From: Greg Coulter [mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com]  

Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2011 1:07 PM

To: Christopher Bolduc

Cc: Richard Parker; rick.anderson@faypwc.com; tballo@earthjustice.org; ScottB@lvmetals.com;

john.caskey@nema.org; jerry.corkran@cooperindustries.com; john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.gov;

adelaski@standardsasap.org; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; gbf1@pge.com; Gaytan Cavazos Carlos (GE Infra

Energy Non‐G; rgreeson@federalpacific.com; bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com; jhodge@howard.com;

mhyland@appanet.org; dave.millure@metglas.com; snadel@aceee.org; Wes Patterson;

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; Raymond.Polinski@atimetals.com; artrosenfeld@gmail.com;

srosenstock@eei.org; rroy@nrdc.org; robert.saint@nreca.coop; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com;

BermanEconomics@gmail.com; Daniel.Cohen@hq.doe.gov; Jim.creevy@nema.org;

ahofmann@publicpower.org; pkumar@publicpower.org; jmauer@standardsasap.org;

Aaron.Meyers@cooperindustries.com; jrossetti@mlgw.org; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com;

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com; mwaltner@nrdc.org; kwinder@mleainc.com;

Brian Coffey; kcoughlin@lbl.gov; brenda.edwards@ee.doe.gov; jeremiah.freeman@ee.doe.gov; Caitlin

Johnson; Zhimei Luo; emily.marchetti@ee.doe.gov; Michael Rivest; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov;

charlied@uus.org; Phil Hopkinson; James.Lass@cleco.com; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net;

DYoung@energy‐solution.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneider‐electric.com; eduardorobles@eaton.com;

vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com; thomas.patzner@us.schneider‐electric.com;

carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com; Raba, Jim; Tom Petrosino

Subject: Re: MV Liquid‐immersed LCC and NIA Results

Chris,

After doing some preliminary study of the information you sent, we have 4 questions as follows where

we would appreciate some additional information:

1. Overall ‐ So that we can more effectively analyze this new information,

could you please provide a brief summary of significant changes from the

9/09/2011 results?

2. Designs Used ‐ Can we assume that the designs defined in the 8/23 and

9/08/2011 Engineering Data files are the same designs used for this

analyses, excluding the ZDMH core designs?

3. Chart 16 ‐ The label above the top table reads "Summary Results by TSL for

Liquid‐immersed Transformers".  We believe this label should read "Summary

Results by EL for Liquid‐immersed Transformers".  Are we correct?

4. Chart 18 ‐ This chart describes 6 draft TSLs.  However, the chart then shows 7 TSLs.  While TSL6 and

TSL7 appear to be the same, is there significance to this additional TSL?
We would appreciate a quick response such that we can understand this information prior to our

upcoming meeting.

Thanks for your help.

Greg Coulter  

  

On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 10:23 PM, Christopher Bolduc <cabolduc@lbl.gov> wrote:

Dear Committee Members,

Please find the draft LCC and NIA results for liquid‐immersed

medium‐voltage transformers (design lines 1 ‐ 5) attached.

A summary of changes and additional sensitivities will be distributed

before next week's meeting.

Thank you,

‐‐ Chris Bolduc

‐‐‐‐ 

Chris Bolduc

Energy Efficiency Standards Group

Environmental Energy Technologies Division

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

t. 416‐535‐7546

c. 647‐832‐4021

‐‐  

Greg Coulter