Exhibit 1.0 (Smith)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Exhibit 1.0 (Smith) STATE OF ILLINOIS ILLINOIS COMMERCE COMMISSION NANPA, on behalf of the Illinois ) Telecommunications Industry ) ) Docket No. 00-0677 Petition for Approval of Numbering Plan ) Area Relief Planning for the 618 Area Code ) DIRECT TESTIMONY OF DANA SMITH ON BEHALF OF VERIZON WIRELESS January 15, 2002 Verizon Wireless Testimony Docket No. 00-0677 Exhibit 1.0 (Smith) 1 Introduction 2 Please state your name and business address. 3 A. My name is Dana Smith and my business address is Six Campus Circle, Westlake, Texas 4 76262. 5 Q. By whom are you employed and in what capacity? 6 A. I am employed by Verizon Wireless (“VZW”) as a Member of the Technical Staff in the 7 Numbering Policy and Standards group within VZW’s Network Planning Organization. 8 Q. Please summarize your education and work experience. 9 A. I received a Bachelor’s of Business Administration degree from the University of North 10 Texas in Denton, Texas in 1992. I have been employed with Verizon Wireless and its 11 predecessor companies since 1995, holding several positions within the Network 12 organization. I have worked exclusively on numbering issues for the past four years, 13 supporting fifteen states in the South and Midwest. My responsibilities have included 14 code administration, area code relief planning and implementation, and representing the 15 company’s interests at several national forums, including the Industry Numbering 16 Committee. 17 Q. Have you previously testified before this Commission? 18 A. Although I have not testified before this Commission, I have testified before other state 19 commissions as an expert on numbering issues. Moreover, I routinely participate on 20 behalf of Verizon Wireless in industry numbering meetings and particularly in NANPA 21 relief planning meetings. 22 Q. Does Verizon Wireless have a significant presence in Illinois? 23 A. Yes. Verizon Wireless provides wireless services to customers in many states, including 24 Illinois. Verizon Wireless has customers in every NPA within Illinois, and tens of 25 thousands of customers that will be affected by the area code relief plan chosen for the 26 618 NPA. 1 Verizon Wireless Testimony Docket No. 00-0677 Exhibit 1.0 (Smith) 27 Q. Has Verizon Wireless previously filed testimony in this matter? 28 A. No. However, Verizon Wireless is an active industry participant in relief planning 29 meetings in virtually every state across the nation, and has participated in the relief 30 planning process in other NPAs in Illinois. 31 Q. What is the purpose of your testimony? 32 A. The purpose of my testimony is to present Verizon Wireless’s position regarding the 33 alternatives for relief in the 618 Numbering Plan Area (“NPA”). Specifically, Verizon 34 Wireless supports the consensus position reached by the industry group for an all-services 35 distributed overlay as the best solution for the 618 NPA. 36 Q. Which option does Verizon Wireless view as the most appropriate in the 618 NPA? 37 A. After considerable review, discussion and evaluation of the available alternatives by 38 industry participants, Verizon Wireless supports the all-services distributed overlay relief 39 option (Alternative No. 3 described in Neustar’s petition in this Docket) for the 618 NPA 40 as the best choice. Verizon Wireless urges the Illinois Commerce Commission 41 (“Commission”) to allow implementation of the overlay to proceed as soon as possible. 42 Q. Why does Verizon Wireless view the all-services overlay plan as the best option for 43 relief? 44 A. An overlay plan has several advantages. Overlays avoid the problems associated with 45 splintering communities of interest into ever-smaller parts, including forced number 46 changes, and allow more flexibility to assign resources once number conservation 47 measures are implemented. An overlay also allows customers to retain their existing 48 telephone numbers. As the Federal Communications Commission has recognized, 49 overlays yield numbers that are available for use throughout the entire geographic area 50 covered by the old NPA, allowing resources to follow demand throughout an area 51 receiving relief. 2 Verizon Wireless Testimony Docket No. 00-0677 Exhibit 1.0 (Smith) 52 Each of the geographic split alternatives considered by the industry in this 53 proceeding would impact VZW’s customers and business negatively. A geographic split 54 will require area code changes for tens of thousands of VZW customers. Because the 55 proposed boundary line is similar in each of the split alternatives, i.e., an east-west split, 56 each geographic split proposal before the Commission is unacceptable. 57 Q. At this point, the Commission is reconsidering the relief options for the 618 NPA. 58 Has VZW given careful consideration to the various geographic split options 59 available? 60 A. Yes. After careful evaluation of the various geographic split alternatives, VZW found 61 that the geographic split options contain serious problems for both customers and 62 providers. These concerns are discussed below. 63 Implications of a Geographic Split 64 Q. From the customer’s perspective, what are the disadvantages of a geographic split 65 option for relief in the 618 NPA? 66 A. Any geographic split option will have several significant drawbacks. From the customer 67 perspective, roughly one-half of the customers in the existing 618 NPA would have to 68 change their area code. Business customers must endure the significant effort and 69 expense associated with changing stationary, business cards, advertising materials, 70 company signage and directory listings, among other things entailed in communicating 71 the number changes to their existing base of customers and suppliers. Residential 72 customers must also communicate the number changes to friends, relatives, schools, 73 doctors and other service providers. Wireless customers must also endure handset 74 reprogramming. All of these changes impose costs and inconvenience. 75 Although overlays require ten-digit dialing, geographic splits may also increase 76 the amount of ten-digit dialing for customers. Once a split is adopted, the frequency of 3 Verizon Wireless Testimony Docket No. 00-0677 Exhibit 1.0 (Smith) 77 ten-digit dialing may increase because the universe of numbers dialable with seven digits 78 shrinks. As NPA boundaries are re-drawn, communities are further fractured and 79 additional dialing confusion is created. Some customers may perceive a mix of seven- 80 and ten-digit dialing, which would be even more confusing than mandatory ten-digit 81 dialing everywhere. 82 Q. Are there any disadvantages related to a geographic split option that are unique for 83 wireless customers? 84 A. Yes. Geographic splits impose a disproportionate and unique negative impact on 85 wireless customers and carriers. That burden results from the need to reprogram wireless 86 handsets with the customer’s new telephone number. Unlike wireline telephone 87 numbers, the telephone numbers of VZW’s wireless customers are programmed or coded 88 into our customers’ individual handsets. The assigned number cannot be changed at the 89 switch, but rather must be done for each individual handset. At a minimum, the 90 Commission should grant wireless carriers the option of extended permissive dialing to 91 allow sufficient time to reprogram tens of thousands of handsets, which can only begin 92 once permissive dialing is in place. 93 Q. What challenges face VZW with respect to a geographic split option? 94 A. As a wireless service provider in the 618 NPA, VZW and other wireless carriers would 95 be faced with the burdensome task of reprogramming customers’ handsets with a new 96 telephone number for those whose NPA would change as a result of the geographic split. 97 VZW would experience considerable cost associated with reprogramming, including 98 customer education/communications and network changes to implement this change. 4 Verizon Wireless Testimony Docket No. 00-0677 Exhibit 1.0 (Smith) 99 Q. If the Commission were to adopt a geographic split, which alternative would 100 Verizon Wireless prefer on behalf of its customers and which portion of the two split 101 areas should retain the 618 NPA? 102 A. None of the geographic split alternatives is optimal for wireless customers generally, nor 103 for Verizon Wireless’s customers specifically. Each split option will force Verizon 104 Wireless and its customers to reprogram number changes for tens of thousands handsets. 105 That being said, alternatives 9, 11 and 12 are very similar and would cause the least 106 customer disruption if Area B is permitted to retain the 618 NPA. 107 Q. Should the Commission consider petitioning the FCC for authority to implement a 108 service specific or technology specific area code? 109 A. No, unless it proposes a transitional overlay with no take-backs. The lifting of the 110 prohibition against service specific or technology specific overlays allows state 111 commissions to petition the FCC with specific proposals. However, the FCC stated that 112 such proposals should not be implemented when the underlying NPA has a projected life 113 of less than one year. The 618 NPA is projected to exhaust in October of this year and 114 therefore is not a good candidate for implementing this type of relief. 115 In addition, Verizon Wireless does not support service specific or technology 116 specific overlays that would permanently segregate wireless carriers, take back numbers 117 from wireless customers, or permanently waive the ten-digit dialing requirement. 118 Verizon Wireless’s comments in the federal proceeding support application of phased-in 119 overlays, that transition into all-services overlays and do not involve take-back of 120 numbers or a permanent waiver of the ten-digit dialing rule. Verizon Wireless believes 121 that any overlay that would require wireless customers to give back their numbers for use 122 by landline customers is discriminatory and anti-competitive.
Recommended publications
  • Before the Washington, DC 20554 See Petition of the California Public
    Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION Washington, DC 20554 In the Matter of Petition of the California Public Utilities CC Docket No. 99-200 Commission for Delegated Authority to Implement Specialized Transitional Overlays VERIZON’S’ COMMENTS SUPPORTING PETITIONS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF THE COMMISSION’S SEPTEMBER 9,2005 ORDER PERMITTING CALIFORNIA TO IMPLEMENT A SPECIALIZED OVERLAY The Federal Communications Commission (“Commission”) should grant the petitions for reconsideration filed by Pac-West Telecomm, Inc. (“Pac-West”)* and the California Cable & Telecommunications Association (“CCTA”).3 The specialized overlay plan proposed by the California Public Utilities Commission (“California PUP) is unworkable, would impede local number portability, and would waste, rather than preserve, valuable numbering resources. The Commission should therefore reconsider and withdraw its Order4 permitting the California PUC to implement specialized overlays in California. 1 The Verizon telephone companies (“Verizon”) are the companies affiliated with Verizon Communications Inc. that are listed in Attachment A. 2 Petition for Reconsideration of Pac-West Telecomm, Inc., CC Docket No. 99-200 (filed Oct. 11,2005) (“Pac- West Petition”). 3 Petition of the California Cable & Telecommunications Association for Reconsideration, CC Docket No. 99-200 (filed Oct. 11, 2005) (“CCTA Petition”). 4 See Petition of the California Public Utilities Commissionfor Delegated Authority to Zmplement Specialized Transitional Overlays, 20 FCC Rcd 14624 (2005) (“Order”).
    [Show full text]
  • Front and Center: a 5-Year Equity Plan for Central Baltimore
    AUGUST 2017 A 5-year Equity Plan for Central Baltimore TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary Chapter 1: Introduction A. Purpose of Plan B. Central Baltimore Partnership C. Homewood Community Partners Initiative D. Progress To Date E. Why a New Plan F. Making Equity Front and Center G. Planning Process: 1. Front and Center Plan Goal 2. Phase 1: Understanding Existing Conditions 3. Phase 2: Preliminary Recommendations 4. Phase 3: Finalizing the Front and Center Plan Chapter 2: Planning Context H. Central Baltimore History I. Existing Conditions Chapter 3: Recommendations and Implementation Plan J. Recommendations • Social Fabric: Youth and Families • Economic Mobility: Workforce Development and Opportunities • Community Health: Physical and Mental Health, Safety, Public Space • Housing Access: Preserving Affordability, Improving Quality, Expanding Choices 2 CREDITS Planning Team: Keswick Multi-Care Center Joe McNeely, Planning Consultant Lovely Lane United Methodist Church Neighborhood Design Center, Design Consultant Maryland Bay Construction Maryland New Directions Planning Partners: Mosaic Community Services, Inc. 29th Street Community Center Open Works AHC, Inc. Greater Baltimore - Workforce Program People’s Homesteading Group Annie E. Casey Foundation Strong City Baltimore Association of Baltimore Area Grantmakers Telesis Baltimore Corporation (ABAG) Wells Fargo Regional Foundation Baltimore City Department of Housing and Community Development Data Work Group Members: Baltimore City Department of Planning Assistant Commissioner, Maryland
    [Show full text]
  • Approval of a Relief Plan for the 2?0 Area Code ("270 NPA"). Neustar Functions As The
    COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION In the Matter of: APPLICATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN ) NUMBERING PLAN ADMINISTRATOR, ON ) ADMINISTRATIVE BEHALF OF THE KENTUCKY ) CASE NO. TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY, FOR ) 2012-00129 RELIEF OF THE 270 NUMBERING PLAN AREA ) ORDER On April 2, 2012, Neustar, lnc. ("Neustar") submitted to the Commission an application on behalf of the Kentucky telecommunications industry ("Industry" ) for approval of a relief plan for the 2?0 Area Code ("270 NPA"). Neustar functions as the North American Numbering Plan Administrator ("NANPA") pursuant to a contract with the Federal Communications Commission ("FCC"), which has ultimate authority over the North American Numbering Plan. In its filing with the Commission, NANPA estimated that the supply of Central Office ("CO") prefixes available within the 270 NPA would be exhausted by the first quarter of 2015." The application filed by NANPA reflected Industry's consensus decision to recommend an alt-services distributed overlay plan as its preferred method of relief for the 270 area code. Thus, on August 30, 2012, the Commission opened this administrative case to develop a 270 NPA relief plan. Since the filing of its application, NANPA released the October 2012 Numbering Resource Utilization Forecast, which now estimates that the 270 NPA will be exhausted during the first quarter of 2014. BACKGROUND NANPA first submitted an application for relief of the 270 NPA on July 25, 2001.'umbering conservation measures taken by the FCC and the Commission, along with reduced historical and projected demand for numbering resources by industry members, contributed to extending the projected exhaust date, which led to the Commission's closing of the matter.
    [Show full text]
  • Application of the North American Numbering ) Plan Administrator, on Behalf of the California ) Docketa1611007 No
    BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION FILED 11-17-16 04:59 PM ) Application of the North American Numbering ) Plan Administrator, on behalf of the California ) DocketA1611007 No. _____________ Telecommunications Industry, for Relief of the ) 916 Numbering Plan Area ) ) ) APPLICATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN NUMBERING PLAN ADMINISTRATOR, ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY, FOR RELIEF OF THE 916 NUMBERING PLAN AREA Kimberly Wheeler Miller Assistant General Counsel Neustar, Inc. 1775 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W., 4th Floor Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 533-2912 (202) 533-2972 (facsimile) [email protected] Joseph R. Cocke Senior NPA Relief Planner North American Numbering Plan Administrator Neustar, Inc. 21575 Ridgetop Circle Sterling, VA 20166 (571) 434-5690 (571) 434-5502 (facsimile) [email protected] Dated: November 17, 2016 CA PUC Page 1 BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ) Application of the North American Numbering ) Plan Administrator, on behalf of the California ) Docket No. Telecommunications Industry, for Relief of the ) 916 Numbering Plan Area ) ) ) APPLICATION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN NUMBERING PLAN ADMINISTRATOR, ON BEHALF OF THE CALIFORNIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY, FOR RELIEF OF THE 916 NUMBERING PLAN AREA Neustar, Inc., the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (“NANPA”), in its role as the neutral third party NPA Relief Planner for California under the North American Numbering Plan and on behalf of the California telecommunications industry (“Industry”),1 requests
    [Show full text]
  • Nebraska Public Service Commission 2010 Annual Report On
    Nebraska Public Service Commission 2010 Annual Report on Telecommunications ANNUAL REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE ON THE STATUS OF THE NEBRASKA TELECOMMUNICATIONS INDUSTRY NEBRASKA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION September 30, 2010 Nebraska Public Service Commission 300 The Atrium 1200 N Street P.O. Box 94927 Lincoln, NE 68509-4927 (402) 471-3101 (800) 526-0017 (Instate Only) psc.nebraska.gov 2010 ANNUAL REPORT TO THE LEGISLATURE Nebraska Public Service Commissioners Gerald L. Vap Tim Schram 5th District 3rd District McCook Gretna Chairman Vice-Chairman Frank E. Landis Anne C. Boyle Rod Johnson 1st District 2nd District 4th District Lincoln Omaha Sutton General Administration Staff Mike Hybl- Executive Director John Burvainis-Deputy Director Shanicee Knutson-Legal Counsel Angela DuVall Melton-Legal Counsel Nichole Mulcahy-Legal Counsel Tyler Frost-Analyst/Economist II Jamie McAlister-Law Clerk Brenda Wicken-Business Manager Amy Kavan-Accountant I Kathy Lahman-Executive Assistant Katy Hanson-Receptionist/Administrative Support Communications Department Staff Gene Hand-Director John Burvainis-Accountant Steve Stovall-Accountant Don Gray-Telecom Analyst Cheryl Elton-Consumer Affairs Advocate/IT Support Deena Ackerman-Administrative Assistant Susan Horn-Administrative Assistant Telecommunications Infrastructure & Public Safety Department Staff Sue Vanicek-Director Laurie Casados-Telehealth Coordinator/Policy Analyst Joan Raffety-E911 Coordinator Angela DuVall Melton-Policy Advisor Brandy Zierott-Administrative Assistant Andrea Grell-NTAP Coordinator
    [Show full text]
  • Middle Branch Master Plan
    middle branch Middle Branch Master Plan Baltimore City Planning Commission Adopted Plan - September 20th 2007 Middle Branch Master Plan City of Baltimore Sheila Dixon Mayor City of Baltimore Douglas McCoach, III Director Department of Planning Department of Planning Mission Statement To provide the highest level of services and leadership in urban and strategic planning, his- torical and architectural preservation, zoning, design, development and capital budgeting to promote the sustained economic, social and community development of the City of Baltimore. OUR PARTNERS The City of Baltimore Middle Branch Master Plan was prepared by the Department of Planning in partnership with the Bal- timore Harbor Watershed Association. Advice and assistance was generously given by the Baltimore Development Corporation, the Department of Public Works, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Recreation and Parks, the Commission on Historic and Architectural Preservation, the State of Maryland and over one-hundred citizens of Baltimore. The high level of cooperation and support from all of these people and organizations allowed us to create a quality Plan in a very short period of time. Your guidance and assistance was most appreciated. Maryland Department of Transportation ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS COMMITTEE CHAIRS Water Quality and Habitat Co-chairs - Bill Stack (Water Quality Manager, Bureau of Water and Waste Water, Department of Public Works) - Phil Lee (Baltimore Harbor Watershed Association) Open Space and Recreation Co-chairs - Beth Strommen
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4: Growth Management and Land
    The County is noted for its rural character and natural beauty, its winding rivers and scenic mountains, and its sense of community. Land Use and Development Warren County Introduction Warren County is characterized by the central Town of Front Royal and a number of compact rural settlements scattered in a landscape of farmlands, woodlands, rivers, and mountains. The County is noted for its rural character and natural beauty, its winding rivers and scenic mountains, and its sense of community. The increased population growth spreading out from the Washington, D.C., metropolitan area has brought changes, welcomed by many, lamented by others, and recognized by all. The new growth also has brought increased traffic, declines in the natural environment, increasing demands on limited services, and declining agricultural, open, and forestal lands. 2013 Comprehensive Plan Growth Management and Land Use Introduction Presently Warren County contains seven main land use categories: National Park, 14,090 acres; National Forest, 6,197 acres; State Park, 1,627 acres; agricultural, 88,331 acres; residential, 11,721 acres; commercial, 846 acres; industrial, 1,753 acres; and rural villages, approximately 110 acres. These figures are, however, somewhat deceiving since many existing uses within zoning categories do not conform to their description. For instance, much of the County's residential development is on two-acre lots zoned as agricultural land (Map 4.1 Generalized Existing Current Land Use). New growth management strategies should clarify the zoning categories to prevent incompatible overlaps and to define those areas suitable for specific types of development. Growth management shall be a coordinated effort by County government to achieve a more efficient pattern for future development, in accordance with a community comprehensive land use plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Title 18 Unified Development Code
    TITLE 18 UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE Contents: PART 1: Preliminaries PART 2: Zones, Land Use, Buildings, and Structures PART 3: Site Design and Environmental Quality PART 4: Nonconformities, Development Review, and Enforcement PART 5: Measurement, Word Usage, and Definitions Appendix A: Approved Plant List Appendix B: Handbook for Boards and Commissions Appendix C: Design Guidelines for Downtown Loveland Appendix D: Historic Downtown Loveland - Legal Description Appendix E: Overlay Zone Maps Appendix F: U.S. 34 Corridor Plan Appendix G: Site Development Standards and Guidelines for the I-25 Corridor (Ord. # 6248, AN ORDINANCE REPEALING TITLES 16, 17 AND 18 OF THE LOVELAND MUNICIPAL CODE AND REPLACING SUCH TITLES WITH A NEW TITLE 18, adopted 11/06/2018) PART 1: PRELIMINARIES Contents: Chapter 18.01 Preliminaries Chapter 18.01 Preliminaries Contents: Division 18.01.01 Title, Purpose, and Applicability Division 18.01.02 Interpretation, Transitional Provisions, and Severability Division 18.01.01 Title, Purpose, and Applicability 18.01.101 Title; Short Title A. Title. This Chapter shall be known as the City of Loveland Unified Development Code B. Short Title. This Chapter may also be referred to herein as “UDC” or “Code”. 18.01.102 General Purposes A. Generally. 1. The general purposes of this UDC are to combine the City’s zoning, subdivision, and annexation regulations into a unified code; to implement the City’s Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans; and to advance the purposes stated herein. 2. The regulations and zones, as herein set forth, which have been made in accordance with a comprehensive zoning study, are designed to promote public health, safety, and general welfare by: a.
    [Show full text]
  • NPA 289/905 TIF Report 1 File ID: 289-905RE1A.Doc
    NPA 289/905 RELIEF PLANNING COMMITTEE - TIF REPORT Date Submitted: 7 December 2009 WORKING GROUP: NPA 289/905 Relief Planning Committee (Ad Hoc) REPORT #: NPA 289/905 TIF Report 1 File ID: 289-905RE1A.doc REPORT TITLE: Relief Planning Committee (RPC) Recommendation for the NPA 289/905 Planning Document and Relief Implementation Plan OUTCOME: Consensus RELATED TASK(s) #: None BACKGROUND: On 28 May 2009, the CRTC issued Telecom Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-310 Establishment of a CISC ad hoc committee for area code relief planning for area codes 289 and 905 in southern Ontario, in which it established the CISC ad hoc Relief Planning Committee (RPC) for NPA 289/905. The NPA 289/905 RPC developed the attached Planning Document (PD) which was prepared in accordance with the CRTC-approved Canadian NPA Relief Planning Guideline dated 2 June 2009. The purpose of the PD is to identify and assess NPA 289/905 Relief Options and to make recommendations to the CISC and CRTC for the preferred relief method for NPA 289/905. Based on the assessment of Relief Options and other issues contained in the PD, the RPC submits the attached PD to the CISC and CRTC for approval. The PD contains various recommendations including but not limited to the following: 1) The Relief Option should be a distributed overlay of a new NPA Code on NPA 289/905 (option 4a); 2) NPA Code 365 should be used for the Relief NPA Code for NPA 289/905; 3) NPA Code 742 should be reserved for subsequent relief in the 365/289/905 region as the 289/905 region has been forecast in the latest R-NRUF (June 2009) to exhaust twice in the next 26 years; 4) The Relief Date should be 24 October 2015 in order to provide Carriers and customers with advance notification and sufficient lead-time to implement relief, which would be 12 months in advance of the current Projected Exhaust Date; 5) The local dialling plan should remain as 10 digits for all local calls originating within the NPA 289/905 area.
    [Show full text]
  • NC Telecommunications Industry and Public Staff's Joint Proposed
    POST OFFICE BOX 109 HUNTON& RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 27602 TEL 919'899-3000 WHUAMS FAX 919 • 833 • 6352 919-899-3096 EDWARD S, FINLEY. JR DIRECT DIAL: 919 • 899 • 3021 EMAIL: efinlcy@hunton,com April 23, 2001 FILE NO: 33674.204 BY HAND Ms. Geneva S. Thigpen Chief Clerk FiLED North Carolina Utilities Commission 430 N. Salisbury Street APR 2 3 2001 Raleigh, NC 27603-5918 Clerk's Office N.C. Utilities Commission elude RE: P-100, SUB 137c Dear Ms. Thigpen: OFFICIAL COW 5anfi*( Enclosed herewith for filing with the Commission are the original and thirty-one (31) TaLo copies of Joint Proposed Order the North Carolina Telecommunications Industry and the Public Staff Approving Overlay Option to Provide Area Code Relief. Public Staff and Neustar have reviewed and concurred with the enclosed pleading. Law Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, V- Edward S. Finley, Jr. StwP cc: Parties of Record 3 CtmM. ^OUstdtc. &/6^r •MMM'A ll-.M.KOK }JKI!SSI1S ('HAK! ()!' I V ! ii i\<., k( )N< i KNOXVIill IONDIIN MUIN" \IA\ V i!.'K r.OKi Oi K R \; i'lOll KlCilMn^il WAHSWs UA1-.!!1' iiK'N v. v\ vv inui'u'd.com WCMLCOPY STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION F I I F D RALEIGH • • U C U APR 2 3 2001 DOCKET NO. P-100, SUB 137c Clerk's Office N.C. Utilities Commission BEFORE THE NORTH CAROLINA UTILITIES COMMISSION In the Matter of ) NORTH CAROLINA TELECOMMUNICATIONS Area Code Relief for North Carolina's ) INDUSTRY TASK FORCE PROPOSED ORDER 336 Numbering Plan Area ) APPROVING OVERLAY OPTION TO PROVIDE ) AREA CODE RELIEF BY THE COMMISSION: In this Order, the Commission will address the issue of area code relief for North Carolina area code 336.
    [Show full text]
  • RECEIVED Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS Commlsslon Washington
    RECEIVED Before the FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMlSSlON Washington. D.C. 20554 NOV 2 5 2002 FEDERAL COMMUNIUTIOU~ c~~~,~~~ OFFICE OFTHE SECRET^^ In the Matter of 1 ) Pelition of Ihc Calilonrizi PlJC Tor Authonty to ) CC Docket No. 99-200 Implement lechnology-Specific Overlay ) Area Codes and Request lor Expedited Treamenl CC Docket No. Of)-OS ) COMMENTS OF NEXTEL COMh1UNJCATIONS, INC. l~~rrenceR Krevor Laura H. Phillips Laura L. Holloway Laura S. Gallagher NEXTEI. COMMUNICATIONS, INC. DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH 1,lJ 2001 Edmund Halley Drive 1500 K Street, N.W., Suite 1100 Reston, Virginia 20 11) Washington, DC 20005-1 209 Novcniber 25,2002 Berow the FEDERAL COMMUNICA ]-IONS COMMISSION Washington. D.C. 20554 In the Matter of ) ) Petition ol‘the Calilomia PlJC for Autliority to ) CC Docket No. 9‘)-200 Iiiiplcment Technolosy-Specific Overlay ) Area Codes and Request Ibr Expcditcd Trccrtmeiit ) CC Docket No. 96-98 ) (:OMhlENTS OF NESTEI, COhlRIUNlCATlONS, INC. Ncxtel Conimunications, Inc. (“Nextcl”), hy its attorneys. hereby tiles comments in the I ahove-captioned procceding. In late Septcmher. tht. Caljtomia Public Utilities Commission (“CPUC”) filed a petition with the Federal Comniunications Commission (“Commission”) seekins tlclegated authority to implement technology-spccilic. overlays (“TSOs”) in Los Angeles and Orange County Calilomia.’ The Public Nolicc seeks comnient on the proposed overlays. spccifically on whether they satisfy the eight criteria statc commissions must address whcn seeking 1 authority to implerrieiit servicc overlays.~ It also asks hi.comment on whether the public intcrest I Wircline (‘omperition Bureau Secks Conimciit on the I’etition OF the California Public lltilitirs Commission for Authoniy to Iniplement 1echnulogy-Specific Overlay, Public Norice, CC Docket No.
    [Show full text]
  • COUNCIL of the CITY of WINNIPEG Thursday, April 29, 2021
    COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF WINNIPEG Thursday, April 29, 2021 The Council met at 9:41 a.m. The Clerk advised the Speaker that a quorum was present. The Speaker called the meeting to order. The opening prayer was read by Councillor Eadie. ROLL CALL Clerk: Councillors Allard, Browaty, Orlikow, Madam Speaker Councillor Sharma, His Worship Mayor Bowman, Councillors Chambers, Eadie, Gillingham, Gilroy, Klein, Lukes, Mayes, Nason, Rollins, Santos and Schreyer. INTRODUCTION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS Madam Speaker: Thank you. Mr. Mayor, over to you for morning announcements. Thank you. Mayor Bowman: Thank you, Madam Speaker. And good morning to my colleagues and all those that are watching these proceedings. Councillor Eadie has me singing and humming in my mind. I won't subject you to my voice. Good song I heard this month was from Nancy Wilson called ‘4 Edward’. It was dedicated to Eddy Van Halen. So, I’d encourage you to check that acoustic piece out. Madam Speaker, we have had a number of holidays that many Winnipeggers have celebrated over the last month including Good Friday, Easter Monday as my family celebrated, and I know many in this council chamber celebrated. Vaisakhi, Ramadan Mubarak and Vasanta Navrati, and I apologize if I’ve mispronounced that last holiday. We’ve also commemorated numerous things over the last month including, of course, Holocaust Remembrance Day on April the 7th, The 104th anniversary of the Battle of Vimy Ridge, and Madam Speaker, also as of today; today is, of course, the one-year anniversary of a terrible occurrence with the crash of Stalker 22 where we lost 6 members of the Canadian Armed Forces.
    [Show full text]