II. Background
The 310 area code serves Local Access and Transport Area (LATA) 7303 located in Los Angeles County. The 310 area code was created in late 1991 to relieve numbers exhaustion in the 213 area code. The 310 area code was subsequently split in January 1997, forming a separate 562 area code, again to replenish number supplies. On February 18, 1998, industry representatives submitted to the Commission yet another proposed relief plan for the 310 area code, again claiming impending numbers exhaustion.
On May 7, 1998, the Commission issued D.98-05-021, approving a 310 area code relief plan, calling for the implementation of the first area code overlay ever used within California. In conformance with federal rules, the overlay plan also required the implementation of mandatory 1+10-digit dialing within the 310 area code and the newly created 424 area code.
On June 9, 1999, shortly after implementation of mandatory 1+10-digit dialing, Assemblyman Wally Knox, with other parties, petitioned to modify D.98-05-021, seeking to halt the opening of the overlay scheduled to occur on July 17, 1999, and to end mandatory 1+10-digit dialing. In D.99-06-091, issued on June 24, 1999, the Commission temporarily suspended mandatory 1+10-digit dialing in order to provide time to address the full merits of the Petition. In D.99-09-067, the Commission granted the Knox Petition, suspending the 310 area code overlay plan, eliminating mandatory 1+10-digit dialing, and instituting a program of number pooling and related conservation measures to extend the 310 area code life.
The traditional system for assigning numbers was a legacy from an era in which one incumbent carrier provided all customers with local service in a given area code. Under the traditional system, a carrier wishing to serve only a few customers in an area is allocated telephone numbers in blocks of 10,000 for each rate center in that area. That system worked reasonably well as long as only one incumbent local exchange carrier required numbering resources. Yet, with the opening of the local exchange market to competition, together with the growth in the market for wireless and advanced technological telecommunications services, the traditional number assignment system could no longer keep up with the growing demand for numbers. The traditional system did not lend itself to efficient distribution of numbers in a competitive market where numbers are assigned to multiple carriers to serve customers in each rate center.
Moreover, industry claims of impending number exhaustion were based merely upon carriers' forecasts of numbering resource requirements. No independent analysis had been provided, however, concerning the reliability of such forecasts or carriers' actual utilization of numbering resources. Accordingly, in D.99-09-067, the Commission ordered the staff to undertake a study of 310 area code number utilization to ascertain how efficiently carriers were actually using numbering resources already assigned to them. The Commission stated that a full accounting of 310 area code numbers actually in use would be required before setting any further date for the opening of a new area code.
We also adopted various number reporting and conservation measures in D.99-09-067 to utilize numbering resources more efficiently in view of the delegated authority granted by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in a September 15, 1999 Order.4 Since the adoption of D.99-09-067, the Commission has made significant progress toward promoting more efficient utilization of existing numbering resources through thousand-block number pooling and related conservation measures.
On March 16, 2000, the Commission's Telecommunications Division (TD) issued its "Report on the 310 Area Code" (Report) presenting findings on how efficiently numbering resources remaining in the 310 area code were actually being utilized by carriers, in compliance with the directive of D.99-09-067. Parties were permitted to file responses to the Report. As reported by TD, there were approximately three million unused numbers as of November 1999. The TD Report provided corroboration of our earlier caution in questioning whether prior carrier claims of number exhaustion were supportable. The number conservation measures that we have adopted, including requirements in D.99-11-027 for carriers to return unused codes, fill rate and sequential numbering rules in D.00-03-054, and thousand block number pooling for LNP-capable carriers, help ensure that the unused numbers in the 310 area code identified in the TD Report are allocated as efficiently as possible.
Nonetheless, even with the unused numbers identified by the TD Report, there are various constraints on the ability of carriers to make use of these unassigned numbers in meeting current customer service needs. For example, per FCC rules, a certain quantity of unused numbers must remain reserved for carriers' inventory needs. Also, in certain cases, carriers may need numbers in a particular rate center.5 Even if there are unused numbers in other rate centers, a carrier may be unable to use those numbers to serve customers in a rate center where there is a shortage of central office prefixes.6 Of the three million unused numbers reported as of November 1999, only 466,000 were identified in the Staff Report as belonging to wireless carriers. At the date of the Report, wireless carriers were not able to participate in the current 310 area code number pool, they had to rely on the semi-monthly 310 area code lottery of central office prefix codes to meet their numbering needs.
Since that time, wireless carriers (except for paging companies) have become subject to FCC number pooling requirements. Currently, only paging carriers still rely on the California lottery for numbers. All other wireless carriers obtain number resources through pooling. The efficiency gain realized through pooling has helped to extend the life of the 310 area code.
On August 2, 2000, the Cellular Carriers Association of California (CCAC) filed a motion asking the Commission to cease rationing of central office prefix codes and to immediately implement 310 area code relief.7 CCAC argued that in view of wireless carriers' forecasted need for triple the number of remaining central office prefix codes at that time, there was an unavoidable need for immediate area code relief. CCAC argued that continued rationing of central office prefix codes violated federal law and deprived customers of access to wireless telecommunications services. CCAC also noted the Commission's TD "Report on the 310 Area Code" which confirmed that wireless carriers were not hoarding numbers, but as of March 16, 2000, held only 466,000 out of three million unused numbers in the 310 area code.
3 A "Local Access and Transport Area" is the designation for a service area covering one or more local exchanges within which local exchange carriers are authorized to provide service. 4 In the Matter of California Public Utilities Commission Petition for Delegation of Additional Authority Pertaining to Area Code Relief and NXX Code Conservation Measures, Order, CC Docket No. 96-98, FCC 99-248 (FCC Order). 5 A rate center is a specific geographic location within a local exchange that is used to determine the rating of calls as either local or toll, depending on the distance between the rate centers serving two calling parties. Telephone number prefixes are assigned to a particular rate center. 6 In the case of wireless carriers, however, it is technically possible, though sometimes undesirable, to use numbers from an adjacent rate center to provide customers with numbers even if there is a shortage of central office prefixes in the desired rate center. 7 CCAC also filed a separate motion to file certain information contained in its pleading under seal, stating that such information was highly confidential and proprietary in nature. No party opposed the motion to file under seal. Accordingly, we grant the motion to file proprietary information under seal.
