Message-ID: <21456369.1075843081880.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2000 05:27:00 -0800 (PST)
From: bruno.gaillard@enron.com
To: jeff.dasovich@enron.com
Subject: Telecom CEQA Review
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Bruno Gaillard
X-To: Jeff Dasovich
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \Jeff_Dasovich_Dec2000\Notes Folders\Eci
X-Origin: DASOVICH-J
X-FileName: jdasovic.nsf

The commission has issued a new rulemaking, R. 00-02-003, to address CEQA 
review for CLECs. 
Parties should file their responses to the following questions no later than 
March 15, 2000.

1. Is the Commission's existing practice for authorizing new CLECs adequate 
to comply with CEQA and to protect California's environmental resources?
2. Is the Commission's existing policy of allowing incumbent local exchange 
carriers and cellular carriers to construct new facilities without 
environmental review in compliance with CEQA? Does it promote adequate 
protection of California's environmental resources?
3. Do local authorities and other government agencies have adequate 
opportunities to protect local environmental resources under the current set 
of Commission practices and policies regarding incumbent local exchange 
carriers and CLECs? If not, how should this circumstance be remedied?
4. Does the Commission's existing practice for authorizing new CLECs create a 
competitive advantage or disadvantage for certain carriers? If so, how might 
those disparities be eliminated or reduced?
5. Is the Commission's existing practice for authorizing new long distance 
carriers adequate to comply with CEQA and to protect California's 
environmental resources?
6. Is the Commission's existing policy of allowing incumbent long distance 
carriers to construct new facilities without environmental review in 
compliance with CEQA? Does it promote adequate protection of California's 
environmental resources?
7. Do local authorities and other government agencies have adequate 
opportunities to protect local environmental resources under the current set 
of Commission practices and policies regarding long distance carriers? If 
not, how should this circumstance be remedied?
8. Does the Commission's existing practice for authorizing new long distance 
carriers create a competitive advantage or disadvantage for certain carriers? 
If so, how might those disparities be eliminated or reduced?

Are we interested in this proceeding? Attached is a copy of the rulemaking.