The new 579 area code "officially" overlaid the 450 area code in
southwestern Quebec (outside of the immediate Montreal QC 514/438
Metro Area) on Saturday 21-August-2010. At the time, the _ONLY_
579-NXX c.o.codes that were assigned and "worked" were the four
579-N10 codes for testing purposes (579-610 for Bell Canada ILEC,
579-710 for Telus-Quebec CLEC, 579-810 for Allstream-CLEC, and
579-510 for Rogers-CallNet CLEC).

At some point in the past few days, SAIC-CNA (Canadian Numbering
Administration) has assigned the first 579-NXX "POTS" c.o.codes,
thirteen of them, to (OCN 2243) the CLEC-side of Telus-Quebec.
Telus-Quebec, formerly GTE's "QuebecTel" is also the ILEC for about
two or three large discontiguous segments of eastern Quebec in the
418/581 area codes (although Bell Canada is also the ILEC for other
segments of that 418/581 region, and there are some small independent
telcos here/there as well in 418/581).

I don't know the exact date "when" SAIC-CNA assigned these 579-NXX
codes, but it was probably in the past two days (since Labor Day,
and Canada does have Labor Day on the same date that the US does),
nor do I know when Telus-Quebec intends on putting these c.o.codes
into effect, but it could be within another two months, certainly
before the end of 2010.

But here are the assignments as they are indicated at the 579-NXX
webpage for the CNA: http://www.cnac.ca/data/ac579.htm

579-230 Boucherville QC
579-231 Chomedey QC
579-232 Granby QC
579-233 Le Gardeur QC
579-234 Longueuil QC
579-235 Mascouche QC
579-236 Pont-Viau QC
579-237 Ste-Rose QC
579-238 Ste-Therese QC
579-239 St-Hyacinthe QC
579-240 St-Jerome QC
579-241 St-Lambert QC
579-242 St-Vincent-de-Paul QC

Also, the 450-NXX CNA webpage: http://www.cnac.ca/data/ac450.htm
shows that there are still several 450-NXX c.o.codes available for
assignment, the 450 "base" area code.

Some of these codes available for assignment are, however, reserved for
assignment only to "new entrant" wireless/CLEC/etc. providers, or at
least a "new entrant" wireless/CLEC/etc. provider to a specific exchange
area (ratecenter).

Here in the US, there are still several recently implemented overlay
area codes where there are still no active NXX c.o.codes in the overlay
(other than the test-number c.o.codes which might still "work"), but
there is also one "officially effective" overlay which has been in place
for over nine years now that still has no (POTS) c.o.codes...

That is the 878 overlay to southwestern Pennsylvania, overlaying both
412 for the immediate Pittsburgh PA Metro Area _AND_ the 724 outer area
of southwestern PA. Ten-digit intra-home-NPA local dialing has been
mandatory throughout the 412 and 724 area codes since July 2001, and the
"official" effective date of the 878 overlay was in August 2001, but
there are still not yet any "POTS" 878-NXX c.o.codes.

HOWEVER, the 724 NPA only has about nine remaining 724-NXX codes still
available for assignment. It doesn't seem that there will be any 878-NXX
codes activated (nor even assigned) by the end of 2010, but I do think
that by Spring or Summer 2011, there will finally be some 878-NXX codes
when the 724 NPA does eventually "run out". And at that time, new
878-NXX c.o.codes will likely be assignable also to the 412 "core"
region as well as the 724 "outer" region, even though there are still
quite a number of 412-NXX codes available.

This is how the assignment process was last year (Fall 2009) when 872
finally took effect with actual 872-NXX codes in the City of Chicago IL.
After several splits in the 1990s-era, 312 has shrunk down to just the
downtown "Loop" area, while 773 has split for the neighberhoods, but
only within the city limits. (Suburbs/etc. outside of the city limits
have their own area codes which split off from other area codes in the
1990s-era). 773 ran out of 773-NXX codes in Fall 2009, while 312 still
has several 312-NXX codes available for assignment. Back in the late
1990s, (Lockheed-Martin at the time) NANPA assigned 872 for "eventual"
overlay to BOTH 312 AND 773, whenever either 312 or 773 "ran out", but
the overlay applied simultaneously to both "base" area codes at the
point whenever either "base" area code "ran out".

At the present time (September 2009), there aren't all that many 872-NXX
c.o.codes assigned/active in the City of Chicago (IL), but only one of
them is actually assigned to "Zone-01" which is also the 312 "base" NPA
region for the downtown (Loop) region. The other (few) 872-NXX c.o.codes
are assigned to other "Zones" which are the 737 "base" NPA region for
the neighberhoods within the city limits.

The Atlanta GA metro area had another overlay assigned for "official"
implementation in September 2001 (nine years ago), the 470 area code.
However, there were still several 404-NXX codes for the Atlanta "core"
ratecenter, and also several 678-NXX codes for ALL of the 404/770/678
metro area. It was only early this year (2010) when 678 ran out of
c.o.codes available, and thus 470-NXX c.o.codes finally were assigned to
both the "770" region as well as the "404" region. However, at this time
(September 2010), there are only TWO "POTS" 470-NXX codes assigned,
470-200 to a CLEC for the Conyers GA ratecenter, and 470-201 to a
wireless provider for the Gainesville GA ratecenter. There are still not
yet any "POTS" 470-NXX codes assigned to the Atlanta "Central" 404-base
ratecenter.

The 760 NPA in California was "officially" overlaid with 442 last Fall
(2009). There are about a dozen remaining 760-NXX codes available at
this time (Fall 2010), but not yet any (POTS) 442-NXX codes.

And this year, there were two other overlays which are already now
"officially" effective, but still no "POTS" c.o.codes assigned in the
new overlay area code --

there are not yet any "POTS" 938-NXX c.o.codes in the 256 "base" area
code in northern/northeastern Alabama, nor are there yet any "POTS"
534-NXX c.o.codes in the 715 "base" area code in northern Wisconsin.

Next year (April 2011), the 402 area code in Nebraska will "officially"
be overlaid with the new 531 area code, but recently the Nebraska PSC
issued an order that _NO_ 531-NXX (POTS) c.o.codes can be assigned by
NeuStar-NANPA to requesting telecom service providers, until the supply
of available 402-NXX c.o.codes remaining for assignment has dropped to
ten or fewer. This is documented in the recent NANPA Planning Letter
#410.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

On Wednesday 08-September-2010, I wrote:

> The new 579 area code "officially" overlaid the 450 area code in
> southwestern Quebec (outside of the immediate Montreal QC 514/438
> Metro Area) on Saturday 21-August-2010. At the time, the _ONLY_
> 579-NXX c.o.codes that were assigned and "worked" were the four
> 579-N10 codes for testing purposes (579-610 for Bell Canada ILEC,
> 579-710 for Telus-Quebec CLEC, 579-810 for Allstream-CLEC, and
> 579-510 for Rogers-CallNet CLEC).
>
> At some point in the past few days, SAIC-CNA (Canadian Numbering
> Administration) has assigned the first 579-NXX "POTS" c.o.codes,
> thirteen of them, to (OCN 2243) the CLEC-side of Telus-Quebec.

[ ... ]

> I don't know the exact date "when" SAIC-CNA assigned these 579-NXX
> codes, but it was probably in the past two days (since Labor Day,
> and Canada does have Labor Day on the same date that the US does),
> nor do I know when Telus-Quebec intends on putting these c.o.codes
> into effect, but it could be within another two months, certainly
> before the end of 2010.
>
> But here are the assignments as they are indicated at the 579-NXX
> webpage for the CNA: http://www.cnac.ca/data/ac579.htm
>
> 579-230 Boucherville QC
> 579-231 Chomedey QC
> 579-232 Granby QC
> 579-233 Le Gardeur QC
> 579-234 Longueuil QC
> 579-235 Mascouche QC
> 579-236 Pont-Viau QC
> 579-237 Ste-Rose QC
> 579-238 Ste-Therese QC
> 579-239 St-Hyacinthe QC
> 579-240 St-Jerome QC
> 579-241 St-Lambert QC
> 579-242 St-Vincent-de-Paul QC
>
> Also, the 450-NXX CNA webpage: http://www.cnac.ca/data/ac450.htm
> shows that there are still several 450-NXX c.o.codes available for
> assignment, the 450 "base" area code.
>
> Some of these codes available for assignment are, however, reserved
> for assignment only to "new entrant" wireless/CLEC/etc. providers,
> or at least a "new entrant" wireless/CLEC/etc. provider to a
> specific exchange area (ratecenter).

I spoke with one of my Canadian telco contacts, and they told me that
these thirteen "first" 579-NXX POTS c.o.code assignments (to Telus
Quebec CLEC) were made on Friday 03-September-2010, and that the
effective date for implementation/activation in the telco network is
for Friday 29-October-2010, a little over two months following the
"official" effective date for the 579 area code "itself" on Saturday
21-August-2010.

> Here in the US, there are still several recently implemented overlay
> area codes where there are still no active NXX c.o.codes in the
> overlay (other than the test-number c.o.codes which might still
> "work"), but there is also one "officially effective" overlay which
> has been in place for over nine years now that still has no (POTS)
> c.o.codes...
>
> That is the 878 overlay to southwestern Pennsylvania, overlaying
> both 412 for the immediate Pittsburgh PA Metro Area _AND_ the 724
> outer area of southwestern PA. Ten-digit intra-home-NPA local
> dialing has been mandatory throughout the 412 and 724 area codes
> since July 2001, and the "official" effective date of the 878
> overlay was in August 2001, but there are still not yet any "POTS"
> 878-NXX c.o.codes.
>
> HOWEVER, the 724 NPA only has about nine remaining 724-NXX codes
> still available for assignment. It doesn't seem that there will be
> any 878-NXX codes activated (nor even assigned) by the end of 2010,
> but I do think that by Spring or Summer 2011, there will finally be
> some 878-NXX codes when the 724 NPA does eventually "run out". And
> at that time, new 878-NXX c.o.codes will likely be assignable also
> to the 412 "core" region as well as the 724 "outer" region, even
> though there are still quite a number of 412-NXX codes available.

[ ... ]

> The Atlanta GA metro area had another overlay assigned for
> "official" implementation in September 2001 (nine years ago), the
> 470 area code. However, there were still several 404-NXX codes for
> the Atlanta "core" ratecenter, and also several 678-NXX codes for
> ALL of the 404/770/678 metro area. It was only early this year
> (2010) when 678 ran out of c.o.codes available, and thus 470-NXX
> c.o.codes finally were assigned to both the "770" region as well as
> the "404" region. However, at this time (September 2010), there are
> only TWO "POTS" 470-NXX codes assigned, 470-200 to a CLEC for the
> Conyers GA ratecenter, and 470-201 to a wireless provider for the
> Gainesville GA ratecenter. There are still not yet any "POTS"
> 470-NXX codes assigned to the Atlanta "Central" 404-base ratecenter.
>
> The 760 NPA in California was "officially" overlaid with 442 last
> Fall (2009). There are about a dozen remaining 760-NXX codes
> available at this time (Fall 2010), but not yet any (POTS) 442-NXX
> codes.
>
> And this year, there were two other overlays which are already now
> "officially" effective, but still no "POTS" c.o.codes assigned in
> the new overlay area code --
>
> there are not yet any "POTS" 938-NXX c.o.codes in the 256 "base"
> area code in northern/northeastern Alabama, nor are there yet
> any "POTS" 534-NXX c.o.codes in the 715 "base" area code in northern
> Wisconsin.

Actually, there is also a THIRD overlay for this year (2010), where
there are still _NO_ "POTS" c.o.codes assigned in the overlay area
code, that being the Oregon (except northwest) 541/458 area code
overlay. I had overlooked it at the time when I was preparing the
original post on Wednesday evening! Ten-digit intra-541 local dialing
is now mandatory, and the 458 NPA is "officially" in effect overlaying
541 in Oregon since February 2010 but it could be quite some time
before there are yet any actual "POTS" 458-NXX c.o.codes assigned and
activated in effect within the 541/458 area code overlay region.

> Next year (April 2011), the 402 area code in Nebraska will
> "officially" be overlaid with the new 531 area code, but recently
> the Nebraska PSC issued an order that _NO_ 531-NXX (POTS) c.o.codes
> can be assigned by NeuStar-NANPA to requesting telecom service
> providers, until the supply of available 402-NXX c.o.codes remaining
> for assignment has dropped to ten or fewer. This is documented in
> the recent NANPA Planning Letter #410.

I don't think that Alabama or Wisconsin regulatory (nor California
regulatory) has mandated that the "base" area codes be used up
(virtually) completely before any c.o.codes could be assigned out of
the new overlay area code, though... but in the 878 overlay to 412 and
724 in Pittsburgh PA Metro and the rest of southwestern PA, the PA-PUC
did indeed order that (at least one of the) "base" area codes be used
up almost completely before the 878 overlay area code could have any
actual 878-NXX c.o.codes assigned/activated. However, mandatory
ten-digit local dialing within 412 and within 724 was made effective
and has been so since Summer 2001, nine years ago.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

I recently posted about how the 579 NPA in southwestern Quebec
(outside of Montreal PQ Metro) overlaying the 450 NPA (as of Saturday
21-August-2010, "officially"), just recently had its first 579-NXX
"POTS" c.o.codes (thirteen of them total) assigned by SAIC-CNA on
Friday 03-September-2010, effective activation date for Saturday
29-October-2010.

In those posts, I mentioned about how there are some additional
overlay NPAs (in the US) which are "officially" in service, yet still
don't have any "POTS" NXX c.o.codes assigned/active within those
overlay NPA codes.

This includes:

- the 878 NPA overlaying BOTH 412 (Pittsburgh PA Metro) AND 724 (the
rest of southwestern PA), overlay has been "official" (along with
mandatory ten-digit local dialing) since Summer 2001 (nine years ago).
there are (at this time) only NINE 724-NXX c.o.codes which are
available for assignment (there are still several 412-NXX codes which
can still be assigned in the Pittsburgh PA Metro area though), so it
is likely that 878-NXX codes will begin to be assigned/activated soon,
probably in early 2011 (I don't think that there will be any for the
remainder of 2010 though, but you never know). NOTE that back in
2000/01, the PA-PUC ordered that 724 OR 412 be (almost) "all used up"
before NeuStar-NANPA could assign any 878-NXX c.o.codes.

- the 442 NPA overlaying 760 in southeastern and eastern California,
this overlay was "official" (with mandatory [1+] ten-digit local
dialing) since last Fall (2009). There are twelve 760-NXX codes still
available for assignment at this time. I don't remember any
regulatory action from the CA-PUC in 2008/09 regarding how 760 had to
be (almost) "all used up" before 442 could be opened up for assignment
of "real/POTS" 442-NXX codes though. Checking NANPA's (US) NPA-NXX
c.o.codes website, I see that there _ARE_ some recent assignments of
442-NXX "POTS" codes! More on that further down.

- also this year, the 541/458 overlay (Oregon except northwestern OR/
Portland OR metro), the 256/938 overlay (northern/northeastern Alabama),
and the 715/534 overlay (northern Wisconsin), all being "official" at
one point or another during 2010, along with mandatory ten-digit local
dialing, still don't yet have any "POTS" c.o.codes assigned. I don't
think that there is any state regulatory action in any of these
requiring the old/base NPA code to be "almost all used up" though. But
at this time, there are still no NXX c.o.code assignments in any of
the new overlay NPA codes. AND, there are still numerous NXX c.o.codes
in the old/base which are still available for assignment.

In the early part of next year (March/April 2011), there will be
(officially) four NPA overlays: 705/249 in northeastern/eastern
Ontario (Canada), 402/531 in eastern Nebraska, the 929 overlay to
718/347/pt.917 for New York City (NOT Manhattan), and the 918/539
overlay in northeastern Oklahoma. All four "base/old" NPAs, 705 (ON),
402 (NE), 918 (OK), 347 (NY), will still have numerous NXX c.o.codes
available for assignment, even after mandatory ten-digit dialing
takes place (in New York City, [1+]ten-digit mandatory local dialing
has been in place since Feb/March 2003) and the overlays have become
"official". But again, I don't know of any state regulatory action
requiring that the "old/base" NPA code be (almost) "all used up"
before NANPA can begin assigning (real/POTS) c.o.codes out of the new
overlay NPA codes, with one exception. Recently the Nebraska-PSC
ordered that the 402 NPA code must be "run down" to only ten or fewer
402-NXX c.o.codes still unassigned before NANPA can begin assigning
new 531-NXX "POTS" c.o.codes. Also, similar to Illinois' pending
overlays (708/464 in the Chicago southern/southwest suburbs, 217/447
for south-central Illinois, 618/730 for southern Illinois), the
570/272  NPA overlay in northeastern Pennsylvania is also "pending",
with no "officially announced dates" for the overlay, mandatory
ten-digit local dialing, nor assignment/activation of POTS 272-NXX
c.o.codes, since the PA-PUC ordered that NANPA submit monthly reports
of how the 570 NPA remains as far as 570-NXX code assignments.

Anyhow, back to 442 in California:

I have checked the 442-NXX c.o.code page at NANPA's website. There ARE
NOW THREE 442-NXX c.o.codes assigned as of Monday 16-August-2010.
These are all scheduled to take effect within the network on Thursday
21-October-2010, in the Oceanside:Oceanside-DA ratecenter (abbreviated
as OCSD:OCSD), all to (OCN 339F) "Telecentris". I don't know if this
is a CLEC or a VoIP provider, or what, but that is who the "default"
assignee is. The three codes assigned are 442-333, 442-777, 442-888.
The CLLI I found for these 442-NXX codes is SNDGCA02XQZ, which is
strictly a "point-of-interconnection" CLLI (NOT an actual "switch" as
such), in nearby San Diego CA. It appears that the actual underlying
switch is Telecentris' Los Angeles CA based (and in a different LATA)
LSANCAJWCA2 known as a "call agent" technology (whatever that is), the
actual manufacturer/equipment/model itself being a CISCO BTS-10200.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

A few months ago, the telco industry and the FCC agreed that the next
toll-free area code 855 (which was originally intended to be opened
up back in 2000, shortly after 866 was also opened up, but then 855
was postponed "indefinitely"), was now to be opened up on Friday
01-October-2010. Then shortly after that, it was determined that a
weekday activation might be somewhat disruptive, so it was agreed that
855 would be opened up for new customer number assignments on Saturday
02-October-2010, today.

Two days ago, on Thursday 30-September-2010, the FCC's Wireline
Competition Bureau issued a new order regarding the allocation of
assignment of customer numbers within the 855 toll-free area code, as
well as delaying the opening of the new 855 toll-free area code by one
week, now to be opened a week from today, on Saturday 09-October-2010.

Here is a link to that Thursday 30-September-2010 dated document from
the FCC, as both a .doc and a .pdf file:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1885A1.doc
http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-10-1885A1.pdf

I have NOT yet read through this document in its entirety, so right
now, I don't know all of the details of the FCC's new allocation plan.

NeuStar-NANPA also issued a brief planning letter, #412, on Friday
01-October-2010 indicating this; http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_412.pdf
NANPA's PL-412 does reference "milestone dates" as to when certain FCC
and/or industry decisions or orders were reached/issued, but NANPA's
Planning Letter does NOT give any links to the FCC's recent document/
order of Thursday 30-September-2010, nor the details of the FCC's
new allocation plans.

Also, I have not yet really checked into ATIS/INC/NIIF/NRRIC/OBF/etc.
(or whatever these telco industry forums and their acronyms are known
as now, some of the ones I listed HAVE recently changed... AGAIN) ...
documents/etc. to see how network testing/implementation/preparation
for 855 has been going along.

I have been informed by one of my contacts with at&t-ILEC that _ALL_
of their 22-state territory (SWBell's five states, Pacific*Telesis in
CA/NV, Ameritech's five states, SNET in CT, and BellSouth's five
states) have had AREA code 855 opened up as a valid "toll-free SAC" in
their local central offices/tandems (to be database-dipped for
toll-free-number translations) for some time now, probably since 2000.
I also know that most (if not all) of at&t/cingular's MTSOs also have
855 opened up in a similar manner, to be database-dipped in the
toll-free number database via the ILECs' LATA-tandems.

A friend in VeriZon territory (Bell-Atlantic, legacy C&P) tells me
that toll-free SAC 855 is similarly opened up as "valid" in his local
5ESS and LATA tandem.

Since 855 was to originally intended to be opened up for new customer
toll-free number assignments back in 2000, even though it has now been
postponed for ten years, it is likely that most ILECs in the US and
Canada do have 855 opened up in their local offices and tandems. But
I can't necessarily speak for CLECs, wireless, PBXes, etc.

However, it does seem that many, maybe even most, private payphones
(but who really uses them anymore), have had 855 (and future 844, 833,
822) opened up for at least ten years now. The FCC/CRTC, NANPA, and
the telco industry has made it known in documentation that 855, 844,
833, and then 822, are to be the next batch (in that order) of future
toll free special area codes for some years now. (After that, the plan
is to use 880, 881, 882, ..., 887, 889, but I don't know if the order
of assignment or activation is to be increasing as listed, or
decreasing though. NOTE that 888 is already in use as part of the
order 800, 888, 877, 866, 855, etc.; also note that 880, 881, 882 for
matching/replacing 800, 888, 877, for originating international
callers use to to call NANP-based toll-free numbers, but on a caller-
pays basis, have officially been reclaimed by NANPA, however it's
always possible that foreign telcos/IXCs might not have discontinued
these codes, as +1-880/881/882, from their networks). Remember that
the private payphone industry has been ordered by state/federal
regulatory to NOT "block" end-user access to toll-free area codes, but
also the private payphone industry can now collect surcharges billed
to the toll-free-number "holder" (who in the case of IXCs who are
using 800/etc. numbers for operator/card including pre-paid card
platform access, will pass those surcharges back to the card, collect,
or third/billed-party), and thus the private payphone industry would
no longer have any desire to block end-user access to 8yy toll-free
SACs since they now make "revenue" from those calls.

NOW, as for the "big three" IXC/LD-carriers in the US (I can't speak
for Canada though, nor any of the other mid-size/smaller IXCs and
resellers though) --

Back in the late 1990s, several of the telco industry forums under
ATIS developed a test-number assignment scheme for new and future
toll-free SACs. The 250 office code within each toll-free SAC is
reserved for such testing, at least the LINE-numbers -0000 thru -1499
within each 8yy-250 toll-free SAC+office code. (I assume that 250-1500
thru 250-9999 can be made available to other customers though, within
all 8yy toll-free SACs, but I don't know for certain).

These 250-0000 thru 250-1499 test-numbers, unfortunately, are not
retained "forever" with such test "validation" recordings on older
toll-free SACs (800, 888, 877, 866), but I don't think that the
"assigned" carriers can re-assign them to "any" customer (some telcos
or IXCs might use them for other internal personnel purposes though).

I do know that the 250-xxxx test-numbers for AT&T-LL (and possibly MCI
and Sprint as well) did work as such under toll-free SAC 855 back in
2000, when 855 was originally intended to be opened up (shortly after
866) for toll-free customer number assignments. But it doesn't seem
that I can get such test/validation announcements now, especially now
that 855 is to be opened up for toll-free customer number assignments
NOW (either 01-October, or today 02-October, or now that next Saturday
09-October-2010 has been determined as the official date).

Here is what I get on the 855 test-numbers for AT&T-LL:

855-250-0391 AT&T-LL -- voicemail for some employee at AT&T-LL
855-250-0392 AT&T-LL -- a vacant recording about "Holiday closures",
with the "trailer" of the AT&T-LL 4ESS (or these days, it could be a
new 5ESS "edge") toll-switch that I "home" on.

SO, at least if the database result is that the 855 number is "valid"
from the calling party's location, and that the carrier to hand-off-to
is AT&T-LL (0288), then AT&T-LL is "capable" of handling such an 855
toll-free number. However, they don't seem to have a "test/validation"
type number as such, i.e., "You have successfully completed an 855
toll-free call through the AT&T network", or the like. But their pair
of "standard" assigned 855-250 test-numbers do "something" as AT&T-LL,
even though they currently don't seem to work as "test/validation"
numbers.

And for MCI and Sprint:

855-250-0379/0380, VZ-B/MCI
855-250-0110/0111, Sprint-LD

ALL of these MCI and Sprint 855 test-numbers are "SS7'ing-back" to
the at&t/BellSouth Lafayette LA "Main" DMS-100/200/TOPS LATA-Tandem
LFYTLAMA0GT (which is also a local switch at "Main" LFYTLAMADS0,
CO-LOCATED with the primary local switch at "Main", a 1AESS
LFYTLAMACG1), for a vacant-number announcement from that
at&t/BellSouth LATA-Tandem for my Lafayette LA LATA #488.

There are some other "consecutive/block ranges" of assignments of
toll-free SACs' test-numbers, higher up in the -0000 thru -1499
test-number block, also assigned to AT&T-LL, MCI, Sprint, and also to
the RBOCs/ILECs/etc., but I haven't yet tried dialing "every number"
in those ranges/blocks to see if I can (still?) reach any meaningful
"test/validation" recordings from those carriers.

Of course, when real customers get 855-nxx-xxxx toll-free numbers and
have chosen MCI or Sprint as the IXC, it is still possible that these
OCC IXCs could still be successful at routing the calls, based on the
results of the database-dips into the toll-free-number master database
queried from the LATA-tandems. But the "standard" toll-free (250)
test-numbers assigned for MCI and Sprint are NOT WORKING AT ALL with
SAC 855, (at least not from my LATA), simply SS7'ing-back to a VACANT
number recording from that LATA-tandem, still today Saturday
02-October-2010 which was to have been the first day for "real"
customer assignments of new 855 toll-free numbers, which has now been
postponed for a week until Saturday 09-October-2010, as per an FCC
order two days ago (Thursday-30-September-2010) which includes a new
FCC "855 number allocation order" as referenced above.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

I received a reply from my friend in VZ/BA/C&P territory regarding the
855 toll-free test-numbers for AT&T-LL, MCI, Sprint. I had mentioned
that I got "something" from AT&T-LL on their pair of "standard" 855
test-numbers, but the pairs of "standard" 855 test-numbers for MCI and
Sprint all SS7'd back to my LATA-tandem for a vacant number
announcement.

He emailed me as follows:

--------------------------------------------------------------------
On 10/2/2010 1:22 PM, Mark J. Cuccia wrote:

> 855-250-0391 AT&T-LL -- voicemail for some employee at AT&T-LL
> 855-250-0392 AT&T-LL -- a vacant recording about "Holiday closures",

That's what I reach with both of those.

> 855-250-0379/0380, VZ-B/MCI

I can reach both of these to a test recording (same recording on both)

[mjc followup: This is a rather lengthy MCI/Worldcom 8yy toll-free
area code test/validation recording that I remember being in use by
MCI/Worldcom some ten years ago, when 866 was opened up, and when 855
was previously intended to also be opened up as well. This recording
references the company as "MCI/Worldcom", note that VZ-B/MCI never
refers to their company with "Worldcom" anymore! Even MCI dropped the
"Worldcom" reference back circa 2002/03, a few years before VeriZon
bought out MCI!]

> 855-250-0110/0111, Sprint-LD

0110 did not work, SS7'd back to my CO.
0111 went to "Welcome to Sprint Long Distance Services" but with a different
tandem code than my local one.

[mjc followup: This recording on 855-250-0111 is the same recording
one should get on (101-0333)-1-700-555-4141, the 101-0333 "CAC" is
optional if Sprint-LD is your inter-LATA "PIC"; or on
(101-0333)-1+home/nearby-NPA+700-4141, the 101-0333 "CAC" is optional
if Sprint-LD is your intra-LATA "PIC". I seem to remember that this
"standard" Sprint PIC-validation recording from Sprint is what I got
on 866/855-250-0111 some ten years ago when 866 (and "at the time"
855) were to be opened up during 2000.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't know why MCI's and Sprint's 855 toll-free validation/test
recordings are currently not working for me at my at&t/BellSouth
Lafayette LA DMS-100/200 LATA-tandem LFYTLAMA0GT/DS0, though, while
their recordings _ARE_ working from VeriZon/Bell-Atlantic/C&P
territory!

BTW, I am being SS7'd back to the LATA-tandem for a vacant line-number
recording when I dial the 855 test-numbers for MCI and Sprint from my
at&t/cingular _cellphones_. When I dial these MCI and Sprint 855 test
numbers from my at&t/BellSouth _landline_ (LFYTLAVMCG0 1AESS), I am
SS7'd back to a vacant line-number recording from my own LFYTLAVMCG0
"Vermillion" 1A end-office!

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

at&t/Southwestern-Bell announces that one of their Houston TX area
Alcatel/Lucent/WECO 1AESS offices will be retired, replaced with a
new digital-packet-remote office.

From the at&t (ILEC) Network Discloures Website main page,
http://www.att.com/gen/public-affairs?pid=3137

scroll down to the legacy Southwestern Bell section (AR/KS/MO/OK/TX) for:
http://www.att.com/public_affairs/regulatory_documents/ATT20100930L.1_rev1_Web.d\
oc

(NOTE that this is a correction of a document from a few days earlier)

This document is dated Thursday 30-September-2010,
with a revision/correction on Monday 04-October-2010.

HSTNTXGLCG0
Houston TX "Glendale" Alcatel-Lucent-WECO 1AESS
SS7-Point-Code 249-147-031
713-330, 713-450, 713-451, 713-453, 713-455, 713-637
(the "default" 713-NXX c.o.codes)

is being replaced with:

HSTNTXGLRP0 Genband-Nortel-MG9000-ABI-Remote
SS7-Point-Code 249-147-124
to be hosted by HSTNTX0806T Houston TX "Weslayan" Genband-Nortel CS2K
same SS7-Point-Code as the new -RP0 replacement for "Glendale"
249-147-124, this tandem being expanded from a DMS-200 tandem

effective Friday 2011-07July-15.

This will still leave THREE remaining 1As in the Houston TX Metro area:

HSTNTXADCG0
Houston (Suburban) TX ratecenter
"Aldine" switch
281-219, 281-442, 281-449, 281-590, 281-985, 281-986, 281-987
(the "default" 281-NXX c.o.codes)

NOTE: at "Aldine" there is also a co-located HSTNTXADDS0
Genband/Nortel- DMS-100, SS7-Point-Code 249-147-137;
this DMS-100 -DS0 is to be replaced with a Genband/Nortel Digital
Packet Remote -RP0 SS7-Point-Code 249-147-124, to be hosted by
HSTNTX0806T Houston TX "Weslayan" Genband-Nortel CS2K same
SS7-Point-Code 249-147-124 as the new -RP0 replacement for the old
DMS-100 -DS0 at "Aldine", this tandem is being expanded from a DMS-200
tandem effective on Friday-22-April-2011, see:
http://www.att.com/public_affairs/regulatory_documents/ATT20100806L.1_Web.doc
dated Friday 06-August-2010.
_NO_ mention is made *at this time* regarding the 1AESS at Aldine -CG0
but I do expect that at&t/SW-Bell is going to migrate its existing
customers/loops and 281-NXX c.o.codes over to the new -RP0 digital
packet remote when it is fully in place, replacing the existing
co-located DMS-100 -DS0 at Aldine.

HSTNTXIDCG0
"IDlewood" switch (and old 2L-5N EXchange NAme)
713-413, 713-433, 713-434 Houston TX ratecenter
713-340, 713-436 Houston Suburban TX ratecenter
(the "default" 713-NXX c.o.codes)

HSTNTXWLCG0
Houston (Suburban) TX ratecenter
"West Ellington" switch
281-464, 281-481, 281-484, 281-921, 281-929
(the "default" 281-NXX c.o.codes)

There will still be some 50+ 1AESS offices remaining elsewhere:

three for VeriZon/Bell-Atlantic/C&P
(one each in Baltimore MD, Richmond VA, Norfolk VA) --

a handful in at&t/Ameritech territory, both Michigan Bell and two in
the Chicago IL region of Illinois Bell --

several in at&t/BellSouth territory, both Southern Bell in the Atlanta
GA metro area, four scattered about southern Georgia, Jacksonville FL
area, and Miami/southeastern FL area; and South Central Bell in the
Birmingham AL metro area, the Nashville TN area, Shreveport LA and
Lafayette LA area --

several in at&t/Southwestern-Bell territory, mostly in the St.Louis MO
area, Dallas TX area, Ft.Worth TX area, the ones which will still be
in Houston TX mentioned above, and one each in El Paso TX, Odessa TX,
Beaumont TX.

As far as I can tell, there are _NO_ more remaining GTE-AE EAX offices
(similar to the WECO 1/1AESS), nor WECO 2/2BESS, nor any other similar
c.o.switches elsewhere in the US (at&t/Pacific*Bell/Nevada*Bell,
Qwest/US-West, other at&t/Ameritech states except for Illinois and
Michigan indicated above, at&t/SW-Bell states except for TX and MO
indicated above, at&t/BellSouth states except for the specific
Southern Bell and South Central Bell states indicated above, at&t/SNET-CT,
Cincinnati Bell, any other VeriZon/BA or VZ/BA/NYNEX states other than
the three VZ/BA/C&P offices in MD and VA indicated above), nor any
more NE-1ESS nor NT-SP(x) offices in Bell Canada nor SP(x) offices
elsewhere in Canada or the US or anywhere else in the NANP.

It may take some time to completely replace all of these some 50+
remaining 1AESS offices -- some of them might be completely retired
altogether without replacement, if customers continue to abandon ILEC
landline services in favor of wireless, CLEC, VoIP, etc.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

NANPA 2010-3Q Newsletter: Jamaica, NPA/Ratecenter Trivia, New Hampshire, etc.

NeuStar-NANPA issued its Third-Quarter 2010 Newsletter
this Wednesday evening, 07-October-2010:
http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/newsletters/NANPA_3Q10.pdf

A lot of the usual code and numbering summary (central
office codes assigned in generalized summaries, and such,
as well as area code assignments and relief planning, and
other numbering/code resource inventory/assignments, such
as ANI-II digits, *XX Vertical Service Code, 456-NXX codes,
5YY-NXX codes, 900-NXX codes, 101-XXXX and 950-xxxx CICs,
and such) is included.

Something QUITE interesting is mentioned in the "NANP Resource
Status Update NPA (Area Codes)" section right at the top of
the first page on the left hand side:

"One NPA code has been reserved for Jamaica."

I doubt that they are referring to "Jamaica NY" in Queens/NYC
though! :-)

Jamaica in the NANP-Caribbean used to share 809 with all of the
other NANP-Caribbean from the time that 809 was assigned (at
least ON PAPER) in 1958, and then during the 1995-99 period when
all of the individual areas of the NANP-Caribbean split off to
their own unique area codes (Dominican Republic the sole entity
retaining 809, subsequently overlaid with 829 in 1995 and then
overlaid with 849 in 2009/10), Jamaica split into its own 876
area code during 1997.

I would _HOPE_ that Jamaica's 'OUR' (Office of Utility Regulation)
will go for an OVERLAY of 876, rather than split 876. So far,
all further ADDITIONAL area codes for individual (existing)
NANP-Caribbean entities have been overlays, the Dominican Rep's
TWO additional (overlay) area codes referenced above, and the
year-2001 939 overlay to Puerto Rico's 787 area code (which split
from 809 during 1996).

There's no mention as to _WHAT_ the new area code to Jamaica will
be, but since the 521 thru 529 codes are NO LONGER (since 2001/02)
required to be reserved for special billing identification regarding
(non-NANP) +52 Mexico ("as if" the earlier Mexican +52-AXXX-xxxx
format could be formatted as "pseudo-NANP" 52A-XXX-xxxx; Mexico did
indeed expand its numbering plan from +52-eight-digits - a total of
ten worldwide significant digits ... to +52-ten-digits - a total of
TWELVE worldwide significant digits), the 521 thru 529 range "could"
be now use for "real" NANP locations, the US (including Caribbean
and Pacific territories), Canada, the NANP-Caribbean ... MAYBE then
Jamaica might be able to get 526 as its next (hopefully overlay)
area code since it "spells" 'JAM' ??

I tried checking the Jamaican-OUR website to see if they have anything
recent on a future area code (overlay?)) to 876, but didn't find
anything as such. The main page for their website is:
http://www.our.org.jm

Back in December 2009, I had posted something to these various
Yahoo Groups, the Telnum email list, and Telecom-Digest (aka Usenet's
comp.dcom.telecom), regarding a November 2009 article in the Jamaica-
Gleaner newspaper regarding speculation for a new area code, as well
as possible further numbering conservation measures. That post I made
is archived at the various Yahoo groups, Yahoo-Local-Calling-Guide is
not "restricted", see:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/local-calling-guide/message/1610
The actual Nov.2009 Jamaica-Gleaner newspaper article (referenced in
my Dec.2010 posting) is still accessible as of October 2010, see:
http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20091120/business/business3.html

Back to the 3Q-2010 NANPA Newsletter...
on page-3 of the newsletter, there is a "Did you know?" side-bar,
which gives some interesting trivia about (US) area codes and
ratecenters. It only references _US_ area codes, so 416/647 in
Toronto ON (Canada) is not shown as being another area code with
ONE-and-ONLY-one ratecenter.

Hawaii's 808 is listed as "the state with the fewest total number of
rate centers (six)", but they SHOULD have added "outside of those area
codes listed above with only one ratecenter".

Since Canada is not included, it should be noted that 514/438 for the
immediate Montreal PQ metro area _ALSO_ has six unique ratecenters.

Alaska/907 is not included as an area code with a huge number of
ratecenters in that section -- IRRC, 907/AK has something like
between 270 and 280 individual ratecenters.

The section on ratecenters which actually straddle two (or more)
geographic/POTS area codes, is not complete, but the section does
state "SOME (emphasis mine) of the more well known include ... "
Others include some ratecenters in western NY state split between
716 and 585 which split off in 2001/02, some ratecenters in the
Hudson River Valley NY area split between 914 and 845 which split
off in 2000/01, three ratecenters in Long Island NY which straddle
the Nassau and Suffolk County boundary line split betwen 516 and 631
which split off in 1999/2000. There are probably even others which
NANPA doesn't list and which I haven't mentioned here.

The Compton:Compton-DA ratecenter in southern CA is quite unique...
the 310/424 section (including Compton:Gardena-DA ratecenter) is
at&t/SBC/Pacific*Bell, as is the 562 side. But the 562 side of the
Compton:Compton-DA ratecenter, which is the "Paramount CA" locality
and c.o.switch of at&t/Pac*Bell is the _ONLY_ legacy BOC within the
562 area code (as an ILEC)! EVERYTHING ELSE within 562 (as an ILEC)
is VeriZon/GTE! I'm considering the legacy _independent_ GTE aspect
of VeriZon here, even though VZ can still be considered a BOC.
NOTE that MOST GTE (and Contel) in California (as well as GTE and
old Contel retained since 2000/02 in Texas, and the GTE-Tampa area
in Florida, has all been retained by VeriZon in the recent sell-off
of _most_ GTE-and-Contel which had still been retained by VZ, to
Frontier.

The very last segment on the final page of the 3Q-2010 Newsletter, on
p.5, mentions that NeuStar-NANPA (on behalf of the telco industry)
has re-filed a petition with the New Hampshire PUC (in August 2010)
for area code relief of NH's 603 area code, again requesting an
overlay. BTW, this relief petition is available at the NH-PUC website:
http://www.puc.state.nh.us/Regulatory/Docketbk/2010/10-211.htm

Of course, the new relief area code for NH/603 (which will hopefully
be approved as an overlay) has not been made public, but my FIRST
CHOICE GUESS is for 946.

NOTHING FURTHER at this time on exactly "when" Sint Maarten's planned
migration into the NANP from the Dutch Antilles +599 country code
(with 5XX-xxxx number/c.o.code ranges) into the NEW +1-721 NANP-based
country-and-area code (retaining most-if-not-all) of their 5XX
c.o.codes... I don't know if any OTHER islands of the (soon to be
dissolved) Dutch Antilles entity (with their own unique NXX code
ranges currently within ITU Country Code +599) might also want to
join Sint Maarten in migrating from +599 to +1-721. It was announced
exactly one year ago by Planning Letter, in early October 2009, that
Sint Maarten would leave the Dutch Antilles +599 and join the NANP +1
with new area code 721, permissive on (Monday) 31-May-2010, mandatory
on Tuesday 30-November-2010. That NANPA-PL, #396, Fri-02-Oct-2009 was
somewhat incomplete -- not all +599-5xx c.o.codes assigned which will
change to +1-721-5xx were included, and there were some errors and
other convoluted things -- also the test-number was not listed, it was
to be determined at a later date. Then on Wed-03-March-2010, NANPA
issued PL #404 which stated that Sint Maarten's migration into the
NANP was postponed "until further notice". And that's where it seems
to still be for now.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Hello All,

Would anyone have any information on this very old Voltmeter Test Set? It's been
in our Lab's collection of old optical equipment, but I think (because of it's
"T", "R", and "S", terminals) that it might be telephone related. It certainly
is pretty, with its finger-jointed wooden cabinet and hand-crafted uninsulated
interior wiring. There are eight terminals in all, three lever switches, two
turn-switches, one push-pull switch, one pushbutton, one indicator lamp, and a
large "Weston" voltmeter. Also attached is a record of change that occurred
sometime in the meter's history; the form was printed in 1931 with the actual
change recorded in 1946, but I think the entire device is older than either of
those dates. (the voltmeter component has patent dates from 1894). I told our
professor that if anyone would know more about the meter, the folks in these
newsgroups would! So, thanks in advance for any information.

Elmer

Yeah, Elmer... it'd help if you post the link to your pictures:

     http://www.flickr.com/photos/elmercat/sets/72157625028192605/



>
>From: ElmerCat <elmercat@...>
>To: centraloffice@yahoogroups.com; strowger@yahoogroups.com; Kenneth Martin
><kemartin@...>; vintage_insulators@yahoogroups.com;
>local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Wed, October 13, 2010 8:59:28 AM
>Subject: [Strowger] Very Old Voltmeter Test Set
>
>
>Hello All,
>
>Would anyone have any information on this very old Voltmeter Test Set? It's
been
>
>
>in our Lab's collection of old optical equipment, but I think (because of it's
>"T", "R", and "S", terminals) that it might be telephone related. It certainly
>is pretty, with its finger-jointed wooden cabinet and hand-crafted uninsulated
>interior wiring. There are eight terminals in all, three lever switches, two
>turn-switches, one push-pull switch, one pushbutton, one indicator lamp, and a
>large "Weston" voltmeter. Also attached is a record of change that occurred
>sometime in the meter's history; the form was printed in 1931 with the actual
>change recorded in 1946, but I think the entire device is older than either of
>those dates. (the voltmeter component has patent dates from 1894). I told our
>professor that if anyone would know more about the meter, the folks in these
>newsgroups would! So, thanks in advance for any information.
>
>Elmer
>
>
>

"Albert LaFrance" <albert.lafrance at coldwar-c4i.net> posted the
following to several Yahoo telecom-related groups earlier...
(Yahoo's "Central Office", "SingingWires", "Long Lines Retirees").

But he isn't on Yahoo "Local Calling Guide" nor the Telnum majordomo
distribution list.

He said it was okay to forward this to the other groups/lists, for
those who aren't on the groups he did post to...

---

> Jim Hebbeln brought some really great news to my attention
> yesterday: Alcatel-Lucent has made the complete set of the Bell
> System Technical Journal, 1922-1983, available online at:
> http://bstj.bell-labs.com/
>
> Albert

---

There are some interesting numbering/switching/routing/etc. related
articles in BSTJ from Fall 1952, and some articles on international
signaling/numbering/etc. circa 1960/61, as well as other misc.
articles on touchtone phone keypad layouts, the Morris IL Electronic
Central Office experiment around the same time (early 1960s), etc.

Bell Labs evolved into Lucent, which was taken over by Alcatel a few
years ago... I do seem to remember AT&T did publish the AT&T Technical
Journal with 1984 divestiture, pre-Lucent (which was spun-out of AT&T
in the mid-1990s), but I don't know if that's eventually going to
become available as well.

And then there was the Bell Labs Record magazine which started in the
mid-1920s, which was renamed AT&T Technology with 1984. I don't know
whatever became of that journal, but I also hope that becomes
available online. There were some interesting numbering/routing
articles in there, in the 1940s/50s era, as well as other numerous
misc. telephone, TWX, etc. topics throughout the 1950s/60s/70s.

And not mentioned much, but still very much worth mentioning is the
Bell Telephone Magazine (originally known as the Bell Telephone
Quarterly) which began in the 1920s, and continued through the end of
1983. There was no "continuation" magazine, although I think that
Bellcore published "something" in their early immediate years of
divestiture.

Bell Telephone Magazine had NUMEROUS articles from the 1940s/50s/early
1960s on numbering/dialing/switching/routing, as Operator Toll Dialing
and subsequently DDD was evolving, as well as numerous misc. articles
on telephony. HOPEFULLY someone with AT&T or Alcatel-Lucent could make
that available online too (1920s thru 1983).

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Town of Iowa Hill CA Finally Gets Landline Telephone Service

Some of you might have already seen/heard this story the other day
on radio/TV or in the newspapers/etc.

The town of Iowa Hill in California (in Placer County), northeast
of Sacramento CA, finally got landline dialtone telephone service
for the first time. The residents have been using spotty cellular
service in recent years. The area is in mountainous territory. There
are about 200 year-round residents in Iowa Hill CA, and at least 50
of them got new landline telephone service the other day.

Most of the news articles that came up when I did a "google news"
search did NOT mention the name of the local telco or any other
related telco information. But at least one news article did mention
a company in Foresthill CA named "Sebastian". This is the name of
the company that owns the independent "Foresthill Telephone Company",
OCN 2318. (The name is apparently one single word, "Foresthill").

I did try looking up on NANPA's (US) NPA-NXX c.o.code pages at their
website for the 530 area code (northeastern California), to see if
there was a ratecenter name (and 530-NXX code) for "Iowa Hill CA",
but there was no such distinct (new) ratecenter.

I looked up on the localcallingguide.com website, and also no such
ratecenter (nor 530-NXX) for "Iowa Hill CA". But there is the
Foresthill CA ratecenter with 530-367 (I wonder if that could have
been an old 916-FOresthill-7- exchange name in the old 2L-5N days? :-)
And the c.o.switch is FRHLCAXFDS0, an Alcatel-Lucent 5ESS.

I called up the Sebastian/Foresthill Telephone Company to inquire
further, and they confirmed that Iowa Hill CA is simply an "extension"
of the existing Foresthill CA ratecenter, with 530-367 numbers, and
Iowa Hill CA also gets dialtone from the 5ESS in Foresthill CA.

According to the localcallingguide.com website, the Foresthill CA
ratecenter (which includes Iowa Hill) has local/EAS with the following
three nearby ratecenters:

Colfax:Colfax (District Area) CA (OCN 4420 VeriZon/GTE-once-Contel)
Colfax:Weimar (District Area) CA (OCN 4420 VeriZon/GTE-once-Contel)
Georgetown CA (at&t/SBC/Pacific*Bell)

There are no other 530-NXX c.o.codes other than 530-367 for the
Foresthill CA ratecenter (including Iowa Hill CA), thus there are NO
CLECs nor wireless providers associated with the Foresthill CA
ratecenter. Also, Foresthill CA is the only ratecenter served by
Sebastain/Foresthill Telco.

About six years ago, the community of "Mink LA" finally got landline
telephone service for the very first time from BellSouth/So.Central Bell.
They had been trying to get service for 40-some years, ever since the
mid-1960s when it was still part of Southern Bell. But in 2004, the
La.PSC finally ordered BellSouth to extend landline loops/dialtone
from the Leesville (Vernon Parish) LA ratecenter (Leesville with an
's', NOT Leeville which is in Lafourche Parish in LA, and served by
the independent Latelco, Lafourche Telephone Company). It's probably
the Leesville LA "Simpson" central office LEVLLASNDS0 which provides
dialtone to the heavily wooded and hilly settlement of "Mink LA",
since this c.o.switch is the one closest; but it "could" be possible
that the "Main" c.o.switch at Leesville LEVLLAMADS0, a 5ESS, actually
provides dialtone to "Mink LA".

SO, it seems that there are still areas in the US which don't yet have
landline telephone service. I don't think that there are still any
"ringdown" or "non-customer-dial" points in the US anymore, but there
were still a few here/there, mostly in remote parts of California and
Nevada as late as the early 2000s. I wonder if it would have been more
efficient to extend better cellular service to Iowa Hill CA and other
similar areas? The trend does seem to be people dumping landline in
favor of wireless, and since this community never had landline before,
even though the cellular was spotty, maybe it would have been better
to improve the cellular signal to this area?

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Cellular coverage seems to have peaked about 2-3 years ago in the Chicago
area.  Signal strength is now going down with AT&T.  (I'm thinking of
switching to Verizon.)  If they're doing the same thing out there, maybe
they want to push landline.



Landline is now more expensive than cellular service.  Maybe ATT(ex-SBC,
originally Ameritech/Illinois Bell) sees wanting people to get their
landlines back as a potential profit center?   I may have to get landline
(which I've not had for 6 years now) because of spotty cellular coverage.



Charles Fregeau



From: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mark J. Cuccia
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 2010 12:59 PM
To: centraloffice@yahoogroups.com; local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com;
singingwires@yahoogroups.com; telnum@...
Cc: markjcuccia@...
Subject: [local-calling-guide] Town of Iowa Hill CA Finally Gets Landline
Telephone Service





Town of Iowa Hill CA Finally Gets Landline Telephone Service

Some of you might have already seen/heard this story the other day
on radio/TV or in the newspapers/etc.

The town of Iowa Hill in California (in Placer County), northeast
of Sacramento CA, finally got landline dialtone telephone service
for the first time. The residents have been using spotty cellular
service in recent years. The area is in mountainous territory. There
are about 200 year-round residents in Iowa Hill CA, and at least 50
of them got new landline telephone service the other day.

Most of the news articles that came up when I did a "google news"
search did NOT mention the name of the local telco or any other
related telco information. But at least one news article did mention
a company in Foresthill CA named "Sebastian". This is the name of
the company that owns the independent "Foresthill Telephone Company",
OCN 2318. (The name is apparently one single word, "Foresthill").

I did try looking up on NANPA's (US) NPA-NXX c.o.code pages at their
website for the 530 area code (northeastern California), to see if
there was a ratecenter name (and 530-NXX code) for "Iowa Hill CA",
but there was no such distinct (new) ratecenter.

I looked up on the localcallingguide.com website, and also no such
ratecenter (nor 530-NXX) for "Iowa Hill CA". But there is the
Foresthill CA ratecenter with 530-367 (I wonder if that could have
been an old 916-FOresthill-7- exchange name in the old 2L-5N days? :-)
And the c.o.switch is FRHLCAXFDS0, an Alcatel-Lucent 5ESS.

I called up the Sebastian/Foresthill Telephone Company to inquire
further, and they confirmed that Iowa Hill CA is simply an "extension"
of the existing Foresthill CA ratecenter, with 530-367 numbers, and
Iowa Hill CA also gets dialtone from the 5ESS in Foresthill CA.

According to the localcallingguide.com website, the Foresthill CA
ratecenter (which includes Iowa Hill) has local/EAS with the following
three nearby ratecenters:

Colfax:Colfax (District Area) CA (OCN 4420 VeriZon/GTE-once-Contel)
Colfax:Weimar (District Area) CA (OCN 4420 VeriZon/GTE-once-Contel)
Georgetown CA (at&t/SBC/Pacific*Bell)

There are no other 530-NXX c.o.codes other than 530-367 for the
Foresthill CA ratecenter (including Iowa Hill CA), thus there are NO
CLECs nor wireless providers associated with the Foresthill CA
ratecenter. Also, Foresthill CA is the only ratecenter served by
Sebastain/Foresthill Telco.

About six years ago, the community of "Mink LA" finally got landline
telephone service for the very first time from BellSouth/So.Central Bell.
They had been trying to get service for 40-some years, ever since the
mid-1960s when it was still part of Southern Bell. But in 2004, the
La.PSC finally ordered BellSouth to extend landline loops/dialtone
from the Leesville (Vernon Parish) LA ratecenter (Leesville with an
's', NOT Leeville which is in Lafourche Parish in LA, and served by
the independent Latelco, Lafourche Telephone Company). It's probably
the Leesville LA "Simpson" central office LEVLLASNDS0 which provides
dialtone to the heavily wooded and hilly settlement of "Mink LA",
since this c.o.switch is the one closest; but it "could" be possible
that the "Main" c.o.switch at Leesville LEVLLAMADS0, a 5ESS, actually
provides dialtone to "Mink LA".

SO, it seems that there are still areas in the US which don't yet have
landline telephone service. I don't think that there are still any
"ringdown" or "non-customer-dial" points in the US anymore, but there
were still a few here/there, mostly in remote parts of California and
Nevada as late as the early 2000s. I wonder if it would have been more
efficient to extend better cellular service to Iowa Hill CA and other
similar areas? The trend does seem to be people dumping landline in
favor of wireless, and since this community never had landline before,
even though the cellular was spotty, maybe it would have been better
to improve the cellular signal to this area?

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina





__________ NOD32 5552 (20101021) Information __________

This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

There was a post on Friday evening (12-Nov-2010) to "Telecom Digest"
(comp.dcom.telecom on Usenet) from a regular participant in the
Wisconsin area, who says that the 920/274 area code overlay in
eastern Wisconsin has recently been postponed by the WI-PSC from
2012 to 2014. He also provided a link to an online news article as
well.

I went to the WI-PSC website, and couldn't find anything about this,
either at their recent press releases, nor at the Telecom section,
not even at the "area code relief" section, especially the section of
documents/etc. regarding the forthcoming 920/274 overlay! Wisconsin
also recently had the 715/534 overlay in northern Wisconsin back in
August 2010. Mandatory ten-digit dialing within 715 took effect in
July 2010, and the first new (pre-assigned) geographic/POTS 534-NXX
c.o.codes "could" have taken effect in August 2010, but at present,
there are NO such (new) 534-NXX codes yet requested nor assigned.
And at present, there are numerous 715-NXX c.o.codes which can still
be assigned.

There isn't anything at NeuStar-NANPA's website indicating that the
920/274 area code overlay has been postponed. The effective date at
NANPA's website (as of today, Saturday 13-November-2010) is still
referencing Saturday 10-March-2012 as the "official" date for that
overlay.

NANPA's second "NRUF" document for this year 2010, regarding area
code exhaust statistics, was released a few weeks ago, on Tuesday
26-October-2010.
http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NRUF/2010_NPA_Exhaust_Projections.pdf
This document indicates that the current projected exhaust of the 920
area code is for 2014-2Q.

I did do a "google news search" on "new area code", and there are
several media/press/news items in Wisconsin, Illinois, and elsewhere
regarding a recent announcement by the WI-PSC that they are officially
postponing the forthcoming 920/274 area code overlay for eastern
Wisconsin.

So, I assume that sometime next week, there "should" be something at
the WI-PSC's website, as well as new documents/etc. at NeuStar-NANPA's
website. There will probably have to be additional telecom-industry
conference calls hosted by NANPA with the telcos and the PSC staff, to
determine revised exact specific event dates for the 920/274 overlay.
I assume that further NANPA projections during 2011 will project the
ultimate exhaust of 920 even further into the future than 2014-2Q.
If an area code is projected to exhaust in a particular year, then
area code relief "should" be fully in place a year BEFORE that
projected exhaust date. And having the 920/274 overlay to be in place
in 2014-1Q if 920 is projected to exhaust in 2014-2Q is cutting it too
close! Of course the state commissions in Illinois, California, etc.
have been known to "squeeze" as much life as possible out of the old
area code before allowing the overlay to actually take effect! But if
the WI-PSC does intend on 2014-1Q as the timeframe for activating the
overlay, by that time, it is possible that the projected exhaust might
be in early 2015, which would be a year afterwards anyhow...

Here are the previously agreed upon dates for specific events regarding
the 920/274 area code overlay in eastern Wisconsin, as outlined in
NeuStar-NANPA Planning Letter #385 dated Monday 22-December-2008,
http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_385.pdf

- Permissive Ten-Digit intra-920 Local Dialing must be in place by:
Saturday 14-May-2011

Wireless providers already allow such permissive 10-digit dialing,
and it is likely that several other landline telcos also allow such
permissive 10-digit dialing

- MANDATORY Ten-Digit intra-920 Local Dialing:
Saturday 11-February-2012

- New (pre-assigned) 274-NXX c.o.codes activated as early as:
Saturday 10-March-2012

- New 274-NXX c.o.codes can be REQUESTED for (pre)assignment from
Neustar-NANPA, by service providers, starting:
Saturday 10-September-2011

The 274 NPA test-numbers will start on Saturday 10-December-2011 and
can be disconnected starting on Tuesday 10-April-2012.

There will be two test-numbers:

LATA 356 (southeastern WI):
274-222-TEST  Frontier (as of July 2010; area once was VeriZon/GTE)

LATA 350 (northeastern WI):
274-274-1274  supposed to be "Solaris" aka Central Wisconsin Comm's,
a CLEC associated with a nearby ILEC (Wood County Telephone Co).
Apparently, at&t/SBC/Ameritech/WI-Bell is not providing a test number
in this overlay.

I don't yet know the ratecenters/switch-CLLIs for these test-numbers.

If the 920/274 overlay is being postponed from 2012 to 2014, that will
mean that the only other new area code presently planned for 2012 will
be the Manitoba 204/431 overlay in Fall 2012. However, I do think that
there will be other area code overlays that will take effect during
2012, announced during the upcoming year 2011 -- there's the 570/272
overlay in northeastern Pennsylvania which doesn't yet have a firm
date associated, which "could" be 2012, and there are two other area
code relief plans still to be approved by the PA-PUC elsewhere in PA:
northwestern PA's 814, hopefully to be overlaid, by 582(?); and south
central PA's 717, hopefully to be overlaid, by 223(?). 603 NH could be
needing relief, hopefully an overlay (maybe 946?); 615 in north-central
TN will need relief, likely an overlay (maybe 546?); Jamaica in the
NANP-Caribbean will need a second area code, hopefully an overlay,
likely to be 658. And there are several other overlays announced which
never had any firm dates indicated when originally announced, or which
have been postponed indefinitely, which could be needed during 2012.

If the WI-PSC and NANPA are to postpone the 920/274 overlay, it will
still be a few weeks before any new specific dates in 2014 will
actually be determined and announced, and a new NANPA Planning Letter
is issued with the new/revised dates -- unless the WI-PSC and telco
industry simply want to (at this time) state that the overlay is
"postponed until further notice" (with a new NANPA-PL issued stating
THAT).

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com

On Saturday 13-November-2010, I wrote:

> There was a post on Friday evening (12-Nov-2010) to "Telecom Digest"
> (comp.dcom.telecom on Usenet) from a regular participant in the
> Wisconsin area, who says that the 920/274 area code overlay in
> eastern Wisconsin has recently been postponed by the WI-PSC from
> 2012 to 2014. He also provided a link to an online news article as
> well.
>
> I went to the WI-PSC website, and couldn't find anything about this,
> either at their recent press releases, nor at the Telecom section,
> not even at the "area code relief" section, especially the section
> of documents/etc. regarding the forthcoming 920/274 overlay!

[ ... ]

Today, Wednesday 17-November-2010, the WI-PSC finally uploaded the
press-release (PDF) from last week (Thursday 11-November-2010)
regarding the delay of the 920/274 overlay from 2012 to 2014.

Their Press Release "Index" page of links to recent press releases
http://psc.wi.gov/apps40/PressRelease/default.aspx
references this press release as (today) Wednesday 17-November-2010,
that being the date that the WI-PSC finally uploaded this press
release to their website, but the press release itself,
http://psc.wi.gov/pdffiles%5CNews%20Releases%5C2010%5C11%20November%5C920%20area\
%20code%20overlay%20postponed.pdf
is dated Thursday 11-November-2010.

> There isn't anything at NeuStar-NANPA's website indicating that the
> 920/274 area code overlay has been postponed. The effective date at
> NANPA's website (as of today, Saturday 13-November-2010) is still
> referencing Saturday 10-March-2012 as the "official" date for that
> overlay.

NANPA will soon be having a telecom industry / regulatory staff
teleconference, to determine the actual revised dates for 920/274
overlay implementation (permissive ten-digit dialing, mandatory ten-
digit dialing, date when new 274-NXX codes "could" take effect, date
when service providers can begin requesting such new 274-NXX c.o.codes
from NeuStar-NANPA, start/stop dates for the 274 area code test-numbers
and so forth). The WI-PSC press-release mentions that NANPA will soon
have a conference call regarding determining the revised implementation
dates. NANPA will then issue a new Planning Letter reflecting the
revised dates.

> NANPA's second "NRUF" document for this year 2010, regarding area
> code exhaust statistics, was released a few weeks ago, on Tuesday
> 26-October-2010.
> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/NRUF/2010_NPA_Exhaust_Projections.pdf
> This document indicates that the current projected exhaust of the
> 920 area code is for 2014-2Q.
>
> I did do a "google news search" on "new area code", and there are
> several media/press/news items in Wisconsin, Illinois, and elsewhere
> regarding a recent announcement by the WI-PSC that they are officially
> postponing the forthcoming 920/274 area code overlay for eastern
> Wisconsin.
>
> So, I assume that sometime next week, there "should" be something at
> the WI-PSC's website,

The WI-PSC did finally upload the press-release from 11-November-2010

> as well as new documents/etc. at NeuStar-NANPA's website. There
> will probably have to be additional telecom-industry conference
> calls hosted by NANPA with the telcos and the PSC staff, to
> determine revised exact specific event dates for the 920/274 overlay.

And as mentioned, there is going to be a NANPA conference call for
the industry and regulatory, to determine the dates and issue a new
Planning Letter with those revised dates.

> Here are the previously agreed upon dates for specific events
> regarding the 920/274 area code overlay in eastern Wisconsin, as
> outlined in NeuStar-NANPA Planning Letter #385 dated Monday
> 22-December-2008,
> http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_385.pdf
>
> - Permissive Ten-Digit intra-920 Local Dialing must be in place by:
> Saturday 14-May-2011
>
> Wireless providers already allow such permissive 10-digit dialing,
> and it is likely that several other landline telcos also allow such
> permissive 10-digit dialing
>
> - MANDATORY Ten-Digit intra-920 Local Dialing:
> Saturday 11-February-2012
>
> - New (pre-assigned) 274-NXX c.o.codes activated as early as:
> Saturday 10-March-2012
>
> - New 274-NXX c.o.codes can be REQUESTED for (pre)assignment from
> Neustar-NANPA, by service providers, starting:
> Saturday 10-September-2011
>
> The 274 NPA test-numbers will start on Saturday 10-December-2011 and
> can be disconnected starting on Tuesday 10-April-2012.
>
> There will be two test-numbers:
>
> LATA 356 (southeastern WI):
> 274-222-TEST  Frontier (as of July 2010; area once was VeriZon/GTE)
>
> LATA 350 (northeastern WI):
> 274-274-1274  supposed to be "Solaris" aka Central Wisconsin Comm's,
> a CLEC associated with a nearby ILEC (Wood County Telephone Co).
> Apparently, at&t/SBC/Ameritech/WI-Bell is not providing a test number
> in this overlay.
>
> I don't yet know the ratecenters/switch-CLLIs for these test-numbers.

[ ... ]

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com

The Los Angeles CA name is applied to fourteen individual ratecenter
zones, all numbered from 01 thru 14. In California, they call these
split-up or zoned ratecenters "District Areas". I don't know if this
term was originated with Pacific Telephone/Southern California Tel
(and GTE and its predecessors) or if the CPUC came up with that term
"District Areas", abbreviated 'DA'.

Throughout California, where-ever such 'DA' zoned or subdivided
ratecenters exist, they have INDIVIDUAL NAMES, even in the Southern
California Metro Area, EXCEPT for those that are tied to the overall
ratecenter of Los Angeles -- in that case, the DAs are numbered 01
thru 14.

I recently found a pdf scan of a 1939 Los Angeles Extended Area phone
book published by (Bell) Southern California Telephone Company at
Archive.org / aka Prelinger Archives. The full directory is available
as color (the pages are yellowed/brown) or as B&W, as well as other
file or online forms. It's a large pdf though! :)

http://www.archive.org/details/telephonedirectojune1939soutrich

In the opening pages of the directory, there is a map of the various
ratecenters down to any zoned/DA level, AND the exchange/office-name(s)
in that zone/DA/ratecenter. However, if the exchange/office-name was
already now 2L-5N instead of just 2L-4N, the third-digit of the
seven-dial-pull number, the third digit of the exchange/office code,
is NOT indicated, unfortunately. NOTE that over time, there have been
re-numberings of exchange/office-codes, where necessary, some of it
probably due to the crazy split-and-split-again of area codes in
so.Cal in the 1990s-era.

But the map does reflect that the fourteen Los Angeles zoned DA
ratecenters actually have NAMES! NO 'DA' numbers are shown AT ALL,
just the DA NAMES for Los Angeles (itself)! There really hasn't been
much in the way of boundary shifts over the decades... I've looked at
some NANPA ILs/PLs for so-Cal when there have been NPA splits and the
maps for relief planning in so-Cal seem to "mostly" show the same
boundaries. Of course, you can never be sure whose maps are perfect,
since most maps are "rough" sketches, NOT "exact" street/block/
property-line by street/block/property-line boundary maps of
wirecenter/c.o.switch, NXX code, NPA (area) code, ratecenter, etc.
coverage areas.

Anyhow, here are the actual DA "names" for the fourteen Los Angeles
numbered ratecenter 'DAs' -- note that DAs 01, 07, 10 are NPA 213 and
all of the others are NPA 323 since 1998:

213 Los Angeles 01 DA (Mutual DA)
323 Los Angeles 02 DA (Olympia DA)
323 Los Angeles 03 DA (Albany DA)
323 Los Angeles 04 DA (Capitol DA)
323 Los Angeles 05 DA (Angelus DA)
323 Los Angeles 06 DA (Lafayette DA)
213 Los Angeles 07 DA (Richmond DA)
323 Los Angeles 08 DA (Adams DA)
323 Los Angeles 09 DA (Thornwall DA)
213 Los Angeles 10 DA (Drexel DA)
323 Los Angeles 11 DA (Republic DA)
323 Los Angeles 12 DA (Vermont DA)
323 Los Angeles 13 DA (Whitney DA)
323 Los Angeles 14 DA (Hollywood DA)

ALL of 213 and 323 is at&t/Bell for the incumbent landline telco.
There is NO VeriZon/GTE within 213 and 323. Also note that 323 has
one additional (named) ratecenter, that of Montebello CA. This is NOT
a zone or 'DA' of "Los Angeles" but its own named ratecenter.

SOME of the District Area names used are (were) also (one of the)
exchange/office-code NAMES (as in 2L-4N, 2L-5N) used within that 'DA'.


ALSO from the map in the 1939 directory, note that the Pasadena
ratecenter is really two 'DA' names (both are at&t/Bell,
NOT VeriZon/GTE):

Pasadena: Pasadena DA, in NPA 616 (split from 818 in 1997)
Pasadena: La Canada DA, in NPA 818 (split from 213 in 1984)

The 1939 map shows that "La Canada DA" of today was known as the
"Laurel DA" back then!


ALSO, the Compton CA ratecenter is split into two 'DAs' -- and one of
those individual DAs is split between two area codes:

Compton: Gardena DA
Compton: Compton DA

BOTH are at&t/Bell for the incumbent landline local telco, NOT
VeriZon/GTE.

NOTE that the Compton: Compton DA has that little "hook" to the
extreme southeast. That little "hook" is (mostly) the community of
Paramount CA, served by its own central office switch, presently
PRMTCA01DS0 (a Lucent-Alcatel 5ESS). (The rest of Compton: Compton DA
is served by CMTNCA01DS0 & CMTNCA01DS1, both in the same building,
and both Nortel-Genband DMS-100s).

Compton: Compton DA is within area code 310 (overlaid with 424 since
2006), EXCEPT for the Paramount CA (PRMTCA01DS0) area, that little
"hook" in the extreme southeast. This split off to the 562 area code
back in 1997, and is the ONLY "at&t/Bell" incumbent telco service area
in the 562 area code -- EVERYTHING ELSE in area code 562 is served by
VeriZon/GTE for the incumbent landline telco.

(Compton: Gardena DA is all within 310/424, and served by at&t/Bell's
GRDNCA01DS0 and GRDNCA01DS1, both in the same building, and both
Lucent-Alcatel 5ESS switches)

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Back in November 2010, it was announced that the Wisconsin PSC had
delayed implementation of the 920/274 area code overlay for
east-central Wisconsin. The second semi-annual 2010 NeuStar-NRUF
projections for exhaust of area codes was issued in late October 2010,
and showed that the 920 area code in east-central Wisconsin could
exhaust in 2Q/2014, instead of any earlier exhaust dates indicated in
previously issued NRUF projections.

Today, Wednesday 22-December-2010, NeuStar-NANPA issued another
Planning Letter, PL-417, which can be downloaded from:
http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_417.pdf

(The previous PL #385 was issued by NANPA on Monday 22-December-2008,
indicating the earlier, now superseded, implementation dates)

The new implementation dates for the 920/274 area code overlay in
east-central Wisconsin are now as follows:

(NOTE that these are still tentative, and depending on subsequent
future semi-annual NANPA-NRUF area code exhaust projections, these
dates could be postponed even further)

Permissive ten-digit intra-920 Local Dialing (alongside existing
seven-digit local dialing) must be in place by:
Saturday 04-May-2013
(The previous date was for Saturday 14-May-2011)

(Wireless providers already allow such permissive 10-digit dialing,
and it is likely that several other landline telcos might also allow
such permissive 10-digit dialing)

MANDATORY ten-digit intra-920 Local Dialing:
Saturday 25-January-2014
(The previous date was for Saturday 11-February-2012)

New (pre-assigned) 274-NXX c.o.codes activated as early as:
Saturday 22-February-2014
(The previous date was for Saturday 10-March-2012)

New 274-NXX c.o.codes can be REQUESTED for (pre)assignment
from Neustar-NANPA, by service providers, starting:
Thursday 22-August-2013
(The previous date was for Saturday 10-September-2011)

The 274 NPA test-numbers will start by:
Monday   18-November-2013
(The previous date was for Saturday 10-December-2011)

Those test-numbers can be disconnected starting on:
Thursday 20-March-2014
(The previous date was for Tuesday  10-April-2012)

Again, these dates are still TENTATIVE, and depending on future
subsequent semi-annual NANPA NRUF area code exhaust projections, the
above revised implementation dates could potentially be postponed
even further.

There will be two test-numbers:

One, terminating in LATA 356 (southeastern WI):
274-222-TEST  Frontier (as of July 2010; area once was VeriZon/GTE)

Another, terminating in LATA 350 (northeastern WI):
274-274-1274  supposed to be "Solarus" aka Central Wisconsin Comm's,
a CLEC associated with a nearby ILEC (Wood County Telephone Co).
(Apparently, at&t/SBC/Ameritech/WI-Bell is not providing a test number
in this overlay)

I don't yet know the ratecenters/switch-CLLIs for these test-numbers.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

On Sunday 10-October-2010 (which, BTW, was "10-10-10") the Netherlands
Antilles in the Caribbean formally ceased to exist as a single
political unit. The five at-the-time existing member islands now are
independent from each other, although each still maintains some kind
of relationship with the Dutch Kingdom in Europe. These five islands
include: Bonaire, Curacao, Sint Maarten, Sint Eustatius, Saba.

(NOTE that Sint Maarten refers to the southern part of the island.
The northern part is French, Saint-Martin, and is NOT part of the
same telephone numbering plan as the Dutch southern part of the
island. Calls between the two sides are "international toll" although
rather inexpensive, probably no more than some measured rate calls in
many US metro areas, but they are also dialed internationally, as
"00+CC+number". There doesn't appear to be any kind of "short-cut"
dialing, although many businesses on each side of the island have
"local" numbers assigned from BOTH telephone and political jurisdiction
sides.)

About 25 years ago, the same thing happened with Aruba, in that they
withdrew from the Netherlands Antilles. Aruba also got their own ITu
assigned telephone country code +297, breaking off from the Netherland
Antilles' +599 country code.

In the meantime, as the complete 10/10/10 breakup of the Netherlands
Antilles was approaching, (Dutch) Sint Maarten had applied to become
a NANP-member country. In October 2009, NANPA announced the assignment
of +1-721 as the future area code for Sint Maarten. Permissive dialing
of either/both legacy +599-(5xx-xxxx) as well as the new/NANP method
+1-721-(5xx-xxxx) for calls to Sint Maarten was to begin on 30-May-2010.
Mandatory use of NANP +1-721-(5xx-xxxx) was to begin on 30-November-2010,
with the legacy use of +599-(5xx-xxxx) to cease.
NANPA also issued a Planning Letter regarding this. The test-number
was not yet known at the time of the first NANPA-PL, to be determined
at a later date. The Planning Letter also was lacking (and even
erroneous) on other information -- it seemed to indicate that there is
local "dialing" between Dutch Sint Maarten and French Saint-Martin,
which is NOT true. And the original PL didn't include all of the
+599-5xx / +1-721-5xx office codes for Dutch Sint Maarten -- the
wireless and the landline CLEC office codes were omitted in that list.
And there were other misc. inconsistencies/errors/omissions as well.

In early March 2010, after no further information regarding the
announcement of a test-number or a more detailed/corrected Planning
Letter, NANPA did issue a second PL re Sint Maarten, indicating that
the permissive date of 30-May-2010 and mandatory date of 30-November-2010
were canceled, and that new implementation dates would be announced at
a later date, when new plans were finalized.

That's about where things have stood for now.

In October 2010, the daily newspaper for Sint Maarten, the Daily
Herald, had an article on Sint Maarten and the NANP, and it stated
that Sint Maarten does still intend on joining the NANP, but that
there are still further political and technical issues that still
needed to be addressed and resolved before any new firm dates could be
announced. This article is still available online at:
http://www.thedailyherald.com/islands/1-islands-news/9771-country-code-721-being\
-worked-out.html
"Country code 721 being worked out", dated Saturday 31-October-2010.

In December 2010, the NANC (North American Numbering Council) had one
of their quarterly meetings. The NANC is a joint FCC and Industry
organization which has meetings to resolve any numbering issues.
NeuStar-NANPA is one of the major bodies in the NANC.

In the December 2010 "NANPA Report to the NANC",
http://www.nanc-chair.org/content/download/2944/34539/version/1/file/Dec10_NANPA\
_Report.doc
there is the following announcement:

"St. Maarten Update ā€“ NANPA received notice that St. Maarten achieved
autonomous country status effective October 10, 2010.Ā  As such, they
are moving forward with the implementation of the 721 NPA code.
Specifically, the plan is to implement permissive dialing of the 721
NPA on September 30, 2011, with mandatory dialing on March 31, 2012.
NANPA will publish a Planning Letter with further details in January
2011."

Today, Wednesday 05-January-2010, NeuStar-NANPA issued a new Planning
Letter regarding +1-721 Sint Maarten, PL #418, which can be downloaded
from NANPA's website at: http://www.nanpa.com/pdf/PL_418.pdf
The new/revised implementation dates are mentioned, and are the same
ones as mentioned in the NANPA/NANC document from the December 2010
NANC meeting. The PL also mentions that 31-March-2013, a year AFTER
mandatory dialing, is the date when carriers can begin removing any
mandatory dialing recorded announcements for calls still dialed as
+599 for legacy 5xx-xxxx Sint Maarten numbers.

There are still errors and omissions in the current/revised PL-418.
It still mentions that "local international calls" to French Saint-
Martin are dialable as "seven-digits". That can't be true, since there
are no "local" calls between the French and Dutch sides, although the
rates/charges are not really expensive for such a distance. Calls must
be dialed as 00+, with apparently (hopefully) NANP dialing procedures
(011+) introduced for calling to the French Saint-Marin side with
the official integration of Dutch Sint Maarten in late 2011/early 2012.

MAYBE... this reference to "local international calls" to the French
side refers to French-side businesses which have requested and been
assigned FX lines with Dutch-side-based +599-5xx-xxxx (to become
+1-721-5xx-xxxx) numbers, which would be dialed locally from the Dutch
side as 5xx-xxxx ????

Also, while MOST of the wireless providers' c.o.codes are now listed
in this new Planning Letter, there are still a few missing.

The incumbent landline provider is "Telem", and most of their office
codes (54x range) are listed. There MIGHT be an additional code for
Telem, in the 52x range which is NOT shown.

If Dutch Sint Maarten does indeed have landline CLEC providers, which
I think they do, their office codes are NOT shown in the new NANPA PL.

TelCell is the largest wireless provider, and is associated with the
landline incumbent telco Telem. There is currently a +599-555 code for
TelCell! If that isn't changed to something else when +599-5xx Sint
Maarten migrates to +1-721-(5xx), then there is going to be a conflict
with US/Canadian service providers who treat all NPA+555 as Directory
Assistance/Information! Calls intended for TelCell phones on 555-xxxx
might either be blocked, or be routed to Telem incumbent Directory,
or might be routed to "AT&T, What Island Please?" Caribbean directory
"intercept". Even though all of the NANP-Caribbean has been broken
into their own distinct NPA codes during the 1995-99 time-frame (and
some have since been overlaid as well), AT&T (and other carriers) have
been known to STILL route Caribbean NPA+555-1212 (except for calls to
the two US Caribbean locations -- 787/939 Puerto Rico and 340 for the
US Virgin Islands) to an AT&T OSPS operator who's pre-recorded
auto-voice answers: "AT&T, What Island, Please?". This is supposed to
be a fraud preventative measure. The AT&T operator will connect the
call to that Caribbean inward directory operator and MONITOR the
connection just in case the Caribbean inward directory asks the
US/Canadian calling customer if they would like to be connected to
that desired number. And thus a "directory call" at a fixed rate might
be used for a longer conversation to a (non-US) NANP-Caribbean point!
The AT&T operator would disconnect the call to the directory operator
and instruct the caller to re-dial to the desired number.

There's no mention in the current NANPA PL for Sint Maarten specifically
on whether or not 011+/01+ will be used for Sint Maarten to non-NANP
points after they officially become part of the NANP. Currently, 00+
is used to place calls to points outside of +599.

There's no mention on whether or not N11 codes for services or '0' for
the local (Telem) operator will be used. Presently, Sint Maarten and
other +599 islands (former Netherlands Antilles) use their own locally
assigned three-digit 91X and four-digit 92XX codes for special
services and the operator. And these are NOT referenced at all in the
NANPA PL. Many NANP-Caribbean as well as non-NANP countries have been
known to use 91X service codes. And since it in the 91X range, 911 is
used for Fire/Police Emergencies (but 912 is for Ambulance services)
in Dutch Sint Maarten.

There are probably more things that SHOULD be addressed in the NANPA
Planning Letter, but aren't right now. Hopefully, these will be in a
future PL, especially the test-number, and correcting any errors and
other omissions. (There's nothing mentioned about "equal access"
for toll calls, whether currently or in their NANP migration, nor what
codes are dialed for "vertical services". Are they going to use
101-XXXX codes? 11(X)XX / *(X)XX codes when they join the NANP?)

Also, the ITU's "National Numbering Plans" webpage,
http://www.itu.int/oth/T0202.aspx?parent=T0202
has recently created line-entry links for the former member islands
of the Netherlands Antilles. The original line-entry link for the
Netherlands Antilles itself is still on the page, with a link to a
page of downloadable numbering-plan documents for the Netherlands
Antilles, dated Nov.2009. (Nothing is mentioned about Sint Maarten's
pending change from +599 to the NANP as +1-721 in that document
though).

The new line-entry links at the ITU NNP webpage are:

- Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba (+599)
http://www.itu.int/oth/default.aspx?lang=en&parent=T02020000F8

- Curacao (+599)
http://www.itu.int/oth/default.aspx?lang=en&parent=T02020000F5

- Sint Maarten (Dutch part) (+599)
http://www.itu.int/oth/default.aspx?lang=en&parent=T02020000F7


When clicking on the links for these three specific entries, all one
current gets to is a page that states:

------------------------------------------------------
Available languages and formats:

No Document currently available
------------------------------------------------------

The available languages and formats refers to MOST countires'
numbering documents from the ITU, which could be doc and/or pdf files,
in English and also usually also available in French and Spanish.
Sometimes the link points to the URL for the numbering plan
administrator for that jurisdiction (the US link points to NANPA's
website, Canada's link points to the CNA's website, the UK's link
points to Ofcom's website, etc), or it could point to a downloadable
.xls spreadsheet of numbering plan information for that country.

As for the future numbering of Curacao, Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and
Saba, that is still unclear. I assume that Curacao (where the capital
city for the old Netherlands Antilles was located), will retain +599.
Bonaire, Sint Eustatius, and Saba, could POSSIBLY become city-codes
within +33 Holland! That's only a guess, but it is a possibility.
OR... they some or all might want to become a part of the NANP as
well, but they would still need to APPLY for admission, on their own,
and probably can't "just simply piggyback" on Sint Maarten's (pending)
NANP-status.

More details as they become available.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Here is the latest info on the pending merger of CenturyLink and
Qwest. CenturyLink itself is a recent merger of CenturyTel and Embarq.
Embarq was the 2006 spinoff of Sprint's ILEC operations which was
mostly legacy United Tel and Centel.

The pending CenturyLink/Qwest merger was announced on 22-April-2010.
On that same date, there was a joint filing with the Securities and
Exchange commission, but I don't have an "approval" date. I don't know
if the SEC actually has to "approve" of this merger.

On 15-July-2010, the FTC/DOJ closed the waiting period of the
Hart-Scott-Rodino Act, which also has something to do with the IRS.

On 24-August-2010, the majority of shareholders of both companies each
approved of the pending merger.

And here chronologically is the state-by-state (including required
approval of the Washington DC regulatory agency) approval. Not all
states where Qwest and/or CenturyLink operates in are required to
approve of the pending merger though. Some states don't seem to have
it under their legislative jurisdiction to require approval of such
mergers, sell-offs, transactions, etc. Each state regulatory agency
is different!

14-June-2010      California PUC
15-June-2010      Hawaii PUC
29-June-2010      Ohio PUC
06-July-2010      Nevada PUC
07-July-2010      Maryland PSC
16-July-2010      Regulatory Commission of Alaska
28-July-2010      Georgia PSC
03-August-2010    West Virginia PSC
24-August-2010    New York State PSC
30-August-2010    District of Columbia PSC
14-September-2010 Mississippi PSC
17-September-2010 Louisiana PSC
24-September-2010 Virginia State (Commonwealth?) Corporation Commission
14-October-2010   Pennsylvania PUC
03-November-2010  Iowa Utilities Board
14-December-2010  Montana PSC
15-December-2010  Colorado PUC
16-December-2010  New Jersey Board of Public Utilities
04-January-2011   Nebraska PSC
05-January-2011   Utah PSC

The following four states still need to approve. In each of them, and
all are states where Qwest is the legacy Regional Bell Company (which
was known as US-West from 1984 divestiture until 2000 when US-West and
LCI/Qwest merged), the commission STAFF has approved recommendation of
the pending merger, but the board itself still needs to vote for
official approval:

Arizona State Corporation Commission
Oregon PUC
Washington (State) Utilities and Transportation Commission
Minnesota PUC

It is possible that an announcement on each of these states' boards
themselves might come in January or February 2011.

And THEN, the FCC still needs to approve.

If all approvals are reached, the actual official merger could come
sometime during the 2nd Quarter of 2011.

I have heard nothing about any possible name change. It might happen
that the Qwest name will remain within its legacy "US-West" states for
a year or two (or even up to five years), as "Qwest, a CenturyLink
Company", and then the CenturyLink name/logo could eventually replace
Qwest? OR, the CenturyLink name/logo could replace Qwest within months
of the official effective date of the merger? Maybe a new "joint" name
could be chosen, such as "CenturyQwest"? But so far, nothing has been
announced from what I can tell, as to any possible name changes.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Two recent news articles:

One from Thursday 06-January-2011 from CBC News:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/saskatchewan/story/2011/01/06/sk-telephone-area-codes-s\
askatchewan-110106.html

Another from Friday 07-January-2011 from CKOM-650am News/Talk Radio
in Regina SK:
http://www.newstalk650.com/story/20110107/45383

regarding a second area code for Saskatchewan, maybe as early as 2014.

Glenn Pilley of the CNA (Canadian Numbering Administration) is quoted
in both articles. He states the two options, split and overlay.

The CNA will begin their 306/SK area code relief planning process
starting in February 2011. At this time, there is nothing at the
CNA website, not even as a "placeholder" regarding documentation for
area code relief planning for SK 306. But when the link is established
it will likely be:
http://www.cnac.ca/npa_codes/relief/306/relief_306.htm
which follows the structure for other Canadian area codes' relief
planning webpage URLs. Presently, this URL goes to a "File Not Found"
(404) page.

Canada hasn't had an area code split since Alberta's single area code
since October 1947, split in 1999, with 403 being retained by the
southern 1/3d of the Province (includes Calgary AB), and the central
and northern 2/3ds of the Province splitting-and-changing to 780
(includes the Province capital of Edmonton in the central third).
Everything in Canada since that 1999 Alberta area code split has been
OVERLAYS -- three overlays in 2001, two overlays in 2006, two overlays
in 2008 (as well as an overlay expansion), and so forth. In 2008, the
ENTIRE Province of Alberta, both 403 and 780, was overlaid with the
new 587 area code. The overlay expansion in 2008 was for the entire
Province of British Columbia -- in 1996, 604 split, with the Vancouver BC
expanded metro area keeping 604, and the rest of the Province splitting
and changing to the new 250 area code -- in 2001, 778 overlaid the
immediate Vancouver BC metro area -- and in 2008, 778 expanded to
overlay the rest of 604 AND also ALL of 250 for the all of the rest of
the Province.

Next year, 2012, the ENTIRE Province of Manitoba 204 will be overlaid
with 431.

I expect that ALL of the Province of Saskatchewan 306 will be overlaid.
The guessed-at code for the overlay is 474, but that hasn't yet been
officially announced, though.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Back in the "good old days" (read 1970's), it was possible to establish a
call-forwarding chain of any length wherever Western Electric ESS-1 switches
were available.  Such an arrangement among a group of friends occasionally
proved valuable in getting around messsage unit charges in areas such as Los
Angeles, where A might be local to B, and B to C, but not A to C.

These chains were subject to two conditions: 1) Although any number of intra- or
inter-office links could be set up, an incoming call would always ring the far
end of an intraoffice link, progressing no further, and 2) A feature was
introduced whereby upon accessing a phone number which was already processing an
incoming transfer, that switch would return a busy signal.  This prevented a
closed circular chain from tying up all available trunks.

As a current resident of my original home town, NYC, I've always been surprised
that, allowing for the usual rival state garbage, there are no local calling
links across the Hudson River from Manhattan and Bronx to New Jersey, or across
the Arthur Kill from Staten Island to New Jersey.  As such, I've occasionally
tried to use this website's data to find a chain of local calls from NY to NJ,
and I finally succeeded.  This of course assumes that all these offices are
ESS-1 or, more likely, digital, and that the generic programming of the digital
switches is, in this regard, the same as in 1970's ESS-1 switches.

Beginning with Tottenville, at the far southwest end of Staten Island:
New York City Zone 15 to New York City Zone 05, to Westchester Zone 1, to
Westchester Zone 7, to Ossining, to Cold Spring, to Beacon, across the Hudson
River to Newburgh, to Maybrook, to Montgomery, to Monroe, to Tuxedo, to Suffern,
across the state line to Cragmere NJ, to Ridgewood, to Hackensack, to Union
City, to Jersey City, to Newark, to Elizabeth, to Rahway, and finally to Perth
Amboy, which is directly across the Arthur Kill from NYC Zone 15.

Enjoy!

Bob

Pennsylvania 814/582 Forthcoming Area Code Relief

The 814 area code in Pennsylvania covers the northwestern corner of
Pennsylvania including the Erie PA Metro area (legacy VeriZon/GTE),
and makes a "quarter turn" around the outside of the southwestern
corner of Pennsylvania (the Pittsburgh PA Metro area which is 412 and
724, and overlaid with 878 since 2001 even though there aren't yet any
POTS 878-NXX codes assigned), meeting the PA/MD state-line east of the
southwest corner/Pittsburgh metro area.

814 has covered the same geographic area since the US/Canada area code
format was finalized in October 1947 - it has never been split before.
There _MIGHT_ have been "slight" boundary changes in years past, but
I'm not aware of, i.e, it's always "possible" that a single ratecenter
(or maybe two or three) have changed to/from 814 from/to an adjacent
area code, but for the most part the boundaries of 814 are basically
the same as they were since 1947.

The eastern/southern parts of 814 (Altoona PA and State College PA)
are VeriZon/Bell-of-Pennsylvania, and the northwestern parts (Erie PA)
are mostly VeriZon/GTE, with some VeriZon/Bell-of-Pennsylvania. But
both sides also contain other independent telcos, including:

- Frontier
- CenturyLink-old-Embarq/Sprint/United
- Windstream-old-Alltel/Mid-Continent Tel
- other one-time GTE and GTE-once-Contel areas which are all now part
of VeriZon (Pennsylvania is one state where VeriZon has NOT sold-off
any legacy GTE and Contel, retaining it all under the VeriZon name)
- Armstrong Tel
- etc.

In 2009, NeuStar-NANPA, on behalf of the telco industry, submitted a
petition to the PA-PUC for an additional area code for "relief" of
the 814 area code region. Relief planning for 814 had actually begun
by NANPA and the telco industry going back to 2002. The industry's
first-choice was for an overlay.

HOWEVER, on Thursday 16-December-2010, the PA-PUC announced that they
had decided 5-0 (unanimously) for a SPLIT of 814, where the Erie PA
(northwestern side) would CHANGE-and-SPLIT to the "new" (TBD) area
code, while the eastern/southern parts of 814 (State College PA and
Altoona PA) would retain the 814 area code. A Press Release was issued
by the PA=PUC:
"PUC Approves Splitting 814 Area Code to Avoid Running Out of Phone Numbers"
http://www.puc.state.pa.us/General/press_releases/Press_Releases.aspx?ShowPR=267\
5

On Tuesday 21-December-2010, the PA-PUC announced the NANPA-assigned
new area code as 582 (which for some years has been the "guessed-at"
code). A Press Release was issued by the PUC:
"582 Named as New Area Code for Portions of 814 Changing in 2012"
http://www.puc.state.pa.us/General/press_releases/Press_Releases.aspx?ShowUtil=T\
P

The PUC would like to see 582 split from 814 permissive on 01-Feb-2012
(a little over a year from now), with a six-month permissive dialing
period until mandatory dialing of 582 would kick in for calls to the
northern and western parts (Erie PA/etc) of the previously existing
814 area code region. (Some news/media/press reports mentioned that
the 582 code might become mandatory a year later on 01-Feb-2013).

Almost immediately, the business/government/etc. customers in the
Erie PA metro area (and residential customers too) began to raise an
uproar, stating that since the Erie PA area is more populated than the
rest of the existing 814 region, that "they" (Erie PA and the northern
and western regions of existing 814) should retain the 814 area code.
However, MOST of those complaining are NOT seeking to "flip" the sides
of the split (i.e., where Erie would retain 814, with the "other" side
of Altoona and State College splitting-off-and-changing to the new 582
area code). Instead, those businesses/etc. in the Erie/etc. area who
are upset by the PA=PUC's December 2010 split decision, would rather
that the PA-PUC put in an OVERLAY of 582 over (all of) 814, even
though this does mean mandatory ten-digit dialing throughout the
entire 814/582 region.

The PA-PUC tried to justify their split decision by stating that the
public hearings in early 2010 held in the Erie PA area were sparsely
attended. However, the originally scheduled hearings in Erie were to
have been in February 2010, and had to be postponed to April 2010 due
to extreme weather conditions in February.

During the second half of December 2010, several grass-roots petitions
to the PA-PUC were drafted by the Erie business and government
"community", most of them to have the PUC change the pending split to
an OVERLAY, although a few requested that the pending split be
"flipped around".

In early January 2011, various news/press/media stories on radio/TV/
newspaper websites indicated that the PA-PUC had received at least 10
petitions requesting that the pending split be changed (in some way).
VeriZon and AT&T are both leading an industry effort (probably with
support from the various above mentioned independent landline telcos,
larger CLECs, and probably also Sprint and T-Mobile) to have the
pending split changed to an OVERLAY.

Yesterday, Thursday 13-January-2011, the PA-PUC acknowledged that
there have been approximately 40 petitions requesting a change in the
pending split, and the PUC is going to re-consider, after further
public hearings and "technical conferences". A PUC Press Release has
been issued: "PUC Agrees to Further Review Decision in 814 Area Code
Relief Case, Plans Additional Public Hearings, Technical Conferences"
http://www.puc.state.pa.us/General/press_releases/Press_Releases.aspx?ShowPR=269\
6

Also see another PUC document issued for more info:
http://www.puc.state.pa.us/pcdocs/1118403.pdf

Note that the other three original (1947) area codes have been split
since 1994/95 and through 1998:

- 215 had 610 split off in 1994/95.
- 412 had 724 split off in 1998. (it WAS to have been a 1997 overlay)
- 717 had 570 split off in 1998/99.

Since then, ALL area code relief in Pennsylvania has been overlay:

- 215 overlaid with 267, and 610 overlaid with 484, both in 1999.
- Both 215/267 and 610/484 were to have been overlaid again in early
2001, 215/267 with 445 and 610/484 with 835, but these further
overlays were postponed until further notice.
- 412 and 724 were overlaid with 878 in Summer 2001, but so far, even
though ten-digit dialing in mandatory throughout 412 and 724, there
are still no 878-NXX "POTS" c.o.codes yet (but it's POSSIBLE that the
first 878-NXX code might be assigned sometime in 2011 or 2012).
- and this past Summer 2010, the PA-PUC approved a 570/272 overlay,
but the implementation date is still TBD.
- 717 is also undergoing relief planning, and it is LIKELY that it
will be overlaid, but the PA-PUC hasn't approved anything yet. The
"guessed at" relief code is 223.

Also, most of the states which border Pennsylvania have overlays, and
with one exception (New York State), those bordering "overlay states"
have an actual overlay bordering Pennsylvania:

- Ohio has overlays, and 330/234 borders Pennsylvania.
- ALL of West Virginia is 304 overlaid with 681, borders Pennsylvania.
- BOTH Maryland overlay regions:
  301/240/(future 227) and 410/443/(future 667) border Pennsylvania.
- New Jersey has overlays, and 973/872 borders Pennsylvania.

New York State borders Pennsylvania, but its only current overlay
region, for New York City -- 212/646, 718/347/929, /917 -- is NOT
adjacent to Pennsylvania.

Delaware also borders Pennsylvania, but it is still just a single area
code, 302. However, it is likely that whenever DE/302 does need relief
it will be an overlay.

Other recent new area code overlays were originally ordered as splits
by their respective state regulatory bodies, even though the telco
industry initially requested an overlay. Either the telco industry or
the general public eventually convinced the regulatory body to change
to the telco industry's originally preferred overlay:

West Virginia 304/681 was ordered as a split in early 1998, but after
grass-roots efforts, the WV-PSC then changed it to an overlay, which
took effect in 2009.

Utah (Salt Lake City Metro) 801/385 was ordered as a split in 2000,
to become effective in 2000/01, postponed several times with new
announced implementation dates, postponed "indefinitely" in 2004.
In 2007, the telco industry requested that the UT-PSC change it to an
overlay, which was approved, effective in 2009.

California also had two overlays recently, but both were originally
ordered by the CA-PUC as splits.

In 1999, the CA-PUC ordered a split of 818 in the area north of the
Hollywood Hills in Los Angeles, including the San Fernando Valley
area. The southwestern part of 818 would have split-and-changed to the
new 747 area code, with 818 retained by everything else. No formal
implementation dates were announced at the time in 1999. By 2008, the
telco industry re-petitioned the CA-PUC, to approve of firm/official
implementation dates, and also to change the pending split to an
overlay. The overlay took effect in 2009.

Also in 1999, the CA-PUC ordered a split of 760 in eastern/southern
California, where the immediate suburbs of San Diego Metro would split
off and change to the new 442 area code during 2000, and 760 would be
retained by the remainder such as Palm Springs CA (legacy GTE/CW&T)
and Victorville CA (legacy Contel). Most of the area retaining 760
would have been VeriZon (both GTE and GTE-once-Contel) with some
Pacific*Bell and some other independent telcos, while the 442 area
code would have been all Pacific*Bell for landline service. This split
was put on hold before being implemented in 2000. In 2007, the telco
industry re-petitioned the CA-PUC to approve an OVERLAY of 760 with
442, but in Spring 2008, the PUC ordered a split (roughly along the
same boundary as the previously ordered 2000 split), to be effective
in Fall 2008 permissive, Spring 2009 mandatory. Businesses and
local/state/federal government agencies (including the US Navy) in
the San Diego metro area, as well as individuals residential customers
started a grass-roots petition effort to have the split changed to an
overlay, which was eventually approved by the PUC in October 2008.
The overlay took effect a year later in October 2009.

The only other pending split has been the Kentucky 270/364 split,
approved initially by the KY-PSC in late Spring 2007. However, the
implementation dates were subsequently delayed numerous times by the
KY-PSC every time NANPA came out with new/revised area code "exhaust"
projections. Eventually, the KY-PSC ordered the split to be on hold
"indefinitely", but more recently the PSC ordered the split completely
canceled. When 270 does eventually need relief as determined by a
future NANPA exhaust projection, the telco industry is to start 270
area code relief planning over again, from "scratch", which SEEMS to
indicate that the KY-PSC MIGHT at that time be more "overlay friendly".

The last actual NPA split in Canada was the Alberta 403/780 split in
early 1999, where 403 was retained by the southern "third" of the
Province (Calgary/etc), and 780 was the new "split" code for the
central "third" (Edmonton/etc., Edmonton being the Province Capital)
and northern "third". In 2008, the entire Province of Alberta, both
403 and 780, was overlaid with the new 587 area code.

The last actual NPA split in the US was the New Mexico split in 2007/08.
505 was retained by the northwestern and central (Albuquerque/etc)
parts of the state, with 575 splitting off for the rest of the state.
The NM-PRC thought that the public would have preferred a split, but
after the split was in progress during permissive, and since it has
gone "mandatory", there has been a "buyers' remorse" -- the NM-PRC
and the NM business/etc. community now realizes that the overlay would
have been much better.

EVERYTHING ELSE in recent years has been OVERLAYS in both the US and
Canada. And Puerto Rico (which is a US possession) implemented the
787/939 overlay in 2001. The Dominican Republic in the (non-US)
NANP-Caribbean has implemented TWO overlays -- 809/829 in 2005, and
then 809/829/849 in 2009.

Jamaica is the next (non-US) NANP-Caribbean location which might soon
need relief in the next couple of years. 876 is filling up, and a new
code has been reserved. The "guess" is for 658. There has been NO
decision yet by the Jamaican OUR (Office of Utility Regulation) as to
whether it will be an 876/658 split or overlay, but I tend to think
that the Jamaican OUR will likely approve an overlay.

With all of this recent overlay activity, especially splits which were
originally planned for which were changed to overlays, HOPEFULLY the
PA-PUC will reconsider the pending 814/582 split and instead order
a full services 814/582 overlay, although there might even be further
number/code conservation measures put into effect first.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

----- Original Message ----
> From: Mark J. Cuccia <markjcuccia@...>
> Pennsylvania 814/582 Forthcoming Area Code Relief
>...
> The  industry's first-choice was for an overlay.
> HOWEVER, on Thursday  16-December-2010, the PA-PUC announced that they
> had decided 5-0  (unanimously) for a SPLIT of 814, where the Erie PA
> (northwestern side) would  CHANGE...


I certainly agree, Mark, that splitting area codes and forcing metropolitan
areas (or anyone) to change their phone numbers makes absolutely no sense
anymore. At this point, if more phone numbers are really needed someplace, then
overlay codes should be used. There's not many places left where 7-digit dialing
is still possible anyway, is there? New overlaid area codes are no hassle for
people to adopt, but changing an existing area code to a new number costs a lot
of money, especially for businesses.

So, my question to you, Mark, (and the group, of course) is: "what were they
thinking?". Their supposed explanation about how many people attended meetings
makes no sense. Seriously, what would a rationale be for proposing an area code
split instead of an overlay?

I know it's probably sacrilegious to say it in these groups, but telephones are
passe. I think the need for new numbers has been way over-anticipated by the
Phone Companies. People just don't use the phone like they did before, even just
a few years ago. Pagers, FAX machines and dial-up modems are mostly obsolete.
Fewer and fewer people even have land-line phone numbers anymore (I don't). When
was the last time anyone had a telephone conversation (of any type) with someone
younger than 25?

Elmer

It looks as though area code 855 has finally been started. IIRC, it was
originally intended to start at the same time as 866.  In any case, I saw a
commercial last night advertising such a number for the first time.

Bob

On Tue, 1/18/11, sklarbob <rsklar at doitt.nyc.gov> wrote:

> It looks as though area code 855 has finally been started. IIRC, it
> was originally intended to start at the same time as 866.  In any
> case, I saw a commercial last night advertising such a number for
> the first time.
>
> Bob


Toll-Free special area codes 866 and 855 were originally both supposed
to start having "real" phone numbers in Spring 2000. I think that 855
was to have been opened up with "real" numbers a few weeks to a month
after 866 back in Spring 2000, not exactly on the very same date.
Note that the NETWORK was supposed to start having 855 and 866 opened
up for testing purposes (with pre-defined 855-250-xxxx test-numbers
assigned to various service providers) earlier than the (potential)
start-date for "real" phone numbers.

However, before the actual Spring 2000 (April?) dates for 866 and then
855, the FCC officially postponed implementation for "real" toll-free
test-numbers under each toll-free code. New dates were announced, I
think in Summer 2000 (July?), but even those dates were not adhered to
with the FCC again postponing implementation of "real" numbers. The
new date announced was for Fall 2000 (November?) for real numbers in
866, but 855 was still postponed "until further notice".

866 did begin to have "real" phone numbers assigned/implemented during
November 2000, but 855 remained "postponed until further notice" for
almost ten years.

Last year, Spring 2010, the telecom industry support groups that
manage toll-free number assignments notified the FCC that 855 would
need to be implemented for assignment and activation of "real" numbers
by the Fall. The FCC announced Friday 01-October-2010 as the date when
(real) 855 toll-free numbers could first be assigned by toll-free
service providers to actual customers requesting toll-free services.
And then a few months later, the FCC changed the date (I forget the
actual reasons) to Saturday 02-October-2010, a day later than the date
earlier announced.

888 numbers began in Spring 1996.
877 numbers began two years later in Spring 1998.
866 numbers began a little more than two years later in Fall 2000.
855 numbers began ten years later in Fall 2010.

Hopefully, telco industry guidelines and regulatory orders will
continue to work to allow market-based use/growth of toll-free numbers
and services, while conserving 855 (and previous codes) to prevent
unnecessary WASTE of these numbering resources -- that 844 will not be
opened up prematurely. If there was a ten year period between the
opening of 866 and the opening of 855, for assignment/activation of
"real" numbers, then 844 might not be needed until the 2015-20 period.

It was about 30 years from the very first origins of 800 in the
1966/67 period, until 888 was opened up in Spring 1996!

NOW... if the industry could justify their need for usage of 500, 533,
544, etc! The original intent for 500 (and subsequent 5YY) was for
"personal follow-me" numbers/services. AT&T and MCI were the biggest
suppliers of such numbers in the mid/late 1990s, however there were
some sleaze entities who were using 500 for "900-like" PAY-per-call.
Eventually, probably because cellular became very popular, MCI and
then AT&T discontinued their original 500 "follow-me" personal number
services, leaving mostly a handful of small "sleaze" entities with 500
being improperly used for "900-like PAY" numbers. Later on, sometime
after 2000, VeriZon-Wireless began using 500 numbers for something to
do with routing of "OnStar" calls. I don't know how it was being
implemented technically, but VZ-Wireless did begin to use up a number
of 500-NXX codes. And then cingular (now at&t-mobility) began to use
up large blocks of 500-NXX codes for similar serivces. 533 was opened
up in Fall 2009 with at&t/cingular using MOST of the 533-NXX codes,
and then just recently, Dec.2010, 544 was opened up, so far
at&t/cingular is the sole entity with 544-NXX codes assigned. But has
anyone seen any "real" 500, 533, or 544 numbers in recent yesrs!?

mjc

Mark,

Speaking of 800, I recall that when 800 was first started, the NNX code
corresponded to a particular toll center, with NN2 codes reserved for intrastate
use.  I even remember, if not mistaken, that a single NN2 code could be used in
several states (I recall 492 numbers in both Maryland and Nevada), although I
never knew whether or not a single number could be repeated in different states.

In any case, when was the current system adopted, in which it appears to be
impossible to know the location of a WATS number by its prefix?

Bob

The Local Calling Guide shows the ZUM3 local toll rate for calls either
direction between Placentia and Elsinore, CA.  I think this may be in error.  If
you e-mail me at rsklar@... I will gladly send you maps I have created
on Arc 9.3 in the style of the old telephone directory message-unit maps.  These
should show that the ZUM3 rate is unlikely.

Thanks,

Bob

On Tue, 1/18/11, sklarbob <rsklar at doitt.nyc.gov> wrote:

> Speaking of 800, I recall that when 800 was first started, the NNX
> code corresponded to a particular toll center, with NN2 codes
> reserved for intrastate use.  I even remember, if not mistaken,
> that a single NN2 code could be used in several states (I recall
> 492 numbers in both Maryland and Nevada), although I never knew
> whether or not a single number could be repeated in different states.

The pool of sixty-four possible NN2 codes were indeed re-use-able from
state-to-state, which eventually included Alaska and Hawaii for their
intra-state 800 toll-free service (AK and HI didn't begin 800 until
the later 1970s), as well as Puerto Rico for intra-PR "only" toll-free
service when they introduced 800 in the later 1970s as well. SOME of
the Canadian provinces as well also had 800-NN2 codes for intra-
province-only toll-free 800, although Canadian toll-free service was
structured a bit differently than that in the US.

I think that the provinces which used to have intra-province "only"
800-NN2 codes were those where intra-province telecom was regulated by
a province-government based agency similar to a state PUC or PSC here
in the US. However, in British Columbia, GTE-held BC-Tel was regulated
by the Federal CRTC. In Quebec and Ontario, Bell Canada was also
regulated by the Federal CRTC.

In the US, inter-state "only" 800 service had successive bands which
the customer could purchase. In Canada, for the most part, one bought
toll-free service on a single number that could be as small as the
"base" province only (except for those provinces which had province
only 800-NN2 service) or it could be expanded to multi-province or
even "Canada-wide" 800.

Anyhow, while I don't know of any specific examples, I have heard that
the same 800-NN2-xxxx number "could" be assigned to completely
different customers in different (hopefully non-adjacent) states, each
for intra-state-ONLY toll-free service. Each individual Bell telco's
state-based in-WATS service department handled intra-state assignments
independently of each other. I assume that the assignments of actual
800-NN2 "codes" themselves was co-ordinated with AT&T-LL in NJ or
Kansas City MO -- hopefully no two adjacent states would have the same
exact 800-NN2 codes -- but the line-numbers themselves could indeed
be "inadvertently" assigned to different multiple customers in such
different states for intra-state "only" service.

The 800-NNX codes for inter-state "only" service were actually
associated with an entire area code region in the US or Canada.

Initially, in the 1966/67 period, only the 48 states and DC had one
800-NNX code assigned to each area code region. Three area code
regions actually had TWO 800-NNX inter-state codes assigned from the
beginning:

- 212 NY had both 800-221 and 800-223

- 312 IL (Chicago Metro) had both 800-621 (Chicago "City", what would
now be 312/773/872) and 800-323 (suburbs of Chicago, what would now be
708/future-464, 630/331, 847/224)

- 213 CA had both 800-421 and 800-423

Quebec and Ontario began having 800 numbers circa 1969/70. The
customer with the toll-free number could purchase a Canada-wide band
origination as early as 1969/70, but it would still be a few years
before businesses in OTHER provinces could purchase 800 service for
intra-province, or regional, or Canada-wide origination.

416 Toronto ON/etc. initially had two codes, 800-261 and 800-263.
514 Montreal PQ/etc. initially had two codes, 800-361 and 800-363.
Every other Canadian area code had ONE 800-NNX (multi-province to
Canada-wide service) code assigned with the origins of Canadian 800.

Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands began to
implement 800 services in the later 1970s, for both intra-state or
intra-PR "only" service (the US Virgin Islands probably never had any
intra-VI "only" 800, since there is no toll w/in the US VI, the entire
territory's three islands are all local to each other), as well as
800 numbers based on/in AK, HI, PR, USVI for callers on the mainland
to dial to, as well as being able to dial to long-established 800
numbers on the mainland.

At the time, late 1970s, individual 800-NNX inter-state "only" codes
were also assigned to AK (800-544), HI (800-367), PR (800-468), and
the US VI (800-524) for businesses on these non-CONUS points to have
so that customers on the mainland could dial to these non-CONUS points.

Also during the (later) 1970s, many US points with a lot of toll-free
customers had additional 800-NNX interstate codes assigned, sort of
like "area code exhaust". In MOST cases, these were actually "overlays"!
A brand new 800-NNX interstate "only" code was assigned for NEW 800
customers, while existing 800 customers retained their old 800-NNX
code. This also applied to 416 Toronto ON, where a third code was
assigned in the late 1970s: 800-268. (In the early 1980s, the 800-261
code was changed to 800-387, but the -xxxx line-numbers remained; I
don't know why Bell Canada changed 800-261-xxxx customers in Toronto
to 800-387-xxxx, but this did happen circa 1981).

There were two "splits" in the US...

Prior to 1972, the entire state of Nevada was 800-648. Sometime in
1972 or so, AT&T-LL changed the 800 customers homing on Centel's
Las Vegas NV toll center from 800-648-xxxx to 800-634-xxxx. Those
customers outside of Clark and Nye Counties, homing on AT&T/Nevada Bell's
Reno NV toll center retained their 800-648-xxxx numbers. I think that
the Vegas customers retained the same -xxxx line-number though.

In 1973, Virginia's "POTS" 703 area code which had been for the entire
state was split. It had 800-336 prior to the 703/804 split. With the
703/804 split, the 800 customers in southeastern VA who were now in
the new 804 area code had their 800-336-xxxx numbers changed to new
800-446-xxxx numbers, retaining the same -xxxx line-numbers. This was
the only CHANGE of an 800-NNX interstate code due to an area code
split. The next actual area code splits in the NANP (and both were in
the US) was in the 1982/83 period -- 714/619 in CA (Nov.1982), and
713/409 in TX (March 1983). By this time, 800 routing/numbering was
changed (see below), and now there was no need for a "new" 800-NNX
code due to an area code split.

> In any case, when was the current system adopted, in which it appears
> to be impossible to know the location of a WATS number by its prefix?
>
> Bob

AT&T-LL introduced a database-dipped system circa 1981/82. The entire
800+seven-digits of the number are checked into a database-network
which returns specific POTS numbers to route to, or else a routing
number/code (non-customer-dialable, though). Thus, the need for
800-NN2 intra-state "only" codes vs. 800-NNX interstate "only" codes,
as well as specific 800-NNX assignments to specific area code regions
is no longer needed. Assignments can be made out of ANY (already
assigned) 800-NNX/NN2 code for ANYWHERE in the US (and later Canada).

AT&T-LL and the BOCs, and Telecom-Canada and its member telcos did NOT
"break out" of the ranges of already-assigned/used 800-NNX codes (some
200 of them, as well as 800-555 for Directory and other telco functions
and 800-855 for the TDD/TTY Hearing Impaired Operator). A never before
assigned/used 800-NNX (or 800-NXX) code was still NOT used in the
post-1982 period, even though it "could" have in theory.

Thus, AT&T-LL and Telecom-Canada had GEOGRAPHIC portability of 800
numbers during the 1980s.

Also, AT&T and Telecom-Canada worked out "cross-border" dialing of
800-numbers, for those US and Canadian 800 customers who now wanted to
be able to receive calls from customers in both countries. This was
NOT provided prior to 1984.

AND... 1984 was also the year that the AT&T Bell System was broken up.
AT&T-LL and the legacy Bell and independent telcos in the US still
co-operated to provide 800 service with no major changes (other than
the enhancements of 1981/82).

But now, the MCIs and Sprints wanted to provide toll-free 800 as well.
The OCCs IXCs (Other Common Carriers; Inter-eXchange Carriers) wanted
the federal courts to order AT&T-LL to give-up their database network
to the BOCs or to Bellcore, so that 800 toll-free could be fully
competitive from the beginning. The courts said NO to that... but
rather the BOCs/etc. could ultimately install their OWN database
network, which would indicate the CARRIER to hand the 800-NXX-xxxx
call over to. The OCC/IXC/LD-carrier's database network would have all
of the other geographic routing information. (There is one exception,
if the BOC/LEC handled that 800 number intra-LATA, the LEC's database
would also include full geographic/routing info, NOT just the carrier,
which was itself anyway).

Until a two-tiered database network could be fully developed, the
previously un-used 800-NXX codes would now be assigned TEMPORARILY by
Bellcore, to requesting carriers (other than AT&T), including BOCs and
LECs who might want to provide intra-LATA "only" 800.

By the early 1990s, SS7 signaling and databases were already in effect
throughout most of the US (and Canada). 800-NXX assignments to specific
competing carriers was still in effect (but only temporarily), and it
was decided that on a specific Saturday in Spring 1992 (I don't
remember the exact date though), the new nationwide fully portable
(both geographic AND by carrier) system would be cut-in, and the
800-NXX-by-carrier assignments would "go away" in the US. However, a
few weeks or months before that Spring 1992 date, the FCC delayed it
one year until Spring 1993. I don't remember the exact "why's" though,
whether it was policy or technical or both.... but the US did
eventually go FULLY portable with Spring 1993. Geographic portability
had really been in effect for over ten years since the early 1980s,
but now CARRIER portability would be in effect.

Canada joined into the US carrier portability database system in
Spring 1994, so there is now a seamless US/Canada 800 database system.
800-NXX codes are no longer specific to carriers nor geography, with
a few (non-US) Caribbean exceptions (although even that is an anomaly).

And then the additional 8YY toll-free SACs were introduced starting in
1996, as outlined in my previous reply post.

Mark J. Cuccia
markjcuccia at yahoo dot com
Lafayette LA, formerly of New Orleans LA pre-Katrina

Hey Mark,

What about area code 899? What is that reserved for?

Elmer


>
>From: Mark J. Cuccia <markjcuccia@...>
>To: local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Tue, January 18, 2011 11:14:11 AM
>Subject: [local-calling-guide] Re: WATS area code 855
>
>

Elmer,

I believe all the N9X area codes are intended for use only when it comes time to
expand the total length of a NANPA phone number.  They are reserved to be used
as transition codes at that time.

Bob



Robert L. Sklar
GIS Specialist, Citywide GIS
New York City Department of
Information Technology & Telecommunications
59 Maiden Lane, 33rd floor
New York, NY 10038

1-212-232-1084
rsklar@...<mailto:rsklar@...>

[cid:image002.jpg@...]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Thanks. This error happened because of a formatting error in the (then)
SBC/ex-Pacific Bell tariff page (Elsinore was showing up as local under
Placentia instead of Rancho Viejo).

--- In local-calling-guide@yahoogroups.com, "sklarbob" <rsklar@...> wrote:
>
> The Local Calling Guide shows the ZUM3 local toll rate for calls either
direction between Placentia and Elsinore, CA.  I think this may be in error.  If
you e-mail me at rsklar@... I will gladly send you maps I have created on Arc
9.3 in the style of the old telephone directory message-unit maps.  These should
show that the ZUM3 rate is unlikely.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bob
>