From: Richard Parker [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, September 02, 2011 11:56 AM To: Phil Hopkinson Cc: Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com; Jerry Schoen (jerry.schoen@aksteel.com); Caskey, John; Rob Greeson (rgreeson@electro-mechanical.com); sco_ choinski@nema.org; Brian Coffey; Dan Cohen; John Cymbalsky; Raymond Pcolinski (R aymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com) Subject: Clarification

Thanks, Phil, for your note. We welcome your expertise and will value your informal contributions as we go along.

I should also correct the record on two points. AK Steel did disclose that Phil has done work for DOE-Navigant on this rulemaking in their nominati on letter. The parenthetical mention on page 2 did not make it into the nomina tion list prepared for the selec tion process on the basis of the comments and so was overlooked. But it was there. Also, Eric Petersen called this morning to clarify that AK Steel did not mean to nominate Phil as an AK Steel representative but simply as a a respected transformer industry expert and consulta nt. I appreciate the cl arifications. I wanted to pass them along. They do not change the basic position that a governme nt consultant should not serve on a stakeholder committee, but again, Ph il's contributions as an expert will always be welcome.

Look forward to seeing everyone on the 15th.

All best, Richard Parker

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Phil Hopkinson < phopkinson@hvolt.com > wrote:

Good afternoon Richard and all:

Thank you for clarifying this situa tion. I think that I should not be representing any stakeholder under the circumstances. I would ask, however, if there may still be a role to review the negotiating data and to be certain that it is accurate. Such a position would not require me to attend the meetings in person but to review the data and check for accuracy. I have been alerted that the payback periods for the various design lines are not consistently changed from the data in the preliminary analysis. Some of the lines have experienced significant increases in the payback pe riods after my work of finding problems with the OPS Design information. However, other design lin es are showing reduced payback periods. This does not seem reasonable as all of the cost curves got steeper after the errors were resolved. They all should be showing longer payback periods.

I have no stake in the outcome of the DOE negotiations but both as a support to Navigant and as a longtime NEMA member, a registered Professional Engineer and an IEEE Fellow, I am most interested in accurate and truthful data being provided to all of th e stakeholders at the meetings. This could be done remotely but the data needs to be accurate.I hope this helps,

Phil

Philip J Hopkinson, PE President & CEO HVOLT Inc. 3704 High Ridge Rd. Charlotte, NC 28270 phopkinson@hvolt.com Ph 704-846-3290 Fx 704-845-2520 Cell 704-236-3320 www.hvolt.com

From: Richard Parker [mailto: richardparkerdc@gmail.com ] Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2011 4:46 PM To: Phil Hopkinson Cc: Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com ; Jerry Schoen ( jerry.schoen@aksteel.com ); Raymond Pcolinski ( Raymond.pcolinski@atimetals.com ); Caskey, John; Rob Greeson ( rgreeson@electro-mechanical.com ); sco_choinski@nema.org ; Brian Coffey ( brian.coffey@navigant.com ); Dan Cohen; John Cymbalsky Subject: Re: DOE Negotiations

Hi all,

Thanks, Phil, for bringing this to my attention, as Brian Coffey did as well, earlier this morning. As you may know you were nominated for th e negotiating committee by AK Steel for your expertise, and to represent their interests, and were selected by DOE staff and myself on that basis. None of us were aware of your prior work for Navigant (DOE's consultant in this proceeding) when that selection was made. Since receiving this email I have conferred with DOE staff and we all agree that it would not be appropriate for a person who has worked for the government (as consultant to Navigant) on this rulemaking to also represent a stakeholder in this same rulemaking. Therefore, we will ask you to disengage from the committee though you are of course free to attend the public meetings.

Thank you for your disclosure, which was entirely appropriate. AK Steel is ably represented by Eric Petersen on the committee so while your expertise will be missed we do not see it as necessary to add a replacement representative for AK Steel.Best wishes, Richard Parker

On Thu, Sep 1, 2011 at 9:32 AM, Phil Hopkinson < phopkinson@hvolt.com > wrote:

Good morning Gents:

I want to bring you up to speed on the DOE Ne gotiations and my role or lack thereof.

1. Richard Parker is the negotiator and has named me to the negotiating team as a result of a request by AK Steel.

2. Brian Coffey of Navigant Consulting is my dir ector of consulting activ ity in support of the DOE.

3. This morning Brian called me to indicate that the DOE does not plan to pay for work by any of the negotiators and that they will not support my work in the DOE task force. He is actually in the same unsupported state and will not be in the meetings either.

4. Brian Coffey pointed out that my contract with Navigant is non-exclusive and as such is not preventing me from representing others but I w ould not be representing the DOE or Navigant.

5. Future work by me for Navigant is likely to be a continuation of general technical expert and information gatherer as requested.

6. We addressed the aspect of poten tial conflicts of interest and I indicated that as in every consulting arrangement, I do my best to find the tr uth (like cost versus e fficiency) and report the facts without bias. We both agreed that such activity would not be a conflict of interest.

7. I see several possible paths forward at this point:

a. Disengage from the task force.

b. Remain on the task force as a repres entative of another organization and attend the meetings.

c. Remain on the task force as a repres entative of another organization but attend the meetings by telephone only and not attend the meetings in person.

8. I will be glad to assist the negotiations in an y useful way that you may see fit at this point and am not trying to rattle a tin cup as I have plenty of othe r consulting work but thought it important to clarify my current status.9. I have one conflict for the first meeting as I am giving a seminar on Voltage Transients to Hammond on September 16 th in Toronto. My plan had been to fly to Washington, DC on the 14 th , attend the morning and early afternoon sessions of the taskforce on the 15 th , and then fly to Toronto on the late afternoon flight on the 15 th to give my seminar. No tickets have been purchased.

10. I don’t know if either of you have ideas but I would lik e to start working on any travel plans early enough to avoid expens ive last minute flights.

Thanks for your interest,

Phil

Philip J Hopkinson, PE President & CEO HVOLT Inc. 3704 High Ridge Rd. Charlotte, NC 28270 phopkinson@hvolt.com Ph 704-846-3290 Fx 704-845-2520 Cell 704-236-3320 www.hvolt.com