Message-ID: <22230284.1075858712292.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 15:30:04 -0700 (PDT) From: l..petrochko@enron.com To: richard.shapiro@enron.com Subject: EBS Update Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Petrochko, Mona L. X-To: Shapiro, Richard X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \RSHAPIRO (Non-Privileged)\Shapiro, Richard\Broadband Services X-Origin: Shapiro-R X-FileName: RSHAPIRO (Non-Privileged).pst I have a conference call w/ Jim Fallon on Wednesday and w/ Paul Racicot, Tuesday afternoon (4 p.m. c.d.t.) I wanted to touch base w/ you on a few issues, before I speak to Jim. Talk to you tomorrow. 1. My plan at this point is to continue activity through the end of 2001, assuming no continued funding in 2002. 2. Need to discuss a graceful exit strategy in DC with legislators and FCC. (Not sure if there are any plans for any news release relative to EBS, but would want to coordinate a release with meetings in DC) 3. Continuing to monitor legislation (including Economic Stimulus Bill (Upton Bill)) which includes accelerated depreciation of investments and tax credits for new investment. Currently doesn't include anything on unbundling, a la Tauzin-Dingel, but we continue to monitor. 4. Low likelihood of other legislation being passed out of Congress this year dealing with telecom. We have been laying low in our coalition efforts with other Houston energy companies (i.e. El Paso and Dynegy). 5. Venable, a law firm in DC, that is representing Verizon, is interested in Enron's participation in its coalition. We haven't been able to find common ground on issues. However, last approach indicated that Verizon views Enron's participation as having cache. I would suggest approaching commercial folks to see if they think they can utilize the leverage of us joining the coalition in exchange for some commercial deal w/ Verizon. Probably a long-shot, but maybe worth a look. Problem here is Venable wants to use Enron's name in a public way around DC with lawmakers. If we have exiting on our minds, doesn't make sense to make a big splash. 6. SBC has filed for non-dominant status at the FCC for provision of advanced services. Has the effect of removing SBC from regulatory oversight. We are seeing what Comptel is doing and determining whether we will join in with their filing or file separately. 7. Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) appears to be a new RBOC organization, filed a letter to the Bush Administration asking that access to advanced services not be provided to competitors on an unbundled basis. Steve Burns has already met w/ Nancy Victory, Telecom Expert for the Administration, giving her the other side of the story. This is another way of trying to get the Administration to weigh in on the issue. 8. 271 applications-3 BellSouth States (MS, LA, GA) have received state 271 authority, pending FCC review. SBC has two application pending FCC review (AK and MO). Qwest has announced its intent to file 7 or 8 applications by end of 1Q02. We are not active at the state level. 9. Interconnection agreements. Hope to have majority of the agreements ready to file by November 01. A few agreements, CO and NV, may take longer. Thanks. Mona