Enron Mail

From:susan.landwehr@enron.com
To:lara.leibman@enron.com
Subject:Re: IXC vs. CLEC
Cc:sue.nord@enron.com, donald.lassere@enron.com, scott.bolton@enron.com,richard.shapiro@enron.com, marchris.robinson@enron.com, steve.montovano@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com
Bcc:sue.nord@enron.com, donald.lassere@enron.com, scott.bolton@enron.com,richard.shapiro@enron.com, marchris.robinson@enron.com, steve.montovano@enron.com, jeff.dasovich@enron.com
Date:Mon, 28 Aug 2000 16:22:00 -0700 (PDT)

Lara--I reviewed this report as well as the memo that Illinois counsel
prepared for you. A number of questions/concerns come to mind. I briefly
discussed these concerns with Sue Nord late last week, but wanted to put them
before the group for possible discussion on our next conference call.

When I read the memo from Stamos (Illinois counsel), it appeared to me that
the categories of requirements might be able to be divided into "regulatory"
responsibilities vs "commercial" requirements. In the regulatory column
would be things like the annual designation of an agent and the annual
identification of the CEO. Also, the certificate itself needs to be renewed
every 2 years (FYI--I don't think I saw that requirement in the chart) Other
items such as participation in the One Call Notice System and the tax
contributions might fall into the commercial category.

These requirements not only need to be kept track of and adherred to, but
there is also the consideration of what the resource costs are associated
with them for both the IXC certifcations and the CLEC certifications. And
are there penalties in place if we don't comply?

Scott/Donald/Sue--can we discuss next call?








Lara Leibman 08/23/2000 01:42 PM

To: Sue Nord/HOU/EES@EES, Donald Lassere/HOU/EES@EES, Scott Bolton/Enron
Communications@Enron Communications
cc: Richard Shapiro/HOU/EES@EES, Marchris Robinson/HOU/EES@EES, Steve
Montovano/DUB/EES@EES, Susan M Landwehr/HOU/EES@EES, Jeff
Dasovich/SFO/EES@EES
Subject: IXC vs. CLEC

Attached please find a chart that summarizes the differences between IXC and
CLEC obligations for Texas, New York and Illinois. This project was meant to
incorporate California and Florida; however, I have not yet received any
information from our counsel in CA and I only received the pertinent
information from our counsel in Florida late last night and this morning. I
apologize that I was not able to include any information from those states.
I will incorporate their information when I return from vacation.

I have asked Gloria to provide some of you with copies of the material that I
received from Florida to utilize in my absence (e.g., Sue, Donald, Scott).
You should already have the material from TX, IL and NY.

Please let me know if anyone has any questions or concerns. Thank you.

Regards,

Lara