miss bronicki, obviously you don't know a lot what's going on. this gentleman, mr. thompson, before he worked for you, he was an in-house -- he worked for mr. reid. anderson of cassidy and associates is a lobbyist for your firm, did you know that? >> yes. >> do you know who he worked for? he was harry reid's deputy chief of staff until 2005. so mr. thompson worked for harry reid. mr. anderson worked for harry reid. i would assume mr. bronicki, is that your husband? >> my son. >> and he was a donor to the reid re-election campaign. there's nothing wrong with that. here's my point. this is not to embarrass you. when we follow this judas goat of taking money from the government, there are strings attached to all this money we take. and there's re purr cushions. it gets to the point people start to wonder, as i said earlier, this feeding frenzy to come after this money. how in the world did 25 of you get to the table and the others were left out in the cold? you start to look, how did they get there? you think, geez, the guys worked for harry reid, and the other guy wor

miss bronicki? >> not that i'm aware of. >> doctor, does this seem unusual to you? this is par for the course when you head down this road, i assume, right? this is what happens when you decide you're going to have this cronyism in government. >> i'm not entirely surprised. i don't know this particular case. >> mr. rakowich, did you think it was a little unusual? that torbin is the one that worked for you, maybe he's a great guy, he's been working hard, we're going to tell him the answers to the exam. >> chairman, i don't think that sending a presentation, as to what project amp is about, that is our project. and so sending the presentation, i don't see as being unusual, no. >> feel free to use the concepts that we articulate in your own words. so this is certainly intellectual property development at the department of energy they're sending out, hey, you might want to use this language when you send it back to us. that's the implication i draw from that statement. is that not what you conclude? >> i don't know. i haven't seen it. >> again, we've got to take this --

bronicki, because i believe you don't know a lot of what's going on. this gentleman, mr. thompson, before he worked for you he was, he worked for mr. reed. kai anderson of cassidy and associates is an outside lobbyist for your from, did you know that? >> yes, sir. >> do you know who he worked for? [inaudible] he was harry reid's deputy chief of staff in 2005. okay, so mr. thompson worked for harry reid. mr. anderson worked for harry reid. who would that be? >> that's my son. >> he was a donor to senator reid's reelection campaign. and there's nothing wrong with this. there's nothing wrong. here's my point. this is not to embarrass you. when we follow this, taking money from the government, there are strings attached to all this money we take him and there's repercussions. tickets to the poor people start to wonder, as i said earlier, this feeding frenzy to come out of this money money, how in the world did 25 of you get to the table and the others were left out in the cold? how did they get there and you said well, gee, the guy his work for harry reid, and the other guy w

bronicki, you believe this is excessively risky or is a lower-risk project? >> from a technology point of view, there are many megawatts' that had been built using the same technology. it was only about expending geothermal innovation -- bailout but the risk was low? one reason why the portfolio can be considered low risk is because most of the projects that received loan guarantees are for power generation. doe required these companies to have long-term agreements in place with nearby utilities to purchase the power once it was built. this means the project have a guaranteed income stream, which greatly limits any risk of default. mr. mancini, can you explain the difference between the power generation projects like the cogentrix loan guarantee and project finance deals, and d you already have agreements to sell power to major utilities once the projects are completed? >> we do have a long-term power purchase agreement with the public service co. of colorado to purchase the power. that is one of the requirements of a loan. >> you could not do it if he did no