From: Cohen, Daniel [mailto:Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:56 PM 

To: 'Kenneth Winder'; Jerry Hodge 

Cc: Richard Parker; Corkran, Jerry L; Caitlin Johnson; rick.anderson@faypwc.com; 

tballo@earthjustice.org; ScottB@lvmetals.com; john.caskey@nema.org; Cymbalsky, John; 

adelaski@standardsasap.org; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com; carlos.gaytan@ge.com; 

rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com; mhyland@appanet.org; 

dave.millure@metglas.com; Nadel, Steve; wes.patterson@us.abb.com; Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; 

Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop; 

chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; mark.stoering@xcelenergy.com; cabolduc@lbl.gov; kcoughlin@lbl.gov; 

Brian Coffey; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; Rosenstock, Steven; Michael Rivest; jrossetti@mlgw.org; 

Jim.creevy@nema.org; Meyers, Aaron; jmauer@standardsasap.org; greg.coulter405@gmail.com; 

bsmith@federalpacific.com; pkumar@publicpower.org; Trujillo, Antonio; Phil Hopkinson; 

ahofmann@publicpower.org; BermanEconomics@gmail.com; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; 

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org; chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com; Kampa, 

Michael; Marusinec, Richard M 

Subject: RE: Used Distribution Transformer market and prices 

That is correct. We addressed this issue in the 2007 final rule for distribution transformers. DOE 

carefully considered its authority to establish energy conservation standards for rebuilt and refurbished 

distribution transformers in light of comments received in that rulemaking, and concluded that its 

authority does not extend to rebuilt and refurbished products. 

Section 332 of EPCA provides that it shall be unlawful for any manufacturer or private labeler to 

distribute in commerce any new covered product which is not in conformity with an applicable energy 

conservation standard. (42 U.S.C. 6302(a)(5) (emphasis added)) 13 Congress made section 332 applicable 

to distribution transformers in section 346(f)(1) of EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6317(f)(1)) Section 332(b) defines 

‘‘new covered product’’ to mean ‘‘a covered product the title of which has not passed to a purchaser who 

buys such product for purposes other than (1) reselling such product, or 

(2) leasing such product for a period in excess of one year.’’ (42 U.S.C. 6302(b)) 

Regardless of the fact that the 332(b) definition may be the most poorly written sentence in the history of 

law, the sentence says that a new covered product is one for which the title has not passed to a consumer 

of that product. After a significant discussion of that statutory provision, the 2007 final rule concluded 

that it is unlikely that Congress would have made transfer of ‘‘title’’ the test of whether a product was 

‘‘new’’ if it intended to cover rebuilt or refurbished products where title had already passed to the 

consumer. The most reasonable interpretation of the statutory definition is that Congress intended that this 

provision apply to newly manufactured products the title of which has not passed for the first time to a 

consumer of the product. 

Note: This e-mail message is intended only for the named recipients. It contains information that may be confidential, privileged, 

attorney work product, or otherwise exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this message in error, are 

not a named recipient, or are not the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to a named recipient, be advised 

that any review, disclosure, use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this message or its contents is strictly prohibited. 

Please notify us immediately that you have received this message in error, and delete the message.

From: Kenneth Winder [mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 12:17 PM 

To: Jerry Hodge 

Cc: Richard Parker; Corkran, Jerry L; Caitlin Johnson; rick.anderson@faypwc.com; 

tballo@earthjustice.org; ScottB@lvmetals.com; john.caskey@nema.org; Cymbalsky, John; 

adelaski@standardsasap.org; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com; carlos.gaytan@ge.com; 

rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com; mhyland@appanet.org; 
dave.millure@metglas.com; Nadel, Steve; wes.patterson@us.abb.com; Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; 

Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop; 

chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; mark.stoering@xcelenergy.com; cabolduc@lbl.gov; kcoughlin@lbl.gov; 

Brian Coffey; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; Rosenstock, Steven; Michael Rivest; jrossetti@mlgw.org; 

Jim.creevy@nema.org; Meyers, Aaron; Cohen, Daniel; jmauer@standardsasap.org; 

greg.coulter405@gmail.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com; pkumar@publicpower.org; Trujillo, Antonio; Phil 

Hopkinson; ahofmann@publicpower.org; BermanEconomics@gmail.com; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; 

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org; chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com; Kampa, 

Michael; Marusinec, Richard M 

Subject: Re: Used Distribution Transformer market and prices 

Jerry and Everyone: 

 Re-manufactured or Rebuilt distribution transformers are not subject to any minimum or other 

efficiency requirements imposed by DOE. It is my understanding that DOE's legal counsel 

eliminated any regulation of this used transformer market during the last Rule Making. 

 The company that gave me the information about the used transformer market said that they 

improve the efficiency of transformers that they rewind in the cases where the original 

transformer had aluminum windings because they replace those with copper windings. They 

may rewind a unit that had copper original windings with new copper windings that may have 

lower losses since they use advanced insulation that is improved and thinner than that commonly 

found in the original windings, and that situation could allow more copper in the same space and 

that should decrease winding losses slightly. 

 Of course, they can measure losses of units being sold, but it is my opinion, from the 

conversation, that these transformers are not sold based upon low losses. Units are sold on the 

basis of first cost only, and there would not be any evaluation of losses. 

Ken 

On 11/16/2011 9:42 AM, Jerry Hodge wrote: 

Ken an All:

 

Your information on the used transformer market is very interesting and enlightening. It 

sounds like the rebuilders are doing a booming business.

 

In your discussion with this rebuilding firm, did they say anything about transformer 

efficiency? When they rebuild a unit, is it upgraded to meet the DOE Efficiencies? Do 

they say that they need to meet the DOE efficiencies or do they just not worry about 

efficiency?

 

It's not clear to me if DOE requires any efficiency levels from a rebuilt transformer. I am 

trying to find out if there are any DOE efficiency requirements on rebuilt transformers. 

Navigant is trying to find out, what if any, are the efficiency requirements for a rebuilder.

 

It's also interesting to note that their prices are close to our new units that do require 

meeting DOE efficiencies.

 

Thanks for the information, I appreciate it.

 

Jerry

 
Jerry Hodge 

Consulting Engineer, E.E., M.S., P.E. 

Retired V.P. & G.M. of Pole Type Transformer & Regulator Div. 

Howard Industries Inc. 

P.O.Box 1588 

Laurel, Ms, 39440 

601 422-1539 Bus. 

484 226-6190 Cell 

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information in this e-mail message, including all replies or forwarded messages connected herewith, is 

confidential, may be legally privileged, and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you, the reader of this message, are 

not an intended recipient hereof, you are hereby notified that you should not further disseminate, distribute, or forward this e-mail message. 

If you have received this e-mail message in error, please notify the sender as soon as possible by return e-mail message or by telephone at 

(601) 425-3151. In addition, please delete the erroneously received message and any reply from your system and any device/media where 

the message is stored. 

-----Original Message----- 

From: Kenneth Winder [mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 5:31 PM 

To: Richard Parker 

Cc: Corkran, Jerry L; Caitlin Johnson; rick.anderson@faypwc.com; tballo@earthjustice.org; 

ScottB@lvmetals.com; john.caskey@nema.org; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov; 

adelaski@standardsasap.org; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com; carlos.gaytan@ge.com; 

rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com; mhyland@appanet.org; 

dave.millure@metglas.com; Nadel, Steve; wes.patterson@us.abb.com; Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; 

Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop; 

chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; mark.stoering@xcelenergy.com; cabolduc@lbl.gov; kcoughlin@lbl.gov; 

Brian Coffey; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; Rosenstock, Steven; Michael Rivest; Jerry Hodge; 

jrossetti@mlgw.org; Jim.creevy@nema.org; Meyers, Aaron; Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov; 

jmauer@standardsasap.org; greg.coulter405@gmail.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com; 

pkumar@publicpower.org; Trujillo, Antonio; Phil Hopkinson; ahofmann@publicpower.org; 

BermanEconomics@gmail.com; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org; 

chad.kennedy@us.schneider-electric.com; Kampa, Michael; Marusinec, Richard M 

Subject: Re: Used Distribution Transformer market and prices

Richard and Colleagues: 

 Discussion with a national firm involved with the used-distribution transformer market has 

provided a look into what is presently happening there. According to them, the used transformer 

market has certainly been impacted by the Rule making on efficiency effective on January 1, 

2010. The demand for used transformers has escalated rapidly. 

 There are basically three (3) categories for used distribution transformers described as follows 

per discussion with them: 

 Category I: Distribution transformers that have been purchased as used equipment from 

industry and utilities that have cores in operating condition. The original primary and secondary 

windings are both removed and are replaced with new windings of copper. Insulating fluid is 

replaced, original tank is re-used but is re-painted, bushings are replaced, new gaskets installed, 

etc. This rebuilt transformer is tested and sold at approximately the same cost (maybe slightly 

higher) than newly manufactured transformer prices available at large-quantity purchases at the 

present minimum efficiency standards. 

 Category II: Distribution transformers that have been purchased as used equipment from 

industry and utilities that are working properly and do not require un-tanking. Insulating fluid is 

replaced, re-gasketed, original tank used but is re-painted, bushings are replaced, etc. This 
rebuilt transformer is tested and sold at between 60 and 75% of new transformer cost. 

 Category III: Owners of distribution transformers send their used transformers to 

maintenance shops for minor repairs, fluid replacement, re-painting, replacement of bushings, 

gaskets, etc. Cost for such repairs and transportation costs to and from shop are acceptable up to 

a set level (not to exceed 50% of new cost as an example). If transformer maintenance and 

improvements are estimated to exceed that value, the maintenance shop buys the unit and it may 

end up in Category I above or be scrapped and salvaged depending upon its condition. 

 

 The owner's of this nation-wide business expressed their excitement about the prospective 

business that will be created for them as prices increase for newly manufactured distribution 

transformers. 

Ken 

-- 

Kenneth A. Winder, P.E.

Manager-Engineering

Moon Lake Electric Association 

800 W Hwy 40 

PO Box 278 

Roosevelt UT 84066

435.722.5406 Office

435.724.1539 Cell 

435.722.5466 Fax

E-Mail: kwinder@mleainc.com

Web Site: www.mleainc.com