

Currently released so far... 12453 / 251,287
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
ASEC
AORC
AMGT
APER
AU
AF
AS
ACBAQ
AFGHANISTAN
AFIN
AR
AE
AJ
ADANA
AEMR
AG
ATRN
ADPM
APECO
AGAO
AMED
AX
AM
AL
ADCO
AA
AECL
AADP
ABUD
AMEX
ACAO
ANET
AODE
ASCH
AY
APEC
AID
AORG
ASEAN
AFSI
AFSN
AINF
AGR
AROC
AO
AMBASSADOR
AFFAIRS
ASIG
ABLD
ASUP
AND
ARM
ARF
AQ
ATFN
AC
ACOA
AORL
ADM
AUC
AGMT
ACABQ
ASEX
AFU
ALOW
AZ
APCS
AVERY
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AER
AN
AIT
AMG
AGRICULTURE
AMCHAMS
ACS
BR
BA
BD
BL
BO
BF
BU
BILAT
BEXP
BRUSSELS
BK
BN
BM
BT
BY
BX
BTIO
BIDEN
BG
BE
BP
BBSR
BC
BTIU
BWC
BB
BH
BMGT
CH
CY
CA
CU
CS
CO
CVIS
CPAS
CMGT
CE
COUNTER
CASC
COUNTRY
CJAN
COUNTERTERRORISM
CG
CI
CD
CIDA
CJUS
CDG
CBSA
CEUDA
CR
CM
CLMT
CAC
CBW
CODEL
COPUOS
CWC
CIC
CW
CBE
CHR
CFED
CT
CONS
CIA
CTM
CDC
CVR
CF
CLINTON
CITEL
CLEARANCE
COE
CN
CACS
CAN
CONDOLEEZZA
CB
CSW
CITT
CARSON
CNARC
CACM
CDB
CARICOM
COM
CROS
CAPC
CTR
CV
CKGR
CBC
CL
CICTE
CIS
ECON
EFIN
ELAB
ETRD
EIND
EC
EINV
EAGR
ENRG
ETTC
EAID
EPET
ELTN
EWWT
EAIR
EFIS
EMIN
EG
EU
ER
EUN
EPA
ENVI
EXTERNAL
ECPS
ENGR
ETRC
ECIN
EN
EI
ELN
ET
EINT
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ES
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
EZ
ETRO
EDU
ETRN
EFTA
EAIG
EK
EUREM
EURN
ECONCS
ECONOMICS
ENVR
ELECTIONS
EAP
ENIV
ECONOMY
ESA
EINN
ECONOMIC
EIAR
EXBS
ECA
ECUN
EINDETRD
EUR
EREL
EUC
ESENV
ECONEFIN
ECIP
ENERG
ENNP
EFINECONCS
EFIM
ENGY
EAIDS
EINVEFIN
EINVETC
EUMEM
ETRA
ETC
ERNG
ETRDECONWTOCS
EUNCH
ECINECONCS
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EXIM
ERD
EEPET
IR
IS
IZ
IAEA
IO
IAHRC
ID
IC
IT
IRAQI
IWC
IN
IL
ISLAMISTS
IV
ICAO
INDO
ITPHUM
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IPR
ICRC
INTERPOL
IQ
IBET
IMO
INR
ITRA
INTERNAL
ICJ
ICTY
IRS
ILO
INRA
INRO
ISRAELI
IEA
INRB
ITALY
ITU
IBRD
IIP
ILC
INTELSAT
IZPREL
IMF
INMARSAT
IRAJ
IDA
ICTR
IA
IGAD
IF
IDP
ITF
ISRAEL
IEFIN
IRC
IACI
KN
KCRM
KOMC
KNNPMNUC
KIPR
KPAL
KWBG
KSCA
KFRD
KNNP
KUNR
KTIP
KWMN
KSTC
KFLU
KOLY
KISL
KPAO
KMDR
KJUS
KSTH
KDEM
KCOR
KIRF
KAWC
KU
KTFN
KWAC
KNPP
KERG
KSEO
KACT
KHLS
KZ
KGHG
KTIA
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KCRCM
KE
KPKO
KCIP
KDRG
KVPR
KV
KIDE
KICC
KPRP
KBIO
KSUM
KGIT
KCFE
KG
KBTS
KFLO
KMPI
KS
KGIC
KPAI
KHSA
KTLA
KSEP
KTEX
KFSC
KOCI
KHDP
KPLS
KTDB
KHIV
KCSY
KSAC
KTRD
KID
KMRS
KOM
KSAF
KRVC
KR
KMOC
KNAR
KIRC
KBCT
KSPR
KFIN
KBTR
KJUST
KNEI
KAWK
KGCC
KMCA
KREL
KMFO
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFTFN
KVRP
KCOM
KO
KLIG
KAID
KVIR
KNSD
KHUM
KSEC
KRAD
KPRV
KCMR
KPWR
KCHG
KIFR
KCFC
KICA
KPIN
KSCI
KESS
KDEV
KTBT
KCRS
KCGC
KOMS
KRIM
KTER
KREC
KPOA
KWWMN
KRGY
KPAK
KWNM
KMIG
KDDG
KRFD
KWMM
KWMNCS
KX
KRCM
KPAONZ
KNUC
KDEMAF
KNUP
MARR
MOPS
MASS
MCAP
MTCRE
MNUC
MIL
MX
MEDIA
MO
MPOS
MU
ML
MA
MP
MY
MERCOSUR
MG
MD
MW
MK
MAS
MEETINGS
MR
MT
MI
MOPPS
MASC
MTS
MLS
MILI
MAR
MTRE
MEPN
MAPP
MTCR
MEPI
MQADHAFI
MAPS
MARAD
MASSMNUC
MEPP
MCC
MZ
MILITARY
MDC
MRCRE
MC
MV
MIK
MUCN
NATO
NL
NZ
NPT
NI
NAFTA
NU
NDP
NIPP
NP
NPA
NG
NRR
NO
NSC
NEW
NE
NH
NR
NA
NS
NSF
NZUS
NATIONAL
NSG
NC
NT
NAR
NK
NGO
NV
NSFO
NSSP
NASA
NW
NPG
NORAD
NATOPREL
OTRA
OAS
OPRC
OIIP
OVIP
OREP
OPDC
OEXC
OSCE
OFFICIALS
OMIG
ODIP
OFDP
OECD
OPIC
OBSP
OPCW
OFDA
OTR
OSAC
OSCI
ON
OCII
OES
OVP
OIC
OPAD
OIE
OHUM
OCS
PREL
PGOV
PK
PHUM
PINS
PARM
PA
PTER
PINR
PREF
PHSA
PBTS
PBIO
PO
POL
PE
PARMS
PM
PROG
PL
PAK
POLITICS
PORG
PTBS
PNAT
PUNE
POLICY
PDOV
PCI
PROP
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PBT
PP
PS
PAO
PG
PY
PTERE
PGOF
PALESTINIAN
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PPA
PINT
PMAR
PRELP
PSEPC
PREFA
PGOVE
PINF
PHUMPGOV
PNG
PMIL
PGOC
PFOR
PCUL
PLN
PSA
PGIV
POLINT
PAS
POGOV
PHUMPREL
PHUMBA
PEL
PGGV
PNR
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PGOVLO
PRAM
PHUS
PDEM
PECON
PF
POV
PROV
PRL
PREO
PAHO
PHUH
PSI
PINL
PU
PRGOV
PAIGH
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POSTS
RS
RU
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RIGHTS
RO
RW
RCMP
RF
RM
RFE
RSP
RP
RICE
ROBERT
ROOD
RELATIONS
RIGHTSPOLMIL
RUPREL
RSO
SU
SNAR
SO
SOCI
SW
SENV
SMIG
SCUL
SP
SZ
SENVKGHG
SR
SY
SA
SYRIA
SF
SI
SC
SWE
SARS
STEINBERG
SN
SG
SIPRS
ST
SEVN
SL
SPCE
SNARIZ
SSA
SNARCS
SYR
SK
SPCVIS
SHUM
SIPDIS
SHI
SH
SOFA
SEN
SNARN
SAARC
SAN
SANC
SCRS
TRGY
TBIO
TU
TF
TERRORISM
TI
TSPL
TPHY
TH
TIP
TSPA
TC
TO
TW
TX
TZ
TNGD
TT
TL
TV
TFIN
TS
TRSY
TINT
TN
TURKEY
TBID
TD
TK
TR
THPY
TP
TAGS
UNGA
UN
UK
US
UNC
UNSC
USUN
UG
UP
UY
USEU
UNESCO
USPS
USTR
UZ
UNHRC
UNO
UNMIK
UNAUS
UNHCR
UNCHR
USAID
UNVIE
UAE
USOAS
UNFICYP
UV
UNEP
UNODC
UNCHS
UNIDROIT
UNDESCO
UNDC
UNCHC
UNDP
UNCND
USNC
UNPUOS
UNICEF
UNCSD
UE
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 09PANAMA519, PRIMARY PANAMA CANAL CONTRACT TO BE AWARDED
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #09PANAMA519.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
09PANAMA519 | 2009-06-30 17:05 | 2011-04-07 00:12 | CONFIDENTIAL | Embassy Panama |
Appears in these articles: http://www.padigital.com.pa/periodico/edicion-actual/wikileaks-panama-interna.php?story_id=1027140&codeth=1593 |
VZCZCXYZ0025
OO RUEHWEB
DE RUEHZP #0519/01 1811705
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
O 301705Z JUN 09
FM AMEMBASSY PANAMA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 3538
INFO RUEHMD/AMEMBASSY MADRID IMMEDIATE 0334
RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN IMMEDIATE 0019
RHMFISS/CDR USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL IMMEDIATE
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RULSDMK/DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC IMMEDIATE
RUMIAAA/HQ USSOUTHCOM MIAMI FL IMMEDIATE
C O N F I D E N T I A L PANAMA 000519
SIPDIS
DEPT OF COMMERCE - MATTHEW GAISFORD
DEPT OF TREASURY - SARA SENICH
E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/29/2019
TAGS: ECON EINV ETRD MARR PM EWWT
SUBJECT: PRIMARY PANAMA CANAL CONTRACT TO BE AWARDED
REF: 2009 PANAMA 195
Classified By: Ambassador Stephenson for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d).
-------
SUMMARY
-------
1) (C) The public ceremony to announce a winner for the
Panama Canal's $3.35 billion third set of locks contract is
expected to be July 9. Three competing consortia submitted
bids and are led by the following firms: 1) Bechtel
(American), 2) ACS (Spanish), and 3) Sacyr (Spanish).
Reportedly, both Bechtel and ACS submitted technically
compliant bids priced over $4 billion; however, there are
doubts about Sacyr's technical and financial compliance.
Unfortunately, there is no clear standard for minimal
technical compliance and how a technically non-compliant bid
would be disqualified. Sacyr's price reportedly is lower
than $4 billion and price weighs heavily in the determination
of the winner. Additionally, Sacyr's bid is reportedly
supported by government export credit agencies reinsuring
their bonding syndicate, which is against the spirit of the
Panama Canal Authority's (ACP) public efforts to not involve
sovereign guarantees (the inclusion of which masks a
consortium's financial well-being and provides a financial
bidding advantage). Post will continue to monitor the
process, to advocate for Bechtel, and to promote U.S. based
content.
------------------------------
A WINNER WILL SOON BE DECLARED
(IF THE BID IS RIGHT)
---------------------
¶2. (SBU) The public ceremony to announce a winner for the
Panama Canal's third set of locks contract is expected to be
held between July 2 and July 14, according to private
statements made by representatives of the ACP and Canal
Expansion Project Advisor CH2MHill to Embassy and consortia
staff. July 9 is the most commonly reported date. As
explained in reftel, the financial portion of the bids will
be opened and scored during a ceremony. The financial score
(45% of the total points) will then be combined with the
technical score (55% of the total points), which is currently
being calculated by a team of experts. The winner will then
be instantaneously and publicly announced. However, if the
winner's financial bid is higher than the ACP's price cap
(which will be revealed moments before the consortia's
financial bids are opened), the winner will be asked to lower
their price to within the price cap. If the winner does not
accept the price cap price, then the ACP will allow all
consortia, who submitted technically and financially
compliant bids, to resubmit price proposals. These new price
proposals would then be combined with already determined
technical proposals and a new winner would be declared. If
the price is still too high, the ACP can raise its price
ceiling (which would need approval by the National Assembly)
or void the entire bidding process.
--------------------------
COMPETITORS AND THEIR BIDS
--------------------------
¶3. (C) Three consortia submitted bids and are led by the
following firms: 1) Bechtel (American), 2) ACS (Spanish), and
3) Sacyr (Spanish). According to a representative from the
Canal Expansion Project Advisor (American firm CH2MHill),
each consortium submitted differing bids. Bechtel reportedly
produced the "Rolls Royce" set of locks, which exceeded ACP
requirements, including for throughput. (As laid out in the
public bid documents, a consortium does not receive extra
points for exceeding requirements.) ACS reportedly more
closely followed the ACP's requirements. Sacyr, according to
CH2MHill, submitted a technical proposal, which may not be
minimally acceptable. Due to the publicly available criteria
for scoring the technical proposals and assuming initial
reports are accurate, it is anticipated that Bechtel and ACS
will receive roughly the same technical score. Sacyr, if
they are found technically compliant/viable, would score only
slightly lower. Thus, if the technical scores are close,
price will be the determining factor in the formula to
determine the winner.
¶4. (C) Reports of the prices attached to the bids roughly
track the quality. According to consortia members, both
Bechtel and ACS have bids that "start with a 4" - meaning
over $4 billion. Sacyr, via consortium member Impregilo,
leaked to the press the price of $3.7 billion on April 21 and
stated that they have the lowest price. Depending on the
accuracy of the leaked price data, Sacyr's financial score
could be significantly better than Bechtel's and ACS's.
(Leaking the bid price is a breach of the bidding rules.
Impregilo recently broke the bidding rules again by declaring
that the Sacyr-led consortium has the highest technical
score. Absent a breach in ACP security, this information was
unknowable at the time of the statements. ACS and Bechtel
have both written strong protest letters to the ACP.) Post's
Senior Commercial Officer reports that during an unrelated
meeting, a senior ACP official accidentally stated the ACP
price ceiling is $3.62 billion.
-------------------------
SACYR - POTENTIAL SPOILER
-------------------------
¶5. (C) When combined the financial and technical components
of the bid are combined in 45% and 55% proportions
respectively, the Sacyr bid could win this "best value"
competition. A Sacyr win could be disconcerting. Sacyr is
considered bankrupt and is being propped up by the Spanish
government. Therefore, besides possibly having a design that
is not workable, a Sacyr wins adds financial risk to the
locks construction. The bid process has protections against
non-compliant bids, if the ACP chooses to activate the
protections. If a bid is technically non-compliant (and the
ACP has not detailed the exact parameters of a technically
non-compliant bid), the ACP has the option to not even open
the price envelope. Bechtel representatives told the
Ambassador on June 24 that they prefer this path. If a bid
is financially non-compliant, the ACP possibly can reject the
offer. A bid would be financially non-compliant if a
consortium failed a financial health audit, which will be
conducted on the winner. All consortia were determined by
the ACP to be financially healthy as of November 15, 2007
during the pre-qualification phase. Based upon previous
decisions to keep all consortia in the process, the ACP is
not expected to disqualify any consortium.
--------------------------------
SACYR - RECEIVING STATE SUPPORT?
--------------------------------
¶6. (C) Based upon reports from representatives from competing
consortia, Sacyr's $50 million performance bond is backed by
the government export credit agencies of Spain
(CESCE-Secretaria de Estado de Comercio), France
(COFACE-Compagnie Francaise D'Assurance Pour le Commerce
Extereur), and Italy (SACE-Servize Assicurativi del Commercio
Estero). Sacyr gained a competitive advantage by securing
the near equivalent of a sovereign guarantee apparently at no
additional cost and no additional scrutiny of their books
(vice Bechtel and ACS who had to purchase the bond on the
open market and subjected their firms to some level of
financial evaluation). This arrangement goes against ACP
Administrator Aleman's publicly expressed desire not to have
sovereign guarantees, because the performance bond ideally
should serve as a surrogate for a consortium's financial
health. If a consortium could not provide the $50 million
performance bond, then the consortium was probably not
financially healthy. If Sacyr wins, litigation from Bechtel
or ACS is likely. For ACS, there is the added dimension of
why the Spanish government is helping one Spanish consortium
and not the other. It should be noted, however, that the ACP
has not prohibited use of export credit agencies in the
bidding process.
-------
COMMENT
-------
¶7. (SBU) In essence, the ACP created a transparent process
and now - due to rigid adherence to that process - may choose
a consortium that provides the "best value," on paper, but
may not be capable of completing the project. It appears
that the ACP wished to retain flexibility by not clearly
demarcating the floor of technical non-compliance and not
deviating from its rules to ask Sacyr for a comprehensive
audit before the bids are open. (We understand that Sacyr may
have provided year-to-date 2009 financial data that, due to
the limited time window of that data, could continue to mask
Sacyr's true financial condition.) Post will continue to
monitor the bidding process closely to ensure fairness. Post
maintains frequent communication with Bechtel representatives
in order to coordinate actions to assure Bechtel is not
unfairly disadvantaged.
STEPHENSON