CUC disconnection regs under review

Commonwealth Utilities Corp. staff members are now reevaluating their power disconnection policies and the dispute procedures, according to CUC executive director Anthony C. Guerrero yesterday.

Guerrero disclosed CUC’s action in response to the report that about a hundred of people, mostly those whose power had been cut, trooped to the U.S. District Court for the NMI Tuesday afternoon to attend a status conference for the reopening of a 1993 class lawsuit against the utility agency.

“We sympathize with the people regarding the rate increase. It’s affecting everybody. The issue at hand is the disconnection notices and the disconnection period as well as the dispute procedures under CUC. That’s something that we are looking into. We’re reevaluating it and looking at it…” said Guerrero in an interview with Saipan Tribune.

The attempted revival of the 1993 class suit against CUC is also being looked at by CUC’s attorney, Edward Manibusan, Guerrero said.

He said some CUC staff members are reviewing their policies as well as the federal court’s order under that 1993 case to come up with an answer to the complaints.

Guerrero said that, as of yesterday, Manibusan and class suit attorney Stephanie Flores were conducting preliminary talks.

“I think that’s happening [discussion] right now at the moment. I’m not privy to it yet because I’m not part of the talks and I’m leaving that to our legal people to discuss with my staff and Stephanie’s staff,” he said.

U.S. District Court for the NMI Chief Judge Alex R. Munson called Manibusan and Flores to his chamber for the status conference Tuesday afternoon.

After the conference, Flores, counsel for disgruntled CUC customers who are plaintiffs in the 1993 lawsuit, told the people outside the Horiguchi Building that Munson asked her and Manibusan to talk and come up with an agreement.

Flores said if they do not reach an agreement, the court will conduct a hearing on her motion Friday at 11am.

In her motion, Flores asked the court to hold CUC in contempt for violating a 1994 federal court order that approved their settlement agreement.

In 1993 some customers sued CUC for disconnecting their utility services without proper notice. The utility agency and the plaintiffs, however, settled.

Under the settlement agreement, CUC is prohibited from doing certain things with regard to future disconnections. Specifically, the court prevented CUC to from disconnecting customers without mailing or personally delivering proper notices prior to disconnection.

In her motion, Flores alleged that CUC violated the settlement agreement, citing cases of least four customers whose power had been disconnected without any notices.