On Tue, 6/2/09, John Novack <novackster at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, this IS KY. Even the much maligned WV has come to their senses,
> but after all they DID re-elect Mitch McConnell.
>
> Lets all hope the FCC will step up and do the right thing.
> Personally I think it is insane these numbering plan changes are up
> to the state PUC's. But no one asked me!

nor was I asked, neither...

At least in Canada, the only regulatory authority regarding area code
relief is on the national level, the CRTC. The Provinces (with the
possible exception of Saskatchewan) NO LONGER have ANY regulatory
authority over telecom issues. And I like the way Canada recently is
not only doing overlays, but "super" overlays and "expanded" overlays!

Regarding Kentucky...

In Summer/Fall 1998, the KY-PSC approved an OVERLAY of the old 502
(all of western KY) with 270. (At that time, 606 covered all of
eastern KY... the 606/859 split had not yet taken place). But in early
sometime in late 1998 or early 1999, the KY-PSC cancelled the overlay
and ordered the 502/270 split. There WAS a precedent for an overlay in
Kentucky ten years ago -- it would have been nice if it were carried
through!

and as for the FCC... right now, there is nothing "before" the FCC
requesting them to intervene in this pending split. There was nothing
put forth before the FCC two/three years ago to prevent the New Mexico
505/575 split (to turn it into an overlay).

And the state regulatory agencies DO have authority over area code
relief in their respective states per the 1996 Telecom Act, as much as
I would have preferred the FCC to simply allow the telco industry to
do overlays, etc. I don't know offhand right now how MUCH authority
the FCC has to over-rule or pre-empt state agencies when necessary,
especially when it comes to something like area code relief. But I do
hope that SOMETHING can be done between now and Jan.2012 (well over two
years away) when the 270/364 KY split is NOW intended to take effect
permissive. And it could be postponed yet further.

And as for OTHER area code relief projects still to be determined by
the state authorities, I tend to think that Nebraska's 402 / ?531?
relief will be an overlay ... the New York State 315 / ?680? relief
could be an overlay (but there's still a chance that the NY-PSC could
go with a split), and the relief planning in Oklahoma (918) and
Arkansas (870) might also be overlays -- the majority of the service
providers are pro-overlay (although some SMALL rural independent telcos
are wnating a split), so even there, the trend might be overlay, but
you never know.

Three area code overlays which already took effect earlier this year
were originally intended to be splits, but later changed to overlay.
And one of the pending area code overlays later this year was also
originally planned as a split, but changed to an overlay:

304/681 West Virginia, which was initially ordered as a split
(announced in Jan.2008), but two weeks later (Feb.2009) was changed
to be an overlay. This overlay has become official as of March/April
2009.

801/385 Utah, which was initially ordered as a split (announced in
early 2000) to be permissive in Dec.2000, but was postponed numerous
times by the UT-PSC. The last intended effective dates was for
permissive in March 2005, mandatory in Sept.2005, but in 2004, the
UT-PSC postponed it yet again during 2004, to "TBD" dates. In 2007,
the telcos were able to convince the UT-PSC to order an OVERLAY in
the Salt Lake City metro area, which was official as of March/April
2009. (In late 2008, a newly appointed state legislator, to fill the
unexpired term of another former legislator tried to force legislation
through to cancel this 801/385 overlay and any future overlay in Utah.
His proposed bill was in committee during early 2009 when the current
overlay and ten-digit mandatory dialing became effective).

818/747 California -- this was announced as by the CA-PUC and NANPA
back in 1999 that it would be a SPLIT at some future TBD date, where
the southwesternmost communities in the San Fernando Valley area would
split to 747, while the remainder of 818 would retain 818. This
proposed split just "sat" out there until 2006/07, when 818/747 relief
appeared necessary in the next few years. And after industry/regulatory
meetings and public hearings, etc., it was determined that 818/747
would be an overlay instead, and this overlay has since taken effect
as of last month (May 2009).

And later this year, there will be the 760/442 overlay in eastern and
southeastern California. It was originally planned as a split for 2000,
and then put on hold. In 2006/07, relief planning was resumed, and it
was determined for the same split to take effect in late 2008/early
2009. But after large scale vocal grass roots efforts by those in the
San Diego CA suburbs who would have been required to change to 442
(with the remainder of eastern/southeastern California retaining 760),
the grass-roots effort to have an overlay instead of a split, the
CA-PUC cancelled the split and instead ordered an overlay, to take
effect later this year, Fall 2009.

And all other recent area code relief for next year, etc., so far, is
to be overlays -- the state agencies have approved overlays for:
Oregon (outside of the northeastern corner) 541/458, northern Alabama
256/938, northern Wisconsin 715/534, eastern Wisconsin 920/274, etc.
And other area code relief plans which were intended to be splits,
such as the additional 849 overlay to the Dominican Republic's 809 and
829 (already in overlay), the Chicago 872 overlay to both 312 & 773
(approved by the Illinois Commerce Commission back in 1998, to take
effect at some TBD future date), and the 203/475 overlay in Connecticut
which was originally planned for 2000/01.

Hopefully, the overlay trend WILL continue uninterrupted, and the
KY 270/364 relief will eventually be changed from a split to an overlay
with all of the overlay precedent, especially if the Kentucky relief
date keeps getting pushed further out into the future.

mjc