Number Conservation

Last month, the FCC, after soliciting comments on LNP, gave the wireless industry an 18-month "breather" to support carrier LNP in the top 100 MSAs. However, what the FCC giveth, it may well taketh away.

Although the FCC endorsed LNP as an essential tool to promote the pro-competitive, deregulatory environment envisioned by the 1996 Telecommunications Act, it also noted that "implementation of long-term service provider portability by commercial mobile radio service (CMRS) carriers will have an impact on the efficient use and uniform administration of the numbering resource."

The FCC's February Order granted the wireless industry an extension to November 2002, recognizing that the wireless industry faces unique challenges in implementing LNP. However, at the same time, the FCC acknowledged the widespread concern that the numbering resources will exhaust quickly. Acting pro-actively, the FCC earlier had asked the North American Numbering Council (NANC) to prepare a report on possible measures to increase the efficient use and allocation of existing numbering resources.

CONSERVATIONThe NANC report identified 14 measures that may be used to optimize the use of numbering resources. The FCC sought public comment on the NANC report, particularly six of the measures, to explore ways that all carriers can optimize number efficiency. Of those six measures, three are forms of number pooling that are dependent on existing LNP architecture using the LRN method. CTIA and some wireless carriers commented on numbering-conservation methods.

According to Michael Altschul, CTIA vice president-general counsel, "CTIA advocates that carriers be given the flexibility to select whatever numbering-conservation methods would best enable them to reach an agreed-upon level of utilization."

Given the need to improve efficient use of numbering resources, the FCC emphasized that extending the deadline to 2002 would not act as a barrier to any number-conservation measures the FCC will undertake. In this regard, the FCC plans to issue a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that will propose certain non-LNP-based numbering resource optimization requirements applicable to all sectors of the telecommunications industry that use numbering resources. The FCC envisions that this proceeding will result in rules that will establish more control over number administration. For example, all carriers could be required to justify their needs for new numbers.

ALWAYS A CRITICExtending the deadline for implementation of wireless LNP has its critics. Some argue that because implementation of LNP is a necessary precondition to number-pooling techniques, an extension of the deadline for CMRS number portability would impede efforts to address number conservation. In addition, the Telecommunications Resellers Association argues that the wireless industry does not require any additional time beyond March 2000 to implement LNP because there is an alternative approach, "LRN relay," that would enable the industry to support LNP.

Despite the critics' arguments and counterproposals, the FCC determined that the extension would not adversely affect number conservation. With respect to number pooling, the FCC recognized that number conservation and LNP are not mutually exclusive. Of the 14 solutions analyzed by NANC, only three require LNP architecture to work. Further, the FCC has not yet implemented pooling requirements for any class of carriers, including wireline carriers, and must undertake further proceedings before it can do so. The FCC also acknowledged that a certain number of non-LNP-based conservation techniques can be implemented before November 2002, but cited alarming statistics regarding the speed at which area codes are being assigned by the North American Numbering Plan administrator and noted that 50 area codes throughout the United States currently are "in jeopardy."

RULES ARE MADE TO BE BROKENFCC staff has confirmed that the FCC soon will issue an NPRM on number conservation. Within the FCC, there was a division between those concerned with the need to conserve numbers and those concerned that capital expenditures necessary to implement LNP in the wireless environment would affect facilities-based competition adversely.

The February order was an attempt by the commission to balance these concerns. The wireless industry would be ill-advised to treat the November 2002 deadline as written in stone. Although the February order gave the wireless industry additional time by extending the deadline to 2002, if presented with evidence that it is necessary to use a number-conservation method before 2002, the FCC will not hesitate to roll back the 2002 deadline. Thus, it would behoove you to participate in the upcoming number-conservation rulemaking.