Interesting to note that the UNH study confirms availability in northern NH at 40 mw. Why would both studies have exclusions by their own admission without reason? Perhaps that's why the State of NH is asking for a third study? Truly a good question. Why would two studies exclude the same sources by their own admission? Very interesting and certainly with two studies and a third on the way by the very State that calls the shots, very important information as well. Good reason to delay any decisions at the State level until they have their wood study done. But then again, the State's not necessarily calling the shots so much with a company under 30 mw, in that case the city requires the company performs a wood study...which of course in this case has been conveniently accomplished. None-the-less, may the best proposal prevail.