NANC Number Conservation Ad Hoc Charge (per 2/21

NANC)

• Should an IMG be commissioned?

• If yes, Scope of assignment

• Time & Budget

Ad Hoc Call Participants-March 12, 2001• Ed Gould, Penn Pfautz, Mark Lancaster - AT&T• Phil McClelland - Office of Consumer Advocate Pennsylvania• Barbara Meisenheimer - Missouri Office of Public Counsel• Dan Kearney - Michigan Public Service Commission• Trent Boaldin - OPASTCO• Jim Goldstein - Nextel• Brenda Stevens - CRTCT• Brian Baldwin - Telcordia• Greg Pattenaude - NY PSC• Beth O'Donnell - NCTA• Peter Guggina, Karen Mulberry, Steve Engelman - WorldCom• Keith McIntosh -Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association• Beth Kistner ALTS• Norm Epstein - Verizon• Bill Adair - SBC• Cathie Capita - Voicestream• Wendy Potts - Bell Canada• Eleanor Willis-Camara - Winstar• Switzon Wigfall - North Carolina Utilities Commission• Larry Krevor - Nextel• Natalie Billingsley - NASUCA • Nancy Brockway New Hampshire PUC• Rose Travers - USTA• Hoke Knox - Sprint• Dawn Lawrence - XO Communications

Suggested Goal of Work

• Determine Lifetime of NANP considering use of optimization techniques. Determine costs of implementation of prioritized techniques.

• Selection of best Number Plan Expansion technique. Determine costs of implementation.

• Comparison of Above to assess best direction.

Ad Hoc Meeting ResultsMarch 12, 2001

• Group considered the charge• Agreed to the need for additional NANP

optimization activities and Number Plan expansion studies

• Many favored a new IMG to better tie together the final goal, many didn’t have a preference versus assignment of Number Optimization work to NRO.

Proposal

• Charter New IMG with two major activities:– Evaluate Number Optimization techniques

• Use List from February NANC meeting

– Evaluate NANP expansion– Compare and Develop Direction

• Focus first on analysis of optimization options • Follow with review of the INC NANP expansion

report adding additional information, such as cost analysis

• Maybe some time period with overlap of work

Proposed Approach for Optimization

• Develop model(s) that will address what drives Number Plan exhaust

• Develop Baseline Number Plan Exhaust Date

• Identify impacts of Additional beneficial methods

• Determine preferred alternatives• Evaluate costs

Optimization Data Analysis

• Develop a set of analyses to be performed on NRUF data to– Understand utilization/consumption at each

resource level (NPAs, CO Codes, TNs)– Estimate the effect of each conservation

alternative (start with February NANC list)

Number Optimization Timeline and Costs

• Two months to develop initial analyses

• Two month iteration with data

• Two months for final analysis

• Need NANPA to perform analysis on disaggregated data. Could be NANPA costs for data analysis.

NANP Expansion Evaluation• Review INC assumptions, conclusions• Consider Network and End User costs• Assess Expansion in relation to Number

Optimization options• Begin work after INC report is available• No identifiable costs but could have if

Consultants required for End User cost determination.

• Timeline not identified but likely 6 months after INC completion