RE:RE:RE:Weighted criteria used to choose the 150mwSchoen ...
Their statement is not true as we also proposed a Montalva owned tie-line to the Guanica substation that would have eliminated the concerns being raised. There is a robust line from Guanica to Costa Sur. Also, we were told by PREPA engineers and S&L that the system could handle 80 MW and we were reduced to 80 from 100. That number came from PREPA not us and we were being reduced from 100MW because of 35 MW of Solaner. If the true number had been 73, then we would have been reduced to 73. Lastly, if only two projects are being selected at this time, was Montalva evaluated assuming Solaner was going to be one of the two selected projects or are we discussing Montalva alone? I remember the 73 number as having been the maximum rating assuming transmission lines were out in both directions, but still available to San German. Under that circumstance, Montalva would be curtailed from 80 to 73. Not the end of the world and any statistical analysis knows the probability of occurrence of that is non-existant. Being eliminated for losing 7 MW and being a very remote possibility is ludicrous.