La gran filtraci¨®n
Cable que analiza las ofertas para las obras del Canal de Panam¨¢
La embajada de EE UU en Panam¨¢ cuestiona la salud financiera de Sacyr y dice que si gana puede haber impugnaciones por haber recibido apoyo del Cesce
| ID: | 214644 |
| Date: | 2009-06-30 17:05:00 |
| Origin: | 09PANAMA519 |
| Source: | Embassy Panama |
| Classification: | CONFIDENTIAL |
| Dunno: | 09PANAMA195 |
| Destination: | 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 |
Traduce este documento ?
Traducci¨®n autom¨¢tica. Puede que el texto traducido no sea fiel al original
Tu suscripci¨®n se est¨¢ usando en otro dispositivo
?Quieres a?adir otro usuario a tu suscripci¨®n?
Si contin¨²as leyendo en este dispositivo, no se podr¨¢ leer en el otro.
FlechaTu suscripci¨®n se est¨¢ usando en otro dispositivo y solo puedes acceder a EL PA?S desde un dispositivo a la vez.
Si quieres compartir tu cuenta, cambia tu suscripci¨®n a la modalidad Premium, as¨ª podr¨¢s a?adir otro usuario. Cada uno acceder¨¢ con su propia cuenta de email, lo que os permitir¨¢ personalizar vuestra experiencia en EL PA?S.
En el caso de no saber qui¨¦n est¨¢ usando tu cuenta, te recomendamos cambiar tu contrase?a aqu¨ª.
Si decides continuar compartiendo tu cuenta, este mensaje se mostrar¨¢ en tu dispositivo y en el de la otra persona que est¨¢ usando tu cuenta de forma indefinida, afectando a tu experiencia de lectura. Puedes consultar aqu¨ª los t¨¦rminos y condiciones de la suscripci¨®n digital.
