Cable Viewer

Currently released so far... 5049 / 251,287

### Articles

Brazil Sri Lanka United Kingdom Sweden Editorial United States Latin America Egypt Yemen Jordan

### Browse latest releases

2010/11 2010/12 2011/01 2011/02
2010/11/28 2010/11/29 2010/11/30
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

### Browse by creation date

66 72 73 75 79 86 88 89 90 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10
1966/12
1972/02 1972/08
1973/04
1975/03
1979/08
1986/05
1988/01
1989/12
1990/01 1990/07 1990/08
2000/06 2000/09 2000/11
2001/02 2001/03 2001/07 2001/10
2002/02 2002/03 2002/11
2003/03 2003/04 2003/05 2003/06 2003/07 2003/08 2003/09 2003/10 2003/11 2003/12
2004/01 2004/02 2004/03 2004/04 2004/05 2004/06 2004/07 2004/08 2004/09 2004/10 2004/11 2004/12
2005/01 2005/02 2005/03 2005/04 2005/05 2005/06 2005/07 2005/08 2005/09 2005/10 2005/11 2005/12
2006/01 2006/02 2006/03 2006/04 2006/05 2006/06 2006/07 2006/08 2006/09 2006/10 2006/11 2006/12
2007/01 2007/02 2007/03 2007/04 2007/05 2007/06 2007/07 2007/08 2007/09 2007/10 2007/11 2007/12
2008/01 2008/02 2008/03 2008/04 2008/05 2008/06 2008/07 2008/08 2008/09 2008/10 2008/11 2008/12
2009/01 2009/02 2009/03 2009/04 2009/05 2009/06 2009/07 2009/08 2009/09 2009/10 2009/11 2009/12
2010/01 2010/02

### Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z
Embassy Athens Embassy Asuncion Embassy Astana Embassy Asmara Embassy Ashgabat Embassy Ankara Embassy Amman Embassy Algiers Embassy Addis Ababa Embassy Accra Embassy Abuja Embassy Abu Dhabi Embassy Abidjan Consulate Amsterdam 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 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 Casablanca Consulate Cape Town
Embassy Dushanbe Embassy Dublin Embassy Doha Embassy Djibouti Embassy Dhaka Embassy Dar Es Salaam Embassy Damascus Embassy Dakar Consulate Dubai
Embassy Freetown
Embassy Guatemala Embassy Gaborone Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki Embassy Harare Embassy Hanoi Consulate Hermosillo Consulate Hamburg
Iran RPO Dubai Embassy Islamabad Consulate Istanbul
Embassy Jakarta Consulate Jerusalem Consulate Jeddah
Embassy Kyiv Embassy Kuwait Embassy Kuala Lumpur Embassy Kinshasa Embassy Kigali Embassy Khartoum Embassy Kampala Embassy Kabul
Embassy Luxembourg Embassy Luanda Embassy London Embassy Ljubljana Embassy Lisbon Embassy Lima Embassy Lilongwe Embassy La Paz Consulate Lagos
Mission USNATO Embassy Muscat Embassy Moscow Embassy Montevideo Embassy Monrovia Embassy Minsk Embassy Mexico Embassy Mbabane Embassy Maputo Embassy Manama Embassy Managua Embassy Malabo Embassy Madrid Consulate Munich Consulate Montreal Consulate Monterrey
Embassy New Delhi Embassy Nassau Embassy Nairobi Consulate Naples
Embassy Ouagadougou Embassy Ottawa Embassy Oslo
Embassy Pristina Embassy Pretoria Embassy Prague Embassy Port Au Prince Embassy Phnom Penh Embassy Paris Embassy Paramaribo Embassy Panama Consulate Peshawar
Embassy Quito
REO Basrah Embassy Rome Embassy Riyadh Embassy Riga Embassy Reykjavik Embassy Rangoon Embassy Rabat Consulate Rio De Janeiro Consulate Recife
Secretary of State 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 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
USUN New York USEU Brussels US Mission Geneva US Interests Section Havana US Delegation, Secretary UNVIE Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius Embassy Vienna Embassy Vatican Consulate Vladivostok
Embassy Windhoek Embassy Wellington Embassy Warsaw
Embassy Yerevan Embassy Yaounde
Embassy Zagreb

### Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ASEC AJ AM AF AR AMGT AE AU AGMT AG AS AORC AFIN APER ABUD ATRN AL AEMR ACOA AO AX AMED ADCO AODE AFFAIRS AC ASIG ABLD AA AFU ASUP AROC ATFN AVERY APCS AER ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG AEC APECO
BTIO BEXP BL BR BM BH BA BE BK BRUSSELS BX BU BO BIDEN BY BG BF BB BC BBSR BMGT BTIU BILAT
CIA CACM CDB CU CH CI CS CVIS CA CO CBW CASC CD CV CMGT CLINTON CE CJAN CG CF CN CAN COUNTER CDG CIS CM CONDOLEEZZA COE CR CY CTM COUNTRY CLEARANCE CPAS CWC CT CKGR CB CACS COM CJUS CARSON CL COUNTERTERRORISM
DEAX DR DA DHS DOE DEA DK DJ DISENGAGEMENT DS DTRA DOD
EI EFIN ECON EAID ETRD EINV ENRG EAIR ELAB EN EAGR ETTC EPET EU EIND EWWT EUN EG ELTN EREL ER EMIN ECIN ECPS EFIS EINT EZ ET EC ECONEFIN ENVR ES ECA ELN EXTERNAL EINVETC ENIV EINN ENGR EUR ESA ENERG EK ENGY ETRO ELECTIONS ECUN EINVEFIN ECIP EINDETRD EUC
FR FINR FAO FTAA FREEDOM FI FARC FBI FJ FMLN
GG GM GH GA GV GE GT GR GTIP GOI GCC GAZA GZ GTMO
HA HU HR HILLARY HUMAN HO HYMPSK HURI HK HSTC
IR IS IZ IT ICTY IV IN IQ ICAO INTERPOL IPR INRB IAEA IRAJ INRA INRO IO IC ID IIP ITPHUM IWC ISRAELI IRAQI ICRC IMO IF ILC IEFIN INTELSAT IL IA IBRD IMF INR IRC ITALY ITALIAN
JAMES JO JA JOSEPH JP JOHNNIE JUS
KPAL KNNP KGCC KSUM KPIN KDRG KTFN KU KPAO KCRM KDEM KWBG KG KBIO KHIV KSCA KAWK KISL KN KS KHLS KCOR KZ KE KSPR KJUS KFRD KTIP KIPR KPKO KNUC KMDR KGHG KPLS KOLY KUNR KIRF KIRC KACT KGIC KRAD KCOM KMCA KV KHDP KVPR KDEV KWMN KMPI KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KCFC KTIA KPRP KAWC KCIP KCFE KOCI KTDB KMRS KLIG KBCT KICC KGIT KSTC KPAK KNEI KSEP KPOA KFLU KNUP KNNPMNUC KOMC KO KTER KHUM KRFD KBTR KDDG KWWMN KFLO KSAF KBTS KPRV KNPP KNAR KWMM KERG KFIN KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KTBT KCRS KRVC KSTH KREL KNSD KPAI KHSA KR KPWR KWAC KMIG KSEC KIFR KDEMAF
LG LH LE LY LU LI LO LOG LT
MOPS MARR MASS MX MCAP MIL MNUC MTCRE MO ML MR MZ MPOS MOPPS MTCR MAPP MU MY MA MG MASC MCC MEPP MK MTRE MP MDC MAR MEPI MRCRE MI MT MQADHAFI MD MAPS MUCN MASSMNUC MERCOSUR
NIPP NATO NU NI NPT NG NL NO NE NS NAR NZ NPG NK NSG NA NT NASA NGO NP NSF NATIONAL
OSAC OAS OPRC OVIP OEXC OIIP ODIP OREP OFDP OPDC OTRA OSCE OPIC OECD OPCW OSCI OIE OIC OTR OVP OFFICIALS
PREL PGOV PINR PTER PINS PHUM PROP PK PARM PINL PL POL PREF PE PBIO PSOE PBTS PHSA PKFK PO PGOF PA PARMS PORG PM PMIL PTERE PF PALESTINIAN PY PGGV PNR POV PAK PAO PFOR PHALANAGE PARTY PRGOV PNAT PROV PEL PINF PGOVE POLINT PRL PRAM PMAR PGOVLO PHUMBA POLITICS PEPR PSI PINT PU POLITICAL PARTIES PECON POGOV
QA
RS RU RW RP RO RIGHTS RICE ROBERT RF RFE REGION
SOCI SP SY SA SENV SCUL SR SNAR STEINBERG SF SW SU SL SG SMIG SO SN SHUM SZ SYR ST SANC SC SAN SIPRS SK SH SI
TS TU TX TBIO TW TSPA TH TIP TI TRGY TC TR TT TERRORISM TO TFIN TD TSPL TZ TPHY TK TNGD TINT TRSY
UK UNSC UP UG UV US UN UNGA USEU USUN UY UZ UNO UNMIK UNESCO UE UAE UNEP USTR UNHCR UNDP UNHRC USAID UNCHS UNAUS UNCHC
VE VZ VN VT VM VTPREL
WTRO WA WI WZ WMO WTRQ WHO WWARD WB WBG WEU WTO
XM XR XS XL XK XH XA XF XT XY XG XC XZ XW XD XE
YM YI YE
ZB ZI ZF ZP ZK ZANU ZOELLICK ZR ZU ZA ZO ZJ

### Browse by classification

CONFIDENTIAL CONFIDENTIAL//NOFORN SECRET SECRET//NOFORN UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

### Community resources

Follow us on Twitter Check our Reddit Twitter this Digg this page Contact us on IRC

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.

To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.
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 | 2010-12-18 12:12 | CONFIDENTIAL | Embassy Panama

`

    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

`