James D.

Cowie 32 North Street Portland Maine 04101 207-774-2365 ELECTRONICALLY FILED ON 07-21-06 THIS IS A VIRTUAL DUPLICATE OF THE ORIGINAL HARD COPY SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS ELECTRONIC FILING INSTRUCTIONS July 21, 2006 Mr. Dennis L. Keschl, Administrative Director Maine Public Utilities Commission 242 State Street, 18 State House Station Augusta Maine 04333-0018 RE: MAINE PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Request for Commission Investigation into Whether Verizon is Cooperating in Maine With the National Security Agency’s Warrantless Domestic Wiretapping Program Docket No. 2006-274

Dear Mr. Keschl: I have been notified by the MCLU that today it filed the 19 July decision in the case Hepting v. AT&T Corp by Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker for the Federal District Court of Northern California. On behalf of the Complainants in this case, I would like the Commission to know we endorse the MCLU’s filing of that decision, as well as the entire content of the cover letter from Attorney John M. R. Paterson, and I offer a few additional remarks for the Commission’s consideration. Judge Walker found that the government has opened the door for judicial inquiry by publicly confirming and denying material information about its warrantless monitoring of telephone and e-mail communications content, and summarized what the government has disclosed about its surveillance activities, including which persons’ communications are being monitored; the locations of those persons; and the types of information being monitored. He found that “because of the public disclosures by the government and AT&T, the court cannot conclude that merely maintaining [Hepting v. AT&T Corp.] creates a ‘reasonable danger’ of harming national security.” Thus Judge Walker rejects the government's claims that allowing the case to go forward could expose state secrets and jeopardize the war on terror or threaten national security. And most important for this complaint that is before the Commission, Judge Walker concluded this: "The compromise between liberty and security remains a difficult one, but dismissing the case at the outset would sacrifice liberty for no apparent

2 enhancement of security." The Complainants believe that conclusion and Judge Walker’s other findings fit to a T the arguments the Public Advocate, the MCLU, and the I have made in this complaint case, regarding the state secrets and security classification issues Verizon has raised, and to convince the Commission to open an investigation. Finally, in recommendations I filed on behalf of the Complainants in response to the 23 June procedural order I recommended the Commission retain established experts in Lucent and Nortel switching machines to assist the Commission in determining if Verizon has provided NSA access to any of its or MCI’s switches in Maine. Now, as the Commission studies Judge Walker’s decision, I recommend the Commission consider adopting, in the complaint case, Judge Walker’s plan to retain, in Hepting v AT&T Corp., an expert with a security clearance to receive the most highly sensitive information and extensive experience in intelligence matters, to advise him as that case goes forward. Sincerely yours,

James D. Cowie Lead Complainant Cc: Andrew Hagler, Esq. Donald W. Boecke, Esq., Verizon William C. Black, Esq., OPA John M. R. Paterson, Esq., MCLU