|
|
Enron Mail |
|
I agree about the need to have a clear strategy. Another thing to keep in
mind, however, is that we can enlist the AGs' assistance on other fronts as well; it doesn't have to be limited to 271 applications. Mona L Petrochko 04/30/2001 02:29 PM To: Lara Leibman/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, John Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Eric Benson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Margo Reyna/NA/Enron@Enron, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron Subject: Re: NAAG Thanks for the information. It is good to know we have a potential ally. I'm not sure when the MA AG weighed in on the Verizon petition. If it was a last minute effort at the FCC it is likely to be less effective that if they were active in the proceeding when the state was making its determination. The point here is that the timing of the AG's participation is bound to be as important as the issues they raise. Obviously, before we would engage in soliciting AG intervention, we would have to have a very clear strategy about how much pressure we want to exert in 271 applications, directly or indirectly, in exchange for cooperation on other fronts (access to high capacity loops, for example). This is especially true in light of our discussion around our primary wholesale trading partners on today's weekly call. From: Lara Leibman on 04/30/2001 02:03 PM To: Sue Nord/NA/Enron@Enron, Mona L Petrochko/NA/Enron@Enron, John Neslage/ENRON_DEVELOPMENT@ENRON_DEVELOPMENT, Stephen D Burns/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Allison Navin/Corp/Enron@ENRON, Scott Bolton/Enron Communications@Enron Communications, Eric Benson/NA/Enron@ENRON, Margo Reyna/NA/Enron@Enron, Marchris Robinson/NA/Enron@Enron, Barbara A Hueter/NA/Enron@Enron, Kerry Stroup/NA/Enron@Enron, Jeff Dasovich/NA/Enron@Enron cc: Richard Shapiro/NA/Enron@Enron, Linda Robertson/NA/Enron@ENRON Subject: NAAG Everyone, I finally touched base with Emily Meyers, my contact at the National Association of Attorneys General ("NAAG") regarding their involvement on the telecom side, specifically with regard to Section 271 authorizations. According to Emily, there is no group effort that exists (i.e., a telecom committee or an individual AG taking the lead on telecom issues). Individual AGs get involved, but that is all. For example, MA AG Tom Reilley recently opposed Verizon's application for 271 authority, but the FCC still granted Verizon's petition. Emily recommends that we use the AGs as much as possible. For example, if we believe that local competition is non-existent and we have evidence to that effect, we should certainly convey that information to the individual AG and have him/her weigh in on our behalf. Emily recognizes that Enron is pro-competitive and that typically the AGs would be in agreement with our positions - so it's something for us to keep in mind as we move forward. There's no guarantee that the FCC will listen to the AGs, but it may be worth a try. If anyone has any thoughts or comments, please let me know. Thanks. Lara
|