4. Public Utilities Code Section 311(g)

Section 311(g)(1) requires the draft decision in this proceeding to be (i) served on all parties, and (ii) subject to at least 30 days of public review and comment prior to a vote of the Commission. The draft decision of ALJ Kenney was mailed on _________________. Opening comments were filed on ___________, and reply comments on ______________. These comments have been reflected, as appropriate, in the final decision adopted by the Commission.

Findings of Fact

1. In D.96-12-086, the Commission required the use of geographic splits for every new area code implemented through the year 2000, with the possible exception of the 310 NPA.

2. On October 15, 1998, Pacific filed a petition to modify D.96-12-086 in which Pacific requested that (i) overlays be considered as an option to relieve exhausted area codes through the year 2000, and (ii) the Commission adopt a policy that favors overlays in regions with specified characteristics.

3. The Commission has repeatedly found that overlays have significant disadvantages.

4. Pacific filed its petition to modify D.96-12-086 in the consolidated docket of R.95-04-043/I.95-04-044. In OIR 98-12-014, the Commission consolidated Pacific's petition into this proceeding.

Conclusions of Law

1. Pacific's petition to modify D.96-12-086 is moot to the extent the petition requests that D96-12-086 be modified to allow the use of overlays for new area codes implemented by the end of the year 2000.

2. Due to the significant disadvantages of overlays, it is not in the public interest to adopt at this time Pacific's proposed policy that favors overlays.

3. Pacific's petition to modify D.96-12-086 should be denied.

4. To ensure that all parties who might have an interest in today's decision received a copy of the decision, a copy of this decision should be served on the service lists for both this proceeding and R.95-04-043/I.95-04-044.

5. The following order should be effective immediately.

INTERIM ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. Pacific Bell's petition to modify Decision 96-12-086 is denied.

2. This order shall be served on the service lists for (i) this proceeding, and (ii) the consolidated docket of Rulemaking 95-04-043 and Investigation 95-04-044.

This order is effective today.

Dated , at San Francisco, California.

APPENDIX A

Excerpts From Commission Decisions

That Highlight The Significant Disadvantages Of Overlays

D.96-12-086, Finding of Fact 24: "Even in small, densely congested NPAs which are the most likely candidates for an overlay, there is still more [consumer] support for a split than for an overlay."

D.97-09-050; mimeo., pp. 4-5: "Because the Commission [in D.96-12-086] considered the advantages of both splits and overlays for all NPAs ... the Commission properly concluded that the net advantages of a split outweighed the net advantages of an overlay as a policy option through the year 2000...Therefore, Pacific has failed to show that the rejection of the overlay option constitutes error of any kind."

D.97-12-100, mimeo., p. 3: "In D.96-12-086 the Commission gave due consideration to the advantages and disadvantages of overlays by virtue of the weight given by the decision to three consumer surveys which together provided a statistically meaningful profile of consumers' preferences for overlays versus splits. In conducting the surveys, respondents were told in extensive detail about the advantages and disadvantages of both splits and overlays. Thus, the surveys accurately gauged consumers' perceptions of the advantages as well as the disadvantages of both options. All three surveys yielded results showing a majority preference for splits...even after taking into account the advantages of an overlay. Because the Commission considered the advantages and disadvantages of both overlays and splits for all NPAs through the weight given to the consumer surveys, the Commission properly concluded that the net advantages of a split outweighed the net advantages of an overlay as a policy option through the year 2000." (Emphasis in original, footnotes omitted.)

D.98-05-021, mimeo., pp. 35-36: "[T]he overlay is not without its own issues. For example, while the NPA boundary would not change, the defining feature of the boundaries would itself, change. In other words, the geographic boundaries would no longer define a single NPA, but two (or more) NPAs. Thus, one of the advantages of having geographically-defined NPA boundaries (i.e., as a means of common identification) will over time become less meaningful as multiple NPAs within a single geographic region proliferate. The area code in an overlay signifies when the customer was assigned the number rather than where geographically, the number is located. Thus, for example, a business may consider an assignment of the overlay NPA less desirable than the original NPA which is assigned to a neighboring business, particularly when the NPA is first introduced. Customers may perceive the business with the new NPA to be newer or less established than the neighboring business that retains the more recognized original NPA. Therefore, the advantage of the overlay in avoiding new geographic splits must be weighed against the drawback that it also tends to obscure the traditional use of NPAs as a common geographic bond of local communities of interest.¹⁰" (Emphasis in original.)

D.98-05-021, mimeo., p. 36: "Another drawback of an overlay which customers will experience is the loss of seven-digit dialing for calls within the same NPA. In the consumer preference surveys reviewed in D.96-12-086, customers generally placed significant value on the ability to dial only seven digits for calls within the NPA.¹¹" (Emphasis in original.)

D.98-05-021, mimeo., pp. 36-37: "Even though customers are accustomed to dialing 1+10-digits for a significant amount of existing calls, the overlay will still require customers to learn a new dialing procedure in which calls within the same NPA require 1+10-digit dialing. Customers will lose the ability to uniquely identify a given geographic region by a single area code."

D.98-05-021, mimeo., p. 37: "Another potential problem with the overlay is that customers who seek to add additional lines at the same location after the overlay takes effect may only be able to obtain the additional lines under the new area code and thus be left with two area codes for multiple lines the same location. The only alternative, if they wish for all their lines to be in one NPA, would be to change the original numbers' area code, thereby losing one of the presumed advantages of the overlay. If the customer's local service provider has a remaining inventory of NXX codes within the 310 NPA, the provider presumably could offer the customer an additional line within the same NPA. We are concerned, however, with the potential for certain carriers, particularly the ILECs, to gain a competitive advantage by being able to assign new numbers using the 310 NPA while new entrants with limited NXX codes in the 310 NPA may have to rely on the new NPA for making number assignments.¹²"

D.98-06-018, mimeo., p. 18: "While the proponents point to benefits from an overlay, they omit reference to the potential drawbacks of an overlay. For example, the proponents fail to address negative impacts such as the loss of seven-digit dialing if an overlay were implemented within the 619 NPA. With an overlay, all customers in the remaining 619 NPA would be required to dial 1+10 digits for all calls within the same NPA."

D.98-06-018, mimeo., p. 18: "In D.96-12-086, we reviewed the results of consumer surveys conducted by various parties regarding preferences for geographic splits compared with overlays. In these surveys, respondents were presented with information concerning both the advantages and disadvantages of splits and overlays...respondents representing both residential and business customers expressed a marked preference for splits in comparison to overlays under every scenario posed in the surveys. To the extent these surveys provide evidence of the relative customer impacts of a split versus an overlay for a portion of the 619 NPA, the evidence indicates adoption of a split would have less adverse impacts on customers than would an overlay. At any rate, survey respondents in the current 619 NPA expressed a strong preference for retaining the ability to dial seven digits for calls within their NPA."

D.98-06-018, mimeo., p. 20: "Worthy of note is the fact that many difficult issues are avoided entirely by providing relief with a geographic split. If relief were...provided with an overlay, issues such as the availability and effectiveness of permanent Local Number Portability, assurance of an adequate supply of NXX codes for CLCs as required by the FCC, and nondiscriminatory access to 619 telephone numbers [would have to be addressed]. These issues are particularly critical in the San Diego area where facilities-based competitors are new entrants with significant infrastructure investments. Because this decision provides area code relief in the form of a geographic split, these issues need not be [addressed]."

D.98-10-061, mimeo., pp. 4-5: "[A]n overlay plan would create problems regarding...the availability and effectiveness of permanent Local Number Portability, assurance of an adequate supply of NXX codes for CLCs as required by the FCC, and nondiscriminatory access to 619 telephone numbers...We also commented on the statements regarding customer impact explaining that if an overlay were used, customers who retained the 619 area code, as well as those with the new overlay code, would be required to dial a 1 plus ten digits for all calls. This means all telephone users within one area code would have to use a ten-digit number, even when calling a close neighbor. In response to comments from business owners who spoke of the expense of changes in stationery and advertisements if they were assigned a new area code, we noted that with an overlay plan, a single household or business with multiple lines could have different area codes depending on when the numbers were assigned and which telecommunications carrier assigned them. In comparison, as we stated in our decision, with a geographic split of area codes, approximately one-half of all the customer involved would have a new area code, but all customers would retain the ability to dial only a seven-digit number for calls within their area code. Furthermore, most businesses are located in the downtown San Diego region which will retain the 619 area code." (Citations and footnotes omitted.)

D.99-03-059, mimeo., pp. 22-23: "Another drawback of an overlay is customers' loss of seven-digit dialing for calls within the same NPA. In the consumer preference surveys reviewed in D.96-12-086, customers generally placed significant value on the ability to dial only seven digits for calls within the NPA. Yet, we must weigh the preference for seven-digit dialing against the other problems involved in yet another split of the 909 NPA. Because of the shrinking of the 909 NPA, an increasing number of customers' calls originated within the 909 NPA terminate outside of the 909 NPA boundaries. Yet, even though 909 NPA customers are already becoming more accustomed to dialing 1+10 digits for at least some portion of their calls, the overlay will still require customers to learn a new 1+10-digit dialing procedure for all calls, including those within the same NPA. Customers will also lose the ability to uniquely identify a given geographic region by a single area code.¹³" (Emphasis in original.)

D.99-07-017, Finding of Fact 16: "With an overlay, geographic boundaries no longer define a single NPA, thereby eliminating the advantage of having geographically-defined NPA boundaries as a means of identifying and unifying communities of interest."

D.99-07-017, Finding of Fact 17: "With an overlay, customers will experience the loss of seven-digit dialing for calls within the same NPA."

D.99-07-017, Finding of Fact 18: "A business may consider an assignment of the overlay NPA less desirable than the original NPA, since customers may perceive the business with the new NPA to be newer or less established than the neighboring business that retains the more recognized original NPA."

D.99-09-067, mimeo., p. 1: "We adopt petitioners' proposal to suspend the [310 NPA] overlay and institute more aggressive measures to conserve existing numbers. We do so in recognition that 1+10 digit dialing and the prospect of an overlay have caused substantial customer confusion and inconvenience."

D.99-09-067, mimeo., pp. 8-9: "In reaching its conclusions in D.98-05-021 [which adopted the 310 NPA overlay], the Commission explored the customer hardships that might accompany an overlay and 1+10 digit dialing prior to their adoption . . . The extent of negative public reaction to an overlay and 1+10-digit dialing, however, was not fully realized, nor was this a salient issue to the local public prior to the Commission's adoption of D.98-05-021. Over the past several months and since the filing of the instant petition, we have received a significant volume of oral and written communications from members of the public expressing strong opposition to the overlay plan. The customer resistance and disruption generated by the implementation of 1+10-digit dialing and which motivated this petition suggests that the hardships encountered by the pubic have been greater than those the Commission originally anticipated. On that basis alone we should reconsider our earlier decision."

D.99-09-067, mimeo., p. 11: "In sum, since the Commission issued its decision instituting an overlay and the commensurate 1+10 dialing in the 310 area, we have become more sensitized to the extent that our solution to avoiding an area code split imposes significant burdens on consumers. This burden, in combination with changes in technology and policy, convinces us that our first objective should be to pursue efficient allocation and utilization of numbers. As importantly, we now have authority from the FCC to pursue more efficient number allocation practices that would obviate the need for an overlay. Consistent with that authority, we will implement several measures in the hopes of significantly forestalling, if not eliminating, the need for an overlay or split in the 310 area."

D.99-09-067, mimeo., p. 19: "Petitioners have convinced us to reverse our earlier decision to require an area code overlay in the 310 NPA at this time. In our efforts to balance numerous competing interests and promote competitive telecommunications markets, we adopted the overlay plan assuming, on the basis of the record before us, that adverse customer effects could be mitigated through public education and temporary number conservation measures. Subsequent events convince us that an overlay may impose more substantial, and possibly unnecessary, hardship on customers than previously anticipated. Technological change and the FCC's September 15 grant of authority to implement number conservation measures permit us to pursue alternatives to imposing an overlay. All will require the concerted efforts of our staff, the industry, and the NANPA. By reversing our order adopting an area code overlay, we may concurrently relieve customers of the associated requirement that customers dial 11 digits to reach customers in their own region."

D.99-10-022, mimeo., pp. 4-5: "In this case, circumstances have not reached the level of crisis. Unlike the 310 area code, the 818 area code is more than a few months from number exhaust. There is adequate time to implement number conservation measures. The authority granted by the FCC's September 15, 1999 order, in combination with our increasing concern with the effects of overlays on customers, has motivated a change in our policy direction. We now intend to employ number conservation measures aggressively to the extent of our authority and thereby avoid splits or overlays whenever possible."

D.99-10-022, mimeo., pp. 14-15: "Neither an overlay nor a geographic split [for the 818 NPA] is free of problems, and no plan can avoid disruptions to customers. On balance, however, we conclude that the proposed split [for the 818 NPA] would be less disruptive to customers on the basis of the record developed in this proceeding and based on our experience with customer disruptions in the adjacent 310 NPA. A split, unlike an overlay, permits existing customers to retain use seven-digit dialing. In addition, only four of the 16 San Fernando Valley rate centers would receive a new area code, minimizing the number of customers required to make an area code change. Finally, the residents of the 818 affected by this split have not had a change in their area code since 1984, when the 818 area code was established. Although the overlay would not require any business in the 818 NPA to change its existing phone number, including the media corridor within the Burbank/Glendale/North Hollywood area, the public's intense dislike of 11 digit dialing in Southern California makes the successful implementation of such an overlay uncertain. Indeed, a measure of the success of any Commission policy is whether it serves the broad public interest."

D.99-10-022, mimeo., pp. 15-16: "With an overlay, customers would also lose the ability to readily identify a geographic region by area code. Moreover, as we have found in the implementation of 11-digit dialing, devices such security alarm systems will need to be reprogrammed and some require replacement. A split avoids these costs."

D.99-12-049, mimeo., pp. 25-26: "The potential merits of splits versus overlays were reflected in the results of the consumer surveys reviewed in D.96-12-086 in which respondents expressed preferences for splits or overlays. Respondents in the survey expressed a greater preference for splits compared with overlays at the time the survey was taken. Since the last split creating the 707 NPA occurred so long ago, we can reasonably expect the residents of the 707 to maintain their preferences for a split. By contrast, Alternative 6A would force all customers in the central and southern sections to undergo both an area code split and an overlay in the same period of time it would take to implement the three-way split. We find it unfair to subject these customers to the disadvantages of both splits and overlays. Alternative 6B is likewise unfair to customers in the northern section which would have to take the NPA even though they have not caused the growth in demand for NXX codes. We also find Alternatives 6A and 6B unacceptable because they would impose an overlay and mandatory 1+10-digit dialing on a majority of customers in the 707 NPA."

D.99-12-049, mimeo., pp. 26-27: "With an overlay...the NPA boundary would not change, but the defining feature of the boundaries would itself, change. In other words, the geographic boundaries would no longer define a single NPA, but two (or more) NPA's. [sic] Thus, one of the advantages of having geographically-defined NPA boundaries (i.e., as a means of common identification) will over time become less meaningful if multiple NPA's within a single geographic region proliferate. The area code in an overlay signifies when the customer was assigned the number rather than where geographically the number is located. Thus, for example, a business may consider an assignment of the overlay NPA less desirable than the original NPA, which is assigned to a neighboring business, particularly when the NPA is first introduced. Customers may perceive the business with the new NPA to be newer or less established than the neighboring business that retains the more recognized original NPA. In the consumer preference surveys reviewed in D.96-12-086, customers generally placed significant value on the ability to dial only seven digits for calls within the NPA. The overlay would require customers to learn a new 1+10 digit dialing procedure for all calls within the same NPA. The intense public dislike of 11-digit dialing in other NPA's makes the successful implementation of an overlay here uncertain. Moreover, as we have found in the implementation of 11-digit dialing, devices such security alarm systems will need to be reprogrammed and some require replacement. A split avoids these costs." (Emphasis in original.)

D.99-12-049, mimeo., pp. 26-27: "On balance, we conclude that, while both the split-and-subsequent overlay and three-way geographic split will have certain adverse impacts...the Alternative 4A three-way geographic split will have certain adverse impacts...the Alternative 4A three-way geographic split will have less overall adverse impacts than the Alternative 6A or 6B split-and-overlay alternatives proposed for the 707 NPA."

D.99-12-051, mimeo., pp. 1-2: "We shall suspend the...institution of mandatory 1+10-digit dialing and for the opening of the overlay area code in each of the affected [NPAs} (i.e., in the 408, 415, 510, 650, 714, and 909 NPAs) where overlays have been approved. We do so in recognition that 1+10-digit dialing and the prospect of overlay area codes caused significant customer confusion and inconvenience in the 310 NPA. As a result, we ordered a halt to the implementation of the 310/424 NPA overlay by Decision (D.) 99-09-067. We conclude that similar considerations warrant a halt to the remaining NPA overlay plans that have previously been approved by the Commission[.]"

D.99-12-051, mimeo., pp. 6-7: "When the Commission adopted each of the overlay plans that have been approved, it recognized the importance of minimizing the adverse impacts of introducing yet another new area code. The Commission believed at the time that an overlay with 1+10-digit dialing appropriately balanced those tradeoffs. We acknowledged that however a new area code is introduced, through overlay or split, it would be disruptive to customers. We revisit our earlier conclusions on this issue with a heightened sense of how those disruptions affect customers.

D.99-12-051, mimeo., p. 7: "The Commission took several steps to solicit the views of the public on their preferences for overlays versus splits. The extent of negative public reaction to an overlay and 1+10-digit dialing, however, was not fully realized, nor was this a salient issue to the local public prior to the Commission's adoption of the 310 NPA overlay in D.98-05-021. The customer resistance and disruption generated by the implementation of 1+10-digit dialing in the 310 NPA suggested that the hardships encountered by the public were greater than those the Commission originally anticipated. Likewise, similar adverse effects could be expected in other overlays scheduled to take effect. Changes in policy and technology are likewise motivating factors warranting reconsideration of our previous decisions approving overlays in the NPAs cited above."

D.99-12-051, mimeo., p. 9: "In sum, since the Commission issued its decisions instituting overlays and commensurate 1+10 dialing in each overlay area, we have become more sensitized to the extent that our solution to avoiding an area code split imposes significant burdens on consumers. This burden, in combination with changes in technology and policy, convinces us that our first objective should be to pursue efficient allocation and utilization of numbers. As importantly, we now have authority from the FCC to pursue more efficient number allocation practices that would obviate the need for an overlay. Consistent with that authority, we will implement several measures in the hopes of significantly forestalling, if not eliminating, the need for an overlay or split in each area for which an overlay was approved."

D.99-12-051, mimeo., p. 20: "The FCC's September 15, 1999 order requires that the Commission establish a "back up" NPA relief plan for an area code that may otherwise run out of numbers in the event that number pooling and related conservation measures prove inadequate to avoid code exhaustion. Given the opposition to overlays expressed in the petitions for modification suspending the overlays, we conclude that a reexamination is warranted of the previously proposed geographic split options for each of the NPA relief plans as a basis for a back up plan for each of the affected NPAs...Thus, we shall conduct an inquiry concerning the adoption of an appropriate back up plan for each of the affected NPAs based on previously formulated geographic split proposals offered by the industry."

D.99-12-051, mimeo., p. 21: "Petitioners and ORA have convinced us to reverse our earlier decisions to require area code overlays in the 408, 415, 510, 650, 714, and 909 NPAs at this time. In our efforts to balance numerous competing interests and promote competitive telecommunications markets, we adopted each of the overlay plans assuming, on the basis of the record before us, that adverse customer effects could be mitigated through public education and temporary number conservation measures. Subsequent events convince us that each of the overlays may impose more substantial, and possibly unnecessary, hardship on customers than previously anticipated. Technological change and the FCC's September 15, 1999 grant of authority to implement number conservation measures permit us to pursue alternatives to imposing an overlay."

D.00-01-023, mimeo., pp. 7-8: "[Petitioner] claims that the seven-digit overlay could be implemented without affecting a single customer. We disagree. Even though existing telephone numbers would retain the 619 area code, customers would still be affected by the overlay. [Petitioner] fails to address the potential adverse affect on all customers as result of disrupting the long-held practice of identifying geographic regions by a single area code, even assuming away the mandatory 1+10-digit dialing requirement. Customers would have to deal with the loss of this long-held practice, suddenly being subjected to one or more area codes within a single geographic region. A transitional dialing period accompanied by a public education plan would still be needed to prepare the public for the changes brought about by an overlay. Even assuming the Petitioner's proposal for an overlay to preserve seven-digit dialing was legally sustainable, the remaining infirmities of an overlay would still exist. Customers would still have to deal with the confusion of potentially dialing a different area code merely to call a next-door neighbor, or being assigned different area codes within the same residence or business where multiple numbers were used. Customers could no longer be certain as to the correct area code for a number within the overlay region simply by reference to the geographic location of the called party's number."

D.00-01-023, mimeo., pp. 8-9: "[Petitioner's] proposal would permit seven-digit dialing only where both the calling and called party had the same area code. Yet, the likelihood that a neighboring number will share the same area code will diminish over time. Even though most holders of 619 NPA numbers may initially only need to dial seven digits for most numbers, new numbers assigned to the underpopulated 858 NPA will proliferate over time, while relatively few new numbers will be available in the 619 NPA which is already heavily populated. Thus, the likelihood will progressively increase of a 619 NPA customer having to dial the 858 area code to reach a neighboring number as time passes. If a next-door neighbor had been assigned the overlay area code, then 10-digit dialing would still be required for a 619 NPA customer to call that neighbor. Under [Petitioner's] proposal, customers could be uncertain as to whether a number called within their own neighborhood requires seven or ten digits, depending on whether the area code is 619 or 858. This uncertainty would grow over time as more numbers were assigned with the new area code. By contrast, Commission's adopted geographic split provides customers with the predictability of uniform seven-digit dialing for all calls within the prescribed geographic boundaries of the 619 NPA."

D.00-01-023, mimeo., p. 9: "Additional time for a public education plan would still be needed to acclimate the public to the overlay dialing process whereby the area code is no longer identified with a unique geographic area. Even if the seven-digit dialing feature were to be implemented as proposed, this advantage would mean little to those customers forced to take a number in the overlay NPA. Such customers would still need to dial 11 digits for the vast majority of their calls since the 858 NPA would be underpopulated, and calls to the 619 NPA would still require dialing 11 digits. The institution of a seven-digit overlay for the 619 NPA would also isolate it from all other NPAs in the state, and force 619 NPA customers into an anomalistic dialing pattern that is not used anywhere else in the state. Implementing such a new relief plan would take additional time, also delaying carriers' access to numbering resources and their ability to provide competitive telephone service within the 619 NPA. Moreover, newer competitors that could only obtain numbers in the new NPA could be placed at a competitive disadvantage by being unable to offer numbers for new lines in the more desirable 619 NPA."

D.00-01-023, mimeo., pp. 9-10: "In comments on the Draft Decision, [Petitioner] argues that any competitive advantage that incumbent carriers may have with a seven-digit dialing overlay is only a short-term problem that will be resolved when local number portability (LNP) can be fully implemented. On this basis, [Petitioner] claims that such a short-term problem should not be a constraint on approving a seven-digit overlay. LNP is already deployed in the 100 largest Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) nationally. In any event, the availability of LNP, of itself, does not fully address the problem of anticompetitive dialing disparities. LNP only allows customers to retain their previously existing numbers when switching carriers. The ability to port existing numbers, however, does not address the needs of new customers to the 619 NPA or existing customers seeking additional lines with a 619 area code. Such customers would likely have to take new numbers from the new area code. Thus, the availability of LNP will not solve the anticompetitive dialing disparity problem in the case of customers seeking new numbers in the 619 NPA. In recognition of this concern, the Federal Communications Commission has recently determined that the availability of LNP does not ameliorate the anticompetitive dialing disparity between the old and new area code sufficiently to justify the elimination of mandatory 1+10-digit dialing[.]"

D.00-03-057, mimeo., pp. 5-6: In D.99-12-051, the backup area code relief plans for the affected area codes call for geographic splits. Pacific claims that the Decision, in so providing, is arbitrary, unsupported by the record, and ignores the interests of many Californians. In making this assertion, Pacific turns a blind eye to the record. The Commission acknowledges that however a new area code is introduced, whether through a geographic split or an overlay, it would be disruptive to customers and therefore revisits the issue with a heightened sense of awareness. The Commission has taken, and continues to take, the steps necessary to solicit the views of the public regarding overlays versus splits, as indeed it is required to do under Public Utilities Code §7931. Public hearings, town hall meetings, and customer surveys were undertaken by various carriers and ORA. Customer surveys conducted by various carriers in 1996 showed a definite public preference for geographic splits. In 1999, ORA conducted a survey of customer preferences on area code relief options which showed that most customers favored geographic splits to overlays. D.99-12-051 was precipitated by public disdain for overlays in the affected NPAs. ORA, on behalf of California ratepayers, petitioned the Commission to halt the start-up of all area code overlays previously approved by Commission decisions. On behalf of its residents, the City of Berkeley filed a Petition to Modify D.99-04-024 to halt the start up of overlays in the 510/324 NPA and mandatory 1+10-digit dialing. Similarly, the City and County of San Francisco and the County of Marin jointly filed a Petition to Modify D.99-04-025 to suspend the start-up of the 415 NPA overlay, along with the related 1+10-digit dialing requirement. (Citations and footnotes omitted.)

D.00-09-073, mimeo., pp. 5-6: At the time we adopted D.98-05-021, we concluded that an overlay would have less overall adverse impact than would a split of the 310 NPA. Since then, we have reevaluated the comparative merits of an overlay compared to a split, as discussed in D.99-09-067 in which we suspended further implementation of the 310/424 NPA overlay. In view of the Commission's findings in D.99-09-067 concerning the public's opposition to the 310/424 NPA overlay, we now conclude that a split would have less overall adverse impact on the public than would an overlay of the 310 NPA. The problems with an overlay lead us to conclude that its adoption as a back-up relief plan would not be in the public interest. The difficulties involved with an overlay include mandatory 1+10-digit dialing for all calls and the prospects of dialing of a different area code simply to call a next-door neighbor. The overlay also disadvantages new customers who must take the new area code which is less familiar and may create confusion as to where the customer is located.

D.00-09-073, mimeo., pp. 6-7: Although Pacific's proposal for an overlay would preserve seven-digit dialing, the other infirmities of an overlay would remain. Customers would still face the anomaly of being assigned different area codes within the same residence or business where multiple numbers were used. Even if seven-digit dialing were permitted as proposed, this advantage would mean little to those customers forced to take a number in the overlay NPA. Such customers would still have to dial 11 digits for the vast majority of their calls, since the new NPA would be underpopulated. Calls to the 310 NPA would still require dialing 1+ the area code. Newer competitors that would only obtain numbers in the new NPA could be placed at a competitive disadvantage by being unable to offer numbers for lines in the more desirable 310 NPA. For these reasons, we conclude that a seven-digit overlay as a back-up relief plan for the 310 NPA is not practical or desirable in this instance, and that a back-up plan needs to be considered via a geographic split.

D.00-09-073, mimeo., p. 8: Thus, notwithstanding all of the drawbacks of a geographic split, we find the Alternative 1A geographic split to be the most viable alternative for a back-up area code relief plan for the 310 NPA. We conclude that while this plan will admittedly result in disruption to customers impacted by the area code change, it will minimize the resulting disruptions in comparison to an overlay.

(END OF APPENDIX A)