WASHINGTON-Two months after the long-awaited wireless local number portability rules became effective, signs continue to point that porting phone numbers is still not a smooth transition.
After spending several years of foot-dragging, the wireless industry-with prodding from the Federal Communications Commission-did a major media push in November to warn customers that it might not be easy to switch.
They were right. When the inevitable problems first surfaced, it was expected and manageable. Still problems persist today. Initially, AT&T Wireless Services Inc. had the most problems. Today, AWS said it is porting at the same rate as other carriers. However, if information on either end is incorrect, it kicks the porting process from an automated one to a manual labor. Then representatives from both companies must work together to solve the problem. Staffing is short and enthusiasm appears to be weak so customers continue to wait. Meanwhile, anecdotal stories of the most troublesome ports are appearing in newspapers across the country.
These problems could impact the big story of the week-will AWS be bought and will regulators OK it?
Legg Mason Equity Research told investors last week that the Department of Justice is likely to look favorably upon a merger since LNP makes it easier for customers to switch. Legg Mason did not address how the Justice Department would react if WLNP continues to go down an increasingly bumpy road.
Meanwhile, the wired and wireless industries have been battling over how to implement intermodal porting, specifically how much time it should take to complete a simple (single line) intermodal port. Not surprisingly, wireline carriers do not want to switch from their four-business-days timeframe, while wireless carriers want to speed up the process.
“T-Mobile USA Inc. urges the FCC to establish a porting interval of two days for intermodal simple ports with mechanized interface and 10-digit triggers. Shortening the porting interval will benefit consumers by making it easier and less confusing to switch between wireless and wireline carriers and by reducing the potential safety issues associated with intermodal ports,” said T-Mobile.
“The FCC should not change the currently prescribed porting intervals for wireline carriers. No party has proven that the purported benefits of changing those wireline intervals outweigh the significant costs that would attend such change,” said Qwest Corp. “Considerable time would be necessary to implement any changes to the current porting interval methodology, involving upwards of two years rather than a few months. The commission must ensure that the requisite time is built into any porting interval change process.”
These comments were submitted just days after the FCC suspended intermodal LNP for rural carriers, a move made with little warning or fanfare.
“We find that special circumstances warrant a limited deviation from the Nov. 24 deadline for carriers operating in the top 100 metropolitan service areas but serving less than 2 percent of the nation’s telephone lines. Specifically, we recognize that the covered carriers’ networks have technological limitations that cannot be resolved immediately to comply with the wireline-to-wireless porting requirement,” said the FCC. “In order to offer intermodal portability to their subscribers, these smaller carriers must acquire the hardware and software necessary to provide porting, make the necessary network upgrades and ensure that their upgraded networks work reliably and accurately.”
Rural wireline carriers that serve customers on the outskirts of urban areas were surprised to discover in November that they would be required to port numbers to wireless carriers even if the wireless carrier did not have point of presence in their central offices or interconnection agreements.
Three rural trade associations said they applauded the decision, but cautioned that a court challenge still would go forward. “This does not negate the issues raised in the court appeal filed by the National Telecommunications Cooperative Association and the Organization for the Promotion and Advance of Small Telephone Companies,” said NTCA, OPASTCO and the Independent Telephone and Telecommunications Alliance. “We believe the transition to a WLNP environment would go smoother if the FCC re-evaluated its rules, specifically taking into account the operational realities of small, rural carriers.”
The FCC had not addressed problems with small carriers operating in top markets in its mandate. “As the Nov. 24 deadline approached, we received a number of petitions for waiver of the intermodal porting requirement from small local exchange carriers operating in the top 100 metropolitan service areas. Nearly all of the petitioners describe themselves as small telephone companies and assert that they are more similarly situated to LECs operating outside the top 100 MSAs than the large carriers operating within the top 100 MSAs,” said the commission. “Because they had not previously received requests from other wireline carriers to make their systems LNP-capable, the petitioners argue that they were at a technological disadvantage compared to most, if not all, of the larger LECs in their MSAs which had already upgraded their systems to provide wireline-to-wireline porting.”
The FCC mandated LNP for wireline carriers years ago, but it was mandated only if a carrier first received a bona fide LNP request. The waiver expires May 24 when nationwide WLNP becomes available.
