From: Corkran, Jerry L [mailto:Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com]  

Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 1:59 PM

To: Richard Parker; Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Bob Smith;

Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Caskey, John; charlie drexler; Charlie Stevens; Chris Bolduc;

Chris Brown; Clark Silcox; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; David Flaten; Eric Peterson; Freeman,

Jeremiah; Gary Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; Hirsch, Bruce R; James Lass; Jennifer

Tiedeman; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie

Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matthew Nardotti; Maxine Savitz; Meg Waltner; Meyers,

Aaron; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Phil Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond;

Puesh Kumar; Rick Anderson; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk; Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul;

Scott Beck; Simmons, Chuck; Steve Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Thomas Petrosino; Tim Ballo; Tom Eckman;

Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo; Trujillo, Antonio; Meyers, Aaron; Marusinec, Richard M

Subject: RE: MV Transformers Material Price Sensitivity Analysis

Mr. Parker – I am assuming that the following requested information would not generate a significant

amount of added work load for the consultants, because the data must already exist.  Would you

request answers to the following questions?   

1. For the price sensitivity summary sheet sent with your memo: Would the consultants add what

prices they used in the computer programs to create the designs supplied to help us evaluate

the summarized reports supplied for these designs?    

2. For the designs Chris supplied, would the consultants supply the output data showing the core

and coil designs plus the tank designs created for a base design at each efficiency level?  We do

not need the hundreds of designs created at each loss level, typical designs at each loss level

would help us to learn if the proposed designs are actually possible to build and if they could be

expected to have the losses shown on the output summaries supplied.

3. For the efficiencies chosen for the various loss levels shown on the data supplied by Chris, were

manufacturing and material loss variations added before calculating the target efficiencies, so

that the normal variations in the tested losses would not prevent designs made that duplicate

the DOE designs from meeting the efficiency standards?  If allowances were not added that are

adequate for normal variations, a manufacturer would not be able to build the designs and

expect that a very high percentage would meet the DOE efficiency loss levels shown.  The

consultants are requested  to list what allowances were used when the target efficiencies were

created for the  summary data recently supplied.

Regards,

               Jerry Corkran

From: Richard Parker [mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com]  

Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 10:21 AM

To: Alex Hofmann; Andrew Delaski; Aris Marantan; Art Rosenfeld; Bob Saint; Bob Smith; Brian Coffey;

Caitlin Johnson; Carlos Gaytan; Caskey, John; charlie drexler; Charlie Stevens; Chris Bolduc; Chris Brown;

Clark Silcox; Creevy, Jim; Dan Cohen; Daniel Young; David Flaten; Eric Peterson; Freeman, Jeremiah; Gary

Fernstrom; Greg Coulter; Greg Rosenquist; Hirsch, Bruce R; James Lass; Jennifer Tiedeman; Corkran,

Jerry L; Jerry Hodge; Jerry Schoen; Jim Raba; Joanna Mauer; John Cymbalsky; John Rossetti; Katie

Coughlin; Ken Winder; Mahesh P. Sampat; Matthew Nardotti; Maxine Savitz; Meg Waltner; Meyers,

Aaron; Michael Hyland; Michael Rivest; Millure, Dave; Phil Harter; Phil Hopkinson; Polinski, Raymond;
Puesh Kumar; Richard W. Parker; Rick Anderson; Rob Greeson; Robert Berman; Robert van Buskirk;

Robin Roy; Ryan, Paul; Scott Beck; Simmons, Chuck; Steve Nadel; Steve Rosenstock; Thomas Petrosino;

Tim Ballo; Tom Eckman; Wes Patterson; Zhimei Luo

Subject: MV Transformers Material Price Sensitivity Analysis

Colleagues,

There have been a number of requests for additional LCC runs with various material prices reflecting

concerns with possible shortages of supply under various standards scenarios.

Attached is a sheet that summarizes the price sensitivity analysis that is currently in the pipeline: ranging

from 2006 minus 25% on the low side to 2008 plus 25% on the high side.  

For amorphous that yields a range from $1.72/lb to $3.64/lb, with a base case (2010) of 2.38/lb.   

For ZDMH, the range is from $1.41 to $3.22 with a base of 2.05.  (A sensitivity is already being run with

ZDMH screened entirely out of the analysis, reflecting concerns that this material may not be available

due to a reluctance to supply the North American market allegedly due to fear of dumping duties.)

As we discussed, each run takes several hours per design line so we obviously cannot accommodate all

requests, nor would it be instructive to do so absent some credible price scenario that is not currently

being modeled and that lies outside these boundaries.

So what I would propose is this:  Could industry participants in the MV Group please communicate with

each other today, examine the attached sheet and  

(a) try to arrive at a collective determination of whether there is reason to believe that  proposed range

of prices is really to narrow such that additional run is warranted; and

(b) if so, propose the set of prices that you would like to see run, and a short explanation/justification

for your request.

Greg Coulter has kindly agreed to serve as the coordinator for this effort so please work with him.  If for

any reason, issues of confidentiality prevent you from communicating with Greg and others in open

forum please let me know and I will discuss with you how to proceed.   

You also will need to choose a couple of design lines to focus on.  I understand that DL 1 and 2 are the

lines with the most shipments in the liquid immersed category.  If you have preferences for MVDT

please convey them with your request (perhaps DL 12?).  I would expect that we could manage runs for

3 design lines.  

Again, the consultants are swamped with work accommodating the input they've gotten from the group

so far, so please do not make work for them by requesting additional runs unless there really is good

cause for doing so.   

Please let us know by cob today what your preferences are.

All best,

Richard