the one developed in the alamosa project present a special challenge. while the technology is proven in one context as previously mentioned, they have not been deployed on a scale. they do not provide project financing until they know that a technology is commercially viable. therefore the willingness to pursue was predicated on the ability to source alternative forms of debt financing. after unsuccessful attempts at attracting private debt capital was only through the loan program that they were able to obtain the debt that was cost-effective enough to allow us to move forward with the project. we committed approximately $115 million in equity and guarantees. we received for just under $90 million under the loan program. we began this process of application for the doe in february of 2010 and signed the guarantee on september 2nd, 2011. to date we have drawn $71 million against the federal loan that was approved. the project reached the operation on time and we expected it would be completed under budget and the final loan amount would be about $865 mi

given that fact, what was goldman sachs' involvement in the cogentrix project in alamosa, colorado? >> congressman kucinich, to answer that question, i think you have to understand how we structured this project. we structured this project at cogentrix like we would any other project financing for the construction of a power project. >> what was their involvement? >> so the involvement at goldman sachs really was derivative to the whole process. if i could just explain. first, we at the cogentrix level, the operating level, we would have to go out and secure and negotiate a power purchase agreement with an off-taker, a utility in this case, for the purchase of the power. the next thing we would do would be to select an equipment provider, and a construction manager. and then, and only then, would we go out and try to find the financing package that would make this project viable. >> so what was goldman sachs' involvement? >> so goldman sachs provided equity capital to cogentrix to make $116 million of commitments to this project. we are in fact the project leading financier. >> than

>> we do in the case of alamosa have a long-term power purchase agreement with the public service company of colorado. to purchase the power, that is one of the requirements of the d.o.e. -- >> you couldn't do it if you didn't have some kind of agreement in place, right? it doesn't work financially? >> it would be very difficult. >> otherwise you would be stuck with a white elephant? >> there are very few of those projects that have actually succeeded without long-term contracts. >> the white house reviewed the d.o.e. loan program office, found the d.o.e. support of publ public/private partnerships in states like california, ensure that loan guarantee recipients have a steady and predictable funding source. mr. crane, do you agree with this assessment? mr. rock rakowich, it has yet to start generating solar energy. that fact is disappointing. can you tell us how much taxpayers' money has been drawn down by the project so far? >> zero, congressman. >> how has the project -- what was that answer? >> none. >> none, okay. has the project amp loan guarantee designed to mitigate -- how was this

>> we do in the case of alamosa have a long-term power purchase agreement with the public service company of colorado. to purchase the power. that is one of the requirements the deal we don't spank you couldn't if he did have some kind of agreement in place, right? >> we couldn't do -- >> it would work financially. >> it would be very difficult. very difficult. >> otherwise you would be stuck with a white elephant. >> there are very few of those objects that have succeeded. >> an independent consultant to review the we loan programs office of the d.o.e. support of public-private partnerships between power generators and utilities in states like california ensure that loan guarantee recipients have a steady and predictable funding source. now, mr. craig, do you agree with this assessment? mr. rakowich, the the majority has document that prologis project amp has yet to start generating solar energy. that fact is disappointed but can you tell us how many taxpayers money has been drawn down by the project so far? >> zero, congressman. >> how has the project -- what was that andrew? >> none. >