Local number portability and local loop competition: Critical issues

Telecommunications Policy

Volumn 22, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 73-87

  Reinke, Thomas H ^a,b  

^a GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPETITION; COST ACCOUNTING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; MARKETING; PUBLIC POLICY; TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES;

LOCAL NUMBER PORTABILITY (LNP);

TELEPHONE NUMBERING SYSTEMS;

EID: 0031998992     PISSN: 03085961     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0308-5961(97)00058-X     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Summarized by Northern Telecom at http://www.nortel.com/cool/Inp/ survey.html.
2. McCarthy, S 'Numbers on the Move Telephony 9 October 1995 p. 9.
3. Telephone number portability, notice of proposed rulemaking, CC Docket No. 95-116, FCC 95-284 (released 13 July, 1995), p. 7.
4. Public Law 104-104, 8 February 1996 Section 3(a) (46).
5. Ibid Title I, Subtitle A, Part II, Section 251.
6. Telephone number portability, first report and order and further notice of proposed rulemaking, CC Docket No. 95-116, FCC 96-268 (released 2 July, 1996), p. 2.
7. Hundt quoted by Gruley, B 'Phone companies call for customer surcharge' The Wall Street Journal 13 September 1996 p. B1.
8. Hundt quoted by Tanzillo, K 'FCC to teach old tricks to new dogs' Communication News July 1996 p. 12.
9. Op cit Ref 6, p. 48.
10. Telephone number portability, first memorandum opinion and order on reconsideration. CC Docket No. 95-116 FCC RM-8535 (adopted 6 March 1997), p. 19.
11. Op cit Ref 6, pp. 13-17.
12. Ahern, K (NYNEX Director - Federal Regulatory Policy) as quoted by Dziatkiewicz, M 'Local number portability pits practicality vs probability' America's Network 15 March 1994 p. 22.
13. NYNEX press release on 19 June, 1995 at http://www.nynex.com/who_we_ are/nynex_media/950619_task force.html.
14. Progress in the Chicago LRN trials is being documented at http://www. ported.com.
15. Snyder, B 'Siemens debuts CO number portability' Telephony 6 May 1996 p. 10.
16. Skinner, L 'Bell Atlantic loses "portability" issue' Daily Record - Baltimore 19 July 1996 p. A3.
17. Summarized by NYNEX in comments of 10 October 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 4.
18. Op cit Ref 10, p. 23.
19. AT&T comments of 27 September 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 9.
20. NYNEX comments of 10 October 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 2.
21. Op cit Ref 10, p. 38.
22. Op cit Ref 10, pp. 60, 78.
23. NENA comments of 12 October 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 2.
24. FCC Press release DA 96-1495 5 September 1996.
25. ICC comments of 14 August 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 pp. 3-4.
26. Petrie, K 'Phone customers could pay for portability predicament' Denver Business Journal 30 August 1996 p. 5A.
27. Spanburg, E 'Keeping phone number could cost consumers' Business Journal-Charlotte 23 September 1996 p. 1.
28. Op cit Ref 4, Title 1, Subtitle A, Part II, Section 251 (e) (2).
29. Op cit Ref 6 p. 208.
30. ICC comments of 14 August 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 5.
31. Quoted in Vittore, V 'Devil in the details' America's Network 1 December 1995 p. 30.
32. Jones Intercable Inc. comments of 12 October 1995 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 9.
33. Vittore, V 'Portability without politics' America's Network 15 May 1995 p. 42.
34. Ameritech comments of 16 August 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 1.
35. SBC comments of 16 September 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. ii.
36. ICC press release at http:// www.state.il.us/icc/PRESS9.HTML.
37. Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission comments of 16 September 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116 p. 1.
38. Ibid p. 4.
39. Comments by the Colorado Public Utilities Commission of 16 August 1996 in FCC CC Docket 95-116.
40. FCC public notice, North American numbering council (NANC) issues recommendations regarding the implementation of telephone number portability, 2 May 1997 in FCC CC Docket 95-116.