On Mon, 21 Mar 2005 jack-yahoogroups@...
> This is an interesting application because the Hiawatha Telephone
> Companies are asking for a local calling area that encompasses all of
> Michigan's Upper Peninsula, which if approved, might well be one of
> the largest ILEC local calling areas anywhere, although it's not true
> local calling because it would have a 2,000 minutes-of-use cap (I
> personally believe such caps are illegal under Section 304(11) of the
> Michigan Telecommunications Act, but the Michigan Public Service
> Commission has been approving such applications for at least a couple
> of years now, in effect thumbing their nose at Michigan law and the
> intent of the Michigan legislature. But I digress...)
> MPSC Case U-14456: In the matter of the application of Chippewa
> Telephone Company, Hiawatha Telephone Company, Midway Telephone
> Company and Ontonagon County Telephone Company for authority to offer
> expanded local calling and to adjust rates for basic local exchange
> "Chippewa County Telephone Company (Chippewa), Hiawatha Telephone
> Company (Hiawatha), Midway Telephone Company (Midway), and Ontonagon
> County Telephone Company (Ontonagon), collectively, the Hiawatha
> Companies, pursuant to § 304 of the Michigan Telecommunications Act
> (the Act or MTA), MCL 484.2101 et seq., hereby request approval to
> (1) offer expanded local calling throughout the Upper Peninsula, and
> (2) implement rates related to the provision of such expanded local
> Chippewa provides basic local exchange service in the Brimley
> exchange. Hiawatha provides basic local exchange service in the Deer
> Park, Eckerman, Grand Marais, Hiawatha Forest, Hulbert, Munising,
> Paradise, Seney, and Shingleton exchanges. Midway provides basic local
> exchange service in the Golden Lake, Trout Creek, and Watton
> exchanges. Ontonagon provides basic local exchange service in the
> Bruce Crossing, Ewen, Mass, Ontonagon, Rockland, and White Pine
> 12. The Hiawatha Companies propose to greatly expand their customers'
> local calling areas. Specifically, the Hiawatha Companies plan to add
> all exchanges located in the Upper Peninsula (UP) of Michigan
> (including island exchanges) to their customers' local calling areas.
> Consequently, if the Commission approves this Application, customers
> of the Hiawatha Companies would receive UP-wide local calling.
> All case documents here:
I assume that this proposal would only apply on calls _FROM_ the
"Hiawatha Companies'" telephone exchanges, for calls to "anywhere" in
NPA 906/Upper Peninsula.
Are there any other (independent) LEC ratecenters in the Upper Peninsula
that are not associated with this "Hiawatha Companies" proposal?
There are also some SBC-Ameritech-Mi.Bell ratecenters in NPA 906/UP-Mi.
that I assume would not have expanded "local" calling from their
exchanges, over and above what they already have...
And the Upper Peninsula MI LATA (#342) also contains four ratecenters
across the state line in Wisconsin, that have OCN 0920, Niagara Tel Co
as their I-LEC: AURORA MI, FLORENCE MI, NIAGARA MI, SPREAD EAGLE MI.
Would these be included as "expanded local" from the exchanges of
"The Hiawatha Companies" ??
I don't think that there are any NPA 906/UP exchanges that are part of
the Northeast WI LATA (#350) though...
Also, what do you know about 906 and a 45-year-old-or-so change in
jurisdiction proposal (that never came through) ??
A few years ago, I was told by a retiree from AT&T Long Lines, that NPA
906 was created in 1961, because there was a move by some in the
counties of Michigan's Upper Peninsula, to secede from the "State of
Michigan", and to become additional counties as part of the "State of
Wisconsin". I don't know if there would have needed to be a referendum
of residents of UP as well as approval by the Wisconsin Legislature,
maybe approval by the Michigan Legislature -- if any popular vote
approval might be needed by "all" of Michigan as a whole and/or if the
voters of Wisconsin might need to approve -- maybe one or both houses of
the US Federal Congress might need to approve ???
Whatever might have been needed to be done to legally change the
counties of UP from being MI to WI instead -- it never happened.
However, AT&T apparantly began to make preparations in case this would
With the finalized creation of the NANP area code format on 22-Oct-1947,
NPA 616 was originally assigned for the entire west coast side of the
mainland (lower) part of Michigan (which it still was in its entirety
until around 1999, when NPA 231 first split off to the north of the
mainland's west coast; later NPA 269 split off in 2001 for the southern
part of the mainland's west coast; NPA 616 retained by Grand Rapids MI
and the immediate surrounding area), and with 1947, NPA 616 also was to
include the Upper Peninsula.
NPA 906 for the UP split off from 616 in 1961.
If this was because of the propsal (that never took effect) for the UP
to move from Michigan's jurisdiction over to Wisconsin's jurisdiction,
even though this was rural (as is northern WI's NPA 715), and even
though customer-DDD was still quite "new" and not yet "entrentched"
throughout "most all" of the US/Canada in the very early 1960s, it is
possible that there were enough "pre-assigned" 715-NNX codes in northern
WI, as "mark-sense billing-ticket" codes (to eventually become customer
dialable area codes) that "conflicted" with such 616-NNX codes also in
use in the UP part of 616/MI. And in preparation for such a political
jurisdctional boundary change, instead of just changing every UP 616-NNX
code to a 715-NNX code, also changing the NNX itself of a 616 location
if the NNX was also numerically identical in conflict with another 715
location's NNX code, AT&T probably just created the new 906 NPA to take
over all UP locations and NNXes "intact" with no mandated further
Does anyone have any specific info on the POLITICAL/JURISDICTIONAL/LEGAL
historical aspects of the proposal? I had never heard about this before
until I was told this by the AT&T Long Lines Retiree when I asked him if
he knew "why" 906 was created for the UP back in 1961. There OBVIOUSLY
weren't any problems back then with the older 616 running out of NNX
codes, since both the UP and the west-coast part of the mainland (lower)
MI are both rather rural, and were no where near eating away at NNX
c.o.codes/mark-sense codes back then...
Mark J. Cuccia
mcuccia (at) tulane (dot) edu
New Orleans LA CSA