********************************************************    
                         NOTICE
********************************************************

This document was converted from
WordPerfect to ASCII Text format.

Content from the original version of the document such as
headers, footers, footnotes, endnotes, graphics, and page numbers
will not show up in this text version.

All text attributes such as bold, italic, underlining, etc. from the
original document will not show up in this text version.

Features of the original document layout such as
columns, tables, line and letter spacing, pagination, and margins
will not be preserved in the text version.

If you need the complete document, download the
WordPerfect version or Adobe Acrobat version, if available.

*****************************************************************

                                                     DA 98-2463
                              December 1, 1998
                              
Ms. Helen M. Mickiewicz
California Public Utilities Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, California  94102-3298

                       Re:    Petition of California Public Utilities Commission and the People of the State of
               California for Granting Additional Authority to Conduct NXX Code Rationing;
               NSD File No. L-98-136

Dear Ms. Mickiewicz:

This is in response to your November 3, 1998, letter requesting additional authority from the
Commission to conduct monthly lotteries for NXX codes prior to adoption of an area code relief
plan or establishment of an area code relief date.  Your letter also requests authority to resolve
disputes among industry participants pertaining to the terms and conditions of NXX code
rationing.

Section 52.19(a)(2) of the Commission's rules delegates to state commissions the authority to
order NXX code rationing pending implementation of area code relief.  47 C.F.R.  52.19(a)(2). 
A state commission may exercise this power, however, only after "decid[ing] on a specific form
of area code relief (i.e. a split, overlay, or boundary realignment) and [] establish[ing] an
implementation date for that relief."

We understand that extenuating circumstances exist in California, which are unique in the United
States.  As of December 1998, California will have 23 area codes, more than any other state. 
Since January 1, 1997, the industry, the California Public Utilities Commission (California
Commission), and the North American Numbering Plan Administrator (NANPA) will have
implemented 10 area code relief plans.  Furthermore, the majority of California's area codes are
in jeopardy.  The Legislature in California has enacted statutes, to be effective January 1, 1999,
which contain detailed meeting and notice requirements designed to "afford affected customers
an opportunity to discuss the potential impact of the proposed area code relief options and
measures that may be taken to mitigate potential disruptions."  California Assembly Bill 2716,
adding Section 7931 to the California Public Utilities Code, at (e)(2).  The meeting requirements
and most of the notice requirements of the statutes must be complied with prior to industry
submission of an area code relief plan to the California Commission.  According to your letter,
by industry practice and by statute, an area code relief plan may be adopted only after receiving
this industry recommendation.

Recognizing the circumstances that exist in California at the present time, we temporarily grant
authority to the California Commission to continue to conserve NXX codes through the use of
lotteries, as has been its practice, prior to determining the form of area code relief and the
implementation date for such relief.  We are sensitive, however, to concerns that parties may
have regarding this limited, additional grant of authority.  Therefore, shortly after release of this
letter order, we will seek public comment on whether situations exist in California which warrant
continuing this grant of authority and the public interest implications thereof.  We will also seek
comment on the impact this grant of authority may have on the competitive marketplace for
telecommunications service in California, and whether this impact could be minimized through
the imposition of terms and conditions for continuing this grant of authority.

Accordingly, pursuant to  section 251(e)(1) of the Communications Act of 1934, the authority
granted in paragraph 57 of the Pennsylvania Order, and the authority delegated in sections 0.91
and 0.291 of the Commission's rules, we grant temporary authority to the California
Commission to continue to conduct its current central office code rationing measures prior to the
implementation of area code relief including the authority to determine all aspects of how
central office codes shall be assigned pursuant to that rationing until such date as the Bureau
concludes its examination of the California Commission's request.  

We thank you for your letter, and we look forward to continuing the dialogue initiated by the
California Commission relating to the rationing of central office codes.

                              Sincerely yours,


                              Yog R. Varma
                              Deputy Chief, Common Carrier Bureau