April 2000 COCUS and NPA Exhaust Analysis NANPA Report to the NANC May 23, 2000

5/23/002 COCUS Overview NANPA is required to forecast availability of NANP numbering resources and to ensure the continued viability of the NANP –Predict area code exhaust –Predict NANP exhaust April 2000 COCUS –Distributed January 2000 with input due back by March 1, 2000 Requested Data –Company Name, Address, Service Provider Type, Operating Company Number (OCNs), Contact Information –CO Codes assigned by NPA as of January 1, 2000 –Yearly Forecasted CO Codes for –Telephone Number (TN) utilization data

5/23/003 NPA Exhaust Analysis Input –April 2000 COCUS survey responses provided by service providers (analysis included submissions provided to NANPA by April 20, 2000) –Historical CO code assignment data by segment over past three years –Number of service providers and their expansion over the same time period –Recent NPA relief activity Other Data Points –CO code assignments as of April 1, 2000 –Total Number of Codes available for assignment –Rate centers per NPA –CO Code rationing amounts –Other miscellaneous data (e.g., last relief, split vs. overlay)

5/23/004 NPA Exhaust Analysis Projecting growth resulting from new entrants and/or expansion of footprint in an NPA –Number of Rate Centers in the NPA –Expected Number of New Entrants –Expected Amount of Footprint expansion –Amount of time until NPA Exhaust NPA Exhaust Projection –Forecasted CO code growth rate –Potential number of CO codes required for non-forecasted growth over the life of the NPA (i.e., growth pool) –NPA Months to Exhaust is the forecasted growth plus codes needed for non-forecasted growth Exhaust projections reviewed by NPA Relief Planning and Code Admin. –Appropriate revisions made

5/23/005 NPAs in Rationing For NPAs in rationing, the projected exhaust was based upon the monthly rationed amount –Identified in the report with an R A non-rationed projected NPA exhaust date was also developed –Guiding principle - What would be the forecasted exhaust date if rationing was not in place? –Sources of data to develop non-rationed demand included historical demand and/or COCUS submissions Variables included length of time in rationing (i.e., was there pre-rationing historical demand available) and COCUS submissions (i.e., April 2000 COCUS response rate for the NPA)

5/23/006 NANPA COCUS Observations Improved COCUS Response - The NPA average for survey responses represented approximately 85-90% of total CO codes assigned (as of 1/1/00) –Ongoing changes and additions to COCUS submissions as service providers updated forecasts and/or added NPAs Variances between historical demand vs. COCUS forecasted demand –High historical demand but low COCUS demand and visa versa COCUS input for NPAs in rationing –NANPA requested SPs to provide their demand of codes, regardless of rationing In some cases, forecasted demand was very high In some cases, forecasted demand was high in the closer years and then leveled off In some cases, forecasted demand was lower than the rationing amount

5/23/007 NANPA COCUS Observations Reclamation of Codes - Continued process of identifying and reclaiming codes unavailable for assignment –Results were not as drastic as experienced between April and December 1999 –Reclamation activity centered around where NPA relief was in progress Reporting TN utilization –Better response rate as compared to April 1999 –Some fairly large code holders did not provide utilization data

5/23/008 Next Steps Ongoing Analysis –Continue to monitor actual CO code assignments with forecasted growth projections –Review and revise individual NPA exhaust projections as necessary (e.g., large CO code assignment, large return of codes) NANP Exhaust Projection Schedule –Review NANP exhaust projection assumptions with the NRO WG (completed May 18, 2000) –Review NANP exhaust projection assumptions with NANC (May 23, 2000) –Provide NANP exhaust projection at June 20-21, 2000 NANC meeting