NANPA Report to the NANC
January 16-17, 2001
1) NRUF Update
2) Code Assignments
3) NPA Inventory
4) Reclamation Process
6) NeuStar 2Q00 Neutrality Audit
Update on NRUF
December 1, 2000 NRUF Form 502 Seminar
On December 1, 2000, NANPA, with the support of USTA, held a training session on the NRUF Form 502. At this meeting, NANPA reviewed the revised Form 502 that had been provided to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for approval. Specifically, the group reviewed each worksheet included in the Excel form and the proposed enhancements. The revisions were targeted to reduce a number of common errors made by service providers when completing the form. A copy of the meeting agenda and notes are attached. The group also reviewed and modified a “Job Aid” prepared by NANPA to assist carriers in completing the revised Form 502.
Availability of Revised Form 502
NANPA was notified of OMB approval of the revised Form 502 on January 9, 2001. Beginning January 10, 2001, NANPA began accepting the submissions using the revised Form 502.
From January 1 – January 9, 2001, there was no approved Form 502 for service providers to submit to NANPA for the February 1, 2001 reporting period. To address this situation, NANPA allowed carriers that needed to file an update to NRUF to support a code application to use the expired Form 502. Carriers were not to use the expired Form 502 for their February 1, 2001 NRUF submission.
As of January 10, 2001, NANPA is only accepting the revised Form 502.
NRUF on File
The FCC NRO Order requires service providers to have a NRUF on file with NANPA in order to receive number resources. NANPA is to withhold numbering resources if the requesting service provider does not have an NRUF-on-file (i.e., forecast) for the area in which the service provider is requesting resources. NANPA has been suspending code applications where NANPA found no NRUF-on-file. More specifically, NANPA looks up the OCN stated on the code application in the NRUF-on-file database which contains the OCN stated in the service provider OCN field on the Form 502. If the OCN is found, NANPA checks to see if the service provider included a forecast for the NPA/rate center in which it is requesting resources. If NANPA finds no forecast or OCN, the application is suspended and the service provider notified. This NRUF on file check was discussed at length in the December 1, 2000 NRUF seminar and also identified in the job aid.
Effective February 1, 2001, NANPA will no longer suspend code applications but rather deny these applications that fail the NRUF on file check. This action is consistent with previous practices when COCUS was made a requirement in early 2000.
State Access to NRUF Data
With regard to state public service commission access to NRUF data, NANPA has received letters from 21 states indicating that it had appropriate confidentiality protections in place to safeguard the NRUF data. NANPA has provided a copy of the submitted NRUF data for the respective NPAs.
Along with the data are four standard reports that states may use in their analysis of the data. The reports are listed below:
· OCN Report – Utilization – List of OCNs by NPA reporting utilization data, including Service Provider Name, Company Address, Service Provider Type, Parent Company Name and Parent Company OCNs, Contact Name, Telephone Number and date of submission.
· OCN Report – Forecast - List of OCNs by NPA reporting forecast data, including Service Provider Name, Company Address, Service Provider Type, Parent Company Name and Parent Company OCNs, Contact Name, Telephone Number and date of submission.
· NPA Utilization Report – List of OCNs by NPA and their respective reported utilization data per the five (5) number usage categories and associated utilization level by NXX (rural carriers) and/or NXX-X (non-rural carriers). This report will also provide a service provider NPA-wide utilization rate as well as a total NPA utilization rate.
· NPA Forecast Report – List of OCNs by NPA and their respective reported forecast data, to include individual non-pooling service provider forecast of NXXs per NPA and pooling carriers’ NXX-X forecast by rate center by NPA.
NRUF on File Distribution List
NANPA has created a new mailing list for NRUF related announcements (“nruf-info”).
To subscribe, send an email message to:
Leave the subject line blank. In the text of the message, type only the line: Subscribe nruf-info
If you have a signature line inserted automatically, delete it.
You will receive a written confirmation that your subscription has succeeded, along with instructions on how to unsubscribe and other majordomo features.
Central Office Code Assignment Activity Report
The following table is a summary of the Central Office (CO) code activity for the period April through November 2000.
· Assignments from April through November averaged 1252 codes per month. Factoring in the return of codes, the net code assignment rate averaged 940 codes per month.
· Assignment from August through November averaged 1141 codes per month. Factoring in the return of codes, the net code assignment rate averaged 812 codes per month.
· The number of disconnects (i.e., returned codes) continues at a fairly high rate.
· With the effective date of the NRO Order in mid-July, there was a significant increase in the number of code denials. This was due primarily to a new code request form and documentation requirements for initial codes. The month of November shows that the number of denials declined significantly.
· The number of suspensions increased due to the NRUF on file check as part of the code assignment process.
· As of 1/4/01, there are 68 NPAs in rationing.
NPA Inventory Report
There are 800 possible combinations in NXX format.
Of the 800, 116 are not assignable or set aside for special purposes. These are N11 (8), expansion codes N9X (80), blocks reserved by INC 37X and 96X (20), 555 and 950 (2), codes set aside by INC for 88X expansion 883-5 and 887 (4), and non-dialable toll point codes 886 and 889 (2).
Subtracting 116 from 800 leaves 684 assignable codes.
Of the 684 assignable codes, 344 are currently assigned.
Of the 344 assigned codes, 289 are in service.
Of the 289 codes in service, 276 are geographic and 13 are non-geographic: 456, 500, 600, 700, 710, 800, 877, 866, 880, 881, 882, 888, 900.
Of the 344 assigned codes, 55 are awaiting implementation. These codes are listed on the next page.
Of the 684 assignable codes, 340 are currently unassigned.
Of the 340 unassigned codes, 49 are easily recognizable codes (ERCs) currently allocated for non-geographic use, and 291 are general purpose codes.
Of the 49 unassigned ERCs, 12 are reserved, leaving 37 available.
Of the 291 general purpose codes, 238 are reserved, leaving 53 available.
NPAs Awaiting Implementation 1/1/01
6NPA / Location / Status
224 / Illinois
251 / Alabama
278 / Michigan / Suspended
283 / Ohio
289 / Ontario
331 / Illinois
339 / Massachusetts
341 / California / Suspended
351 / Massachusetts
369 / California / Suspended
385 / Utah
386 / Florida
424 / California
434 / Virginia
442 / California / Suspended
445 / Pennsylvania
464 / Illinois
475 / Connecticut
557 / Missouri
563 / Iowa
564 / Washington
567 / Ohio
586 / Michigan / Suspended
620 / Kansas
627 / California / Suspended
628 / California / Suspended
647 / Ontario
657 / California / Suspended
669 / California / Suspended
679 / Michigan / Suspended
731 / Tennessee
737 / Texas
747 / California / Suspended
752 / California / Suspended
764 / California / Suspended
774 / Massachusetts
778 / British Columbia
822 / (toll free)
833 / (toll free)
835 / Pennsylvania
844 / (toll free)
855 / (toll free)
857 / Massachusetts
872 / Illinois
878 / Pennsylvania
935 / California / Suspended
939 / Puerto Rico
947 / Michigan / Suspended
951 / California / Suspended
959 / Connecticut
975 / Missouri
980 / North Carolina
985 / Louisiana
989 / Michigan
Standard and Customize Reports
At the November 2000 meeting, NANPA reported that it was working with state commission representatives to identify their data requirements and how NANPA may be able fulfill those data requirements with minimal costs to the states and NANPA. NANPA shared the type of data that has been identified to date that may be included in a standard report(s) includes data presently available on the web site but enhanced with additional information. For example, weekly updates of CO codes assigned and available by NPA are presently available. It is proposed that these reports be provided in a different format (e.g., Microsoft Access or Excel) and include information such as the date of code assignment and identification of initial and growth assignments. In addition, it is proposed that information concerning monthly CO code assignment quantities per NPA, number of returned codes, total codes available for assignment, total codes unavailable for assignment and other associated information be included in a standard report.
NANPA revisited this issue with the states in December 2000 and is now moving forward with development of these standard reports. It is expected that these reports will become available beginning the end of January 2001. The reports will be posted to the NANPA web site.
The Second Report and Order specifically identifies two types of customized reports that NANPA may offer. The first customized report concerns NRUF data. Presently, NANPA provides state commissions the disaggregated NRUF data as submitted by service providers for that state’s NPAs. Per the Second Order, if a state commission desires to receive the NRUF data in a different format involving the processing and culling of the data, NANPA may create and provide such customized reports to requesting states as an enterprise service. The second customized report pertains to providing application materials to states that prefer to receive such materials from a single source (i.e., NANPA).
For both services, per the Second Order, NANPA must charge a fee that is reasonable and supported by appropriate cost analysis. The costs for these services are to be borne by the states.
Over the next few months, NANPA will review the fees it initially proposed for two customized services presented to the NANC in July 2000, which appear to be very similar to the enterprise services discussed in the Second Order. Based upon that analysis, NANPA will determine the next steps in terms of whether it intends to offer these services and any changes to the proposed fees. If NANPA determines to offer such services, per previous NANC direction, NANPA will review these services and associated fees with the NOWG.
The FCC NRO Order directed changes in the CO code reclamation process. One of the these changes allowed state commissions to investigate and determine whether service providers have activated their numbering resources and may request proof from all service providers that numbering resources have been activated and assignment of telephone numbers has commenced. The NANPA is to abide by the state commission’s determination to reclaim numbering resources if the state commission is satisfied that the service provider has not activated and commenced assignment to end users of their numbering resources within six months of receipt.
For those states where the commission chooses not to become involved in the reclamation process, the FCC makes the decision on whether or not to reclaim a code. NANPA has developed a process for coordinating the reclamation efforts with the FCC. This process is outlined in the attached letter dated January 3, 2001.
Key points to note in this process:
· NANPA will compile a list of NPA-NXX codes to be reclaimed (i.e., no Part 4 form was provided by the code applicant) and provide to the FCC. NANPA will proceed with the reclamation process for those codes appearing on the reclamation list unless otherwise directed by the FCC.
· Service providers will be notified of NXXs to be reclaimed. Service providers will have 14 calendar days to respond. If the service provider provides a Part 4 form, NANPA will cancel the reclamation.
· If there is no service provider response (and no further direction from the FCC), NANPA will send a disconnect notice to Telcordia TRA.
· If a service provider desires an extension, the service provider must direct its request to the FCC. NANPA is not authorized to grant an extension and will not request extensions on behalf of the service provider.
· In the instance a service provider requests an extension from the FCC, NANPA will continue the reclamation process unless directed by the Commission. NANPA will only accept notification from the FCC, not the service provider, that an extension has been granted.
· NANPA will accept a Part 4 for the code in question at any time up to when NANPA sends a notification to Telcordia to disconnect the code in the LERG. After NANPA notifies Telcordia to disconnect the code in the LERG, only the FCC can direct NANPA to stop the reclamation of a code.