Background

On April 24, 2008, this Commission issued Decision (D.) 08-04-058, which adopted a geographic split to address the projected third quarter 2009 exhaustion of the supply of available telephone numbers in the 760 area code.

On August 15, 2008, Assemblyman Martin Garrick and the Chambers of Commerce of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, San Marcos, Oceanside and Vista filed their Petition for Modification of D.08-04-058. The petition contends that the Commission's decision was the result of erroneous interpretation of public comment received and the absence of comment from significant portions of the affected public. Due to a claim of inequitable economic harm imposed on northern San Diego County businesses and residences, the petition asks the Commission to modify the decision to adopt an area code overlay, rather than the area code split that had been adopted.

In a ruling dated August 22, 2008, the assigned Commissioner and Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) scheduled public participation hearings in Victorville and Carlsbad to take public comment on the Petition for Modification. The Victorville hearing was sparsely attended with most speakers supporting the April decision, which allowed them to retain the 760 area code. The burden of dialing 11 digits for all calls was the most cited reason for opposing the proposed overlay.

In contrast, more than 200 persons attended the Carlsbad hearing, with over 125 offering comment to the Commission. The overarching theme was that changing their area code would impose substantial costs on businesses for advertising, documents, products as well as lost customers when they are unable to reach the business, and that residential customers would suffer lost contacts from friends and family when the 760 area code would no longer be effective for their telephone numbers. Businesses, especially seasonal ones, explained that advertising is often placed many months in advance and that the Commission's ordered notice provisions provide for inadequate time to notify all existing customers and change advertising for prospective customers. Residential customers stated that relatives and friends with whom they have infrequent contact will assume that the customer has moved when the "no longer in service" message is received in response to a telephone call.

Written responses in support of the Petition for Modification were submitted by Verizon California Inc., Pacific Bell Telephone Company dba AT&T California, Verizon Wireless, Telscape Communications, Inc., Sprint Nextel Corporation, and Cox California Telecom LLC, dba Cox Communications. The responses reiterated the major themes of the petition; namely, that an overlay is preferred because it would be less expensive for customers to implement and would allow all to retain their existing telephone number and area code.

Inyo County responded in opposition to the petition and recommended that the Commission let stand the April 2008 decision adopting a geographic split. Inyo County stated that the 10-digit dialing protocol required by an overlay would be burdensome and confusing for its elderly and rural population.

The petitioners filed a reply to the responses and concluded that the public overwhelmingly supported an overlay, and that the Commission should grant the Petition for Modification and adopt an overlay.

Discussion

Pursuant to Pub. Util. Code §§ 7936 and 7943(c), before approving any new area code, the Commission must obtain utilization data from the North American Numbering Plan Administrator for any area code for which an area code change is proposed and must "perform a telephone utilization study and implement all reasonable telephone number conservation measures." Where there is no reasonable alternative other than to create a new area code, the Commission must "do so in a way that creates the least inconvenience for customers."

Our consideration of the information presented by the Administrator is set out in D.08-04-058 and remains valid. The Petition for Modification did not take issue with the need for area code relief, only the form of relief ordered in D.08-04-058. Today's decision is limited to our reconsideration of the two-way geographic split ordered.

In D.08-04-058, we explained our support for an overlay as typically the best approach for creating additional numbering resources, but that the uniquely expansive geography of the 760 area code warranted departure from this general rule. The extensive public response to our decision focused on the inconvenience and expense of changing telephone numbers, as compared to the relatively minor burden of 10-digit dialing. Customers explained in great detail the expenses that will be incurred by businesses, the lost contacts for individuals, and the use of "speed dial" features on modern telephones that can offset the impact of 10-digit dialing.

We have considered the volume and substance of these comments and have determined that we should grant the Petition for Modification and adopt a geographic overlay. This will allow all customers to retain their existing telephone numbers, which we understand to be the highest priority for customers. The overlay will require all customers to adopt the 10-digit dialing protocol.

Therefore, we vacate all provisions of D.08-04-058 which order or require a two-way geographic split. The implementation schedule for the split set out in Ordering Paragraph 5 of D.08-04-058 is suspended. The following implementation plan is adopted:

DATE	EVENT
Saturday, May, 2009	Permissive Dialing begins
Saturday, October 24, 2009	Mandatory Dialing begins
Saturday, November 21, 2009	New 442 area code becomes effective

Carriers with numbering resources in the 760 area code will be also required to implement a public education program to assist customers in adopting the new 10-digit dialing protocol. The carriers and the Administrator, subject to the approval of the Director of the Communications Division, shall develop a detailed public education plan generally consistent with the plan used for the 818 overlay as ordered in D.08-04-049. The Director is authorized to oversee the implementation of the public education plan and shall require all actions necessary to achieve a 70% awareness level of the overlay in all major customer and telephone user groups. Such actions may include: additional educational efforts, obtaining outside professional services, reviewing and approving all educational materials, overseeing the customer awareness assessment process, and requiring any needed additional funding from the carriers.

The final public education plan, approved by the Director, shall be filed and served as a compliance filing no later than 30 days after the effective date of this decision.