Some states make reassigned-number screening mandatory

The requirementstatement

Where a state requires it, reassigned-number screening is an obligation rather than a safe-harbour option.

Severityseverity: HighHIGHRejected by at least one carrier or provider, and a common cause of failure at the rest.
When it bitesphase: After you are livepostFalls due once you are sending: STOP handling, quiet hours, suppression, record retention.
What is checkedobject: reassigned-number screening policy
Where it liveslayer: OperationalOPERATIONAL
How Ekas settles itdetectability: External recordEXTERNAL_DATA; The fact that settles it lives in a register we cannot query, such as the IRS file, a postal database, or another provider’s tenant. Reported as a warning with the evidence to check, not as a pass.
What the fix involvesfailureClass: Wait on someone elseTERMINAL_EXTERNAL; Needs an external system or a waiting period, such as IRS propagation, a vetting result, or a carrier queue.
Who requires itauthorities: state law (ME)
When it appliesapplicabilityText: Applies to every 10DLC registration.

Why this rule existsrationale

Maine converts the federal safe harbour into a duty, which changes the calculus completely: skipping the lookup is no longer accepting a risk, it is a violation on its own terms. National programmes miss it because the federal framing — screen if you want the defence — is the one everybody read.

How to fix itremediation

Screen every number rather than maintaining a state-conditional policy — the lookup is the same one the safe harbour needs, so doing it universally satisfies both. Done when screening is unconditional rather than triggered by a state field you may not hold.

Check this yourselfattestation

No tool can settle this one for you. Here is the check, and what wrong looks like.

Is reassigned-number screening unconditional, rather than triggered by a state field you may not hold?

1Decide between screening every number and building state-conditional logic on location data you can defend. The first is cheaper than it looks.
2It is the same lookup the federal safe harbour needs, so doing it universally satisfies both.

What wrong looks like: Maine converts the federal safe harbour into a duty. National programmes miss it because the federal framing — screen if you want the defence — is the one everybody read.

Notesnotes

Needs the recipient state, which we do not hold and which is not the area code. What the user has to decide is whether to screen universally or to build state-conditional logic on top of location data they can defend — the first is cheaper than it looks.

Rules you will hit next

Other operational rules at the same severity. A registration is judged as a whole, not rule by rule.

OPS-034A programme in another language still owes the English keywordHighHIGH OPS-035The mandatory keywords must work over MMS tooHighHIGH OPS-044Suppression is brand-wide, not per numberHighHIGH OPS-047A state may give you less time than the federal limitHighHIGH OPS-052Silence after a scope question revokes everythingHighHIGH OPS-053A STOP answering a scope question must not be answered with anotherHighHIGH

All operational rules

OPS-088 is one of 139 operational rules in the 915-rule 10DLC registry. Free to cite under CC BY 4.0.