In his letter to Attorney General Edward Buckingham and CUC general counsel Deborah Fisher, O’Brien proposed the creation of an efficient process involving numerous revenue and grant stakeholders to ensure to the extent possible that the CNMI government and CUC can fund and timely meet the requirements of the stipulated orders entered in March 2009.
With respect to the status of federal funding available to the CNMI, O’Brien said “potential future funding requests should also be described” by the work group.
O’Brien said: “There is no question that federal funding has been made available to CNMI for projects throughout CNMI; however, it is extremely difficult to determine the current funding needs or how funds should be re-allocated unless the participants to this process have a clear view of the entire funding landscape and the scope and timing of the projects for which funds have been allocated.”
The EPA lawyer added, “Because this information will be integral to evaluating project and funding needs and how funds should be re-allocated, I suggest that CNMI and CUC provide this information in a readily understood format within 30 days of this letter.”
Representatives from the CNMI government, CUC, and the EPA held a status conference on Feb. 14, presided by Judge David O. Carter for the Central District of California.
The court also discussed the extent to which funding and project completion should be prioritized.
In furtherance of that goal, O’Brien said the federal government suggested that the “stakeholders to the funding process work cooperatively.”
O’Brien proposed that the persons and entities typically involved in CNMI federal funding process and in implementing local drinking water, wastewater and oil handling projects participate, along with CUC, the CNMI Attorney General’s Office, and the EPA “in a work group that will focus on the application, allocation, and re-allocation of federal funding and any other sources of funding available to CNMI that will facilitate CUC’s and CNMI’s compliance with the stipulated orders.”
