Findings of Fact

1. By D.98-12-081, the Commission directed telecommunications carriers serving the 310 NPA to undertake a public education plan to prepare the public for the then-pending 310/424 NPA overlay.

2. The Commission did not prescribe LE factor recovery for the costs of the 310/424 NPA PEP.

3. In D.98-10-026, the Commission prescribed the criteria for recovery of costs through the LE factor, confined to Commission-mandated costs for which recovery is authorized in the underlying decision mandating the cost.

4. The failure of the 310/424 NPA PEP to achieve its intended results was indicated by the significant negative reaction to mandatory 1+10-digit dialing instituted in the 310 NPA in April 1999, leading to the subsequent suspension of the overlay plan.

5. In view of the suspension of all previously approved overlay plans within California, PEP expenditures are now limited only to the funds already spent, and there will be no cumulative growth of PEP costs for the foreseeable future.

6. Based on the limited amounts spent on PEPs to date, the magnitude of such costs incurred by Pacific and GTEC is not sufficient to require LE factor recovery.

7. While the Commission mandated the PEP as a condition of an overlay and approved the PEP budget, nonetheless, Pacific and GTEC have had a significant degree of control over the cumulative sequence of events giving rise to the PEP costs.

8. While the aggregate percentage of PEP costs absorbed by Pacific or GTEC may exceed that of other carriers, Pacific and GTEC experienced no disproportionate impact in relation to other carriers in terms of the cost per NXX code.