House minority has more questions on Agingan project

By
|
Posted on Mar 02 2005
Share

The House minority bloc said it remains unsatisfied with the information being provided by the Commonwealth Utilities Corp. about the critical Agingan wastewater project.

Among others, Rep. Ray Tebuteb said that CUC has not even given the Legislature a copy of the administrative order issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in 1999 relating to deficiencies in the treatment facility.

“Where is the [administrative order]? We asked for it the last time but we’ve not seen it. And what has happened since 1999? Why are they only rushing this now?” asked Tebuteb.

The congressman also noted that during a recent session, Vice Speaker Timothy Villagomez himself testified that the CUC had $21 million, which should have been sufficient to meet the obligation.

Villagomez, a former CUC executive director, introduced a bill last month that aims to reprogram $3.3. million for the Agingan upgrade.

The bill cited that the money should be secured no later than Feb. 28 this year or EPA would penalize CUC with a $37,500 in daily fines for every violation.

As of yesterday, CUC said EPA has given the utility firm another 30 days to find the necessary funding. EPA has given the firm countless deadline extensions already to fix the outfall, which has been cited as non-compliant with federal wastewater regulations.

Tebuteb, meantime, said that lawmakers are not clear yet on the actual matching rate, citing that the reprogramming bill shows the need for $5.6 million to complete the project.

He said the bill also cited a $2.1 million EPA grant received by CUC for the project. Earlier, he said, the amount was $1.2 million.

“We’ve got lots of questions. We want to substantiate these claims,” said the lawmaker.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.