such additional enforcement authority may enable the
  Wisconsin Commission to ensure that numbering resources are allocated efficiently, we
  delegate this authority to the Wisconsin Commission.  
  14.           The Wisconsin Commission also seeks authority to set and enforce a fill rate "that
  must be met before a growth NXX can be granted."  Subject to the conditions set forth
  below, we delegate authority to the Wisconsin Commission to require NXX code applicants
  to demonstrate that they have met certain fill rates in previously assigned NXX codes prior to
  obtaining additional numbering resources, even if the NPA is not in jeopardy.  In prior
  orders, the Commission stated that the establishment of fill rates would encourage more
  efficient use of NXX codes.  In these orders, the Commission addressed the competitive
  concerns associated with a fill-rate regime, and parties commenting in the instant proceeding
  have not raised any new concerns.  Based on Commission precedent, we therefore delegate
  authority to the Wisconsin Commission to establish fill rates, subject to the same conditions
  the Commission imposed in prior orders.
  15.          Although we do not wish to dictate the parameters of the fill-rate regime, we urge the
  Wisconsin Commission to allow for some flexibility in establishing fill rates and applying them
  to carriers.  Our primary concern is that fill rates not be applied in such a manner as to deprive
  customers of their choice of carriers from whom to purchase service upon request.
  16.          We are also concerned about the impact of multiple, disparate number conservation
  regimes on the availability of telecommunications services and the industry's ability to forecast
  and plan properly for exhaust of the NANP.  Therefore, during its implementation of this
  authority, we ask that the Wisconsin Commission consult and coordinate with other state
  commissions that may obtain authority to impose fill rates.  We encourage the Wisconsin
  Commission to establish fill rates that are not inconsistent with those imposed by other states.
  17.          As the Wisconsin Commission recognizes in its petition, it may only consider a
  carrier's fill rate in relation to growth codes.  In its prior orders, the Commission determined
  that a carrier's ability to establish a service "footprint" should not be restricted.  That is, a
  carrier ought to be able to obtain initial numbering resources in rate centers where the carrier
  is authorized to offer service and plans to do so within the NXX activation timeframe
  established by the CO Code Assignment Guidelines (six months).  
  18.          As stated in the Pennsylvania Numbering Order, we are concerned that granting
  this request and other, similar requests will overburden the NANPA, which based its bid for
  providing number administration services on industry guidelines that are applicable
  nationwide. Therefore, to avoid imposing an additional burden on the NANPA, to the extent
  that the Wisconsin Commission chooses to implement a fill-rate requirement, we delegate
  authority to the Wisconsin Commission to ascertain carrier compliance with the fill-rate
  requirement.  To avoid delay in NXX code application processing, we direct the Wisconsin
  Commission to conduct its review of carrier compliance with any required fill rate within the
  ten-day timeframe established by the CO Code Assignment Guidelines as the time in which the
  NANPA must respond to an applicant's NXX code request.  Of course, a carrier's failure to
  provide the Wisconsin Commission with adequate evidence of compliance with the fill-rate
  requirement upon request will toll the running of this 10-day timeframe.  Further, while we
  delegate to the Wisconsin Commission the authority to request and evaluate information
  provided by carriers to demonstrate compliance with the fill rate, we request that the
  Wisconsin Commission not release such information to any entity other than the NANPA, the
  Commission, or the Common Carrier Bureau.
  19.           The Wisconsin Commission further requests the additional authority to set and enforce
  a demonstration of readiness requirement to provide service before an initial NXX code can
  be granted.  In a prior order, the Commission delegated authority to the Maine Commission
  to require a carrier to demonstrate that it will have the necessary facilities to serve a specific
  rate center within six months of assignment of an NXX code for use in that rate center.  The
  Commission recognized that such a requirement would be consistent with the provision in the
  CO Code Assignment Guidelines requiring carriers to place NXX codes in service within six
  months of assignment of their effective dates, and is an appropriate method of ensuring that
  carriers not obtain numbering resources well in advance of when they will actually be able to
  provide service.  The Commission also found that the additional authority would help the
  state commission to ensure that carriers that do not need numbering resources (such as non-
  facilities based resellers) are not obtaining unnecessary NXX codes.  Based on Commission
  precedent, we therefore delegate authority to the Wisconsin Commission to require a carrier
  to demonstrate that it will have the necessary facilities to serve a specific rate center within six
  months of assignment of an NXX code for use in that rate center.
  20.          Reclamation of unused and reserved NXX codes and thousand-number blocks. 
  The Wisconsin Commission seeks the authority to order the return of initial and growth NXX
  codes if they are not activated in accordance with the existing CO Code Assignment
  Guidelines.  The CO Code Assignment Guidelines provide that carriers shall activate NXXs
  within six months of the "initially published effective date."  In prior orders, the Commission
  has granted state commissions the authority to reclaim unused NXX codes, and has
  recognized the value in reclaiming those codes.   
  21.          Parties commenting in the instant proceeding have not raised any new concerns. 
  Based on Commission precedent, we grant authority to the Wisconsin Commission to
  investigate whether code holders have activated NXXs assigned to them within the time
  frames specified in the CO Code Assignment Guidelines, and to direct the NANPA to reclaim
  NXXs that the Wisconsin Commission determines have not been activated in a timely manner. 
  This authority necessarily implies that the Wisconsin Commission may request proof from all
  code holders that NXX codes have been "placed in service" according to the CO Code
  Assignment Guidelines.  We further direct the NANPA to abide by the Wisconsin
  Commission's determination to reclaim an NXX code if the Wisconsin Commission is satisfied
  that the code holder has not activated the code within the time specified by the CO Code
  Assignment Guidelines.
  22.          We note that the CO Code Assignment Guidelines dictate substantial procedural
  hurdles prior to reclamation of an unused NXX, in part to afford the code holder an
  opportunity to explain the circumstances that have led to a delay in code activation.  The
  Commission earlier recognized that new entrants, in particular, may suffer unexpected delays
  or scheduling setbacks beyond their control, which may lead to code activation delays.   We
  clarify that the Wisconsin Commission need not follow the reclamation procedures set forth in
  the CO Code Assignment Guidelines relating to referring the issue to the Industry Numbering
  Committee (INC), as long as the Wisconsin Commission accords the code holder an
  opportunity to explain the extenuating circumstances behind the unactivated NXX codes.
  23.          The Wisconsin Commission also seeks authority to reclaim unused thousand
  number blocks.  In prior orders, the Commission recognized the utility to be gained in
  connection with number pooling trials through the reclamation of blocks of one thousand
  numbers with no, or relatively low, contamination.  Parties who commented on this aspect of
  the Petition raised issues similar to those the Commission addressed in these prior orders. 
  We address below the Wisconsin Commission's request for authority to implement thousands-
  block number pooling.  Based on Commission precedent, to the extent we delegate herein
  the authority to the Wisconsin Commission to initiate thousands-block number pooling trials,
  we also delegate to it the authority to reclaim unused thousands blocks in connection with
  those trials.  The conditions that apply to the implementation of a thousands-block number
  pooling trial shall also apply to any reclamation of unused blocks of numbers.  In particular,
  the industry's guidelines regarding reclamation of thousands blocks shall apply to the
  Wisconsin Commission. 
  24.          The Wisconsin Commission further requests the authority to investigate and order the
  return of reserved and protected NXX codes if it becomes necessary and can be done without
  causing disruption to network operations.  In a prior order, the Commission granted similar
  authority to the Maine Commission.  Likewise, we grant the Wisconsin Commission the
  authority to investigate whether any reserved or protected NXX codes can be placed in
  carriers' pools for potential activation, without causing disruption to carriers' operations.  If,
  after such an investigation, the Wisconsin Commission is satisfied that carriers' use of these
  codes for testing purposes is not warranted, the Wisconsin Commission may direct the
  NANPA to reclaim these codes for assignment to other carriers. 
  25.         Finally, the Wisconsin Commission requests the additional authority to require that for a
  company to retain a newly obtained NXX, it must not only be activated within six months, but
  numbers must actually be assigned to end users within that time.  We note that this issue has
  been raised in the Numbering Resource Optimization proceeding where the Commission
  noted that such a requirement could lead to undesirable behavior by carriers that might
  activate a few numbers in an otherwise unused NXX block to avoid reclamation.  For this
  reason, at the present time, we decline to reach this particular aspect of the Wisconsin
  Commission's request for additional authority.  We believe that the authority we are
  delegating to the Wisconsin Commission elsewhere in this order will provide the Wisconsin
  Commission the tools it needs to address the underlying behaviors contributing to the
  inefficiencies of numbering use in Wisconsin.
  26.          Sequential number assignment.  The Wisconsin Commission also seeks authority to
  require sequential number assignment.  In a prior order, the Commission delegated authority
  to the California Public Utilities Commission to order sequential number assignment, and
  parties commenting on this aspect of the instant petition raise issues which the Commission
  considered in this prior order.  Based on Commission precedent, we therefore grant the
  Wisconsin Commission the authority to order sequential number assignment.  We are
  concerned, however, that this requirement could interfere with a carrier's ability to satisfy a
  customer request for a particular set of numbers.  In light of this concern, we urge the
  Wisconsin Commission to allow carriers some flexibility in assigning numbers sequentially. 
  For example, like Illinois, the Wisconsin Commission may simply wish to require that carriers
  assign a certain percentage of numbers from a given thousands-block prior to assigning
  numbers from another thousands-block to other customers.  This allows for some flexibility
  for carriers to meet customer requests for numbers, as well as minimizing "contamination" of
  blocks of numbers for future implementation of thousands-block pooling.  We also urge the
  Wisconsin Commission to consult with other state commissions that may have already ordered
  carriers to implement sequential number assignment.
  27.             Requiring submission of utilization and forecast data and auditing carriers' number
  use.  The Wisconsin Commission requests the authority to order number utilization and
  forecast reporting by all providers in Wisconsin.  The Wisconsin Commission also seeks
  authority to conduct number utilization audits to help ensure compliance with number
  assignment and utilization requirements.  In prior orders, the Commission granted similar
  authority to the public utility commissions of New York and Florida, determining that state
  commissions should be able to monitor carriers' use of numbering resources, if they choose to
  do so.  Parties commenting on the instant Petition raise issues similar to those which the
  Commission already disposed of in these prior orders.  Based on Commission precedent, we
  therefore delegate authority to the Wisconsin Commission to require carriers to submit
  information regarding number utilization and forecast demand for resources and to conduct
  audits of carriers' use of numbering resources.  We reiterate, however, that because these are
  measures under consideration in the Numbering Resource Optimization Notice, this grant of
  authority is limited in duration until such time as the Commission enacts rules or policies
  relating to collecting number utilization and forecast data or auditing carriers' use of
  numbering resources.
  28.          Unassigned Number Porting.  The Wisconsin Commission requests the authority
  to investigate and implement Unassigned Number Porting (UNP) as an additional tool to
  conserve numbering resources.  As described in the 1998 NANC Numbering Resource
  Optimization Report (NANC Report), UNP is a telephone number usage optimization
  measure where available individual telephone numbers in one service provider's inventory are
  ported, using LNP, to another service provider under the direction of a neutral third party
  coordinator for assignment by the second service provider to a specific customer.  In prior
  orders, the Commission agreed with commenters that UNP was at too early a stage of
  development to order implementation.  The Commission also detailed its concerns that UNP
  might adversely affect service providers' switching systems.  Because the arguments raised
  by parties commenting on this aspect of the instant Petition are similar to those already
  addressed by the Commission in prior orders, we decline to grant the Wisconsin
  Commission's request for authority to implement UNP.
  29.          We emphasize, however, that our determination not to grant the Wisconsin
  Commission the authority to order carriers to use UNP does not preclude carriers from
  voluntarily engaging in UNP where mutually agreeable and where there are no public safety or
  network reliability concerns.  As a matter of fact, we encourage the carriers to do so. 
  Furthermore, we also encourage the Wisconsin Commission and the carriers to work together
  to identify and promote other innovative measures as well that would encourage the
  conservation of NXX codes. 
  30.          Additional NXX code rationing authority.  The Wisconsin Commission has also sought
  the authority to investigate and order rationing as an area code nears jeopardy.  The
  Wisconsin Commission may currently order and revise rationing processes where it has
  ordered area code relief and established a relief date, and the industry has been unable to reach
  consensus on a rationing plan.  As determined in the Pennsylvania Numbering Order,
  however, the rationing of NXX codes should only occur when it is clear that an NPA will run
  out of NXX codes before implementation of a relief plan.  Further, state commissions may
  not use rationing as a substitute for area code relief.  In prior orders, the Commission has
  declined to grant state commissions authority to adopt NXX code rationing procedures prior
  to adopting an area code relief plan, except in the most extreme circumstances.  To the
  extent that Wisconsin is requesting authority to adopt rationing measurers prior to having
  decided on a specific plan for area code relief, absent a demonstration of such extreme
  circumstances, we decline to grant this aspect of Wisconsin's petition.  We believe that the
  authority we are herein granting to the Wisconsin Commission will provide it with the tools it
  needs to address the underlying behaviors contributing to inefficiencies in number use in
  Wisconsin.   
  31.          On our own motion, however, we grant the Wisconsin Commission the authority to
  address extraordinary need for numbering resources in an NPA subject to a rationing plan. 
  We conclude that such delegation will provide the Wisconsin Commission with sufficient
  authority to assure that customers in Wisconsin retain their choice of service providers in the
  face of an NXX code rationing scheme.  In order to address such situations, if requested, the
  Wisconsin Commission may hear and address claims of carriers that do not, or in the near
  future will not, have any line numbers remaining in their NXX codes, and will be unable to
  serve customers if they cannot obtain an NXX code, 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 Wisconsin Commission to direct the NANPA to assign an NXX code to
  a carrier outside the rationing plan currently in place in an area code, upon the Wisconsin
  Commission's determination that such relief is necessary.  We also grant the Wisconsin
  Commission the authority to request whatever information it deems necessary to evaluate a
  carrier's request for additional numbering resources.  This information may include the
  carrier's business plan, requests for new service that the carrier 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 to provide service.  Further, while we
  delegate to the Wisconsin Commission the authority to request and evaluate this information,
  we request that it not release such information to any entity other than the NANPA, the
  Commission, or the Common Carrier Bureau.  This grant of authority empowers the
  Wisconsin Commission to ensure that carriers in dire need of numbering resources can obtain
  the numbering resources necessary to continue to provide service to their prospective
  customers, if the rationing plan will not ensure that the carrier will have adequate and timely
  access to numbering resources.
  32.          Maintenance of rationing procedures for 6 months following area code relief.  The
  Wisconsin Commission requests the authority to order the continuation of a rationing plan for
  six months following the implementation of area code relief in order to control accelerated
  demand in the relieved code following implementation of area code relief.  In prior orders,
  the Commission granted similar authority to state public utility commissions.  The
  Commission reasoned that a continuation of rationing after area code relief neither contradicts
  the Pennsylvania Numbering Order,  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.  Based on Commission precedent, we grant the Wisconsin Commission the
  authority to order continuation of a rationing plan for six months following area code relief
  implementation.
  33.            When area code relief takes the form of an area code split, we grant the Wisconsin
  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 area code relief date. 
  Correspondingly, if the area code relief is in the form of an overlay, the Wisconsin
  Commission may direct that the pre-existing rationing plan be applied to both the overlay code
  and the relieved code for a period of six months following the area code relief date.  For
  reasons discussed in paragraph 28 above, we limit this authority to continuing the pre-NPA
  relief rationing procedures.  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 for up to six months following area code relief. 
  The Wisconsin Commission may order a continuation of rationing for up to six months, but
  neither the Wisconsin 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 potentially contentious re-opening of the terms of a previously settled code
  rationing plan, resulting in uncertainty and a drain on resources.
  34.           Thousands-block number pooling.  The Wisconsin Commission requests authority to
  implement mandatory thousands-block number pooling.  The Commission tentatively
  concluded that thousands-block pooling is an important numbering resource optimization
  strategy, essential to extending the life of the NANP.  In granting the Illinois Commission the
  authority to engage in a mandatory thousands-block pooling trial in the Pennsylvania
  Numbering Order, the Commission recognized that state number pooling trials could aid in
  developing national pooling implementation, architecture, and administrative standards.
  35.          In prior orders, the Commission has granted several state public utility
  commissions the authority to implement thousands-block pooling trials.  In so doing, the
  Commission considered support for the proposal as well as concerns regarding the burdens
  that thousands-block pooling trials might impose.  The Commission noted that, in spite of
  the potential for strain on the network occasioned by multiple pooling trials, the relatively
  small volume of ported numbers and the importance of providing relief to states experiencing
  severe strain on their numbering resources weighed heavily in favor of delegating authority to
  implement number pooling trials. 
  36.          Since the release of the Pennsylvania Numbering Order, the telecommunications
  industry has arrived at detailed guidelines governing the technical and administrative
  functioning of thousands-block number pooling.  In the Pennsylvania Numbering Order, the
  Commission stated that, upon the establishment of uniform, national standards for pooling, it
  may determine that it is appropriate to delegate to state commissions the additional authority
  to implement and enforce those standards.   
  37.          Parties to the instant proceeding raise issues similar to those that the Commission
  addressed in its prior orders.  Because no new issues peculiar to Wisconsin have been raised,
  based on Commission precedent we therefore grant authority to the Wisconsin Commission to
  conduct mandatory thousands-block number pooling trials in Wisconsin, subject to the same
  conditions the Commission has previously imposed.
  38.          We direct the Wisconsin Commission to conduct its pooling trials in accordance
  with industry-adopted thousands-block pooling guidelines.   Where the Wisconsin
  Commission determines that changes, modifications, or departures from the guidelines are
  desirable, we direct the Wisconsin Commission to consult with the industry prior to
  implementing such changes.  Although we will not dictate the manner in which the Wisconsin
  Commission should consult with industry, it should, at a minimum, seek input from the
  industry regarding the implications of any proposed changes to the guidelines so that it may be
  able to weigh the industry's concerns in its decision-making process.
  39.          We grant this authority subject to the conditions and safeguards similar to those
  enumerated in the Pennsylvania Numbering Order that granted such authority to Illinois. 
  Thus, we require that in any NPA which is in jeopardy in which the Wisconsin Commission
  implements a pooling trial, the Wisconsin Commission must take all necessary steps to prepare
  an NPA relief plan that may be adopted by the Wisconsin Commission in the event that
  numbering resources in the NPA at issue are in imminent danger of being exhausted.  This
  criterion is not intended to require the Wisconsin Commission to implement an NPA relief
  plan prior to requiring thousands-block number pooling in Wisconsin.  Rather, we require only
  that the Wisconsin Commission must be prepared to implement a "back-up" NPA relief plan
  prior to the exhaustion of numbering resources in the NPA at issue.  Consumers should
  never be in the position of being unable to exercise their choice of carrier because that carrier
  does not have access to numbering resources.  This criterion attempts to ensure that
  consumers continue to retain a choice of telecommunications providers in the event that the
  pooling trial or trials do not stave off the need for area code relief.
  40.          Only those carriers that have implemented permanent LNP shall be subject to the
  trial.  At the present time, we do not grant the state commission the authority to require a
  carrier to acquire LNP solely for the purpose of being able to participate in a thousands-block
  pooling trial. Carriers are only required to implement LNP if requested by another carrier
  subject to the requirements established by the Commission.  Within NPAs that are subject to
  the 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 a pooling regime,
  i.e., non-LNP capable carriers shall continue to be able to obtain full NXX codes.  We
  recognize that conditioning the Wisconsin Commission's authority to implement a mandatory
  thousands-block pooling trial on exemption of non-LNP capable carriers from participation in
  the trial will create a disparity in the way different types of service providers obtain access to
  numbering resources, in tension with the criteria set forth above.  In order to ensure that
  consumers may continue to obtain service from non-LNP capable carriers of their choosing,
  however, we find that for the purposes of this interim delegation, it is necessary to safeguard
  these carriers' access to numbering resources, while they lack the technical capability to
  participate in pooling.  The Numbering Resource Optimization Notice raises a number of
  issues relating to non-LNP capable carriers' participation in pooling, and we believe these
  issues are best addressed in the larger rulemaking context.  In the meantime, we suggest to the
  Wisconsin Commission that it urge the non-LNP capable carriers to use various other
  numbering resource optimization strategies such as those discussed in the Numbering
  Resource Optimization Notice to improve the efficiency of numbering resources assigned to
  such carriers.
  41.          We direct the Wisconsin Commission to ensure that an adequate transition time is
  provided to carriers to implement pooling in their switches and administrative systems. 
  Thousands-block pooling requires carriers to alter significantly the manner in which they
  account for their inventory of telephone numbers, including changing their Operations
  Support Systems (OSSs) and retraining their staffs.  In addition, we also urge the Wisconsin
  Commission not to require carriers to engage in processes related to thousands-block pooling
  which might divert critical resources away from preparations related to the Year 2000
  rollover.
  42.          We  further require that the Wisconsin Commission determine the method to
  recover the costs of the pooling trial.  The Wisconsin Commission must also determine how
  carrier-specific costs directly related to pooling administration should be recovered.  The
  Commission has tentatively concluded that thousands-block number pooling is a numbering
  administration function, and that section 251(e)(2) authorizes the Commission to provide the
  distribution and recovery mechanisms for the interstate and intrastate costs of number
  pooling. We conclude that, inasmuch as we are hereby delegating numbering administration
  authority to the Wisconsin Commission, the Wisconsin Commission must abide by the same
  statute applicable to the Commission, and, therefore, ensure that costs of number pooling are
  recovered in a competitively neutral manner.  We note that the Telephone Number
  Portability proceeding found that section 251(e)(2) requires all carriers to bear the costs of
  number portability on a competitively neutral basis, and, thus, established a cost recovery
  mechanism that assesses even carriers that cannot or have not implemented LNP to date. 
  The Wisconsin Commission may consider the recently released Telephone Number Portability
  Order for guidance regarding the criteria with which a cost recovery mechanism must comply
  in order to be considered competitively neutral:
     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."
Consistent with the Commission's treatment of cost recovery in the Telephone Number
Portability proceeding, we believe that even those carriers that cannot participate in pooling at
this time will benefit from the more efficient use of numbering resources that pooling will
facilitate.  We also encourage the Wisconsin Commission to consider the "road map" provided by
the Numbering Resource Optimization Notice regarding cost recovery for thousands-block
number pooling.
  43.          In order to minimize possible disruption and expense and maximize the value of
  the information that can be obtained from a number pooling trial, we believe that such trials
  should be limited in nature.  As an initial matter, we limit the authority we grant to the
  Wisconsin Commission to a trial that generally covers one Metropolitan Statistical Area
  (MSA).  We believe that such a limitation strikes the appropriate balance between the
  Wisconsin Commission's desire to move quickly to implement measures that will enhance
  number utilization efficiency, and possibly prolong the lives of certain area codes in Wisconsin
  and our obligation to ensure that such pooling trials are implemented and conducted in a
  manner that does not disrupt network operations or reliability.  We believe these goals
  ultimately benefit consumers in Wisconsin by allowing the Wisconsin Commission to move
  forward with a pooling trial quickly in whatever area it determines it is most necessary, while
  providing some assurance that the network changes required for the trials are implemented in
  a manner that does not disrupt the normal functioning of the network in Wisconsin and
  nationwide.
  44.          After having implemented a thousands-block number pooling trial in one MSA, the
  Wisconsin Commission may wish to expand to another MSA.  Should it wish to do so, we
  direct the Wisconsin Commission to allow sufficient transition time for carriers to undertake
  any necessary steps, such as modifying databases and upgrading switch software, to prepare
  for an expansion of thousands-block pooling to other MSAs.   In other words, start dates
  for thousands-block pooling trials in different MSAs should be appropriately staggered to
  permit the industry to undertake all necessary steps.  The purpose of a staggered roll-out is to
  provide carriers time to upgrade or replace their Service Control Points (SCPs) and other
  components of their network, as necessary, if the increased volume of ported numbers as a
  result of the pooling trial requires them to do so.
  45.          We suggest to the Wisconsin Commission that it consider concentrating its
  thousands-block pooling trial in those NPAs which are the best candidates for pooling, based
  on the considerations set forth in the Numbering Resource Optimization Notice.  For
  example, we encourage the Wisconsin Commission to consider number pooling in areas where
  multiple LNP-capable carriers exist.  We also suggest to the Wisconsin Commission that it
  allow for exceptions to participating in a pooling trial, if doing so would prove prohibitively
  expensive to a particular carrier.  For example, certain switch types may not be able to
  accommodate thousands-block number pooling.  Finally, as the Commission stated in the
  Numbering Resource Optimization Notice, we encourage the Wisconsin Commission, to the
  extent it has not already done so, to consider consolidating rate centers prior to implementing
  pooling.  Fewer, larger pools logically increase the effectiveness of thousands-block
  pooling.
  46.          We reiterate that the authority we grant herein to the Wisconsin Commission to
  undertake thousands-block pooling trials is interim in nature, and is in no way intended to
  relieve the Wisconsin Commission of its obligation to implement necessary area code relief in
  a timely fashion.  Whatever decisions the Commission reaches with regard to thousands-block
  pooling administration and guidelines will supersede whatever systems the Wisconsin
  Commission puts in place prior to enactment of those rules.

                     XLVII.CONCLUSION
  48.          We recognize the difficult situation for consumers in Wisconsin, having had to
  undergo area code changes in only a few years, with the potential for more on the near
  horizon.  The authority we have herein delegated to the Wisconsin Commission, we hope, will
  provide it the tools it needs to address the situation.  For example, the authority to order
  thousands-block pooling trials allows the Wisconsin 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 now do.  The authority to require
  sequential number assignment allows the Wisconsin Commission to address the demand side
  of the number assignment regime by requiring that carriers not request more numbering
  resources until they have efficiently used numbers already in their inventory.
                   XLIX.ORDERING CLAUSE
  50.          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 Petition of the Public Utility Commission of Wisconsin for Expedited
  Decision for Authority to Implement Number Conservation Measures is GRANTED IN
  PART and DENIED IN PART to the extent described herein.
                         FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
                         
                         
                         Yog R. Varma
                         Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau