Parties' Positions

Petitioner seeks to modify the decision with respect to the scheduled dates for "Start of Mandatory Dialing" and "End of Mandatory Dialing" for Phase 1, as adopted in D.98-06-018. Petitioner requests that these dates be extended six months to allow for evaluation of a seven-digit overlay option. In order to provide for a favorable outcome for 619 NPA customers, Petitioner requests extending the 619/858 permissive dialing period until the public has been educated to the benefits of an overlay, which permits seven-digit dialing. At that time, Petitioner suggests either the 858 or the 935 area codes could be overlaid on top of the entire 619 area or on a smaller subregion, as decided by popular opinion. Petitioner claims this approach extends the life of the 619 area code because it allows for complete exhaustion of the 619 numbers before any of the alternates are given out. Petitioner further claims this approach provides for the possible re-integration of the 619/858/935 NPA with the 760/442 NPA by spanning all regions with all five area codes while not disturbing any existing phone service.

Responses in opposition to the Petition were filed by Pacific Bell (Pacific) and jointly by California Cable Television, Time Warner Telecom of California, L.P., AT&T Communications, Inc., ICG Telecom Group, Inc., and NEXTLINK California, Inc. (collectively, the Joint Respondents).

While agreeing that the Commission should generally consider seven-digit overlays for most areas needing area code relief, Pacific argues that the need for new NXX codes in the 619 NPA is too urgent to delay implementing area code relief there. Pacific points out that the 619 NPA has virtually exhausted all of its NXX code supply. As of September 1, only 58 NXX codes remained available for assignment to carriers. At the current rate the lottery distributes these codes -- 11 codes per months -- the 619 NPA will be exhausted in less than six months. Even now, carriers need more NXX codes to serve their customers than they can receive through the lottery.

Moreover, Pacific states, many customers have already completed, or at least begun, making changes to stationery, signage, brochures, and other materials to reflect the new area code in reliance on the split ordered by D.98-06-018. Pacific argues they should not have to spend the time and money needed to undo these changes.

Additionally, Pacific believes that Petitioner's request would delay area code relief longer than the six months he has requested. The six-month delay would simply permit time to evaluate the merits of a seven-digit overlay for the 619 NPA. If the Commission adopted an overlay, Pacific claims it could take up to a year to implement the overlay because of statutory requirements. For example, notice must be given to customers of the specific geographic area that will be included in a new area code at least 12 months prior to the date adopted by the Commission for opening the new area code.

Joint Respondents claim that Petitioner failed to meet the procedural requirements of Rule 47 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure since the Petition was filed more than one year after the effective date of the decision.

Under Rule 47(d), a petition for modification is to be filed and served within one year of the effective date of the decision proposed to be modified. If more than one year has elapsed, the petition must also explain why the petition could not have been presented within one year. If the Commission determines that the late submission has not been justified, it may on that ground issue a summary denial of the petition.

Joint Respondents argue that Petitioner fails to point to any unverified fact in the record that supports his position now or indicates a change of facts that was not considered by the Commission in D.98-06-018 or D.98-10-061. Joint Respondents argue that an extensive review occurred in the 619 area code before the adoption of the three-way split in D.98-06-018, involving consideration and development of 10 area code relief alternatives by the industry, the North American Number Plan Administrator, and in several public meetings for 619 area code customers, and one local jurisdictional meeting for city and county government representatives.