Previous Story
Where is the money?
|
Posted on Jul 01 2008
The mistake CUC made was very costly, not to mention a waste of taxpayers’ time and money hiring an unprofessional sole-sourced contractor. You failed to mention to the senators that DCM Group agreed, acknowledged, and represented that it has readily available the necessary expertise, training, knowledge, parts, materials, and equipment, manpower, and capacity to perform for the fee of $5,006,350.70
You also failed to mention that they do not have the expertise or the manpower, otherwise DCM Group wouldn’t have recruited Felipe Atalig’s former power plant mechanics (which DCM has denied but records at the Labor Department show differently).
You also failed to mention that there are penalty clauses in the signed DCM sole-sourced contract; you stated it did not.
You also failed to mention that the 90 days timeframe had lapsed and rehabilitation and repair of all engines on contract is a complete failure.
CUC has not learned from its mistakes; rather it is compiling and adding burden on the consumers.
Mr. Muna, privatization is an option but deliberately and intentionally running our public utilities to the ground by way of oppressing the already suffering consumers is wrong and someone has to be held accountable and responsible.
Engine No. 7 will not be operational within 30-45 days since the default contract expires on July 10,2008. As you stated, three other engines will eventually go online. We ask: If the total MW to be produced is above 10 MW, then you have no need for a $6 million rent-a-container temporary power generation.
CISCO needs to be held responsible and accountable for the non-performance contract signed by the Lt. Governor on March 14,2006. Where is the $885,000 rehabilitation contract for Power Plant II? Where is the money?
[B]Gregorio Cruz Jr. [/B] [I]President, Taotao Tano CNMI Inc.[/I]
