### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 1

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY APPLIANCE STANDARDS AND RULEMAKING FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ASRAC PUMPS WORKING GROUP

Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C.

Thursday, May 29, 2014 8:07 a.m.

Reported by: Christine Allen, Capital Reporting Company

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 2 1 A P P E A R A N C E S 2 FACILITATOR: Doug Brookman 3 AND ASRAC REPRESENTATIVES: 4 Lucas Adin U.S. Department of Energy 5 Betsy Kohl 6 U.S. Department of Energy, Gen Counsel 7 INDUSTRY PARTICIPANTS: 8 Charles Cappellino 9 ITT Industrial Process 10 Greg Case(via phone) (Representing the Hydraulic Institute) 11 Pump Design, Development and Diagnostics 12 Dan Delaney Regal Beloit 13 Tom Eckman 14 Northwest Power and Conservation Council 15 Gary Fernstrom California IOUs 16 Mark Handzel 17 Xylem Corporation 18 Brian Henry Patterson Pump Company 19 Joanna Mauer 20 Appliance Standards Awareness Project 21 Brent McManis Baldor Electric 22

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 3 1 A P P E A R A N C E S (Cont.) 2 INDUSTRY PARTICIPANTS (Cont.): 3 Douglas Potts(via phone) American Water 4 Steve Rosenstock 5 Edison Electric Institute 6 Jay Sivigny Flowserve Corp., Industrial Pumps 7 Louis Starr 8 Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance 9 Steve Thompson Taco, Inc. 10 Greg Towsley 11 Grundfos USA 12 CONSULTANTS: 13 Christopher Lau Navigant 14 Erica Johnson 15 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 16 Daniel Weintraub Navigant 17 Sarah Widder 18 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 19 Alison Williams Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory 20 21 22

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 4 1 A G E N D A Page 2 1. Continue Negotiations for Standards Levels 5 2. Discuss Implementation of Metric 105 3 PER vs. PEI Standard vs. Label 4 3. Finalize Metric Issues that Affect Standard 250 5 Load points and weights Motor sizing and losses 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 5 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 (8:07 a.m.) 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Let's start. Good 4 morning, everyone. Welcome. This is 5 the second day of the Commercial and Industrial 6 Pumps Working 7 Group, Meeting Six. Today is May 29, 2014, 8 here in Washington, D.C. in the Forrestal 9 Building. 10 Welcome, nice to see you this morning. 11 My name is Doug Brookman from Public 12 Solutions in Baltimore. Let's start by doing 13 introductions around the room. Please say your 14 name, your organization/affiliation. You can 15 get used to turning these microphones both on and 16 off. 17 Please. 18 MR. SIVIGNY: Jay Sivigny, Flowserve 19 Corporation. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: That?s really good, 21 because sometimes unless you get these things 22 close to your face, they don't really pick up the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 6 1 full sound. Please. 2 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, ITT 3 Corporation. 4 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel, Xylem. 5 MR. HENRY: Brian Henry, Patterson 6 Pump 7 Company. 8 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 9 MR. THOMPSON: Steve Thompson, Taco. 10 MR. FERNSTROM: Gary Fernstrom, 11 representing the California Investor Owned 12 Utilities, who are the Pacific Gas and Electric 13 Company, the Southern California Edison Company, 14 the San Diego Gas and Electric Company, and the 15 Southern California Gas Company. 16 MR. STARR: Louis Starr, Northwest 17 Energy Efficiency Alliance. 18 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal 19 Beloit. 20 MR. ECKMAN: Tom Eckman, Northwest 21 Power and Conservation Council. 22 MS. MAUER: Joanna Mauer, Appliance

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 7 1 Standards Awareness Project. 2 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl, DOE General 3 Counsel. 4 MR. ADIN: Lucas Adin, DOE. 5 MS. WILLIAMS: Alison Williams, 6 Lawrence 7 Berkeley National Lab. 8 MR. WEINTRAUB: Daniel Weintraub, 9 Navigant. 10 MS. WIDDER: Sarah Widder, Pacific 11 Northwest National Lab. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Please stand up and say 13 your name. 14 UNIDENTIFIED: (Off microphone.) 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Please. 16 MS. JOHNSON: Erica Johnson. Pacific 17 Northwest National Lab. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks very much. 19 Thanks again to all of you for being here on time. 20 We will get an early start on this day. 21 I?ve had a brief consultation this 22 morning. Just another logistical thing or

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 8 1 two. 2 Meg Waltner communicated with me at the 3 end of the last meeting and said she wouldn?t be 4 able to make it to this one. This morning we 5 have 6 Steve Thompson sitting in for Bob Barbour. We 7 have Brian Henry sitting in for Al Huber, and Jay 8 Sivigny sitting in for Chuck Powers. 9 Greg Case is probably on the phone. 10 Doug Potts said that he very likely 11 would be on the phone. 12 MR. HANDZEL: Greg is on the phone, 13 Doug. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Great. Okay. Thanks 15 for that, Mark. Hopefully, those members will 16 be able to join us and keep up with what?s going 17 on here. 18 I had a brief conversation this 19 morning with the two principal caucuses about how 20 they would like to proceed this morning. Both 21 the 22 Manufacturers? Caucus and the Energy Efficiency

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 9 1 Advocates? Caucus have something akin to a 2 starting point for negotiations, either in their 3 front pocket or their back pocket. 4 I was thinking that a few individuals in 5 the Manufacturers? Caucus were saying they still 6 had a series of questions they would like to have 7 answered, and I was thinking maybe that would be 8 not a bad place to start, to just kind of answer 9 as many of those as possible before we actually 10 begin launching into the standard setting 11 activity, the standard setting negotiation. 12 Then as the day proceeds, I guess we are 13 going to return to metrics and try to get as much 14 closure, perhaps full closure on metrics. 15 I?m looking at Sarah. Yes? 16 MS. WIDDER: That would be ideal. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: That would be great. 18 We made huge progress on metrics at our last 19 meeting. 20 I think the meeting notes that I wrote 21 reflected that about half the room was willing to 22 make a preliminary vote yes on the agreement, and

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 10 1 other half was hesitant to do so. 2 I think we had substantially 3 conceptually a lot of agreement on the shape, the 4 contour of the metrics, despite the fact that 5 they?re complicated. 6 I was just going to suggest we start 7 with questions/comments here at the outset, and 8 perhaps I will look to Lucas Adin, DOE. Do you 9 wish to make opening remarks? 10 MR. ADIN: I don?t think I have 11 anything specific to start with today: no. 12 Thanks, Doug. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. To just cue this 14 up, Mark Handzel, you referenced you had 15 questions, for example, about enforcement, and 16 perhaps other things as well. 17 MR. HANDZEL: Yes. We spent a lot 18 of time discussing after the meeting last night 19 just where we thought we were and what we knew and 20 what we didn?t know. I think one of the biggest 21 open areas that we feel as the pump manufacturers? 22 group that we are not up to speed on is how will

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 11 1 DOE implement a regulation in terms of--we all 2 make a lot of different products. 3 Are you going to create a database? 4 Are you going to monitor this or is it self5 policing? 6 How does the process work once the rule 7 goes into effect? 8 It?s just detail, but I think it?s a big 9 void that we don?t know anything about, because 10 none of us have ever been through this before. 11 MR. ADIN: Some of that will need 12 to be addressed in a rulemaking by DOE subsequent 13 to the adoption of standards. That is normally 14 how we do it for other products; we set standard 15 levels, we have a test procedure, and then we have 16 specific procedures that we adopt that are for 17 enforcement of the standards for that product that 18 are specific to it. 19 I can speak generally about the way that 20 DOE?s enforcement process works, as it would for 21 any other product. There?s no reason to 22 believe it would be any different for pumps than

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 12 1 it would be for motors or any other type of 2 product. 3 The enforcement process for DOE 4 standards generally relies upon manufacturer self5 certification, which means that for a given 6 product that is subject to a standard, each basic 7 model has to be assigned a rating and its 8 compliance with the applicable standard has to be 9 certified to the Department. 10 That is the responsibility of the 11 manufacturer. The manufacturer would--unless 12 some other requirement is adopted that says 13 otherwise-- do its own testing or could do its own 14 testing or at its own option, hire a third party 15 lab to do the testing for them. 16 Based upon those tests, using the 17 prescribed DOE test method, assign a rating to 18 each basic model, and then submit a compliance 19 certification to the Department certifying that 20 each basic model, based on the rating obtained 21 from those tests, complies with the applicable 22 standard.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 13 1 A few years ago, we set up an on line 2 system that allows manufacturers to certify 3 through an on line process as opposed to paper 4 reports or something like that. That is the way it 5 used to be. 6 The system that we use is called a 7 Compliance Certification Management System, CCMS. 8 We use data submittal templates, which 9 are just formatted Excel templates, and they have 10 a number of different fields which satisfy the 11 data requirements that the Department has for 12 information about the manufacturer and information 13 about the models being certified and certified 14 ratings. 15 The data that is submitted goes through 16 a validation process, and then provided it is 17 valid, it includes all the necessary information 18 and the products meet the applicable standards, it 19 goes into a public database, and all that 20 information would be accessible for viewing by the 21 public, consumers or whomever is looking for 22 information.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 14 1 To get to part of your original 2 question, there is an element of self-policing, 3 too. Manufacturers are free to bring information 4 to the Department about possible non-compliance of 5 another manufacturer or something of that nature, 6 and the Department does investigate complaints of 7 that nature. 8 It relies both on manufacturers 9 supplying the required information to the 10 Department and some element of self-policing in 11 the industry. The Department also has the 12 authority to periodically test products on its own 13 to evaluate whether products that have been 14 certified are in fact compliant with the 15 applicable standards. 16 It?s all those things, really. 17 MR. HANDZEL: I just have some 18 questions. Just to come back to where I was, 19 basically--this is going probably a little more 20 deep, we would submit every model that?s in the 21 scope that we manufacture. Is the testing one 22 pump? Is it multiple pumps? How do you guys

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 15 1 handle those types of things? Like with the 2 motors, is it a sample? 3 MR. ADIN: It depends on the 4 product. 5 By and large, with a few exceptions, the 6 testing of each model is based on a minimum sample 7 of two units, just so you can actually get an 8 average, you know, have a statistical method of 9 ensuring that is a representative sample of the 10 population. 11 As to how many models you have to test, 12 again, this is something I think we would still 13 have to determine for the pumps because it is 14 something we are setting standards for the first 15 time, but DOE generally uses a concept called 16 basic models to determine how many models have to 17 be tested. 18 Essentially what that means is that 19 models can be grouped together based upon their 20 physical characteristics and their energy 21 consumption. If you have a group of models that 22 are essentially identical as far as their energy

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 16 1 consumption, they don?t have any differing 2 characteristics that would affect how much energy 3 they use, then they can be grouped together as a 4 basic model, and just one of them has to be 5 tested, and the rating of that model can represent 6 all the other models within that group. 7 But with the understanding that if any 8 one of them were to be tested and failed, the 9 whole group would be considered non-compliant. 10 MR. HANDZEL: Lucas, would this 11 Working 12 Group be involved in making recommendations on how 13 this would be set up or this will be DOE?s 14 decision once we make a recommendation to ASRAC 15 and it proceeds through the process? 16 MR. ADIN: That is something that 17 DOE would do, but we would do it through a 18 rulemaking process. This group would still 19 have the opportunity to provide specific input and 20 comment on whatever DOE proposed. 21 Of course, we would consider everything 22 that we discussed here with respect to test

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 17 1 procedure and metrics, and the information you 2 have all provided about your products. 3 The idea is to try to make it as 4 representative as possible of what is appropriate 5 based on the characteristics of these products, 6 how many really need to be tested, what is the 7 appropriate statistical sampling method, what is 8 the likely variation between models based on 9 production tolerances, that kind of thing. 10 We will be looking for that kind of 11 information. It is not the kind of thing we can 12 really do in this setting, but we will do it 13 through a rulemaking, and we will be soliciting 14 very specific input on how to set all that up. 15 MR. HANDZEL: For every rulemaking 16 that the DOE puts in place, do they create a 17 budget to support enforcement and that outside 18 testing? 19 I see Betsy wincing over there. You 20 struggle with the same thing we do in properly 21 budgeting support for these programs. 22 MR. ADIN: That is a little bit

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 18 1 more difficult for me to comment on. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Okay. 3 MR. ADIN: Obviously, that is not 4 entirely up to us. 5 MR. HANDZEL: Right. 6 MR. ADIN: We do the best we can 7 with the resources we have, and understanding it 8 has to be spread across all the products that we 9 regulate. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: We have an additional 11 question or two. Steve Rosenstock, I don?t 12 believe, got a chance to introduce himself. 13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, 14 Edison Electric Institute. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: You first. Dan 16 Delaney, would you introduce yourself? Did you 17 get a chance? You did? Okay. Steve, go 18 ahead. 19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Just as a follow up, and 20 again, I know the test procedure goes through a 21 rulemaking. I?m getting a little confused. I?m 22 not familiar with any sort of enforcement

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 19 1 procedure going through a rulemaking unless it?s 2 part of a test procedure. I thought 3 enforcement was outside of the scope of a 4 rulemaking. I thought DOE just did that, you 5 know, as part of its normal, I?ll say, enforcement 6 activities for any product whatsoever. 7 MR. ADIN: When I talk about 8 enforcement procedures, I?m not speaking about 9 establishing authority to enforce. We already 10 have that. 11 That?s in the statute. It is really 12 just about identifying the specific requirements 13 for pumps with respect to compliance. 14 The specific data elements they would 15 have to report for each basic model and 16 statistical sampling plan that?s used for testing, 17 just like we have for every other product. 18 We do typically do that through a test 19 procedure rulemaking. We don?t necessarily have 20 to. We can do it separately if circumstances 21 warrant. That is normally how it is done. 22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay: thanks. I was

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 20 1 getting confused in terms of compliance as part of 2 the test feature versus a DOE enforcement action, 3 which I never heard about being in a rulemaking. 4 Thank you. 5 MR. BROOKMAN: To clarify what I 6 thought we established yesterday, DOE, in a 7 separate and traditional rulemaking, will 8 establish the test procedure. As possible, 9 this group, if we are still working, could comment 10 on it, or as would happen in a traditional 11 rulemaking, every person, every party, could 12 comment on that Notice of 13 Proposed Rulemaking, and then the Department of 14 Energy would proceed. 15 Lucas is nodding yes. 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Do you have additional 17 questions, Mark? 18 MR. HANDZEL: I need a moment to pull 19 more thoughts together. You guys, anything else? 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary Fernstrom has a 21 question or comment. Go ahead. 22 MR. FERNSTROM: I just wanted to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 21 1 respond, too. This question comes up in 2 California with respect to our work with the 3 California Energy Commission. 4 There is a certain degree of latitude 5 granted manufacturers in what they do to determine 6 the basis that they are going to utilize to 7 report. The expectation is that products will 8 perform as reported. 9 Whether you report the best performing 10 product and average the worse performing product, 11 the expectation is that if a product were to be 12 tested off the shelf, it would be at least as good 13 as what you say. 14 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 15 Gary, I haven?t been in a lead role in 16 the development of this test standard that HI has 17 been working on with Sarah?s help, but I know that 18 all those types of things have been discussed, you 19 know, the plus/minus ranges, all those types of 20 things are included in that. 21 I know we share that concern because we 22 know we have variation. Obviously, that is a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 22 1 decision that we all face when we are developing a 2 product, at what efficiency do we put it out at, 3 and can we maintain it and hold it. 4 As our tooling wears, how do we maintain 5 and hold it. 6 Certainly, those are some of the 7 concerns that we have, that we know that tooling 8 wears over time, you know, with a regulation in 9 place and enforcement in place, it will force us 10 to be a little bit more disciplined in our 11 maintenance and just doing our own testing more 12 rigorously. 13 I think that is part of the reason why 14 we wanted to try to understand this a little bit 15 better because we know we all have some homework 16 to do on the back end of our businesses to support 17 this. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Dan Delaney. 19 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal 20 Beloit. 21 Just to note, obviously, there is a 22 concern that is a valid concern on variation and

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 23 1 tolerance. 2 Obviously, as products vary. 3 One thing that maybe NEMA could offer 4 you is simply an overview of how the motors has 5 been doing it for the past 20 some years. 6 That might be helpful for you to understand not 7 only basic model and the matrix, but also the 8 registration process, the labeling process, 9 certification. 10 There is a rule, the CCE, the 11 Certification, Compliance, and Enforcement Rule, 12 Part 429, I think, that could give an overview as 13 well to give you some idea. 14 There are different ways, right. 15 You can do the self-certification. For us, that 16 is motors. You can do what they call the AEDM 17 Program. 18 Those might be helpful for you to 19 understand better maybe what would be best for the 20 pump industry. 21 We can certainly offer that. NEMA 22 could certainly sit with HI, provide an overview.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 24 1 It wouldn?t take very long for us to do that. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 3 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 4 AHRI might be another good resource since they 5 cover air conditioning and heating, water heating. 6 They have thousands of models that they are 7 dealing with as part of their compliance and 8 testing. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. What is 10 the status of the HI generated test procedure? 11 Last I heard, it was out to ballot. Is it 40.6 12 that we?re talking about? Do you know? 13 MR. HANDZEL: 40.6 and 40.7. There 14 are two of them. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Lucas? 16 MR. ADIN: I can actually answer 17 that, 18 Doug. We have received notification from HI that 19 they have essentially finished. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: They?ve finished: okay. 21 Now DOE has it in its possession? 22 MR. ADIN: Yes. It should be at

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 25 1 a point now where it is available for 2 incorporation into our proposed test methods. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 4 MS. WIDDER: Would it be helpful to 5 forward that or is it available to be forwarded to 6 the group? 7 MR. ADIN: That?s--I?d have to 8 check. 9 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 10 MR. ADIN: I don?t know if it?s at 11 a point where it is a public document we can 12 forward. In any case, it is subject to 13 copyright restrictions on HI?s part, so whether we 14 can just distribute it. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: I see: okay. For 16 those individuals that are not familiar with DOE 17 rulemaking procedures, DOE frequently, after doing 18 its due diligence, will look at an established 19 test procedure done by another body like ASHRAE or 20 some other body with standing. 21 Having done due diligence, will accept 22 that test standard by reference, sometimes with

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 26 1 minor modifications, sometimes with large 2 modifications. It is quite common for that to 3 proceed that way. 4 Are there other questions here at the 5 outset. Yes, Mark? 6 MR. HANDZEL: Doug, I just wanted to 7 maybe ask if we could put the agenda back up from 8 yesterday. There was some stuff on there, we 9 need to make sure we allocate time for today. 10 Just like the report to ASRAC and some of those 11 other things. I just don?t want to lose sight of 12 those things. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. That would be 14 another thing. 15 MS. WIDDER: I think it might be on 16 here. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: I think I wrote them 18 down. Let?s look. 19 MS. WIDDER: This is a new-- 20 MR. HANDZEL: While everybody is 21 looking for that, Lucas, if there?s any--thank you 22 for the description of the enforcement. Is there

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 27 1 anything written that would benefit us? 2 Obviously, I think we all have obligations to our 3 companies to report on this, and to start giving 4 us a window of what?s coming. 5 Anything you could share with us that we 6 could have in writing? It would help us to say 7 this is an example of what motors do or this is 8 what we do in this area or that area. That type 9 of thing would just be helpful. I know it wouldn?t 10 be it exactly, but just to understand what the 11 process is, and certainly I am going to follow up 12 with Dan, because I think we would like to see 13 what the motor guys do. 14 Part of the reason why I?m asking this 15 question is my understanding from the motor guys 16 is they have like 300 models. Well, I think you 17 have all seen from what we have been shown: we?re 18 talking like 3,000 models. It is a 19 considerably significant administrative effort 20 that we?re going to go through. 21 MR. ADIN: Right. That?s 22 completely understood. We deal with products

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 28 1 like in the 2 HVAC world where there are literally millions of 3 combinations. It can be complicated, but there 4 are ways of addressing that burden. 5 MR. HANDZEL: Okay: great. 6 MR. ADIN: When it comes from that, 7 we?ll be looking for input from your industry on 8 how to appropriately address that. In the 9 meantime, I?m happy to provide information about 10 what our regs say currently. 11 MS. WIDDER: This doesn?t reflect the 12 changes. This is just off my thumb drive. 13 It doesn?t reflect the changes we made yesterday 14 afternoon about how we were going to potentially 15 finish discussing or finish negotiating this 16 morning, and then discuss the metric in the 17 afternoon. 18 I?ll just make those changes now. 19 All the items are on there. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Just to confirm, we are 21 going to end today, no later than 3:00. 22 MS. WIDDER: I?ll put half the metric

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 29 1 in the morning and half in the afternoon. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. The other items 3 that I had listed were we anticipate that this 4 Working Group is going to send a brief report to 5 ASRAC. I?m going to write that report, and then 6 I?m going to hand it off to Lucas to make sure I 7 haven?t missed anything major. 8 I was going to have a little discussion 9 today surrounding your input to that report, which 10 I anticipate would largely be here?s what we 11 discussed, here?s what we have agreed to, here?s 12 the outstanding work that needs to be done, and 13 that?s the bulk of it really at this point. 14 I see the agenda up there reflects the 15 metrics, the general architecture of the metrics. 16 It would be great if we could finalize 17 that today. 18 I think we are real close to doing that. 19 Then begin the standards? discussion, the 20 standards? setting discussion. 21 MS. WIDDER: Do you want to do them 22 in that order? I had switched them, because

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 30 1 that?s what we agreed to do today. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: No, I think that order 3 is going to work. 4 MS. WIDDER: Okay: great. 5 (Pause.) 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Maybe we could start and 7 we could make the transition towards thinking 8 about what the proposals would be from the two 9 major caucuses, what their thinking would be as a 10 starting point for the standards? discussion. 11 I don?t know who would like to start. 12 Do you want me to flip a coin? 13 MR. HANDZEL: No, we?ll go first. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Mark, Mark 15 Handzel. 16 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 17 We spent a lot of time talking last 18 night just about obviously some of the questions 19 we were asking toward the end of the meeting about 20 a two phase approach, timing, and all those sort 21 of things. 22 Clearly, you guys have heard at multiple

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 31 1 meetings our concerns about resources in our own 2 engineering departments as well as at our 3 foundries, which will be taxed to develop new 4 patterns and pour samples, and do things as we 5 develop. 6 You have also heard us say that we 7 wanted some synchronization with the European 8 standards. I think that if you start to look at 9 what are the key concerns, those are really the 10 key items for us. 11 Based on that, and taking in all the 12 data that was presented yesterday and 13 understanding the difference between PER and MEI, 14 where we have really kind of chosen as a starting 15 point is we would like to recommend that we start 16 at a PER of 17 15. 18 We feel that basically would not be an 19 enormous overburden to our engineering 20 departments. It would allow us to get in 21 compliance within the time period. Also, we 22 noted that is above the starting phase where

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 32 1 Europe started. They started with their MEI 2 of 10, so this would be above that, around double, 3 not quite double, but close to it. 4 We felt we were setting a bar above the 5 starting point in Europe, but also one that was 6 within reach for us to accomplish, and also if you 7 go back and look at the MIA charts, one that 8 wouldn?t put a severe burden financially on the 9 industry. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. I?m just 11 consulting my list here. How do you wish to 12 do this? Does the Energy Efficiency Advocates? 13 Caucus wish to respond at this point? 14 MR. ECKMAN: Sure. I?ll preface 15 this by stating that we would rather not design 16 your industry for you. 17 (Laughter.) 18 MR. HANDZEL: Thank you. 19 MR. ECKMAN: Nor how you respond to 20 the standards. We have a performance goal, 21 and then we would like to figure out how to get 22 there. Our performance goal is we?d like the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 33 1 rulemaking to result in about 0.25 or so quads of 2 energy savings. How we actually achieve 3 that across the various product categories and 4 time frames is something we need lots of 5 discussion about. 6 We have sort of a bottom line target 7 we?d like to get from the energy savings, which is 8 our goal, not how to run your industry. 9 If we can meet somewhere along those 10 lines, we are in good shape. That?s a pretty 11 simple request. I don?t know if it?s simple to get 12 there, but it?s a simple request. 13 MR. HANDZEL: Right. Mark Handzel 14 from 15 Xylem again. Tom and I did have a post-meeting 16 discussion yesterday. We talked about was there 17 a way that we could look at the different pump 18 types and maybe phase in based on the pump types. 19 Based on what we looked at, I think you 20 all know, those pump types that are in our scope 21 that we agreed upon have been the recommendations 22 of those of us here at the table through the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 34 1 Hydraulic Institute for a long time. 2 There is not really anything in there 3 that?s a smaller piece that we could see breaking 4 out separately to maybe do in a different phase. 5 We really didn?t see a benefit to 6 pulling any of the pump types out of the scope in 7 terms of-- 8 MR. ECKMAN: I don?t think we were 9 talking about--we were talking about, I think, 10 maybe perhaps looking at varying levels for 11 different types of pumps. 12 MR. HANDZEL: Right: right. I think 13 there may be--particularly, we spent a lot of time 14 understanding some of the difference in RSVs 15 yesterday. I think that particular category, 16 there may be an opportunity to discuss that. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Cappellino. 18 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, 19 ITT. Tom, the 0.25 quads, one of the things we 20 have talked a lot about are kind of the two pieces 21 here. One is the bare pump efficiency and then the 22 extended product approach, that there is lots of

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 35 1 opportunity in the extended product approach. 2 Are you guys looking at both of those 3 pieces to achieve your goal or are you 4 specifically looking at one or the other? 5 What is the thought there? 6 MR. ECKMAN: I don?t think we had 7 detailed discussions about that, but our end goal 8 is energy savings, so performance goal as opposed 9 to prescriptive, getting there. I don?t suspect 10 we?d have a lot of problems one way or another on 11 how that actually came together. 12 MR. CAPPELLINO: Okay: thank you. 13 MR. ECKMAN: I think we are clearly 14 interested in seeing the extended product take off 15 because we think that is where the long game is. 16 MR. CAPPELLINO: Thank you: okay. 17 MR. ECKMAN: I think harmonization of 18 the market was our concern and your concern is 19 that we have a level playing field for you and us, 20 and not having bypass happen and lots of other 21 things that are not good for anybody. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis Starr.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 36 1 MR. STARR: Louis Starr, NEEA. 2 I assume by selecting a level of 15, it basically 3 breaks down into a number of pumps that you are 4 going to have to redesign. Is that kind of 5 the thought process? 6 You are looking at the effort it?s going 7 to take in order to accomplish that, because you 8 can?t really split it out per pump type to get 9 that thing, what you are doing is looking at the 10 cross section of pumps that you have to redesign, 11 taking five years and backing out how many pumps 12 you have to get there. 13 Once you redesign, it doesn?t matter 14 whether you go 15 percent, 40 or 55. Well, I?m 15 sure there is a break point somewhere in there. 16 Really, the main concern is how much 17 redesign you can do and how much time and that is 18 how your setting is? Is that kind of the 19 thought process? 20 MR. HANDZEL: Yes. Mark Handzel 21 from 22 Xylem. Louis, that?s pretty accurate. I will say

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 37 1 that we all said that we?re not anywhere close to 2 being ready to vote on this because we need to 3 start a back and forth discussion, see where you 4 guys were, where we were, and then we have to do 5 some more homework and get into it in depth. 6 We took what resources we had available 7 to us last night and kind of came up with a 8 ballpark starting point, and just said we think we 9 can work from here. 10 We all now have to go back and reassess 11 if this is truly the number, what is the impact to 12 each of us. Is it more severe than any of our 13 companies can absorb. 14 The way we always looked at MEI. 15 An MEI of 40 meant you were redesigning 40 percent 16 of the products. In all the studies we did 17 through HI, basically it was pretty close to that, 18 that 40 percent of the models were dropping out at 19 MEI of 40, ten were dropping out at an MEI of 10. 20 PER changes that a little bit. We are 21 still kind of working back and forth between PER 22 and MEI in our heads, just to get those ballpark

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 38 1 numbers. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis? 3 MR. STARR: One of the thoughts, it 4 is really the capacity to do redesign that is kind 5 of what is setting it. I was thinking of Tom?s 6 suggestion of splitting it up by category. 7 In other words, if you have five types 8 of pumps, and let?s just assume they are evenly 9 distributed, making the numbers real easy, let?s 10 assume there are 150 pumps you have to redesign. 11 There are five categories. That is 12 30 apiece. 13 If you only have to redesign half of 14 that or two-thirds of it, say three of the five 15 categories, that seems like it would reduce the 16 burden so that maybe you can push up the standards 17 to higher, you know, using that concept kind of as 18 a matrix to get to the same end point by designing 19 a limit of 60 percent of the models at a much 20 higher level and 20 percent of the models or 40 21 percent of the models not really touching. 22 You mentioned it didn?t really make sense to split

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 39 1 it up. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 3 So, a couple of things, Louis. The 4 consultants know that within our families, there 5 is a little bit of interchangeability, there is 6 some common parts. 7 Certainly, breaking out one of those 8 families wouldn?t be productive. We are 9 going to do those parts. If we do it for end 10 suction frame mounts, it is going to go right into 11 end suction closed couple, you know, those types 12 of things. 13 The other part of it is for our 14 marketplace to not have a full--how can I explain 15 this--a DOE regulated product--when we go into a 16 project, a commercial building, for example, we 17 are selling end suction frame mounts, end suction 18 closed couple, and in-line pumps, so to have one 19 that is not in the regulation where the others 20 are, it would just cause confusion in the 21 marketplace. 22 Again, we just didn?t feel that was in

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 40 1 our best interest for our customers to do 2 something like that. 3 MS. WIDDER: This is Sarah. I just 4 want to make sure it?s clear that it?s not in or 5 out of the regulation. I think what Louis is 6 trying to get at is you could set a PER of say 20 7 for some pumps and five for other pumps, for 8 different equipment classes, like end suction 9 closed couple, end suction frame mount could be 10 PER 20, and then the in-line and RSV could be 11 something lower than that. 12 I just want to make sure that was clear 13 to everybody. 14 MR. HANDZEL: Obviously, I understand 15 that, Sarah, but I don?t see a benefit to us 16 because to be honest with you, it is really what?s 17 the pool that we have to redesign. 18 If it?s in that initial pool, you know, 19 we?re not going to just try to get it so it goes 20 to PER 20, you know, we?re going to try to jump 21 higher than that. 22 Whatever the volume of pumps we have to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 41 1 redesign-- 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark, you are going to 3 have classes of pumps that the designs are 4 different enough, distinctive enough, or their 5 performance characteristics are such that-- 6 MR. HANDZEL: Definitely, the RSV 7 family that we talked about yesterday, and Daniel 8 clarified, it is really a global platform. 9 It?s already complying with the European MEI of 10 40. 11 That is an example of one clearly that 12 there may be an opportunity to go to a high PER 13 right away, because we?re there. Most of us are 14 not going to have to do much redesign. There 15 is not that many manufacturers in these 16 categories. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Maybe these advocates 18 would give you credit toward the 0.25 quads. 19 MR. HANDZEL: Yes. I guess to come 20 back to that, do you have ideas on PER and how it 21 transfers back to the 0.25 quads? 22 MR. ECKMAN: I think our initial

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 42 1 thinking along those lines is to let you pick and 2 choose-- our goal was to pick and choose something 3 that got us--we were looking at TSL-3, but 4 recognizing that if you go across the board there, 5 that has a fairly significant economic impact on 6 the manufacturers, so we are cognizant of that. 7 We were at least strategically looking 8 at the potential to pick and choose among the TSLs 9 that would add up to that value. Some might 10 be better than three, some less than three, but in 11 aggregate, there might be a potential for making 12 trades between the product categories, where there 13 is not a lot of cross over, where the product 14 substitution isn?t a significant issue, so we 15 would see a loophole in effect from creating one 16 standard at one level for one kind of product and 17 substitutes to a lower standard. 18 That is the initial thinking. Again, 19 our intent was not to design your industry. 20 MR. HANDZEL: Right. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary Fernstrom. 22 MR. FERNSTROM: Or some lines might have

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 43 1 a higher volume than others and would generate 2 more savings to spread the redesign cost over. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Jay Sivigny. 4 MR. SIVIGNY: Jay Sivigny, Flowserve. 5 Quick question for the consultants. 6 On slide 44, which is the National Impact Study, 7 it kind of gives a correlation-- 8 MR. BROOKMAN: From yesterday?s packet? 9 MR. SIVIGNY: Correct. Between 10 quads and PER level or the TSL levels. I 11 just want a clarification that on one of the rows, 12 RS-V, it says N/A. I was wondering--I know 13 you have all the data, but is there any type of 14 estimate as to what that level might be? 15 That would roll up into that overall 16 number, and whatever that number is, that needs to 17 get baked into the initial discussion. It?s 18 missing in this calculation. 19 MR. ECKMAN: We are thinking of that 20 right now as zero but we don?t know. A quarter 21 of a quad roughly is-- 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Tom, get closer to the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 44 1 mike. 2 MR. ECKMAN: A quarter of a quad, if 3 that value turns out to be fairly sizeable, we are 4 good to go. 5 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. I do 6 want to comment on the RSV. If it is truly a 7 global platform, then we could probably consider 8 the baseline to be MEI 40, you know, PER 40. 9 Even if you went higher than that, it might not 10 necessarily be that high because your baseline is 11 much higher than other products. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Your starting point is 13 high. Louis Starr. 14 MR. STARR: What really seems to be 15 affecting the energy savings and also 16 manufacturing costs and capability really is time. 17 To some extent, if we had the ability to 18 do an extended-- when the regulations went in, it 19 would help you get the higher PER levels because 20 phased in over a longer period, you could then get 21 more models. 22 It appears yesterday the answer was that

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 45 1 five years was it. If that answer changes, it 2 could potentially change the levels that you could 3 potentially reach. 4 MR. HANDZEL: Correct. 5 MR. STARR: Another question is do 6 you have a sense of meeting that PER level of 15, 7 how many models you anticipate that is in 8 redesign? 9 How about on a percentage basis, of all 10 the models that exist, what percentage are you 11 having to redesign to reach that 15 level? 12 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 13 Louis, roughly ball parking it, we saw 14 it at about 20 percent of the models. 15 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. That 16 level was from our dataset to attempt to get 15 17 percent of models. 18 MR. HANDZEL: Right. Basically, we 19 don?t think a PER of 40 is really very fair to us 20 because we are immediately going above the EU 21 standard. The EU standard has had quite a number 22 of years to get to that point. That?s a tall

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 46 1 challenge for us to accept that. 2 MR. ECKMAN: Yes. When we looked 3 at the crosswalk that Dan showed yesterday, it 4 looked like roughly somewhere between the 25 and 5 30 level was about equivalent to the EU standard, 6 in that range. 7 MR. HANDZEL: That?s pretty much what 8 we saw, Tom. 9 MR. ECKMAN: Again, that was the 10 locus of where we tried to center our proposal, in 11 that same range, again, for harmonization with the 12 EU standard and where you were attempting for any 13 international product. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Is that the current EU 15 standard? 16 MR. ECKMAN: That is the 2015. 17 MR. HANDZEL: January 2015. Current 18 is 0.1 and January of 2015 is the 0.4. 19 MR. STARR: I think part of the 20 deal, one would think if it is MEI of 40, it would 21 be 40 percent, but a lot of the data was in 2007. 22 What has happened is the market has crept up to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 47 1 probably need a new standard, and instead just 2 designed a much higher level, so now current 3 market appears to have crept up. What is on 4 the market seems to be appearing around 25 or 30. 5 MR. HANDZEL: We clearly have a vision 6 that we are going to get to equality with the EU 7 standard at some point in time, but in the absence 8 of the ability to do a two tier standard, we 9 wanted to come out the gate at a level that 10 allowed us to get started on this and then figure 11 there will be the normal get five years in, and 12 you said it had to be at least, what, two years 13 before review was done and the bar could be raised 14 again. Within five to six years afterwards: 15 right? 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Five to six years after? 17 MR. HANDZEL: The first five years. 18 MS. KOHL: Betsy Kohl. The 19 statutory language says that somewhere within six 20 years after you establish a final standard, we 21 have to take another look. We may determine 22 they don?t need to be amended or determine an

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 48 1 amendment is needed. 2 MS. MAUER: This is Joanna. If I 3 could just clarify, it is six years to publish 4 either a proposed rule or a determination that no 5 change is warranted and then another two years to 6 publish a final rule. 7 MS. KOHL: Yes. 8 MS. MAUER: Eight years. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis? 10 MR. STARR: Maybe you can tell me if 11 what I am seeing is an accurate characterization. 12 I?m looking at the MEI 40 and I see it 13 seems to be about a PER of somewhere between 25 14 and 30. 15 One would think that means the European 16 market has brought along the American market. 17 Would that kind of be the 18 assumption, that maybe there has been some cross 19 over in technology and there is some learning or 20 maybe redesigns that happened in Europe and have 21 translated over to the 22 American market?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 49 1 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 2 We saw yesterday, I think, from the C3 value data that really the North American market 4 is at a higher efficiency level than the European 5 market was when they started. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: When they started? 7 MR. HANDZEL: When they started. 8 We are actually--without regulation, with just 9 companies doing their own redesigns, their own 10 focus on energy efficiency, we are actually 11 producing products in general on a playing field 12 that are above the efficiency levels when the EU 13 started their process. 14 I think there is some impact there in 15 terms of where we are at already and where we 16 would go. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna? 18 MS. MAUER: Mark, I?m wondering if 19 you can say a little more about kind of what 20 harmonization means to you, or kind of the value 21 of harmonization. I think from my 22 perspective, true harmonization is not just the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 50 1 same efficiency levels but at the same point in 2 time. 3 In 2015, the EU will go to MEI of 40. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Say it again. 5 MS. MAUER: Maybe I said it wrong. 6 What 7 I meant to say was in 2015 in the EU they will go 8 to an MEI of 40. I think we are talking 9 about a 10 DOE standard that would take effect in 2019, and 11 perhaps the subsequent standard wouldn?t take 12 effect until 2027 or something like that. 13 We are talking about a really long time 14 frame for potentially reaching the EU levels that 15 will take effect in six months. 16 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 17 Joanna, absolutely. We are trying to 18 counterbalance the demands on resources with 19 harmonization. We aren?t saying we want to start 20 off at the 10 MEI level. We did try to go 21 above it, knowing we should be able to, and we 22 could get there quick, and we wanted to.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 51 1 That is something we have to go talk 2 more about. We are out of sync with the EU. No 3 matter what, we are out of sync. How do we 4 get in sync without over burdening the 5 manufacturers, our engineering departments, our 6 component suppliers and everything else. It?s a 7 tall order is my assessment. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: I saw Charlie first, and 9 then I?m going to Jay. 10 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, 11 ITT. It?s a good question, Joanna. One of the 12 realities is--you all see it as well--over the 13 last ten years, the world has become more global. 14 Ten years ago, the pump business, they 15 were typically very local. The North American 16 players played mostly in North America. The 17 European players played mostly in Europe. 18 In the last ten years, there has been a 19 lot of consolidation in the industry and business 20 has become more global. 21 From our view, and we are the bigger 22 company, so it is easier for us to be more global.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 52 1 Everything aside from a harmonization 2 standpoint, everybody is trying to become more 3 global and create global products, but again, it 4 is a resource issue. Even without this, we would 5 want to try to move in that direction, but it is a 6 pretty tall challenge when you have a legacy of 7 product that were designed for the North American 8 market. 9 For example, they are all designed for 10 60 Hertz electric supply and 60 Hertz speeds. 11 Europe is more 50 Hertz. There is 12 differences in application. 13 We are trying to get there but we can?t 14 get there just by basically saying hey, we want to 15 basically harmonize the standard. There is a 16 lot of work to do that. It is a timing issue 17 for us from a resource standpoint to be able to 18 make that transition. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Jay Sivigny. 20 MR. SIVIGNY: Jay Sivigny. Hi, 21 Joanna. 22 The one comment related to harmonization

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 53 1 I?d like to throw in is that I think this group is 2 taking more of a leadership role in the extended 3 product approach. 4 I think the Europeans only did MEI to 5 start out with. I think this group has really 6 taken a broader step in getting towards an 7 extended product approach before the Europeans. 8 I think from that standpoint, with the 9 PER of 15 that we?re recommending and the extended 10 product approach to take advantage of the system 11 benefits that we all want to see, I think that 12 would help with the harmonization we are talking 13 about. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark? 15 MR. HANDZEL: Joanna, I just wanted to 16 come back because I think you asked how important 17 is it to us for this harmonization. Certainly 18 you have been with us a long time in this 19 discussion. 20 You know that the Hydraulic Institute 21 has pretty much preached that we wanted 22 harmonization.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 54 1 We have worked closely with the Euro 2 pump group to align our pump standards so that we 3 have some alignment. That is why we really 4 suggested that the DOE almost adopt something 5 similar or identical to MEI. 6 I can tell you our European counterparts 7 are going to be frustrated that we have a PER and 8 they have an MEI and they are not the same. 9 We are at the table, we are coming to 10 accept it. They would prefer we were in 11 harmonization. Really, it would make our lives a 12 lot simpler if it was completely harmonized. 13 We are okay with it. We are moving 14 along with it. I think that is part of the reason 15 we are going back and forth between PER and MEI 16 because that is still kind of the way we are 17 thinking. It will be a challenge going 18 forward because of that. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Cappellino. 20 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, 21 ITT. I think the other comment that needs to be 22 said is the people on the pump side here, most of

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 55 1 us are from larger companies that have global 2 footprints, and there is a lot of small companies 3 that aren?t global. They have to be able to 4 make that transition as well. 5 There are hundreds of small companies 6 that are basically regional and deal with just 7 North America, so they have to have the 8 opportunity to make the transition, and they 9 haven?t had the opportunity to see what?s 10 happening around the world and start on that road. 11 Frankly, for them, harmonization 12 probably isn?t that big of a deal because most of 13 their business is in North America, so you have 14 to kind of remember that as well. We?re not 15 just affecting the larger companies, that frankly 16 are more represented here, there are the smaller 17 companies that we need to consider as well. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis Starr. 19 MR. STARR: I guess saying a PER of 20 15, which translates to about three percent a year 21 of redesigned models, if you think about it that 22 way, so if you had an extra two years, you would

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 56 1 be at a higher level. I?ve done the math a little 2 bit before and I came up with four percent. If you 3 had seven years, you basically would be able to 4 redesign 28 percent of the pumps, which would be 5 about a PER level that we are asking--TSL-3, what 6 is the PER level? 7 MR. HANDZEL: Forty. It?s sizeable. 8 MR. STARR: It would be closer with 9 a little bit more time. It?s a thought. Maybe 10 that is something we can talk about. I think if we 11 had a little bit of time, it might be helpful if 12 we could talk internally. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, we?re going to 14 provide time for some back and forth here today. 15 I don?t think we are going to reach 16 closure on this today, not nearly. There is going 17 to be more time for different caucuses and other 18 individuals who have an interest in this to have a 19 discussion. 20 Mark? 21 MR. HANDZEL: I would just ask Tom and 22 the other NGOs, how did you arrive at the 0.25

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 57 1 quads? Is that a goal that you typically 2 established in other rulemaking or is it just what 3 you feel would be a good result out of this 4 effort? 5 Obviously, from our perspective, we?re 6 not looking at it in terms of quads. I just 7 want to understand. We have tried to explain to 8 you what our issues are. I would just ask if 9 you guys could give us some more insight into 10 where your position comes from. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Tom Eckman. 12 MR. ECKMAN: I think generally 13 speaking, where we see the consumer economic 14 benefits--we are weighing the consumer economic 15 benefits with the manufacturing impacts. You 16 look at the consumer economic benefits, they 17 continue to get better as we get out to TSL-5. 18 We are back and back to a fairly 19 significant amount from very large consumer 20 benefits of a lot smaller consumer benefit saying 21 make the trade based on knowledgeable effects on 22 you guys to get there, and the benefits the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 58 1 consumer would get. We are weighing those two 2 and saying this is a huge net present value for 3 consumers of a discount rate, but it is also a big 4 hit for you to move out that far. That is 5 sort of where we landed. Making that trade. 6 Of the seven factors DOE considers, each 7 of those are important. 8 MR. STARR: The other aspect is we 9 are trying to get the market--so people that are 10 selling stuff into both markets are basically 11 meeting the standards internationally, so for the 12 manufacturers in theory it is matching up on an 13 equal level on both markets is the thought process 14 as well, you know, that harmonization. 15 I hear part of what you are saying is 16 you don?t think the harmonization is going to 17 happen no matter what. 18 MR. ECKMAN: To Charlie?s point 19 earlier, this pushes extended products. There may 20 be better pump designs but there may also be a way 21 of getting there in the interim that doesn?t 22 require better pump designs, just better extended

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 59 1 products. To the extent that can be achieved 2 that way, that is a good outcome. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Maybe that would be 4 worth pursuing, a brief discussion, because I lost 5 track myself on how this rulemaking--how it 6 latches to or connects with and promotes the 7 productive use of extended product. 8 Lucas, do you want to comment? You have 9 your hands on the microphone there. 10 MR. ADIN: I can give my view on 11 that. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Please. 13 MR. ADIN: Our view of how that 14 would work is essentially inherent in the metric, 15 that we are designing a metric that would 16 recognize the benefits of use of an extended 17 product by showing a lower consumption of energy 18 based on less energy use at these different 19 weighted load points that we are looking at. 20 It is really through the design of the 21 metric and use of a label that would show that 22 benefit as well.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 60 1 Energy savings accrued would be through 2 consumer choice really. We are not prescribing the 3 use of extended products, but we would be relying 4 upon consumers to make choices about what works 5 for them and what kind of benefit they want to 6 realize. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna? 8 MS. MAUER: I just wanted to add 9 while I think the metric is a really important 10 starting point, but I think I said at the last 11 meeting for utilities, what might be very helpful 12 in addition would be not just to have the PER 13 values of all the pumps but essentially the data 14 that goes into calculating PER, so you know, power 15 consumption at the different load points, things 16 that come straight out of the test procedure that 17 DOE will be developing, but would provide more 18 information to utilities to be able to kind of 19 design effective programs. 20 I don?t know if that is something you 21 guys have thought about. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Handzel.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 61 1 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 2 We have some involvement with some other 3 groups that are looking at some of those things. 4 Certainly, we are making suggestions to 5 them, guiding them. 6 Obviously, we have been somewhat 7 reluctant to go further until we knew where this 8 group was going. We clearly--we have shared 9 much of the same information that we have shared 10 here with those groups to help them understand and 11 look for opportunities. 12 MS. MAUER: This is Joanna again. 13 Maybe just to clarify, when Lucas mentioned in the 14 enforcement discussion the database that?s on line 15 with information about all the models that are 16 certified, I think that is what I was envisioning, 17 that that database could have not just the model 18 number and PER but also additional columns of 19 data, I think just as an easy way to really kind 20 of have that publicly available, easily 21 accessible-- 22 MR. HANDZEL: Almost as a way to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 62 1 estimate the extended product approach value with 2 that pump? Is that what you are thinking? 3 MS. MAUER: Right. If you knew what 4 an actual load profile was, you could calculate 5 savings. You wouldn?t have to assume 6 savings are just based on PER, but if you actually 7 knew what a load profile was in the field, you 8 could come up with a better savings estimate, for 9 example. Gary may want to add on this. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary? 11 MR. FERNSTROM: I?d like to support 12 Joanna?s point of view because the way we do our 13 energy efficiency programs, we have a multitude of 14 different market sectors, each which have their 15 own load profiles. 16 Having the part load values would be 17 important for us to derive market sector specific 18 savings, rather than just one average number. 19 I have a point of-- 20 MR. BROOKMAN: May I ask a question of 21 Lucas? I believe Betsy said that is the kind of 22 thing that DOE typically does not do. If that

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 63 1 data were to be reported, I presume it would have 2 to be through a third party like HI or somebody 3 like that. Maybe I misheard that. 4 MR. FERNSTROM: No. I think you?re 5 correctly reflecting Betsy?s point of view on 6 this. However, we brought this up with Ashley in 7 the PTAC meeting and asked that maybe-- 8 MR. ECKMAN: (Off microphone.) 9 MR. FERNSTROM: The ones you find in the 10 smaller hotels that go through the wall: right. 11 For that matter, Goodman Air 12 Conditioning, a representative from industry, 13 mentioned there might be some flexibility in 14 testing at extended points and reporting that to 15 the database because it is part of the existing 16 test procedure, which would represent an 17 additional burden, but it?s not necessarily part 18 of the standard. 19 I think there is some uncertainty as to 20 just what the expectation is there. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas Adin. 22 MR. ADIN: I can address that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 64 1 I have also spoken to Ashley about that. 2 There is truth in both what Ashley said at the 3 meeting and what 4 Betsy said. Typically what we do is we only 5 require reporting of those data elements that are 6 necessary to ensure the product is complying with 7 the applicable standard. 8 In this case, it means if just PER was 9 the only metric that was used for the standard, we 10 would only require reporting a PER. That said, 11 since the test procedure would enable a 12 manufacturer to determine the load at those 13 different loading points, we could allow at the 14 very least the representations of energy used by 15 the manufacturer at those different loading 16 points, and we could evaluate the possibility of 17 requiring that information to be reported. 18 Obviously, we would have to balance the 19 need for that information with the burden on 20 manufacturers of reporting that to us. 21 It is something we would do through 22 rulemaking. We would collect comments. We

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 65 1 would look at what is the benefit compared with 2 that burden. 3 MR. FERNSTROM: I think the key word you 4 used, very appropriately, was allow. If 5 industry were willing to report and didn?t deem 6 the reporting to be too much additional burden, 7 maybe because it is part of the test procedure 8 anyway, allowing that might be useful for the 9 utilities and their programs. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: In the course of this 11 negotiation, one of the points that I think has 12 been said over and over, which has become clear, I 13 believe, is that everyone in the room is 14 interested in moving towards the extended product 15 and moving the industry towards the utilization of 16 things beyond the bare pump that are going to 17 increase the efficiency of these products. 18 I am wondering if, for example, the 19 energy efficiency advocates, whether there is some 20 way beyond this bare pump PER, if the 21 manufacturers can get credit for moving toward the 22 0.25 quads for consumer uptake, if there is some

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 66 1 fancy modeling that can be done. 2 I am just thinking about the 3 possibilities. They are listening over there at 4 that table. Louis, go ahead. 5 MR. STARR: Sure, you could put a 6 better motor on there. That would be one way to 7 get there. I had one other thought. In 8 terms of-- never mind. I had another train of 9 thought and then I lost it. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Steve 11 Rosenstock. 12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 13 In terms of these data points, there is 14 another possible--I don?t know if the utilities 15 would be interested--if the data is presented 16 correctly, the end use customers would also be 17 interested to really know the apples to apples. 18 That way, if they are looking at 19 different pumps, they are seeing, if they are 20 estimating their own load profiles or they just 21 want to get an annualized kilowatt hour energy 22 use, that would be helpful to them.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 67 1 Remember, PER is helping us, but you 2 have to think about what the consumer is looking 3 at, okay, how much energy is really being used by 4 this product, how much does it cost me to use it. 5 I think the ultimate customer would also 6 get a benefit out of this. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: I think Louis has-- 8 MR. STARR: I regained my thought. 9 This 20 percent of the models that you are 10 redesigning, you anticipate, what levels would you 11 redesign to? 12 Would it be PER 20? PER 21? Is there 13 a general concept that if you redesign a pump 14 line, where you go with that efficiency level? 15 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel. Louis, 16 to answer your question, I think obviously we all 17 would have to form our own opinions and strategic 18 direction with this. I can say speaking as a 19 logical person, if I knew that the standard was 20 going to go up to higher levels and I was 21 redesigning a pump at a certain point, I certainly 22 want to go to the higher level right away rather

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 68 1 than have to reinvest in that product on a design 2 shortly in the future. 3 It is pretty common sense that we would 4 do that, but obviously all of us would have to 5 form our own direction with that and how we would 6 handle it. I would think if someone were 7 designing it, they would go to a higher level 8 right away. 9 MR. STARR: What you do in the 10 European market, because that is a case where you 11 went from 12 MEI 10 and then you knew it was going to MEI 50 or 13 whatever number. 14 MR. HANDZEL: Forty. 15 MR. STARR: Forty. 16 MR. HANDZEL: Right now, that?s the 17 highest level. There is no next step coming in 18 Europe. Obviously, all of the redesign that my 19 company has done has been to achieve that 40. 20 Now, EU is starting to focus on extended 21 products, so that is going to be the next push in 22 these larger pump areas and other products.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 69 1 MR. CASE: This is Greg Case, if I 2 could jump in. Can you hear me? 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Please, Greg. You 4 sound good. Keep going. 5 MR. CASE: Okay. I?ve been 6 advising clients to try to design to an MEI of 7 0.5. Going too much above that, we end up 8 with having to go to what you guys are calling 9 ?max tech,? and that is just simply not feasible 10 at the price points we have in the market. 11 Trying to go to a very high MEI level or 12 to bring that over to a PER level turns into a 13 real problem for the manufacturers and what is 14 going to actually happen to the cost of trying to 15 produce those units. 16 It is not just a redesign cost at that 17 point, it is complete material change out. 18 There is a whole bunch of other factors that are 19 going to go into those really high MEI levels. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you, Greg. 21 Steve Rosenstock. 22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 70 1 One of the slides yesterday showed the 2 manufacturer investment by PER level. Wasn?t 3 kind of the big break point around PER 40? I 4 don?t have that slide. It doesn?t look too 5 good on my 6 Blackberry. I think there was a slide that kind of 7 showed all the different break points. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Green and yellow lines 10 in terms of positive versus negative net present 11 values. That was from Chris? presentation. 12 MR. CASE: I think that break point 13 was more on 0.25. 14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I forget where it was. 15 I?m sorry. There it is. Thank 16 you. 17 MR. HANDZEL: It might be a little bit 18 higher than 0.25. 19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Mark? 21 MR. HANDZEL: I just wanted to come 22 back to the question, Gary, on the multiple load

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 71 1 points. We have talked about it before. Part of 2 our struggle is we aren?t always working directly 3 with the owners. We?re working with their 4 consulting engineer or their contractor. 5 I think just about everybody at this 6 table has tools available to do that modeling 7 right now. It is just a matter of--we really feel 8 we need something to help push it to get it to a 9 way when someone thinks of a pump, they think 10 extended product, think drive and motor at the 11 same time. 12 I would just say from my company?s 13 perspective, we would not be opposed to putting 14 percentage load point values in there, because it 15 would only help us sell the extended product 16 approach. 17 Certainly that is something we need to 18 caucus on and make sure the industry supports. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary? 20 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. To 21 respond, in having those part load values, we 22 would like to have the credibility associated with

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 72 1 knowing it has been reported to DOE. 2 If DOE can accommodate that--I heard 3 Betsy say DOE wasn?t in the business of providing 4 wish lists--if DOE can accommodate that and you 5 are willing to supply it, it would give us the 6 basis that we need for doing these more detailed 7 savings estimates by market sector. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 10 Also, as a follow on, especially for a 11 lot of rebate programs, a lot of them are giving 12 incentives for replacements, replacing the old 13 pump or the pump and the drive, pump drive and 14 control, with newer stuff. 15 Just thinking from a consumer 16 perspective, ideally, especially in a replacement 17 situation, the customer would want the information 18 for all three categories, all three aspects of 19 retrofit because it will have an impact in terms 20 of what they might actually--if they just are 21 going to do the pump or the pump and the motor or 22 pump, motor and the drive, to have that

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 73 1 information for all. There might be programs 2 that are just geared toward just --I?ll say the 3 component versus the system replacement. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Cappellino. 5 MR. CAPPELLINO: I think Gary had his 6 hand up first. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay, go ahead, Gary. 8 MR. FERNSTROM: Okay. I should say for 9 Rob?s behalf, Rob isn?t here today, wanting these 10 part load values and wanting to be able to 11 estimate energy savings on a more defined or 12 refined level doesn?t necessarily preclude there 13 being some minimum level that might qualify for 14 prescriptive rebates. 15 Similar to the NEMA premium motor, there 16 could be a premium integrated pump, there might be 17 a rebate framework associated with that, in 18 addition to what you might do using the part load 19 values. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. That?s 21 helpful. 22 Charlie?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 74 1 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, 2 ITT. Doug, I think you mentioned earlier how do we 3 figure out a way to work together here 4 collaboratively to save energy through the 5 extended products approach. I think that is a 6 very interesting area that does need more 7 exploration. I think we are getting there. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: You can see the linkage 9 to the metrics discussion which is going to follow 10 here. 11 MR. CAPPELLINO: Yes. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: All the work and thought 13 process that has gone into establishing that 14 metric that would enable that comparison that 15 would be very, very productive from everyone?s 16 point of view. 17 MR. CAPPELLINO: Yes. Some of the 18 companies that are represented here already offer 19 kind of extended product. Frankly, one of 20 the struggles we have is getting customer 21 awareness, getting them to see the economics. 22 I?m just kind of thinking out loud here

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 75 1 a little bit, so forgive me. One of the things 2 that we find fairly effective is simply being able 3 to present that information to the customer of 4 different choices. 5 Here?s a better pump, fixed speed pump. 6 Here is what the life cycle cost would 7 be for that product, energy cost over a period of 8 time. You could come up with whatever defined 9 metric you want. Here is the information, maybe 10 with a premium efficiency motor, and if you have 11 Application A, here?s the typical life cycle cost 12 based on a load profile, et cetera. 13 In some cases, just presenting that 14 information to the customer, it could be part of a 15 proposal, it can be part of the standard 16 application of a given product, it is one way to 17 communicate to get customers more aware and make a 18 better choice, and you get energy savings out of 19 that. 20 That?s one way. It doesn?t require the 21 DOE to do anything specifically. I?m not 22 saying they are mutually exclusive.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 76 1 I?m just saying that?s one of the things 2 I have been trying to get through my head here, 3 the whole labeling process and how does labeling 4 enable the same goal you guys have, which is 5 energy savings, and the same goal we have, which 6 is basically to sell a more intelligent product, 7 that we can sell more, that is a win for us, and 8 at the same time, it is a win for the customer if 9 they are educated, because they are going to save 10 energy. 11 In most of the cases, not only do they 12 save energy, they save other costs as well because 13 the product is more reliable and everything else. 14 Again, we came into this, I came into 15 this, with a strong interest in the extended 16 product approach because frankly, if you look at 17 cost/benefit, it is the best cost/benefit value 18 that is there. 19 I think the team has done a good job 20 here of trying to figure out how do we build a 21 metric around it, and now we just need to figure 22 out a little bit more, how do you take all the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 77 1 work we have done on the metric and put it in a 2 form and fashion that achieves the goals of both 3 sides of the table, all three sides of the table 4 here want to get to. 5 I think we are there. I think we just 6 need to spend a little bit more time on that. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary Fernstrom. 8 MR. FERNSTROM: Charlie, you have well 9 stated precisely what we are trying to do, and 10 just to elaborate on some of the key contributors, 11 certainly education and information or vice versa, 12 we deem information to be fairly broad-based and 13 education to be fairly customer specific. 14 Rebates help. 15 Having a DOE recognized or approved 16 methodology for evaluating savings helps with 17 credibility. The one last thing that helps is 18 narrowing the incremental costs between the more 19 efficient extended product and the baseline 20 technologies. That is precisely what we want to 21 do. Thank you. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Louis Starr.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 78 1 MR. STARR: I think one of the major 2 advantages is having adequate information so that 3 an utility can then evaluate and see that you have 4 lots of information on the pumps, the number of 5 load points, and then you can really do an 6 accurate estimation of energy savings. 7 What is essentially happening is it is 8 allowing the pump manufacturers--the utilities a 9 lot of times have very good relationships with 10 their customers, so you are increasing your 11 customer base based upon those relationships, and 12 you are getting it from a third party, which in 13 this case is the utility, which has a vested 14 interest in it. 15 Normally, when a sales person comes to 16 your door and is trying to sell you something, it 17 is not always clear that they have a vested 18 interest in selling you the product that is best 19 for you. However, an utility has more 20 interest in making sure of that, you as a 21 customer. 22 By having adequate and lots of

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 79 1 information, an utility can do a really good job 2 of I guess selling or getting in front of the 3 customer and also making sure there is really 4 energy savings there. 5 I think this extended product and all 6 the metrics is the leverage in helping the 7 utilities provide rebates and all that. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie, follow on? 9 MR. CAPPELLINO: Just to close the loop, 10 it all kind of goes back to resources because we 11 all have a limited number of engineers. Frankly, 12 we could have all the engineers trying to squeeze 13 the last point of efficiency out of a given point, 14 or you could take some of those same engineers and 15 have them develop the technology and concepts and 16 products that really promote the extended product 17 approach. 18 I just want you guys to realize it is 19 that same group of people. It?s the same R&D 20 team. It?s the same people in the company that are 21 doing the marketing and everything else. 22 If we can find a way through everything

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 80 1 that Gary said, education, using DOE to kind of 2 promote that. We are in the extended product 3 business. We have been in it about ten 4 years. We see a lot of benefit to it, but it 5 takes a lot of effort to make that happen. If 6 you take all your effort and apply it to purely 7 the pump efficiency, it is less effective in every 8 way, in energy savings, in savings to the 9 consumer, product reliability and everything else. 10 I just want to make sure we strike the 11 right balance here. Again, I?m not trying to 12 argue against the specific proposal. I just 13 want everybody to kind of understand the reality 14 of what we have to deal with. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 16 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 17 Just to kind of follow up with what 18 Louis was saying, if an utility is designing a 19 program, it is designed to be vendor neutral. 20 We?re not going to play any favorites and to 21 provide savings for different applications. 22 Let?s just say it?s a pumping program,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 81 1 especially for retrofit situations, it would be 2 designed that if a customer was purely interested 3 in just a bare pump, the utility might say if you 4 replace that pump and show energy savings, you get 5 an incentive. 6 Now if you are replacing the pump and 7 the motor or other driver, there might be a 8 separate incentive for that type of system 9 approach. A third incentive might be the 10 pump, driver and control. Obviously, if it?s a 11 prescriptive program, a set amount. If it?s a 12 custom program where there is some analysis 13 needed, you are showing higher energy savings and 14 the incentive is based on the savings, that would 15 be a third thing. 16 Again, I know you are talking about the 17 extended system approach, but from an utility?s 18 perspective, if they are after energy savings, if 19 you say the extended product approach, the 20 customer isn?t doing extended product, that might 21 be a lost opportunity for energy savings, so from 22 an utility approach, if they would do something

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 82 1 like that, they might want to cover all the bases, 2 not just one of the applications. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary Fernstrom. 4 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. Charlie, 5 we are on the same page about the extended 6 product. To come back to the bare pump, I think 7 what the efficiency advocates here would like to 8 see is some reasonable improvement in the pump 9 itself. You know, balance between the impact on 10 industry and the clear cut benefit to consumers 11 across the board, plus on a voluntary basis, 12 working toward this extended product opportunity. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. This has been 14 productive. I?m wondering if there is anything 15 else we wish to say at this point. Mark? 16 MR. HANDZEL: Just as I let off, 17 clearly, we were working on napkins last night. 18 Charlie wrote all over a menu, things 19 like that. 20 (Laughter.) 21 MR. HANDZEL: We need more time. 22 UNIDENTIFIED: What was the special,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 83 1 Charlie? 2 MR. HANDZEL: They were all impressed 3 because the menu says, ?Welcome Mark Handzel and 4 his guests.? 5 (Laughter.) 6 MR. CAPPELLINO: Welcome Mark Handzel. 7 MR. HANDZEL: Yes. I think we have 8 had a good discussion. I think we can start to do 9 some more studies. I think we know we want to do a 10 little bit more focus individually to understand 11 impacts to each of our companies, whether we went 12 to 40, whether we went to the 25, whether we went 13 to the 15. 14 Certainly, we have been doing that, but 15 we have just been looking at how many models drop 16 out. Now, we can go back and say okay, let?s look 17 at truly what the cost is, how much time we think, 18 and just start to gauge what is doable and what 19 isn?t. 20 I think that will be what we will 21 prepare for at the next meeting. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Great. Tom Eckman.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 84 1 MR. ECKMAN: I think picking up on 2 Charlie?s point on the extended products, and we 3 mentioned this yesterday--I think because of the 4 way we have set the metric up, it clearly will 5 give a pretty stark signal about how much better 6 an extended product is than a bare pump efficiency 7 limit. 8 There is no doubt about it, it is going 9 to show significant advantage to having any sort 10 of a variable speed and control, or improved 11 motor, for that matter. 12 One of the things we considered in 13 thinking about this was how to drive that because 14 the metric will tell the story pretty starkly, and 15 thinking through when you do your redesigns, which 16 of those do you want to do. 17 Charlie is right. I can spend my 18 engineering time over here to make a little 19 improvement or I can make a lot over here by 20 expanding my extended product offerings. 21 Both of those would comply with a new 22 rule.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 85 1 MR. HANDZEL: To add, Tom, Doug?s 2 line, how do we blend in extended product. 3 Right now, we are just focusing on the PER, so I 4 think this is really important, how do we also 5 make sure the rule emphasizes-- 6 MR. ECKMAN: Encourages that. 7 MR. HANDZEL: Exactly. We have 8 all seen it, the analysis. We know it?s the 9 right thing to do. How do we make sure the 10 rule reflects it. 11 MR. ECKMAN: We?re thinking about it, 12 you know, strategically, and we?re not going to do 13 your business for you, but Charlie is right, 14 strategically thinking the way we were, the 15 application of the extended products satisfies the 16 standard just as much as improving the pump would, 17 but you get more bang for the buck out of it by 18 far. 19 Thinking through what the ramifications 20 of that might be with respect to compliance 21 options to the standard and how much engineering 22 time you devote to the pump versus the extended

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 86 1 product offerings, what is in your portfolio to 2 make the standard happen, compliance that way 3 versus just improve it and move on. 4 Those are bare pump offerings are going 5 to have to do the pump, but anything that has 6 extended product with it, where you offer that, 7 can comply a different way. 8 I?m pretty certain there is more money 9 in one of those than the other. 10 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 11 Obviously, we can go back to a lot of 12 the old meeting minutes and stuff and we have 13 talked a lot about groups like ASHRAE that have 14 standards that apply to when you have to use 15 drives, you know, fairly prescriptive. 16 I think there isn?t any of us at this 17 table that don?t have drives in our offering 18 already. I guess I would throw the ball 19 back to some of the consultants because I know you 20 guys asked us what percentage do we think are 21 being installed with drives now. 22 I would just ask you guys, have you guys

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 87 1 done any analysis on energy savings? If that 2 number went up higher, just to try to understand 3 how could we impact that on the extended product 4 side to make sure that we were getting to the 0.25 5 quads or beyond. 6 MR. CAPPELLINO: Like one percent. 7 MR. ECKMAN: (Off microphone.) 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 10 Again, just because this is a minimum 11 standard and if there are manufacturers who do not 12 offer the extended product, you know, it?s one 13 thing if you have a standard where they say a 14 product will have a much higher PER, that?s fine, 15 but as a minimum standard that?s affecting small 16 businesses that might not be at the table that 17 only offer bare pumps, you know, you have to be 18 cognizant of that. 19 If they don?t have the capital to offer 20 an extended product, we ought to think about 21 impacts on small businesses and raising the boat 22 so that all manufacturers can comply. That is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 88 1 another factor here that?s going on. 2 Remember, as part of any rulemaking, the 3 Justice Department does a competitive analysis and 4 writes a letter to DOE saying this will not hurt 5 competition or it will hurt competition. 6 There is that aspect in the background as well. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks, Steve. 8 Mark? 9 MR. HANDZEL: I?m done. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Thompson. 11 MR. THOMPSON: Steve Thompson with 12 Taco. 13 One thing, and I?m really liking this 14 conversation, what I?m hearing about the extended 15 product approach, and I?m hearing a possible 16 request for predictability of upgrading a pump by 17 itself or how much energy are you going to save by 18 upgrading pump and motor, and what is the big 19 apple, the pump, motor and drive. 20 One of the things we all have to 21 consider is the more accurate the number is on how 22 much energy you are saving, that is going to move

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 89 1 us into different things like are we required to 2 test drives, different control strategies, whether 3 it is a constant pressure system or are you going 4 to put a constant pressure drive control strategy 5 in, is it going to be a building management 6 system. 7 As soon as we talk about a labeling 8 program, there has to be some kind of quantifiable 9 energy savings which may move us into a very 10 complicated, potentially complicated monster of a 11 test procedure. 12 So, there are some cautions that I think 13 we all need to be aware of. The more accurate 14 the number is, we are going to be tasked to 15 deliver that number somehow. 16 All pump manufacturers have this data, 17 or we go to our customers saying you can 18 potentially save this much energy, but if a lot of 19 it is estimates and estimates on cost of 20 electricity and hours of operation or load 21 profiles and stuff like that, as soon as we start 22 to move out of the estimate area into more

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 90 1 accurate numbers, it is going to increase the 2 complexity of what we need to deliver. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 4 Gary? 5 MS. KOHL: Doug, could I-- 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Betsy, please. 7 MS. KOHL: I?m sorry. I know 8 I?m coming into the middle of a conversation, but 9 we have some additional information on the 10 compliance date we wanted to share with folks. 11 We looked at the statutory authority 12 again on the five year, and what we determined was 13 the five year specific date was for additional 14 types of commercial equipment that we would want 15 to cover. 16 Pumps, as we all know and discussed, 17 were already listed as a covered product in the 18 statute, so they are in a different list. 19 In this case, for pumps, they are kind 20 of an odd duck. There is no statutory prescription 21 for five years. What that means is could have 22 three, could have seven, could have as we talked

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 91 1 about yesterday for different product classes, 2 different compliance dates. 3 There are still issues and other 4 statutory prohibitions on tiering, either across 5 the board, so we couldn?t have three now or three 6 in five years--one standard in five years and 7 another in seven, either across the board or 8 within product classes. 9 There is significantly more leeway than 10 we thought we had up to this point. 11 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. Thank 12 you. 13 (Laughter.) 14 MS. KOHL: You?re very welcome. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Betsy, that was very 16 helpful. That was rather clear. That was 17 very good. 18 MR. FERNSTROM: We know that there are 19 legislative and other constraints on DOE, but when 20 ways can be found, it is really helpful. 21 I wanted to go back to Tom?s opening 22 point with respect to just bare pumps and

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 92 1 encourage our friends from industry when they do 2 their detailed analysis to try to find the 3 opportunity for the least redesign and the most 4 energy savings because we are interested in energy 5 savings. 6 If you can optimize energy savings with 7 respect to costs, that would be great. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Mark? 9 MR. HANDZEL: Just to come back to 10 Betsy?s point, basically what you just told us--I 11 think what you said is this group now needs to 12 make a recommendation whether it?s three, five, 13 seven, 14 2.5, ten. We have that option, 15 that?s what you?re saying: right? 16 MS. KOHL: Yes: uh-huh. 17 MR. HANDZEL: Obviously, we were 18 basing on that five years, so obviously shorter is 19 going to further tax us. I guess it?s just 20 another variable that we have to consider. I 21 just wanted to make sure I understood exactly as 22 you described it to us.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 93 1 MS. KOHL: Correct: yes. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Thank you. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 5 Again, thank you. Again, as a 6 first time standard, you know, my own personal 7 view, I think the manufacturer should be given at 8 least three years, at least three years to comply. 9 That is in line with many other products. 10 Typically, the more complex products usually get 11 five years, but at least three years. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis Starr. 13 MR. STARR: Just a thought here. 14 I have been doing some math. Five years and you 15 are redesigning 20 percent of your pumps, that is 16 four percent a year. If you go out to seven years, 17 that means you are at a PER of 28, which I think 18 perhaps equates to 0.24. 19 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. I?m 20 sorry for interrupting. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: No, go ahead. 22 MR. FERNSTROM: At least me personally

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 94 1 and I think our group in general would prefer 2 longer and more to shorter and less, because we 3 are long term thinkers. 4 (Laughter.) 5 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Mark 6 Handzel. 7 MR. HANDZEL: Betsy, just one more 8 clarification. The follow up window, is it still 9 six years? That didn?t change? 10 MS. KOHL: Correct. 11 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. I just 12 wanted to clarify something. The 2019 13 compliance date I was showing is actually only 14 three years from publication of the final rule, 15 which is 2016. 16 That was sort of confusing to you all. 17 I had it wrong. Typically, the five years would 18 have been 2021. I just wanted to point that out 19 as you are considering what date you might want to 20 think about going forward. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Yes, 22 Steve?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 95 1 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 2 As part of the negotiation, wouldn?t this possibly 3 have been a direct final rule that would have been 4 --no? All right. Never mind. 5 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Cappellino. 6 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, 7 ITT. So, when Tom talked about his 0.25 quads this 8 morning, everybody immediately were ruffling 9 through their papers and looking for this chart. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. 11 MR. CAPPELLINO: I was wondering if the 12 consultants could give us a little bit more 13 background and insight into where those numbers 14 came from. 15 For example, a simple question like--I?m 16 presuming there is a motor efficiency assumed in 17 here, and as we think about extended products, 18 that was the whole idea here, right? By having 19 a premium motor offering, for example, that could 20 basically be built into energy savings or a drive 21 could be built into energy savings. 22 I was curious what some of the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 96 1 background here was and is there something to be 2 learned or understood here. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: This is a pretty simple 4 NIA, we are basically--because hydraulic redesign 5 is the only design option, each of the efficiency 6 levels are analyzed based on the savings from 7 hydraulic redesign. We do assume a motor 8 efficiency, which is currently the Federal minimum 9 motor efficiency, just for ease of simplicity. 10 One of the things that I talked about 11 that isn?t in here is users with VSD. A 12 percentage of users that currently have VSD, you 13 know, estimate the energy savings from that on a 14 percentage basis, and just basically apply factors 15 to this pretty easily. 16 That is an option. Currently, it 17 was designed just to look at the effects of 18 hydraulic redesign. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Maybe I misunderstood. 20 I thought Charlie was asking about another brief 21 statement about how these figures were derived. 22 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 97 1 One question about that. You made 2 a statement that the motors are the Federal 3 minimum: right? 4 There is multiple levels, right, within 5 that category, 100 to 200 different types. 6 I?m curious, is there an efficiency 7 level or are there multiple levels because there 8 are different products, different categories. 9 Federal minimum means a lot of different 10 things across the categories. I?m just curious, 11 what levels, or if it is that complex when you are 12 talking about base case. 13 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. It?s not super 14 relevant to this analysis because everything is 15 scaled. We?re using--we are sizing motors the way 16 it is currently proposed in the test procedure, 17 and then we are using the Federal minimum for that 18 specific motor size, and we are taking the most--I 19 forgot--we are taking open or closed. I think 20 it?s closed. 21 MS. WIDDER: Closed, but we are going 22 to talk about that in depth in a few minutes.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 98 1 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes, we are currently 2 making the same assumptions as are currently 3 proposed in the test procedure, but those are not 4 determined yet. The impact that will have on these 5 results I anticipate to be quite small. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Do you want to rephrase 7 your question? Just ask Alison again what you 8 hope to gather from that slide. 9 MR. CAPPELLINO: Alison, maybe if you 10 could just repeat what you said as far as where 11 the energy savings came from because it?s still 12 not clear to me, is there an opportunity inside of 13 the energy savings that you?re showing there 14 around motor efficiency improvements, in terms of 15 what we offer, and variable speed drives, in terms 16 of what we offer or not. It?s still not 17 clear to me if that is part of the modeling or 18 not. 19 MS. WILLIAMS: So, currently that is 20 not part of the modeling. NIA is using the 21 average energy use under base case and standards 22 case from the LCC.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 99 1 MR. HANDZEL: It?s pump efficiency 2 only. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: Pump efficiency only. 4 We are only using the motor efficiency to 5 calculate actual power use, right. We?re 6 not changing from a base case motor efficiency to 7 a standards case motor efficiency because that is 8 not a design option from the standard. 9 What I was just adding is it?s not that 10 we can?t modify our models to do that, that just 11 has not been the purpose, it is not part of the 12 standards right now. 13 MR. ADIN: Just to clarify. 14 Lucas Adin. 15 What we would have to do, and we talked 16 a little bit about this yesterday, but to do that, 17 we?d have to make an assumption about how many 18 products would use a more efficient motor because 19 like 20 Alison stated, it?s not a design option. 21 MR. HANDZEL: We keep saying ?more 22 efficient motor.? I think we need to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 100 1 clarify. 2 Right now, and Dan, you can step in, 3 there are no more efficient motors. We are using 4 premium efficiency motors. That?s pretty set. 5 It?s the drive. It?s reducing the speed of the 6 pump and motor to match those requirements for 7 loading the system. 8 We keep talking about a more efficient 9 model, and Dan can comment further, but it?s not 10 like there is something better out there that we 11 aren?t already all using. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan? 13 MR. DELANEY: Just to clarify, and I 14 know the way, Alison, you clarified this, and we 15 can probably get into this a little bit later, but 16 it is important to understand those calculations 17 and what manners in which the motors were used as 18 the base case, right, for the sake of the quads 19 and the discussion there. 20 The product, obviously as Federal 21 minimum, wouldn?t even be on the radar, so because 22 of the mechanical differences and things like

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 101 1 that, it wouldn?t be regulated at all. 2 That?s important to remember, even if 3 industry is using that today, the base case is 4 important to understand that it would not even be 5 an EPACT level, right, because of the scope and 6 mechanical modifications that type of product is. 7 It is just important for us to 8 understand that as we look at those levels, 9 regardless of what the industry may be using 10 today. What is Federal minimum, I want to make 11 sure we understand what are those actually being 12 used. 13 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. We are 14 using the same default motor values in the base 15 case and the standards case, so there is going to 16 be very minimum impact of that change on the delta 17 energy savings between the levels. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Steve 19 Rosenstock. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 21 Just to follow up, they are using the 22 Federal minimum standards for motors which are

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 102 1 full load. 2 Motor standards are just full load 3 efficiency. 4 MS. WILLIAMS: We are taking into 5 account part load loss. 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: They are modifying it, 7 but again, that is what is out there and it could 8 be used with a bare pump. That is an option 9 for a customer, especially in a retrofit 10 situation. 11 Remember, in 90 percent of the cases, it 12 is going to be retrofit. It?s up to the customer, 13 not the pump manufacturer, what is going in there. 14 MR. HANDZEL: (Off microphone.) 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Right: exactly. They 16 could be using a 20 year old motor with a new bare 17 pump if they wanted to. That?s part of the 18 analytical situation they are dealing with. 19 Also, DOE just came out today in the 20 Federal Register, motor efficiency is going up in 21 two years. That doesn?t change because the 22 standard for the base case and standards case is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 103 1 still the same efficiency motor. 2 But again, when you?re talking about 3 what percentage of people are currently using 4 variable speed drives, if you?re saying it is 5 really higher than what it is, guess what, our 6 base case energy usage is lower. Maybe your 7 potential savings go down as well. That all 8 plays into the analysis there. 9 about due for a break. Louis Starr. 10 MR. STARR: Before we break, Alison 11 mentioned 2019. I assume the 20 percent redesign 12 which would equate to the PER 15, that is assuming 13 reaching those levels by 2019 of the standard 14 going in would be the PER 15. 15 It actually switches up the percentages 16 of pumps to redesign, it?s like six percent 17 instead of four percent. 18 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel. Louis, 19 based on the discussion when we left here 20 yesterday, we thought it was clarified it was five 21 years. We were basing it on January 2015 to 22 January 2020. Again, we have things changing a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 104 1 little bit. We need to factor all that into 2 our discussion. 3 MR. STARR: Okay. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Jay? 5 MR. SIVIGNY: Jay Sivigny, Flowserve. 6 I just want to recapture and understand fully 7 exactly what the NGOs are offering or saying. 8 Tom, you mentioned a 0.25 quad, savings 9 overall, and if I heard Gary correctly, we want 10 some sort of mechanism to capture in totality what 11 the pump users could select from, so that some 12 sort of rebate program could be put into place. 13 Do I have that correct? 14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Not as far as the 15 standard. 16 MR. SIVIGNY: My question is, is there 17 anything else that is of interest at this point 18 that you want to put on the table before we go on 19 for a break. 20 MR. ECKMAN: I think the information 21 on timing, we thought we were more constrained 22 there.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 105 1 I think that gives us some opportunity 2 to talk about how that might work, Betsy?s comment 3 on the potential for laying in product classes at 4 different points in time might be a way to remove 5 some of the constraints on engineering talent. We 6 need to look at that seriously. 7 In terms of just options for getting to 8 closure on this, I think we have a different set 9 of options than we had before, and that?s a good 10 thing. 11 MR. HANDZEL: Another variable. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Let?s take a 13 break. It is now 9:50. We will take a 15 minute 14 break. We will resume at 10:05 here in this room. 15 Make sure to wear your badges. I 16 believe everyone knows where the restrooms and 17 coffee shop are. A good start on the day. 18 (A brief recess was taken.) 19 MR. BROOKMAN: The next item on the 20 agenda is to move for the metrics discussion that 21 we had noted we would do. However, before we 22 moved to that, I wanted to provide an opportunity

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 106 1 for anyone that wishes to make additional comments 2 on the standard setting segment we just left. 3 Any additional thoughts, any additional 4 insights, any additional questions for the 5 analysts? Just open this up to see if 6 anything else comes out at this time. 7 Mark Handzel. 8 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 9 Slide 44, the National Impact Analysis, 10 and Tom, you can be in this question, too. I 11 just want to confirm like that TSL-3 category that 12 shows the 0.24 quad savings, is that kind of where 13 you guys were picking as the target, because that 14 is really where you were? 15 MR. ECKMAN: Yes. 16 MR. HANDZEL: Alison, then the 17 question for you is are those values impacted by 18 the potential change in the three, five or seven 19 year duration that Betsy put in as a new variable 20 for us? 21 MS. WILLIAMS: Sorry. 22 MR. HANDZEL: That?s okay. That?s

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 107 1 why we are asking. I?m looking at Charlie?s 2 slides and he wrote some notes and said like this 3 was over a 30 year period of sales. 4 MS. WILLIAMS: I believe that the 5 national energy savings are not impacted but the 6 NPV would be impacted, because of the discounting 7 and-- 8 MR. HANDZEL: Right. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Lucas Adin. 10 MR. ADIN: I didn?t really have 11 anything to add to that other than just energy 12 savings are shifts, NPV shifts, because of 13 discount rate. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis Starr. 15 MR. STARR: Just a clarification. 16 The 0.24, because this is on the slide, we are 17 essentially picking the level. In other words, 18 re- figure these numbers and it turns out that 19 ended up being 0.4 instead of 0.24, you say hey, 20 we?re there. It?s really the level or class 21 we?re looking at. I just wanted to clarify 22 that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 108 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Steve Rosenstock. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 3 If you also remember, the slide, like 4 slide 32, and then slide 34 of the representation, 5 depending on where--then slide 34 was a more, I?ll 6 say, conservative number, that could have 7 obviously a huge impact on estimated savings as 8 well. 9 Again, we all kind of looked at the 10 slide and said it?s a flatter slope and it seemed 11 a little bit more realistic based on the last ten 12 year trends, so that could have a huge impact, 13 too, depending on what the slope of the shipment 14 curve is going to be over the next 30 years. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna? 16 MS. MAUER: I just wanted to echo 17 Louis? comment that the 0.25 quads was not a magic 18 number. It came off this slide. I think part of 19 the reason we were looking at that level was 20 because of all of the discussion we had about 21 harmonization, but I think kind of coming into 22 this, knowing that the EU is going to MEI a 40 in

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 109 1 2015, I think we kind of saw that as kind of the 2 lowest level we might want to go to. 3 Now, we have a lot more information 4 about what the actual savings are, what the 5 impacts on manufacturers are. As Gary and Tom 6 have said, it?s balancing energy and consumer 7 savings and manufacturing impacts. I think we 8 have a lot more discussion that we need to have 9 about that. 10 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel, Xylem. 11 Joanna, I would just say that obviously, 12 we have been going back and forth between PER and 13 MEI, from our perspective, a 40 PER is not a 40 14 MEI. I think somewhere we have to come to an 15 understanding of that and just make sure if we 16 were looking at harmonization, it?s not going to 17 be at that 40 level. 18 MS. MAUER: Yes, it was helpful to 19 see that comparison yesterday. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: My notes reflect that 21 MEI 40 is something like PER 25/30, in that 22 general range. Yes?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 110 1 MR. HANDZEL: That?s what we saw, 2 Doug: 3 yes. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay: good. Final 5 comments before we move on? 6 (No response.) 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Moving on to 8 metrics. Sarah Widder. 9 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Thank you, Doug. 10 Let me get the right slides up. We?re 11 going to talk about metric and test procedure for 12 a little while now. We?re going to start with 13 reviewing the general metric architecture that we 14 presented in depth at the last meeting, and just 15 sort of remind everyone where we are, what it 16 looks like, and then see if there are any 17 additional comments, if people have had time to 18 consider it, or if we feel comfortable enough to 19 maybe vote on the architecture, including the load 20 points and weights. 21 We?re going to have a discussion of 22 nomenclature around the PER. We have all been

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 111 1 calling it PER. Even in our internal discussions, 2 we recognized that can refer to different things 3 at different times. We?re going to try to 4 clear that up, and be clear about how we are 5 referring to the different parts of the metric, 6 and then how that might impact a label. We 7 are also going to talk about motor sizing and 8 losses. 9 We really can do this in any order or in 10 a particular order, but if we want to jump 11 somewhere in the deck, if anyone wants to do 12 anything first, just please let me know. 13 I?m going to start with nomenclature, 14 just so we all know what we?re talking about 15 moving forward. There are two potential ways, and 16 the thing is sort of blocking it, but I have an A 17 and a B here. These are the two initial 18 proposals 19 I have for nomenclature. 20 One is we have always defined a PER, so 21 I stuck with the PER, constant load and variable 22 load, being a weighted average input electrical

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 112 1 power to the pump, which is the pump plus motor 2 controls if they are available, over the weighted 3 average input power to a similar minimally 4 compliant uncontrolled pump, and calling that 5 whole ratio the PER for the different variables 6 versus constant load applications. 7 That should look familiar. We?ll go 8 through in detail what exactly is in the numerator 9 and denominator. That is one nomenclature 10 option. 11 Nomenclature option number two, this is 12 changing things a little bit, so I recognize that, 13 but I found this method personally more clear. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: This is an entirely new 15 slide. 16 MS. WIDDER: This is an entirely new 17 slide, B. This is option B. There 18 could be more options. We referred to the 19 weighted average pump input power as the PER, the 20 pump energy rating, since that is what we started 21 with since we began talking about a metric, and 22 then calling the ratioed value a pump energy

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 113 1 index. 2 So, having separate terms for the 3 separate pieces of information that go into the 4 metric. I know we have been calling everything 5 PER. That means we changed like all of Alison?s 6 and Dan?s equations, instead of being PER 10, 25, 7 40, now it is PEI 10, 25, 40. 8 I recognize that can be confusing. 9 The thing I personally like about this is now it 10 is 11 PER of the control load or variable load--sorry, 12 the constant load or variable load over the 13 maximum PER, which is the standard level. 14 You have a separate term to refer to that weighted 15 average pump input power and then an unique term 16 for the radioed value, and you can be clear when 17 you are talking about them. 18 Those are the two options for 19 nomenclature. We will take any comments. 20 Yes, 21 Steve? 22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 114 1 Quick question on the third bullet 2 point, (i), and then for your percentage of flows, 3 are you saying that each one is an option or both 4 have to be included? I guess I?m a little 5 confused, percentage of flow at the BEP, you are 6 showing two different (i)?s there. I guess I?m 7 getting a little confused in terms of do both have 8 to be included or-- 9 MS. WIDDER: Right. It?s referring 10 to the constant load versus variable load. 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Right. 12 MS. WIDDER: Let?s run through those 13 slides and we can all be on the same page. 14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. I was also going 15 to say I thought for the second part, I thought we 16 had kind of taken out the 25. 17 MS. WIDDER: Not for variable load. 18 We will go through those slides and make sure we 19 are all on the same page or do we want to stick on 20 nomenclature and we will get to Steve later? 21 MR. ROSENSTOCK: That?s fine. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 115 1 MR. STARR: I was just going to say 2 I think splitting out those things separately is a 3 good idea. It really is an index. It?s a 4 more accurate thing. I think it makes sense. 5 MR. BROOKMAN: If we knew as a working 6 group a general sense of direction at this point, 7 I think that would be useful. I noticed a few of 8 you over here were shaking your heads that the 9 index portion made sense to you. 10 Gary Fernstrom. 11 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. Maybe 12 I?m getting ahead of the game, but I like approach 13 B. 14 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: I think we mentioned 16 index last time around. 17 MS. WIDDER: On the webinar, I 18 initially presented this idea, just so we had 19 clear terms to discuss at that time. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: This is a new thing, but 21 Mark, comments? 22 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 116 1 We were kind of starting to use this 2 term yesterday and we were pulling ourselves back 3 because we hadn?t really talked about it yet. I 4 don?t think we disagree. 5 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: It looks like we are 7 headed kind of in that direction, not confirmed 8 yet. Steve Rosenstock. 9 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 10 Just getting in the weeds here, the PEI, 11 the numerator of PEI says CL and VL. Again, 12 I?ll just say is that kilowatt hours or watts? 13 You say ?power.? Are you saying kilowatt 14 hours or watts? 15 MS. WIDDER: Okay. I have a 16 proposal. 17 I?m going to answer your question, 18 Steve, but in more depth. From this slide, I?m 19 going to move forward at least for the rest of 20 today using the nomenclature B here that you see, 21 and then I have about four slides that are going 22 to answer your question in detail about where we

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 117 1 use constant load, where it is variable load. 2 It is actually one or the other. We will 3 just answer those in the next couple of slides. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay, because that?s 5 confusing. Thank you. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, let?s let her do 7 these slides in sequence. Charlie? 8 MS. WIDDER: Yes, just because having 9 all of it on there gets too busy. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie? 11 MR. CAPPELLINO: Just real quick, PER max 12 is in the denominator? 13 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 14 MR. CAPPELLINO: There is no definition? 15 MS. WIDDER: Yes, I apologize for 16 that. 17 PER max is the PER CL for a minimally 18 compliant 113 pump. 19 MR. 20 CAPPELLINO: All right: got it. 21 MS. 22 WIDDER: Okay. Here?s some equations.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 118 1 We had discussed previously defining a constant 2 load and a variable load metric for 3 For the constant load application for the 4 uncontrolled pumps, so that is bare pumps, we had 5 previously discussed loading points of 75 percent, 6 100 percent and 110 percent of the BEP flow rate. 7 That is consistent with the EU. 8 Equally weighting those points. 9 The motor performance would be that of 10 the motor that?s paired with the pump with pumps 11 sold with motors or a minimally compliant pump, a 12 pump that minimally complies with DOE?s 13 regulations, for Subtype 1 or Subtype 2. 14 This is in answer to your question, Dan. 15 For general purpose motors, Subtype 1 16 for all pumps except for end suction closed 17 coupled, and Subtype 2 for end suction closed 18 coupled pumps. Then we will have to update those 19 to the new motor standards, obviously. 20 That would be the motor losses or the 21 motor that?s paired with a bare shaft pump. 22 Here is the equation in all its glory. The

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 119 1 ratioed value would be the equally weighted input 2 power to the pump in the numerator. 3 You can see in the third line here that 4 it is broken out into pump shaft input power and 5 the motor losses. We discussed that a couple 6 of times, but if there are questions, we can get 7 to that. 8 This is the equation for minimally 9 compliant pump. I have a separate slide addressing 10 that. This is essentially an equally 11 weighted average of the input power to a minimally 12 compliant uncontrolled pump. The pump 13 efficiency is set using the MEI equation. We will 14 talk more about that later. 15 For variable load application, we had 16 talked about using different loading values of 25 17 percent, 50 percent, 75 percent, and 100 percent 18 of BEP flow rate of the pump, and equally 19 weighting those four points in this case. 20 Other than that, this equation looks 21 identical. The full load losses is only that 22 of the motor paired with the pump, since it is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 120 1 impossible to sell a pump with controls but no 2 motor. 3 The controls? performance is calculated 4 in this scenario, which I?m not going to talk 5 about today, but is calculated based on an assumed 6 system curve. We presented that at the webinar 7 and those slides are available. 8 It captures the benefit in a consistent 9 and reliable way. We have proposed to still 10 capture drive efficiency here. I don?t know how 11 to use this thing, it doesn?t seem to work. 12 Anyway, we have proposed to capture 13 drive efficiency here just out front. There are 14 a couple of ways we could do that, but that is the 15 way presented here in this slide. That is 16 probably something that will be determined as part 17 of the more detailed test procedure rulemaking, 18 how exactly to incorporate drive efficiency. 19 The general equation architecture is exactly the 20 same except for the load points. 21 To your question, Steve, whether or not 22 you were sold as a bare pump or a pump plus motor

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 121 1 or with controls, it would determine which of 2 these load points and metric equations you would 3 use. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: For that original 5 equation-- 6 MS. WIDDER: It is really an ?or,? 7 like the hash was an ?or,? not an ?and.? 8 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay: thank you. 9 The text said ?and,? so that confused me. 10 MS. WIDDER: I apologize for that. 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thank you very much. 12 Again, I thought we had some discussion 13 before about that 25 percent of BEP, I thought the 14 manufacturers had said that really wasn?t-- 15 MS. WIDDER: It?s not feasible in a 16 throttled situation, so for a pump that doesn?t 17 have a VFD, it?s very difficult or impossible for 18 some pumps to reach 25 percent of BEP flow, but in 19 this controlled scenario, we determined that to be 20 more representative of the flow profile of a 21 controlled pump. 22 MR. TOWSLEY: We agree with that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 122 1 MS. WIDDER: Great. Just a little 2 more detail on the minimally compliant pump. We 3 sort of saw this equation before. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: I want that on the 5 record. Mark Handzel. 6 MR. HANDZEL: Clearly, the point is on 7 a constant load pump, we don?t recommend running 8 that far back on shutoff, just because it?s 9 detrimental to the bearing life and all those 10 other things. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: But you agree with this 12 construct? 13 MR. HANDZEL: We agree with this 14 construct: yes. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. 16 MS. WIDDER: Okay: great. The 17 minimally compliant pump again is equally weighted 18 pump, input power to the pump, so that in this 19 case of the standards? pump, the minimally 20 compliant pump, we have used pump efficiency as 21 determined by this equation that was also used in 22 the EU to set the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 123 1 MEI, so this is the equation for a surface that 2 defines pump efficiency. 3 Taking a ratio of hydraulic power to 4 that pump efficiency, we can determine the pump 5 shaft input power at each of those load points, 6 that 0.95 and 0.985 weights were also used in the 7 EU analysis to determine how efficiency falls off 8 for the minimally compliant pump after BEP, above 9 and below BEP, and then adding the motor losses. 10 Yes, Steve? 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 12 As I said on the webinar and again that 13 line is still there, value for the pump at 50 14 hertz, does the equation change when it is going 15 to be 60 hertz for U.S.? 16 MS. WIDDER: I haven?t updated this 17 equation to U.S. units. It really is not going to 18 be part of the test procedure. I didn?t see that 19 to be--this is going to be a value. We will 20 give a value of--I guess we will have to have the 21 equation. 22 We will update this to U.S. units, but

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 124 1 this is in metric units right now. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. Hertz, 3 regardless of whether it is U.S. or Europe, it is 4 just a matter that in the U.S., the test will be 5 at 60 hertz. 6 MS. WIDDER: Right. 7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I just want to make sure 8 that for all these equations, everything--if there 9 is a difference, it needs to be adjusted for 60 10 hertz. 11 MS. WIDDER: Right. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Greg? 13 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 14 Steve, the calculator that we are using 15 to analyze, while this equation is in there, there 16 are some conversions in there to get it over 17 fairly to 60 hertz. 18 MS. WIDDER: Right, so we are 19 accounting for it. All right. Now, here?s my 20 slide where we maybe vote or make recommendations 21 on the general 22 EEI architecture. I don?t know if this is a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 125 1 question for the Working Group, we don?t need to 2 vote, this is a test procedure issue, but if this 3 is something that warrants being included on the 4 term sheet, this could be something that is done 5 now or we could keep going. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Did you describe the 7 load points? 8 MS. WIDDER: We did. We did discuss 9 the load points for controlled and uncontrolled 10 application, equally weighted. Those are the 11 three things essentially that we would be voting 12 on, this general pump energy index as a ratio of 13 the controlled or uncontrolled PER for that pump, 14 and the PER max of the uncontrolled minimally 15 compliant pump on the bottom, the pump weights, 16 where they are equally weighted, and the load 17 points. 18 Those are the things that are on this 19 slide. Yes? 20 MR. STARR: Louis Starr with NEEA. 21 There are lots of equations up there, 22 maybe you can just kind of tell me in words, and

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 126 1 this is more on the variable speed load, on the 2 variable speed load, your equations and your index 3 takes into account the fact that motors are very 4 inefficient at low speeds, 25, 50 and 75, and VFD 5 also are, so is that somehow equated so that when 6 you are comparing things, it works out? 7 MS. WIDDER: Yes, we can talk about 8 motor loading before we make any decisions on this 9 slide. That is incorporated in the general 10 architecture of this metric. That is 11 incorporated in this ?L,? motor losses? values. 12 We didn?t describe how these motor 13 losses are calculated. We have before but not 14 today. We?re going to talk about that, and we do 15 have motor loss curves that account for the fact 16 that you have decreasing efficiency at motor load. 17 MR. STARR: Okay. The only reason 18 I?m asking that is I want to make sure when the 19 pump guys actually go to test, they end up with 20 values that are better than a calculated PER. We 21 want to encourage pump people to test their 22 products. I would hate to have a calculated

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 127 1 value that their test value comes out higher, and 2 I bet they would, too. 3 MS. WIDDER: Right. I think we are 4 all on the same page there, but we do need to make 5 sure that happens. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary Fernstrom. 7 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. Sarah, 8 with the PCM/ECM motor family, smaller horsepower 9 motors, they tend to maintain their efficiency 10 across their speed range while the three phased 11 drive controlled motors do not necessarily. 12 In developing the load factor, I hope we 13 can account for those two different types of motor 14 families. 15 MS. WIDDER: Let?s get to the motor 16 sizing and losses discussion. I feel like we?re 17 going there. Maybe we can have all of that in 18 more detail. Then we can discuss the 19 suggestions. 20 Yes? 21 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 22 MR. CASE: If I could comment.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 128 1 This is 2 Greg Case. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Greg. 4 MR. CASE: Gary, to your point, the 5 ECM would be a motor upgrade and it doesn?t have 6 to be in the standard losses here. It would be 7 an upgrade, so when we tested that, it would get a 8 better value. 9 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. Greg, 10 you?re right. That then would require actual 11 testing of all of those products versus being able 12 to handle through a calculated methodology to 13 reduce the testing burden. 14 I think we ought to be able to do that 15 through a calculated methodology as well. 16 MR. CASE: Wouldn?t we want to use 17 the load profile for that motor when we put it in, 18 so we would actually get that load profile from 19 that manufacturer to plug that in. It wouldn?t 20 be the standard load that the DOE gave us. 21 MS. WIDDER: That would be something 22 that we need to discuss. I think we should-

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 129 1 -I?m going to present a couple of slides on motor 2 sizing and motor losses. Steve has a 3 comment first, and then I?m going to get to the-- 4 MR. BROOKMAN: I?m going to let Lucas 5 respond, Lucas Adin. 6 MR. ADIN: This was really just in 7 response to Gary?s comment. With respect to 8 the test method accommodating these different 9 types of motor technologies that might 10 prospectively be used, clearly there is a benefit 11 in having a calculation method. We don?t want 12 to discourage the use of better technology because 13 of test burden. 14 Sarah is going to talk about that, but I 15 think we are all on the same page about wanting to 16 ensure that we are accommodating different 17 technology options equally in that respect. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve, go ahead. 19 Then we are going to go back to Sarah. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 21 It was really about the general slide 22 about the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 130 1 EEI, but we are getting into details of motor 2 loading. Maybe we can come back to it. I 3 have a few comments on this slide, but if you want 4 to get into the motors and get back to this, I?m 5 fine with that. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, thank you, Steve. 7 We will wait on that then. 8 MS. WIDDER: So, save those. I?m 9 going to skip this standard label thing for now 10 and go to the motor loading. Great. 11 I?m going to try to get through all of 12 this. It?s going to present in general what?s in 13 the calculator right now, reflecting that some of 14 the suggestions that have already been made aren?t 15 completely incorporated into the calculator. 16 My goal with these slides is really 17 to capture those items, those recommendations from 18 the Working Group, that we can take back and try 19 to incorporate into the test procedure. I don?t 20 anticipate we will be able to completely resolve 21 them today or even maybe as part of the Working 22 Group. It might be something that we have to move

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 131 1 to the test procedure rulemaking, but we will take 2 all these recommendations into account. 3 Okay. We already presented this in the 4 previous material. The motor selection will 5 either be standardized motor performance that?s 6 based on the DOE minimum standard or manufacturer 7 motor performance of that sold with the pump. 8 That is for determining the full load 9 losses, that L rated is the full load losses of 10 the pump, which is based on the full load 11 efficiency of that pump. 12 The other two pieces of information are 13 variables that are needed to determine the part 14 load losses in DOE?s current--in the current sort 15 of framework that we have, the motor size, how 16 would you size a motor to a given pump, because 17 they come in discrete bins, and then the pole is 18 sort of obvious, the poles of the motor will be 19 that which the pump is rated and being sold. 20 The size and the full load losses are 21 the two pieces of information that we need. 22 Our current thinking, let me talk about

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 132 1 this first, is that the motor would be sized--the 2 standard motor would be sized based on the next-- 3 this is sort of complicated so I?m going to talk 4 through it a couple of times--the next horsepower 5 above the maximum of pump shaft input power at 6 BEP, 110 percent of BEP or 120 percent of BEP. 7 Previously, we had talked about sizing-- 8 that bullet right there. We talked about 9 sizing 120, rounding up at 120 percent of BEP 10 value. This is essentially that but in case 11 there is a weird shape to the power curve and you 12 have higher power at BEP say and you sort of tail 13 off, this accommodates that type of power curve 14 where you really probably would size off the max 15 power between BEP and 120 percent of BEP. That 16 is where this maximum of those three values comes 17 from. 18 The pump shaft horsepower at BEP, 110 19 percent of BEP, and 120 percent of BEP, would be 20 determined based on the linear regression of 21 tested pump shaft horsepower data. 22 The linear regression is also up for

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 133 1 discussion, but that is what we have talked about 2 here. 3 Here?s just an example pump curve. 4 The bottom is a flow versus head curve, and then 5 the top is the power curve. You can see we have 6 linearally regressed the 75 percent, 100, 110, and 7 120 percent points, with the blue triangles and 8 the blue line, and then the green square is the 9 120 percent point that is used for motor sizing in 10 this case, it?s the maximum. 11 This is just a little bit more 12 information on the linear regression. I think 13 that is all clear. Some alternatives to the 14 linear regression that we have discussed here is 15 we could instead linearally interpolate between 16 the points. We could require testing at the 17 individual flow points and establish a tolerance, 18 or we could establish some other regression 19 besides linear. 20 Those are some other options that we 21 could consider. In general, we understand the pump 22 shaft input curve to be actually pretty linear,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 134 1 especially at this higher range, 120 percent of 2 BEP flow rate range. That is the method we have 3 proposed here, that we considered. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 5 In this case, based on this table, you 6 would be putting in a 60 horsepower motor for this 7 pump configuration: correct? 8 MS. WIDDER: Correct. It could 9 be a 60 horsepower motor. We would round 10 that up to the nearest horsepower, the next 11 highest horsepower bin. 12 Consider this, manufacturers especially, 13 think about what makes sense for your pumps. 14 You have all used the calculator. It employs 15 this method. If those pump sizes look reasonable 16 to you, that might be a good check that this is a 17 reasonable sizing approach. 18 I will emphasize that this is just a 19 default. It doesn?t control--if you sell 20 your pump with a motor, then the size of the motor 21 is the size of the motor that you sell the pump 22 with.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 135 1 It doesn?t restrict that at all. 2 This is just a default. It will be 3 applied consistently to all pumps. Yes? 4 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 5 Sarah, is this what is currently in 6 Version 10 or 7 Version 11? 8 MS. WIDDER: It?s in Version 11. 9 It?s actually in Version 10. It?s sort of 10 complicated. 11 We have always determined--in the 12 calculator, we have always determined the pump 13 shaft input power values that we plugged in as 14 those examples based on this linear regression. 15 That?s what we have always done to determine those 16 values at the specific flow points. 17 Ever since Version 1, this has been the 18 method that?s been implemented. It wasn?t explicit 19 in the calculator because we used to request the 20 120 percent value. Based on feedback from 21 manufacturers, we eliminated that necessity and 22 extrapolated the 120 percent point based on the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 136 1 100 and 110 percent point. That is exactly what 2 is currently in the calculator. Yes, that is 3 exactly what is currently in the calculator. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis? 5 MR. STARR: I guess I have a couple 6 of questions. In design, what I used to size 7 pumps, which may or may not be the right way to 8 have done it, you would have calculated your brake 9 horsepower and then you would have made sure you 10 had ten percent extra brake horsepower. If you 11 came up with 47, you would make sure you ended up 12 with enough that you had ten percent in case you 13 missed a design point. 14 What I?m wondering about is if you?re 15 going 20 percent over flow, how does that 16 translate into over sizing in horsepower? 17 Normally, just straight out design, you 18 would want to kind of hit the horsepower rating 19 for the design point that you selected. 20 If you are constantly over selecting 20 21 percent flow on a pump curve, that could be a lot 22 of horsepower extra. Maybe the pump guys or

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 137 1 maybe you have a sense for how much over sizing is 2 happening due to that. 3 MS. WIDDER: Based on the pump, we 4 don?t have--I clearly don?t have as much 5 information as the pump guys, so I?m going to let 6 them answer, but based on the pump data we do have 7 and like the example implemented in the 8 calculator, you can actually see here, you can see 9 what over sizing is happening--47 to 43.8 in this 10 example. This is based on data that we had 11 tested. It?s sort of a small table. I 12 apologize. 13 That is about five percent, a little bit 14 more than five percent over sizing. No, over 15 ten percent. Sorry. I?m not doing math 16 very well. 17 It?s about ten percent over sizing. 18 MR. CAPPELLINO: Charlie Cappellino, 19 ITT. The two options there are size the motor 20 based on the design condition or size it based on 21 end of curves. 22 MR. HANDZEL: (Off microphone.)

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 138 1 MR. CAPPELLINO: Some customers prefer to 2 select to size their motor based on end of curve, 3 because if say something does get out of control, 4 somebody opens a valve wide open and the pump 5 moves out to the end of curve, the motor isn?t 6 sized large enough to accommodate that condition, 7 then the equipment will actually shut down. 8 The electrical system would be sized 9 appropriately for the motor, so you could actually 10 shut your system down, depending on the 11 application and what you are trying to do, but a 12 lot of customers will go end of curve, which does 13 get you a larger motor but it accommodates that 14 situation that somebody is operating the equipment 15 and opens up a valve all the way, you are going to 16 get in a situation where the system shuts down. 17 That is one example. 18 MR. STARR: In that example you are 19 using, is that more like an industrial application 20 where if the water flow doesn?t get there, or is 21 that more of a really dire situation, or is that 22 134 something else?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 139 1 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 2 Louis, it?s very common in the 3 commercial building market for engineers to 4 specify non-overloading motors. I would say 70 to 5 80 percent of the selections, and they do it 6 primarily as a cushion in case they under estimate 7 the flow and have to put a bigger impeller in. 8 They have the big motor there already. 9 It is a very common design practice. 10 You can look at any of our selection 11 programs. We give the consulting engineer the 12 ability to specify he only wants non-overloading 13 motor 14 It is very common in commercial buildings. I think 15 Charlie kind of spoke to the industrial market 16 more. 17 MR. STARR: Does that result--I 18 guess there isn?t really a rule of thumb in terms 19 of what percentage over sizing that normally gets 20 you or is it really application specific? 21 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 22 It?s really pump specific, but depending

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 140 1 on where you are picking on the curve, depending 2 on the shape of the curve, whether it?s a flat 3 curve or a steep curve, a flat curve, you could 4 end up getting a motor several times larger than 5 you actually need. 6 All of us have different design 7 practices. Some of us have flat curves, some of us 8 have steep curves. It varies all over the 9 place, 10 I think would be my answer. I don?t know if 11 you could add something to that, Charlie. 12 MR. CAPPELLINO: No, I think it?s good. 13 MR. STARR: It does sound in general 14 that if I were to call up as a designer and tell 15 you I was doing this, you would say, well, that 16 seems reasonable or you would probably just say 17 we?ll give you the motor that meets that curve. 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 19 It sounds like a possible safety factor in 20 designing for growth. In this case, your 21 choices are a 50 or 60 horsepower motor. Which one 22 would people choose in this case? I?m guessing

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 141 1 60, but I?m sure there might be some customer that 2 would say well, we?re just going to be really 3 strict and we?re just going to go with 50 and see 4 what happens. 5 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 6 Steve, I think it just depends on the 7 customer-- the engineer?s confidence in his 8 design, his confidence in the overall system, and 9 how it is going to perform. 10 Typically, what an engineer does is if 11 that is his design practice, he always specifies a 12 non-overloading motor. Obviously, you are wasting 13 energy doing it but it is a risk they 14 predominately take. 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Sarah, Steve 16 Rosenstock, EEI, do you have the numbers if they 17 chose a 50 versus a 60 in this example? 18 MS. WIDDER: I don?t have any numbers 19 worked out in this example. I will talk to you 20 about motor sizing. I did do some scenario 21 analysis looking at larger motors and smaller 22 motors in selecting this.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 142 1 When you up size the motor, it will 2 decrease PER. Having larger motors will actually 3 decrease the PER number. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Right, but what about 5 the PEI ratio? 6 MS. WIDDER: The PEI ratio will be 7 very, very minimally affected because it is the 8 same motor losses that are on the top and the 9 bottom almost. If you think about a curve and you 10 were here, if you?re a little bit better than a 11 minimally compliant pump, you might be a little 12 tiny, like this much back on the curve, but 13 virtually identical motor losses above and below 14 the line. 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 16 Thanks. In this case, it is such kind of 17 a stark jump. 18 MS. WIDDER: Right. 19 MR. ROSENSTOCK: It?s a large 20 application, but it would be kind of interesting 21 to see--I?m just thinking down the road in terms 22 of just to make sure there would be no gaming

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 143 1 going on in the future. 2 MS. WIDDER: Right. The fixed motor 3 size is designed to sort of help address the 4 gaming issue, so people always have to size the 5 same, so it?s difficult to game. 6 If you were going to--the motor that is 7 paired with the pump should be driven by the 8 customer selection. I just think the market 9 will control the pump manufacturers more than 10 trying to up size the motor to get a better PER. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis? 12 MR. STARR: I was just going to say 13 in general, the California Energy Commission has a 14 whole program about going back and retro15 commissioning pumps that are oversized, and 16 usually it goes about half of the brake horsepower 17 that it was originally designed. 18 Just building in lots of safety factors 19 everywhere has some problems, and that is one area 20 where the pump guys may be not specifying non21 overloading motors, maybe just getting it right 22 the first time would be a better idea. That?s one

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 144 1 area where you could actually tighten things up. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 3 Louis, Greg is our resident expert on 4 ASHRAE 90.1. 5 He?s out of the room at the moment. 6 I can tell you that ASHRAE 90.1 advocates once a 7 building is installed and the system is operating, 8 that you go back in and trim the impeller to match 9 the load, so you can reduce the horsepower that 10 way. 11 How often does it happen? It 12 doesn?t happen basically is the bottom line. 13 Sometimes you will see it. We are certainly 14 seeing more focus on commissioning in the 15 buildings? market, and there, it might be done, 16 but still, it?s extremely rare. 17 It is a tough thing for us. A lot of 18 times the engineer is doing that just to protect 19 himself. He doesn?t want to have to pay to 20 upgrade that pump and motor if he under estimates 21 it. It is really out of our hands. We give 22 the customer what he specifies us to provide.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 145 1 I think there may be an opportunity for 2 us to influence that down the road, but we are 3 definitely not there right now. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Cappellino. 5 MR. CAPPELLINO: Mark talked about the 6 opportunity to trim the impeller and the fact that 7 is difficult to do and people don?t do that, just 8 another plug for extended product, because it is 9 really easy to just-- 10 MR. HANDZEL: The drive is the 11 impeller trimmer. 12 MR. CAPPELLINO: Turn the dial down, so 13 all that over estimating and over sizing with the 14 movement of a dial can be basically taken out. 15 Therein lies the opportunity. 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve? 17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 18 Again, another reason for over sizing 19 especially in multi- tenant commercial buildings 20 is five or ten years down the line, you have a 21 tenant with much higher water needs--I?ve seen 22 more situations where data centers are going into

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 146 1 office buildings. Many data centers are 2 basically co- located with office buildings. They 3 have 24/7 cooling needs. All of a sudden, the 4 water pumping needs go up by 10/15/20 percent in 5 that same building. 6 The over size, they were still covered, 7 so that is always that future proofing as well 8 that is going into this. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan Delaney. 10 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal. 11 I just wanted to make a note. This seems very 12 reasonable to me as far as the sizing, but 13 certainly you could run the example that 50 14 horsepower could meet those BEP levels. It really 15 depends on where is that operation occurring. 16 I like the proposed rating you have 17 because of that fact, because of future upgrading, 18 and creates that level playing field, if you will, 19 when you are selecting these and using the PEI and 20 PER. 21 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Thank you. 22 MS. MAUER: This is Joanna. Just a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 147 1 quick question, Sarah. I just want to understand 2 why-- you say horsepower goes down when you choose 3 a larger horsepower motor? 4 MS. WIDDER: Yes. The reason is 5 because motor losses is calculated as the full 6 load losses, which is based on the efficiency 7 times these part load factors that we have 8 determined, which are essentially a ratio of the 9 input power to the pump at that load point over 10 the motor size, so as we saw on the BEP curve, 11 that pump shaft power, input power to the pump, 12 does in fact go down as you go down the load 13 curve. 14 If we go back here--let?s just use 15 the 50 and 60 horsepower examples. Our pump shaft 16 input power is going to be lower at 75 percent of 17 BEP, that PEI at 75 will be lower, and then the 18 motor size, if we have 50 horsepower on the bottom 19 versus 60 horsepower on the bottom, it will be 20 further reduced if we have 60 horsepower on the 21 bottom. 22 It is sort of a vestige of even though

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 148 1 the efficiency is going down and we are capturing 2 that in the motor loss, power isn?t the same 3 animal as efficiency. The power is going down 4 because the pump is requiring less power and 5 because the loading of the motor is less on the 6 motor curve. 7 The efficiency is going down and that?s 8 being reflected, but the power itself that is 9 being driven to the motor is going down also, sort 10 of like the other way to think about the same 11 concept is system curve. The efficiency of 12 the pump system actually might stay the same or 13 even decrease slightly as you are going down the 14 system curve, but the power reduces dramatically. 15 They are just not totally related. 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie Cappellino. 17 MR. CAPPELLINO: Just to maybe give you 18 an example that will help illustrate. An extreme 19 example would be if you took 1,000--let?s say you 20 had a need for 90 horsepower. If you take a 21 1,000 horsepower motor and you only ran it at 90 22 horsepower, it wouldn?t be very efficient. If

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 149 1 you took a 100 horsepower motor and ran it at 90 2 horsepower, that 100 horsepower motor would be 3 more efficient. 4 Using less power of a motor, its 5 efficiency varies by size, what percentage of the 6 size you?re using. I don?t know if that 7 helped or not. 8 MS. WIDDER: The impact is small and 9 relative to the 90. Let?s say in Charlie?s 10 extreme example, 90 to 100, maybe you are 85 11 percent efficient, and 1,000 to 90, maybe you are 12 50 percent efficient. 13 If you look at input power to the motor, 14 it is going to be say 90--I can?t do the math in 15 my head--90 divided by 85, whatever, 94. 16 With 1,000 horsepower motor divided by 50, you are 17 going up-- 50 is an extreme example, it probably 18 won?t drop off that much. You will go up to 19 maybe 100. It will go from 94 horsepower, input 20 power to the motor, to 100 input power to the 21 motor. 22 The difference between the over sizing

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 150 1 is not that large. Does that make sense? 2 MS. MAUER: I?ll look at it. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: We?re diving rather 4 deep, 5 Sarah. I want you to keep going with the 6 presentation. 7 MS. WIDDER: Okay. We all feel 8 pretty comfortable with how it is being sized, is 9 what I hear. If there is additional proposals or 10 suggestions, I?d be happy to hear them. 11 (No response.) 12 MS. WIDDER: Hearing none at this 13 point, 14 I?m going to move on. This is some ways, some 15 options for accounting for motor losses. We 16 have heard it is important to account for, as 17 Louis mentioned, the fact that efficiency of the 18 motor changes with motor loading. 19 We have determined it requires 20 assumptions regarding how the motors perform at 21 part load. The current calculations require 22 assumptions. That is because part load motor

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 151 1 data is not widely available, especially in DOE?s 2 program. In DOE?s regulation of motors, 3 only full load motor efficiency is required to be 4 certified, so based on that, we determined to use 5 only full load motor efficiency and then assume 6 losses for those part loading points. 7 The options presented here are you could 8 use full load efficiency only. Yes? 9 MR. HANDZEL: Sarah, Mark Handzel from 10 Xylem, sorry. You said assumed assumptions for 11 part loads? What do you mean by that? 12 Did you put a variable to it and assume there was 13 some sort of loss? 14 MS. WIDDER: This equation that we 15 just discussed, this-- 16 MR. HANDZEL: Okay, it?s accounting 17 for it. 18 MS. WIDDER: Yes. That?s what I 19 mean. 20 This slide I can actually be really 21 brief on because we are all there. 22 We could use full load efficiency only

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 152 1 and not account for losses. We have all 2 decided that is not very technically accurate. We 3 could do what we have decided to do, which is use 4 full load losses and a default loss curve that is 5 applied to the motor. We are going to talk about 6 how that default loss curve is selected in the 7 later slides. 8 The last one is to the most accurate 9 approach to use measured part load efficiencies. 10 That would be problematic if that is not 11 available for all motors. That is why we have 12 determined to use this sort of middle ground. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: In the previous 14 discussion, I thought we kind of landed on this 15 one. Lucas, go ahead. 16 MR. ADIN: I was going to make a 17 suggestion perhaps. It might be something we 18 have talked about with respect to the motor loss 19 curves, since obviously there would be some 20 variability. We are going to make an assumption 21 about what they are and try to be conservative. 22 If pump manufacturers wanted to obtain

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 153 1 the actual loss curves, they could do that. We 2 could incorporate a means in the test procedure 3 for them to do that. 4 MS. WIDDER: Yes, certainly. 5 MR. ADIN: Use the actual loss 6 curve if the motor manufacturer and the pump 7 manufacturer have some kind of arrangement where 8 they can obtain that data. We wouldn?t 9 impose that upon anyone because it is an 10 additional data gathering requirement. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Handzel first. 12 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 13 I know we have data from the motor 14 manufacturers that we actually use in our 15 selection program for part load data. We can get 16 it. Dan, I?m sure, can provide it for Regal?s 17 products. I know Rob 18 Boteler could do it for Nidec?s products. 19 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 20 MR. HANDZEL: I think it would be 21 prudent of us to do some comparisons. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: That is an endorsement

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 154 1 on 2 Lucas? idea to make that available. I?m going 3 to let Dan follow on. 4 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal. 5 Agreed, this would be a good option, 6 Lucas, on the ability for manufacturers to provide 7 a default loss curve for their specific product 8 line, whatever each manufacturer decides. I 9 think that would be a good option. 10 The other approach to our--as Gary 11 Fernstrom brought up, it is a disadvantage of 12 products that would have a higher efficiency 13 across a part load loss curve that we would want 14 to recognize with maybe some increase, right? 15 Maybe there is an induction part loss 16 curve and the plus 20 percent, whatever it may be. 17 I think we can define a curve that would 18 incorporate--let?s call it ?those advanced 19 technologies? that would have improved part load 20 loss curves to encourage their use: right? 21 I think we can do that generically by 22 looking at that type of product and just call that

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 155 1 a ?part load loss curve plus,? right? 2 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 3 MR. DELANEY: In addition to allowing 4 motor manufacturers then to supply part load loss 5 curves. I like that in addition to that option, 6 but along with that option, part load loss curves 7 for induction motors, say a part load loss curve 8 essentially for advanced technology, permanent 9 magnet AC is certainly one of those categories. 10 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve? 12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 13 I?m looking at the footnote, 14 ?Conservative equals higher PER for calculation 15 method as compared to testing.? 16 MS. WIDDER: Yes. I?m going to 17 revise this. I?m sorry. Let?s say ?lower 18 PEI.? What I mean is the calculation will be 19 worse than testing. You will get better value 20 testing. 21 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Leave in the PER because 22 we haven?t settled that yet. Whether it is PER

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 156 1 or PEI, I think that is yet to be determined. 2 My only thought--higher PER. How much--what is 3 the difference would you say in terms of you are 4 calculating--suppose the number is PER 20, and in 5 the calculation method, it might be PER 25, and in 6 a test method, it might be PER 7 18? 8 MS. WIDDER: We?re hoping that the 9 discrepancy is not that drastic. That is 10 something that still needs to be discussed. We 11 need input from certainly the manufacturers and 12 the motor manufacturers regarding performance of 13 their equipment, tested performance of their 14 equipment, to make sure the calculation method is 15 conservative but reasonably conservative. 16 We have a suggestion that is in some 17 subsequent slides, but yes, it is an idea that we 18 would like to implement. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Thompson. 20 MR. THOMPSON: Steve Thompson with 21 Taco. 22 All of us pump manufacturers can get

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 157 1 very detailed motor load efficiency curves on the 2 motors themselves, based on different load rates. 3 Looking at this, full load loss and 4 default loss curve, are you suggesting we would 5 have the option of actually using the motor 6 efficiency curve in addition to that, whichever 7 one works out better, that is what we would go 8 with? 9 MS. WIDDER: Well, yes, sure. 10 Whichever works out better. The way we would 11 probably write it or it would probably be written 12 is the full load losses--the stated NEMA 13 efficiency value of the pump plus the default loss 14 curve would be the default. That would be 15 the worst case option that is potentially the 16 least burdensome, because we know that NEMA value 17 is going to be available, the default loss curve 18 is a calculation. You?re good to go. 19 If for some reason you didn?t already 20 get part load loss information from the motor 21 manufacturer, if you are a small pump manufacturer 22 and you don?t get that, this is where we need

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 158 1 input from the motor manufacturers, whether or not 2 the item in the yellow box, really using measured 3 part load loss efficiency is in fact too 4 burdensome. 5 That is clearly the most accurate 6 approach and would probably be ideal than trying 7 to assume a part load loss curve, except for the 8 fact that we could make the part load loss curve-- 9 MR. THOMPSON: There is no burden on 10 the motor manufacturers on that at all. They 11 already provide it. The good news for us pump 12 guys is it doesn?t add an extra step in the 13 tasking. 14 MS. WIDDER: Yes. The yellow box 15 could be proposed? 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas? 17 MR. ADIN: That?s a useful piece of 18 information for us. We just don?t know what 19 the situation looks like for all the other pump 20 manufacturers who are going to be facing this. 21 Like Sarah said, there might be smaller 22 ones who don?t necessarily collect all the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 159 1 information you do, or maybe they do. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve, I thought the 3 thrust of your comment was it is made available by 4 the motor manufacturers. 5 MR. THOMPSON: Absolutely. You 6 could request it from the motor manufacturer, 7 whether you are a big pump manufacturer or not. 8 The good news about that is this would have a very 9 nice effect on using ECM motor technology more to 10 that flat torque load curves to tie into Gary?s 11 point. 12 That is a predictable number that the 13 motor manufacturers provide to us pump guys. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Charlie, and 15 then back to Dan. 16 MR. CAPPELLINO: The only added 17 complexity is if you?re working with multiple 18 motor manufacturers, it multiplies the complexity 19 of-- 20 MR. HANDZEL: All the data. 21 MR. CAPPELLINO: All the data you have to 22 manage and comply with, everything else. I

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 160 1 agree with Steve. You can get that, but if 2 you offer that pump with motor vendor A, B, C, D, 3 E, it gets pretty complicated. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Just to confirm, I 5 thought you were suggesting it doesn?t necessarily 6 need to be either/or. 7 MR. ADIN: No. The idea is that 8 we don?t want to write this in a way that would 9 necessarily compel the manufacturer to obtain the 10 part load loss values, the loss curve for each 11 motor that they use for a pump. 12 This provides a fall back. There 13 are assumed values they are allowed to use, they 14 are defined in the test procedure, and we just 15 want to make sure those values are conservative 16 such that it is always better to use the actual 17 values if you can obtain them. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Do we need one fall back 19 or are you proposing that maybe there is more than 20 one method to calculate this? 21 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. I just 22 want to say there are two issues here, right, for

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 161 1 bare pumps, we have to have a default motor loss 2 curve. 3 MS. WIDDER: Right. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. 5 MS. WILLIAMS: For pumps with motors, 6 then yes, there could be these options. I just 7 want to make sure we are not forgetting about the 8 bare pump. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan is next. 10 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal 11 Beloit. Just so everyone understands, from the 12 motor manufacturer side, when we talk about 13 measured part load efficiencies here, we are not 14 talking about each and every model, obviously. We 15 are talking about product lines. 16 Each manufacturer is a little different 17 there, whatever their combinations are, right? 18 Within these PM AC motors, there are 19 different families within those, even different 20 characteristics, all within there. 21 When we are talking about measured, we 22 are talking about tests performed and extrapolated

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 162 1 across that family, and those families vary in all 2 different size, shapes, and horsepower. I just 3 want to make sure it is understood, when we talk 4 about measured part load efficiencies, we are not 5 talking about each and every motor you purchase 6 would have it. It is characteristics, which are 7 very, very typical and easily extrapolated across 8 those curves that you see are done across 9 families, not each and every test model. 10 Just for an example to do this kind of 11 testing that is performed on this, it is at least 12 a day if not a couple of days to do the full 13 product testing on all the multiple load points. 14 For example, a CSA C838 is basically the 15 C390 or IEEE 112 method B testing, in addition to 16 the 10, 20 or 40 points, depending on which test 17 you want to follow. We even said you could do it 18 with three points. However, once you start doing 19 the points, it can be done--if you have let?s say 20 an automatic acquisition--data acquisition, you 21 can do it relatively quickly, but it is in 22 addition to the efficiency test.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 163 1 Not each and every model you buy would 2 have that but the basic model, going back to 3 Lucas? definition, easily has those 4 characteristics around measured part load 5 efficiency. 6 I just want to make sure everyone 7 understood that, motors don?t have that capacity 8 to test each and every combination of a model you 9 put with that. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: I?m hoping that this 11 discussion is heading us towards advice here. I 12 think we are obtaining some additional clarity, 13 but the Department would benefit from all of you 14 experts helping them to understand what is more 15 beneficial. 16 Louis? 17 MR. STARR: I have some more basic 18 questions. I?m assuming a default loss curve 19 is something that is required in a Federal testing 20 procedure for motors, that we can be assured of 21 the data. Sometimes manufacturers self22 report data. They will display it in order to sell

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 164 1 a product as opposed to actually being verified. 2 The part load curves, it may be from a 3 very reputable one would be accurate, but maybe 4 from offshore people or someone else, not. 5 A little bit of my concern here just 6 using some values published by a manufacturer and 7 not actually confirmed, should that be a concern 8 or not? 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan? 10 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal. 11 I agree with Louis? comments that there should be 12 more of a procedure around this. Obviously, 13 today, as I mentioned before, that is where 50598 14 and some of these efforts, extended product, looks 15 to standardize this approach. 16 Any manufacturer who feels they are 17 doing this at the most accurate levels is in favor 18 of a position of wanting to find this. I think it 19 is to the favor to have that because each 20 manufacturer is providing it based upon their own21 -let?s call it internal process versus industry 22 accepted process.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 165 1 MR. BROOKMAN: As they are required to 2 do. DOE wants to make sure the burden is less when 3 possible. I actually saw Joanna next. 4 MR. STARR: I was just going to add 5 on, just make that part of the load loss curve has 6 to be by IEEE whatever procedure, and that would 7 take care of it. 8 MS. WIDDER: Right. There is 9 actually two elements to using tested motor part 10 load data that certainly could be incorporated as 11 an option for pump manufacturers. 12 The first is to obtain the data and 13 trust the data is reliable, in which case we would 14 probably need to reference a test procedure that 15 would follow in order to use that data, that part 16 load data. The second is those part load 17 points that were used to determine the test, the 18 part load points on the motor performance curve, 19 are not the same part load points on the pump 20 curve. 21 You would need the curve, then to have 22 an equation or interpolate or somehow use those

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 166 1 tested data that you have to determine the losses 2 or efficiency at the specific load points we are 3 interested in. 4 That can all be accomplished as an 5 option, but just so everyone is clear. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Let me let Lucas in 7 here. 8 MR. ADIN: Sarah touched on 9 something that Betsy and I were just talking 10 about, which is the extent to which we need to 11 specify how the load points for the motors are 12 obtained. I don?t know if that?s what you 13 are getting at. 14 There is a test method for those. 15 MS. WIDDER: Right. 16 MR. ADIN: There is a DOE test 17 method for motors. Right now, the DOE test 18 method for motors is focused specifically on 19 nominal full load efficiency but the test is 20 otherwise the same for those other load points, as 21 far as I understand it. Dan will correct me if I?m 22 wrong.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 167 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan? 2 MR. DELANEY: It?s not identical 3 because you are doing a segregated loss test 4 method at the single point. What Sarah would be 5 looking at doing is more of an input/output at 6 those other points. 7 Just to be clear, it?s not a segregated 8 loss at those points, you would not do that. 9 You would do essentially output/input at each of 10 the points we define, whether that is three or 11 five or whatever that number ends up being. 12 Yes, there is test procedures out in the 13 industry today. I certainly agree that can be 14 done. However, just to understand, I agree with 15 her accuracy simplicity burden, it is high, right. 16 It does need to have a default loss 17 curve built around that aspect as well as I?ll 18 reiterate again, one that has an improved 19 efficiency for what we will call ?advanced 20 technologies? that could incorporate that through 21 let?s say industry proposed levels that would be 22 greater than the induction default loss curve.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 168 1 MR. ADIN: I think the question 2 inherent in this issue is whether we would be 3 imposing on motor manufacturers by allowing pump 4 manufacturers to request the data from them, 5 effectively another test requirement on top of 6 whatever they are already doing. 7 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal. 8 In my perspective, giving the option of both of 9 these, I like that. I think that would be in 10 the favor of the industry today, that allows for 11 manufacturers that either don?t have it or don?t 12 choose to have that as a default loss curve. 13 The pump guys can make a choice versus 14 if manufacturers want to have more of what we will 15 call ?pump friendly? type product line, to have 16 the ability to do that. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Let me note that Dan?s 18 suggestion elicited nods of heads in approval, by 19 three or four individuals around the table. 20 Joanna has been patient. Joanna 21 is next. 22 MS. MAUER: I think similar to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 169 1 Louis? question, I?m just trying to understand how 2 it will work for pump manufacturers to certify 3 pumps sold with motors using motor data that is 4 not certified. 5 I suppose the pump manufacturer would 6 have to verify that-- 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Make a leap of faith. 8 MS. MAUER: Yes. 9 (Laughter.) 10 MS. WIDDER: They would have to 11 represent that the test data had been collected in 12 accordance with the test method that?s established 13 in the pump test procedure. 14 MS. MAUER: I guess maybe I?m 15 thinking kind of--we had a discussion this morning 16 about enforcement. If DOE were to do some 17 verification testing on one of these products that 18 were certified using data from the motor 19 manufacturer, 20 I would imagine as part of that, they would have 21 to verify the motor, the part load losses as part 22 of that testing.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 170 1 If they were inflated, I guess the 2 burden would fall on the pump manufacturer. Is 3 that how this would work? 4 MR. ADIN: Well, I think those are 5 things that we have yet to articulate, but the 6 responsibility for the rating that is certified to 7 DOE is with the pump manufacturers. They are 8 making a choice to use data. That would be 9 inherent in their certification. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark? 11 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 12 Lucas, I think you are exactly right. 13 We have not articulated exactly that information. 14 What we talked about this morning pertained to 15 testing the pump, which we got. We get that. 16 We own it. We understand it. 17 What we are moving into now, the 18 extended product side of things, it is a whole 19 other can of worms in terms of testing. I just 20 think we would need to clarify this. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: This discussion, I 22 think, has been very useful, a lot of clarity. I

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 171 1 want to make sure it is directional. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Right. I think it is 3 directional. We started this yesterday with 4 numerous conversations about the concern about the 5 calculated values versus the actual values that we 6 test to, ensuring we could test the higher values 7 than we calculated. 8 This is an assumption. There are some 9 assumptions being done here in terms of motor 10 efficiency. It is going to impact the 11 calculated values. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: So far, what I?ve heard 13 essentially from Dan and others supporting him was 14 to have these two methods available would be a 15 good thing, and so far, no one said I believe that 16 is not going to work for variable load: right? I 17 thought that is what I heard. 18 Who wants to go next? I want us to 19 obtain some advice on all of this. Steve 20 Rosenstock. 21 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 22 Again, when I?m hearing the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 172 1 conversation, it is kind of spilling over into the 2 motor standards in a way, when you?re talking 3 about test procedures. 4 This is all about motor test procedures 5 and motor load points and motor energy usage. In 6 a way, right now, for those covered motors, it is 7 a separate standard already. 8 I don?t know where Louis went. I also 9 heard that he sounded like he wanted some sort of 10 third party to develop the default loss curves for 11 the motors rather than data from the motor 12 manufacturers, or did I mishear him? 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan, go ahead. 14 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal. 15 One of the things that I?ve been 16 thinking since we had this last discussion was in 17 the same manner, do you do this, since so much of 18 this heavily relies on the motor manufacturers, is 19 this a test that defines very much like we have in 20 our 10 CFR 21 Part 431, which is allowance of an AEDM, a 22 validated

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 173 1 AEDM. 2 I think that?s going to be very critical 3 for this because you look at the 300 plus basic 4 ratings that can be supplied across all these 5 items, the yellow item becomes more and more 6 reality for the pump manufacturer and can be more 7 of a helpful tool as a better option. 8 In the last option, using measured part 9 load efficiencies, then an AEDM type approach can 10 be allowed, right, can be more effective 11 information for them to apply the right 12 efficiencies, but then allows a system, let?s say 13 a more validated system, for our advocates that 14 ensures what they are doing is through a program 15 that has let?s say a little bit more rigor to it. 16 An AEDM program for the pump 17 manufacturers, for your information, what motor 18 manufacturers do is have essentially motor math 19 models that can calculate efficiencies, but it is 20 done through a calibration process of testing, 21 right, back and forth. 22 It is not just a system that you get a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 174 1 thumbs up, hey, we?ve been doing this for 50, 60, 2 100 years. No, it?s a validated system that 3 shows test data calibrating back into this math 4 model. 5 I would encourage that it is probably 6 necessary for us to have that instead of just 7 saying where is your test data for that measured 8 part load efficiency. 9 Motor manufacturers are going to use the 10 test of efficiencies, to use those across the 11 product lines, not for each and every model. I 12 want to make sure that is clear. I 13 mentioned that before, but I wanted to make sure 14 that was clear again, and the vehicle by which I 15 saw that happening was AEDM. 16 I just don?t know if that occurs within 17 this pump standard or what vehicle of a test 18 vehicle. Lucas, I don?t know if you can 19 share where something like that would exist. 20 MR. ADIN: We haven?t specifically 21 touched on the topic of AEDMs yet. We should 22 do that at this point.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 175 1 What Dan is talking about in AEDM, it 2 stands for alternative efficiency determination 3 method. For a lot of the types of products and 4 equipment that DOE covers, there are either simply 5 too many models or combinations, or the testing is 6 so burdensome and complicated that the Department 7 saw fit to reduce that burden across the 8 manufacturers? lines of products by allowing 9 ratings based on a simulation or calculation 10 rather than physical testing. 11 We do it for a number of different types 12 of equipment. Motors is one of them. We do it 13 for commercial HVAC equipment, distribution 14 transformers, a number of different things. 15 It is a very useful tool in many of 16 those cases. Like I said, based on part on the 17 test burden of those products, and the desire to 18 get more accurate representations of the actual 19 efficiencies of those products, defining a 20 particular simulation method that each 21 manufacturer would have to use. 22 There is a tradeoff which is that when

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 176 1 it is the manufacturer?s choice to define its own 2 simulation method, a lot less is known publicly 3 about how that is done. 4 If we define up front what the 5 assumptions are, then it is known to everyone they 6 are the same across the board, and that is clear. 7 When it is AEDM, in many cases, you 8 don?t necessarily know as much about what is being 9 done. 10 You might be trading off accuracy for 11 just less information publicly about how that 12 rating is obtained. That said, the rules state 13 that the manufacturer has to obtain complete 14 records of the outputs of those simulations and 15 how they are constructed. 16 The Department at any time can ask for 17 information about how they work, and you have to 18 do validation testing to demonstrate it is in fact 19 an accurate simulation of the actual performance 20 of those models. 21 We would have to make a choice about is 22 it worth getting that accuracy for knowing less

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 177 1 about- -in a defined way--about how those ratings 2 are obtained. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Several people wish to 4 speak. I guess Dan, I?m going to let you follow 5 on, and then I?m going to Gary. 6 MR. DELANEY: Just to follow on, just 7 to try to make it a little more real to you, as 8 far as how you would register a program like that. 9 For example, on the motor side, it 10 basically dictates that you pick five ratings. 11 Out of the 300 plus ratings, you pick five of 12 those. Then you have five samples built of 13 each of those. 14 Those 25 samples are then tested and 15 they must be within the tolerance of each of 16 those, not only each one, then the average of the 17 five. It validates the program and it shows how 18 both your calculated and then your test, what the 19 variation is within your math model program. 20 There are some specific rules about 21 registration, and then through our NIST NVLAP 22 Program, that validates the test procedures, that

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 178 1 is also looked at on usually a bi-annual basis, 2 when they come in and do those reports. They also 3 go through each and every test that you do. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary? 5 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. I think 6 we?re making with respect to whose responsibility 7 it is and what sort of confidence we need much 8 more difficult than it needs to be. 9 As I recall this whole discussion came 10 up around the issue of establishing motor loss 11 values. Steve suggested that maybe motor losses 12 ought to emanate from the motor regulation and 13 maybe in order to have confidence, those values 14 ought to be somehow reported to DOE. 15 I don?t think so. I think the pump 16 manufacturers in this extended product situation 17 are selling an integrated product that consists of 18 a pump, a motor, and maybe a drive. 19 The pump manufacturer might buy a 20 bearing for the pump from somebody else, and the 21 bearing isn?t reported to DOE or the database. 22 The pump manufacturer simply represents

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 179 1 that when the pump is assembled, it is going to 2 perform a certain way. 3 With regard to the motor losses, I don?t 4 have any problem if the motor manufacturer reports 5 the motor losses to the pump maker, and that?s the 6 value we use in our default calculations, but the 7 pump manufacturers are representing that the pump 8 is going to perform as specified when tested. 9 I don?t think it needs to be that 10 complicated, you know, where all the back-up and 11 responsibility lies, because ultimately it is the 12 pump maker that is selling the product, reporting 13 it, and representing that it is working the way 14 they say. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas? 16 MR. ADIN: I think that was kind of 17 a good, concise way of summarizing the issue that 18 we are dealing with right now. I personally 19 agree. 20 I think the Department?s view on this is 21 we want to enable--we want to allow the pump 22 manufacturers the opportunity to provide what they

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 180 1 believe is a more accurate rating, but we don?t 2 want to impose additional data burdens if we don?t 3 have to. We don?t want to impose additional 4 testing requirements on an otherwise already 5 covered product. 6 That is really the idea behind this, the 7 default loss curve, which is the only thing we 8 would actually require under this proposed 9 framework. They could use that but at their 10 option use this other motor data that is between 11 them and the motor manufacturer, with the 12 understanding that if their product were tested 13 and failed, they would be on the hook for the 14 rating that they provided. It is their 15 responsibility to ensure it is accurate. 16 Like with any other product, all the 17 ratings require retention of the underlying test 18 data, whatever it was that went into creating that 19 rating. 20 If the product were to fail, there would 21 be questions about how that was obtained and that 22 sort of thing.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 181 1 We don?t necessarily need to go down the 2 road of establishing exactly how each of those 3 load points has to be obtained if the only 4 requirement is that as a baseline or-- 5 MS. WIDDER: Lucas, I?m sorry. 6 I?m going to disagree with you. If we allow 7 part load motor test data to be used, we will have 8 to establish a part load motor test in the pump 9 test procedure. Otherwise, there is no back-up. 10 We want to prevent people from gaming 11 but there is no baseline if we don?t establish it 12 as part of the test procedure. 13 MR. ADIN: Yes. You?re right, 14 Sarah. 15 What I meant is those aren?t values that 16 you have to report to the Department. 17 MS. WIDDER: Right: no. 18 MR. ADIN: Thank you for that 19 clarification. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Charlie, and I think 21 Steve and Joanna. 22 MR. CAPPELLINO: Getting back to the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 182 1 screen to figure out where we are. The middle 2 row there says, ?Use full load losses and default 3 loss curve.? I believe I heard a recommendation 4 that could be curves, meaning there is a curve for 5 standard induction motor, which is a selection. 6 There could be another default curve for 7 advanced motor technology to be defined: right? 8 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 9 MR. CAPPELLINO: That would be the 10 primary option, and you could use that for bare 11 pump testing as Alison talked about earlier, and 12 you need that anyway. 13 You can use it for extended product 14 approach, and then as an option, you would use the 15 third row down, the actual motor vendor?s curves 16 as supplied. 17 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 18 MR. CAPPELLINO: I think it?s end of the 19 discussion. What more is there to discuss? 20 MR. BROOKMAN: So far, I think I?ve 21 heard that both of these could be used, both of 22 them would have different, as the table suggests,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 183 1 benefits and burdens. I think that is a good 2 thing for the pump manufacturers. 3 I?m waiting to see if there is anything 4 else we need to describe at this point. I think 5 Steve is next. Is there anything else we need to 6 describe before we move on? 7 MR. THOMPSON: Steve Thompson, Taco. 8 I?m not clear on what this extra burden 9 we are talking about on the motor manufacturers is 10 to provide us with part load efficiencies. 11 The vendor we buy motors from, we can go 12 on to that vendor?s website and get that 13 information any time, any place. It might 14 be only measured at 20, 40, 60, 80, 100 percent 15 load, and the in between points are interpolated. 16 That information, it is just like a pump curve, 17 where you have head capacity and efficiency. 18 The burden on the motor manufacturers 19 might be to do part load efficiencies, like what 20 is the accuracy of that number, is it plus or 21 minus three percent, plus or minus five percent. 22 If that is close enough, there is no

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 184 1 extra burden to a motor manufacturer. As pump 2 manufacturers, we have control over the 3 information that the vendor--the motor vendor 4 provides us. If you folks say it has to be 5 within two percent, then we can go back to our 6 motor vendors and say if you want to sell us 7 motors, this is what you have to do. 8 I think I heard you say that for the 9 option, instead of taking this data that we 10 already have from the motor guys on part load 11 motor efficiencies, we would actually have to put 12 that motor on our pump and test it. 13 MS. WIDDER: No. Let me reiterate 14 what?s on the screen. The screen does not 15 address wire to water testing, which would be a 16 pump and a motor. That is also an option or also 17 could be potentially an option to manufacturers, 18 but that is not being addressed here. 19 What we have here is using the NEMA 20 nameplate full load efficiency that DOE already 21 requires for motors, and a default loss curve. We 22 will discuss how it was generated later on, but

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 185 1 that would be part of the test procedure. 2 All you would need for information is 3 the full load loss of the motor, the efficiency of 4 the motor. 5 This optional method is more burdensome. 6 I agree with you, Steve, that a lot of 7 motor manufacturers do make part load efficiency 8 data available. However, there are a couple 9 of issues there. 10 One, at this point in time it is not 11 clear how that motor part load efficiency data is 12 generated, and if we are going to use it, if you 13 as pump manufacturers and DOE is going to use that 14 data, we want to make sure everybody does it 15 exactly the same way with exactly the same rigor 16 and exactly the same accuracy and tolerances, just 17 like we are doing with testing pumps. We want to 18 be sure of that. 19 Since this would be new, this is not 20 part of the existing motor standard, motor test 21 procedure, establishing that level of rigor for 22 motor manufacturers would be an additional burden.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 186 1 Through this test procedure, that would 2 come back to you as a pump manufacturer, because 3 you would require that of your motor manufacturer 4 and they would say yeah, I am going to charge you 5 25 percent more. Maybe. I don?t know. 6 I think there is some additional 7 elements to consider there, which is why we wanted 8 to have the default, just what is already 9 available option be primary, and then this 10 optional measured efficiency method also. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Let?s have our motor guy 12 respond. Dan? 13 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal. 14 Steve, just to respond to your comments, 15 the difference-- basically what you are describing 16 is exactly what motor manufacturers can provide, 17 obviously. They are not providing what is in 18 yellow, just to understand, they are not providing 19 a measured part load efficiency. They are 20 not doing a full test procedure on that product, 21 all those efficiency points. 22 They are taking part load efficiencies,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 187 1 extrapolating those from various product lines, 2 just like any manufacturer would do. 3 As you described it, it?s a hybrid, if 4 you will, of a calculated part loss curve using 5 some measured full load efficiency. What Sarah 6 is describing is--well, we don?t really 7 specifically know, we don?t have the details--a 8 little bit further to fully measured, and that is 9 a big difference here. 10 What I was explaining was a hybrid of 11 the two on an AEDM approach. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna, you are next. 13 I am hoping we are pretty much done with this 14 slide. 15 I think we are pretty close. 16 MS. MAUER: I?m still trying to 17 understand how this would work. Sarah, your 18 comments have been helpful to me in understanding. 19 I think one thing you clarified was that 20 the DOE test procedure would have to contain a 21 part load test. I think that is partly because 22 that would be the test procedure that DOE would

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 188 1 follow if they were testing a pump. 2 If a manufacturer is certifying a 3 product to DOE, it is certified based on the DOE 4 test procedure. The DOE test procedure contains a 5 section describing how you come up with part load 6 losses. The manufacturer is certifying those part 7 load losses were developed based on that DOE test 8 procedure. 9 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 10 MS. MAUER: Whether they tested it 11 or the motor manufacturer, but it is not just 12 going to the motor manufacturer and getting some 13 sheet of data. 14 MS. WIDDER: Right. 15 MS. MAUER: But certifying it was 16 tested as according to this DOE-- 17 MS. WIDDER: Right. 18 MS. MAUER: That is not new. 19 There is equipment where manufacturers have third 20 party labs certify their equipment for them. 21 MS. WIDDER: Right. 22 MS. MAUER: Conducting the full

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 189 1 test, you are testing the product, not a component 2 of the product. 3 MS. WIDDER: Right. As the pump 4 manufacturer taking responsibility for your motor 5 manufacturer testing, if you are using those 6 values that have been provided by the motor 7 manufacturer, and he certified they have been in 8 accordance with the DOE test procedure for part 9 load motor efficiency that may exist at some point 10 in time-- 11 MS. MAUER: For me, it would take a 12 more important clarification, it is not just any 13 data from any motor manufacturer, but data--they 14 are certifying it is data based on a DOE test 15 procedure for part load losses. 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve? 17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 18 There is no DOE test procedure for part 19 load for motors. 20 MS. WIDDER: There is not at this 21 time. 22 It would have to be part of the pump

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 190 1 test procedure. Just like we defined pumps-- 2 going back here--just like we defined pumps as 3 inclusive of a bare shaft pump motor and drive, we 4 have to include a test procedure that establishes 5 how one measures the energy use of all of those 6 parts of the system. 7 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 8 Basically, what we are saying is the 9 pump manufacturers would have to set up a motor 10 test procedure as part of their--would have to put 11 in motor testing. 12 MS. WIDDER: They don?t have to test 13 the motor. They just have to certify that the 14 motor-- 15 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Lucas. 16 MR. ADIN: They would only have to 17 test the motor if they felt they couldn?t trust 18 what the motor manufacturer was supplying to them. 19 MS. WIDDER: Right. 20 MR. ADIN: There would be a 21 prescribed test for the part load process, but 22 presumably the motor manufacturer would have

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 191 1 accomplished that. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Again, there is a cost 3 of doing that and who bears the cost. 4 MS. WIDDER: That is why we have the 5 options. Back to the options. That is 6 why you can still use a NEMA nameplate value that 7 is already certified, motor test procedure, 8 default loss curve, away we go. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: I think we?re done with 10 this one. Are we done with this? Joanna? 11 MS. MAUER: Developing a part load 12 test, is this a six month process or a five year 13 process? 14 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. My 15 understanding is that a motor test procedure, not 16 DOE?s, but the one DOE references for full load 17 motor efficiency contains part load testing. 18 All we would really have to do, I think, is to 19 reference that test procedure. 20 I?m just laying out options. It?s not 21 like we have to recreate something from scratch. 22 MS. WIDDER: Right. These exist.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 192 1 As 2 Dan had mentioned previously, this exists. 3 This is done. Actually, probably most of 4 the manufacturers are in fact testing to a similar 5 test procedure today. This is not like, you 6 know, this whole new framework that needs to be 7 developed. 8 It is something that is additionally 9 burdensome, which is why it is being maintained as 10 an option. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary and then Charlie. 12 Let me note that I?m eager to move on. 13 (Laughter.) 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary, go ahead. 15 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. Like I 16 noted before, I think we are making this way more 17 complicated. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Thank you. Charlie? 19 MR. CAPPELLINO: If a standard exists for 20 part load efficiencies, can we simply put that up 21 there on the slide? 22 MS. WIDDER: A test?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 193 1 MR. CAPPELLINO: Use measured part load 2 efficiency method number such and such and such. 3 MS. WIDDER: On the slide right now? 4 Is that what you?re talking about? 5 MR. CAPPELLINO: I?m saying as a solution 6 to the problem, because part of what I hear is 7 there is no method. 8 MS. WIDDER: Oh, no, there is a 9 method. 10 It?s just not referenced by DOE 11 currently. 12 MR. CAPPELLINO: Okay. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: But it could be 14 referenced. 15 MR. CAPPELLINO: Could we reference it in 16 our rulemaking? 17 MS. WIDDER: That?s what we are 18 considering right now as part of this yellow box. 19 MR. CAPPELLINO: Okay. That is 20 basically what Alison was saying. 21 MS. WIDDER: Must establish motor 22 test procedure. Really, that just means a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 194 1 referenced industry test procedure. 2 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney, Regal. 3 There are a couple of ways to do that, Charlie. 4 There is the easy way, just use the part load loss 5 efficiencies that are already in 112B, so we 6 already have those. You can expand those load 7 points. You can do it that way, already in the 8 test. You could then do this new test, which is 9 this separately developed CSA C838. 10 MR. CAPPELLINO: Let?s use the first one. 11 MR. DELANEY: Okay: that?s fine. 12 (Laughter.) 13 MR. DELANEY: We can use that. 14 We have to be specific about the load points, just 15 making sure those load points here are the load 16 points we have, because it allows you ranges on 17 the motor side, what you pick versus we want to 18 say use this 19 25, 20 50, 75, 100. 21 MR. CAPPELLINO: I?m with Gary. I think 22 the impact of what we?re talking about here is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 195 1 very small as a part of the overall scheme of what 2 we are trying to do, so let?s just pick a 3 simplification, give somebody the option, you can 4 go do it if you like, just get on with it. 5 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan, Steve suggested you 6 could interpolate, could you do it, or do you need 7 to hit those load points? 8 MR. DELANEY: The question is can you 9 get part load efficiencies by interpolating. 10 MR. HANDZEL: Those are pump load 11 points, not the same as the motor load points. 12 MR. DELANEY: They can be the same. 13 If the standard allows that to be the same, it 14 says do this range, zero to 25. They don?t 15 have to do those points. 16 MR. HANDZEL: If it?s a non17 overloading motor, the motor is technically not at 18 120 percent. 19 MS. WIDDER: Right, and also from the 20 motor manufacturer perspective, you don?t want 21 that, because every pump?s points, BEP 110, is 22 going to be different, so you would have to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 196 1 essentially test every motor that went out your 2 door, and we don?t want that. We do want an 3 interpolation method, I think, of some sort. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: That?s why I asked the 5 question. Okay. We?re moving on now, 6 right? 7 Okay. 8 MS. WIDDER: Great: okay. 9 Wonderful. I think that was really good. 10 I think we made a lot of progress. 11 We have seen this slide before. Now, 12 given these two options that we discussed, I?m 13 going to focus today on the default option, the 14 primary option. 15 This optional option, the yellow item, 16 is really more of a test procedure issue. 17 It?s not related to how motor performance is 18 determined for the purposes of setting standards, 19 which is really all that we are going to discuss 20 today. 21 We will discuss yellow more in the test 22 procedure. I?m going to focus on the primary

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 197 1 calculation option today, and the next couple of 2 slides are going to talk about how we determined 3 potential loss curves, and the loss curve that is 4 in the calculator now. 5 We are going to talk about other options 6 for that, and hopefully get closer to a resolution 7 on what we should use. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: We should find at a 9 reasonable break point to go to lunch. 10 MS. WIDDER: Do you want to go now? 11 I think this motor loss thing is going to take a 12 while. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: I would say the 14 foregoing discussion to me is an illustration of 15 why we can be in a group like this. Why we 16 have all this expertise in the room, why are you 17 spending your time here negotiating surrounding 18 the standards for pumps, and I really appreciate 19 the quality of what we just did, and how it 20 influences the end result here. 21 Let?s go to lunch. It is now 11:45. 22 We will get an early lunch, we will get ahead of

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 198 1 the crowd. Forty-five minutes? 2 UNIDENTIFIED: Suggestion-- 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Let?s go for an hour. 4 Take just about an hour. We will 5 resume at 12:45 here in the room. Thanks for 6 a real good start on the morning. Sarah, good 7 work. We are making good progress here. 8 (Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., a 9 luncheon recess was taken.) 10 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O 11 N 12 (12:55 p.m.) 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Let?s start back up. 14 Welcome back from lunch. We were 15 making really good progress just as we broke for 16 lunch on this metric discussion, and we are going 17 to return to that and Sarah Widder. 18 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, Dan? 20 MR. DELANEY: I apologize. Dan 21 Delaney from Regal. Can you back up one slide? 22 MS. WIDDER: Yes.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 199 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Insight over lunch. 2 MR. DELANEY: Yes. When we talk 3 about that last option, the third option, measured 4 part load efficiencies, we talked about getting 5 those part load efficiencies and what is a good 6 test reference. 7 The reason 112B is not a good test 8 reference is it is based on sine wave: we are not 9 interested, so we do want to replace that 10 reference with CSA C838. There are two 11 reasons. 12 Certainly, number one, because obviously 13 it is designed for part load losses, but it has 14 the drive consideration in there. Efficiencies 15 when used on a VFD, that is very important that be 16 the test reference there. 17 If you would, put ?C? in front of the 18 838, just like C390, it is C838. Thank you. 19 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 21 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Thank you, that 22 was very helpful. Moving on, we established

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 200 1 before lunch that in the default case, the least 2 burdensome case, and for the standard, for setting 3 the standard for the minimally compliant pump and 4 bare pumps, we need a part loss curve to account 5 for the impact of part loading on motor 6 efficiency. 7 We have looked at a lot of motor data 8 and have come up with this cubic polynomial part 9 load loss curve. It takes the full load 10 losses that is L rated, up there on the top, and 11 multiplies it by a part load loss factor--yes? 12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Could you make that full 13 screen? Thank you. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Why is it a cubic? 15 MS. WIDDER: You will see, because 16 there is a graph. That is what the data 17 suggest. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Cubic 19 polynomial. 20 MS. WIDDER: Because we just need to 21 make everything complicated--no. 22 (Laughter.)

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 201 1 MS. WIDDER: It could be--I?ll show 2 you the data. We can remove the cubic 3 polynomial and we could discuss other 4 equation options. 5 MR. ECKMAN: He?s having nightmares 6 of his graduate work. 7 (Laughter.) 8 MS. WIDDER: Right. At each load 9 point, that is ?Li,? we?ll determine the part load 10 losses at that point by the full load rated losses 11 times this factor ?Yi,? which we are calling the 12 part load loss factor, for lack of a better term, 13 and the part load loss factor is determined by 14 this cubic polynomial that we will see was 15 determined by a chart of a bunch of motor data 16 that we gathered from a DOE motor challenge 17 program. 18 It is a little bit dated but it is the 19 best part load loss data that we have and could 20 find available for U.S. motors. We certainly 21 welcome other data that can help us inform this. 22 The point I wanted to make on this slide

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 202 1 besides what has already been made is--I?m going 2 to save this and then we can revisit comments on 3 it. I made this slide when we were considering 4 actually quite a few different--we have made part 5 load motor loss curves for TEFC and ODP motors and 6 different poles. We have like nine 7 different motor loss curves. 8 None of them are very different. 9 We could suggest there is one motor loss curve for 10 all motors. We heard a discussion earlier 11 there be maybe one for induction type motors and 12 one for 13 ECMs. There could be other default motor loss 14 curves we consider. 15 That would be something we would welcome 16 the group?s feedback on, so just keep that in 17 mind. We can use this approach to set a motor loss 18 curve for any number of motor types that we would 19 consider. 20 Generating the motor loss curve, we used 21 part load motor efficiency data at 25, 50, 75, and 22 100 percent of the motor rated load. That is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 203 1 not pump load in this case. That is motor rated 2 load. 3 This is from efficiency values from 4 DOE?s motor challenge program. I have a little 5 site on there. When you get the slide, you can go 6 visit this PDF and consult the data yourself if 7 you?re interested. 8 That?s an error. It?s not from 9 2040. 10 It?s not from the future. It is in 11 fact from 2004. It is a little bit dated and we 12 recognized that. 13 Because we are just using this to 14 determine a curve as opposed to using the actual 15 efficiencies and we are normalizing to one, we 16 thought how efficiency changes at part loading 17 maybe hasn?t changed as much as improved motor 18 efficiency has. That is an assumption we are 19 making here. 20 We used this data to obtain a part load 21 fraction of the total motor loss. This is 22 some more math, but essentially this is--?FX? is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 204 1 the Li over L rated, essentially a fraction of the 2 losses, what would be the losses at the load point 3 of interest, over the full load losses. 4 It is just a fraction but because the 5 data we have is efficiency and not the motor 6 losses, we need just a little bit more complicated 7 equation to convert the efficiency to the losses. 8 To make that more clear, I could have 9 that out here, but this is essentially just the 10 losses at the load point over full load losses. 11 It needs to look a little more 12 complicated. 13 The next step was we have all talked 14 about how we wanted this curve to be 15 representative of the minimally compliant motor, 16 both in terms of full rated efficiency and in 17 losses. We want to represent the worst performing 18 motor that can be sold. 19 The way we have done that here is by 20 looking at all the data that was available in the 21 motor challenge database, and selecting the 22 maximum value, which is the maximum losses, from

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 205 1 that curve, and then we are scaling it again here 2 by a factor of 0.95. 3 We could have scaled it just as a bias-- 4 I?m going to go down one so we can look 5 at what this looks like. This is the data. 6 The green dots are the data. The blue dots 7 are the conservative-- the yellow dots are the max 8 of the data, the highest loss points. The highest 9 fractional load loss, as you see on the Y axis. 10 That was the highest data point in our database, 11 and then the blue triangles are slightly higher 12 than that applying our scaling factor. 13 We could have applied a scaling factor 14 that essentially just translates that maximum 15 value up, but we thought it would be more 16 appropriate to use that full load value at its 17 face value. We are not adjusting this value. 18 You will see that is the same. As we go down 19 to part loading, it becomes more and more 20 conservative. 21 That was the conservative factor that we 22 just presented here. We could consider others.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 206 1 Steve, you had a comment? 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Actually, just a quick 3 question. You are talking about the motor 4 challenge program, for this graph, which is very, 5 very helpful, that also runs in the range that we 6 talked about, 1 to 200 horsepower. That 7 covers motors throughout that size: right? 8 MS. WIDDER: Yes. We only used 9 data for motors that would be sized with the scope 10 of pumps we are considering. 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: So, 1 to 200. Thank 12 you. 13 MS. WIDDER: 1 to 200. That is 14 how this curve was generated. The polynomial 15 above the curve is associated with the blue dots. 16 You will see moving down here, those are the A, B, 17 C, 18 D values that are fit into the cubic polynomial. 19 Doug, in answer to your question, the 20 reason we used a cubic polynomial is because it 21 matches the data pretty well. Alison wants to 22 add something.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 207 1 MS. WILLIAMS: There is also literature 2 that indicates the motor part load losses follow 3 cubic. 4 MS. WIDDER: Yes. This is also 5 true. 6 Here is the conservative A, B, C, D 7 values that are generated based on that curve. 8 Carrying this all the way out to how you would 9 calculate--use that part load loss curve to 10 calculate your motor losses. 11 You would have this factor ?Yi,? plug in 12 ?Xi,? which if we go back to this slide, ?Xi? is 13 just the part load part at ?i? over the motor 14 size. It is basically how far down are you on your 15 motor loss curve. That is what we are 16 representing there. 17 You calculate ?i? for each load point. 18 You can see this table at the bottom 19 here. We have each value calculated for 110, 20 175 percent of 21 BEP flow. ?Yi? is multiplied by the full 22 load losses, which for this pump, I don?t have it

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 208 1 on this slide, but I think it is something like 2 3.9. 3 I will have to look back at that. 4 The full load losses multiplied by this 5 part load loss factor will give you your 6 fractional load loss at each point. That is 7 added to the bare pump shaft input power to 8 determine the input power to the pump, including 9 the motor, at each load point. 10 That is this value in the very right11 hand side, what would plug into the numerator of 12 the PEI, your PERs, weighting those three values 13 in the uncontrolled case. 14 Okay. That?s the motor losses. 15 For ECM motors, let?s say we take this curve or a 16 similar approach, you will notice that this 17 example is for 18 ODP motors at 3,600 RPMs. I have in the 19 back-up slides the exact same curves for 1,800 20 RPMs, for 21 TEFC motors, for a lot of different curves. 22 As I described earlier, they are all

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 209 1 very similar. We could combine all that data and 2 create one generic induction curve that could be 3 applied, or we could break it out by rated speeds. 4 We can go through all of that, all of 5 those curves-- hopefully not today. 6 I think what we would like feedback on 7 the committee on is this general approach, and 8 potentially the number of curves that you would 9 like to see, and then also how this--I don?t know 10 that we have as good data for ECM motors, so we 11 might have to do a little more educated assuming 12 in that case, of what a representative ECM curve 13 might be. 14 I think what I?d like feedback on is 15 this general approach, how many curves we would 16 like, and if ECM, what ECM might look like at this 17 point. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan? 19 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal. 20 Thank you for the presentation. I guess 21 what I?d like to see is all those curves, if I 22 could take those back to the NEMA members, I?d

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 210 1 like to get some feedback on those different 2 efficiency curves by all the different types and 3 how you broke those out. 4 MR. WIDDER: Great. They will be in 5 this slide deck lower down. This is what they 6 all look like (indicating). We can just go through 7 them briefly here. 8 Study them at length and we will welcome 9 feedback, not today, but once you have had a 10 chance to review them in detail. 11 MR. DELANEY: Just generically, just 12 in looking at a couple of-- 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Let me note, we have now 14 adopted this practice, which is to provide 15 feedback to the analysts between meetings, not 16 simply active-- 17 (Laughter.) 18 MR. DELANEY: It?s surprising to see 19 the lowest point, the 25 percent point, being a 20 little higher. I wouldn?t have expected that on 21 some of this induction. It would be interesting to 22 study when we actually get some of the data, and

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 211 1 many of the manufacturers will have some data to 2 pull up against this. 3 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 4 MR. DELANEY: In the last couple of 5 years, and compare that. Probably the most 6 interesting point that jumps out at me. 7 MS. WIDDER: This one also looks sort 8 of strange, probably vestige of the data that was 9 available in the database. 10 MR. DELANEY: Yes. 11 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Yes? 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan, you didn?t make a 13 comment on the general approach, I don?t think. 14 MR. DELANEY: I really can?t comment 15 on the general approach unfortunately until I can 16 look at some of the data. I?ve seen the 17 equation, to look at them, but I really can?t 18 comment until 19 I start a comparison of that data. 20 MS. WIDDER: Right. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve? 22 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 212 1 Again, thank you for all the graphs. 2 I saw you blitzed through a bunch of them in terms 3 of different RPMs for the motors. I think in 4 terms of the 25 percent, isn?t that a function--a 5 lot of times, motor efficiency drops off big time, 6 going below 40 percent, and I wonder if that is 7 also part of--I?ll say the ?flattening,? you?re 8 not saving as much just because the efficiency is 9 going down so much. 10 Again, the tough part is with all the 11 different motors and all the different speeds, and 12 then how many curves are you going to need for the 13 defaults. 14 MS. WIDDER: Right. 15 MR. ROSENSTOCK: It is probably really up 16 to the manufacturers. There is obviously 17 data out there: just how many do you start with. 18 MS. WIDDER: Right. What is the 19 tradeoff between accuracy and representativeness 20 and how complicated the test procedure is to 21 implement. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Dan?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 213 1 MR. DELANEY: One thing wasn?t clear 2 to me, and it?s just by speed or is there a load 3 on these motors? How did load come into some of 4 that discussion on your curves here? 5 MS. WIDDER: Load. 6 MR. DELANEY: Horsepower. When you 7 did this, 200 horsepower when you were looking at 8 data? 9 MS. WIDDER: Yes, and we did not--I 10 didn?t create--actually, I think we looked at 11 this. I don?t have data at my fingertips 12 regarding how the motor loss curve might change at 13 different horsepower bins. Alison might have 14 something to add about that. 15 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. 16 MS. WIDDER: Come sit at Betsy?s 17 seat. 18 Other side. 19 (Laughter.) 20 MS. WILLIAMS: Now nothing I say is 21 going to be--we did a few different bins, like 22 five different bins of horsepower last week, and

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 214 1 they are not sequential in order. Like we 2 were looking to see if there was a trend, you 3 know, they would line up sequentially, and there 4 was not. They were scattered, which seemed to 5 indicate horsepower is not-- 6 MS. WIDDER: Yes, my recollection is 7 we presented these ones because TEFC and ODP and 8 speeds appeared to be different enough that it is 9 worth breaking out, and there was really no 10 relationship, meaningful relationship, based on 11 the horsepower size. 12 MS. WILLIAMS: Yes. Just to add on 13 that, I think we do want feedback on that, as 14 Sarah said, how many curves there are? Our 15 understanding is there is not necessarily a 16 theoretical reason why the speeds and enclosures 17 should be different in terms of part load, so it?s 18 not clear if it is just an artifact of the data 19 that we were using. 20 MS. WIDDER: Right. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary? 22 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. I want

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 215 1 to make sure that we don?t lose our focus on 2 considering the ECM motors, and I wanted to ask 3 that Dan not only evaluate this, but provide you 4 with some feedback in response to your questions 5 about ECM motors. 6 MS. WIDDER: I appreciate that, Gary. 7 Thank you. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Can anyone comment 9 without looking at those curves whether you think 10 this approach--what you think about it? Mark? 11 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 12 I think it?s giving us a representative 13 data point that we can use as a reference. I think 14 obviously 15 Dan?s feedback is going to be critical. I think 16 certainly speak up, guys, but I don?t think we 17 would have a problem with it. 18 Obviously, there are assumptions in 19 them. There is stuff that is going to have some 20 margin of error, but I think it will be a far 21 better way of calculating it than any other way we 22 have right now.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 216 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 2 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: One curve, a bunch of 4 curves? Maybe that is too fine. 5 MR. HANDZEL: I think that really has 6 to come from the NEMA guys. I know if I 7 were them, I would want a representative sample, 8 you know. I think we need to hear that from the 9 motor guys. 10 That?s not our call. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Louis? 12 MR. STARR: Louis Starr, NEEA. 13 The only other thing, and I?m not sure this is a 14 problem, whether it is an inverter duty rated 15 motor or not, and if that changes the performance. 16 I don?t know if you have looked at that or not. 17 In other words, if you?re setting it up 18 to use with a VFD, it has more insulation on the 19 winding. I actually talked with Dan a 20 little bit earlier to see whether that made a 21 difference or not, and it was a complicated 22 answer.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 217 1 That would be maybe something for Dan to 2 look at, because that is also another part of the 3 extended product, so if you are not getting the 4 same performance with a different insulation type 5 on the motor, then it is going to affect things. 6 MS. WIDDER: Right. That is a really 7 good point, Louis. I didn?t bring that up 8 here mostly because that doesn?t affect the 9 setting of the standard. We are limiting our 10 discussion at this point to just things that 11 affect setting the standard. 12 I think in terms of how we account for 13 motor losses and actually efficiency of the drive 14 in general, we could consider a motor loss curve 15 separately for controlled and uncontrolled 16 applications, if that was appropriate. 17 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal. 18 One more time, I guess I saw three 19 possible categories, certainly talked about the 20 induction motor, constant load, in constant load 21 point. If you certainly talk about the product, 22 that would be more specific or what we call in the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 218 1 motor world, ?definite purpose inverter duty,? and 2 there is less and less variation of that product 3 today than there used to be, because more and more 4 of the inverter style of product is more the 5 standard, but there is still definite purpose 6 inverter only product, and we would expect there 7 to be a little difference in curves. 8 The question is can there be a default 9 curve that could represent all induction motors. 10 That may or may not be favorable. 11 MS. WIDDER: Right. 12 MR. DELANEY: As one aspect. One 13 thing 14 I think was brought up that made me go back, and 15 my colleague from Baldor also mentioned, if we go 16 back to my favorite slide, that three tiered 17 slide. 18 MS. WIDDER: The three tiered one 19 where we have two. 20 MR. DELANEY: Okay. What I was 21 jumping ahead to on this was assuming the variable 22 load was one which has a drive, that is not the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 219 1 right assumption. It is a variable load on the 2 sine wave. 3 MS. WIDDER: We can change it back to 4 IEEE? 5 MR. DELANEY: We can change back to 6 IEEE 112B for sine wave variable load, but if we 7 want to just make the note that look, when we use 8 a drive, when we did the extended product approach 9 of the control, that is the appropriate standard, 10 CSA 11 C838. 12 The extended product approach where 13 there is a drive motor pump, that is appropriate. 14 When it is just a sine wave, obviously, 15 there is 60 Hertz power, and we are changing the 16 load points, 25, 50, 75, IEEE 112B could be 17 appropriate. 18 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 19 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Those are more 20 important test procedure details that we will 21 capture in future test procedure discussions. 22 MR. ADIN: I just wanted to ask a

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 220 1 quick question if I could of Dan. This is 2 Lucas. I?m less familiar with the CSA C838 3 procedure. I?m familiar with IEEE 112B. 4 Is that one identified in MG-1 for particular 5 motor types? 6 MR. DELANEY: C838 is not. It is 7 the only standard in the motor industry that makes 8 an attempt to take a motor and a drive and 9 establish efficiencies across any point you would 10 want. 11 MS. WIDDER: Similar to AHRI 1210, I 12 think. 13 MR. DELANEY: Yes, if we look at AHRI 14 1210, that would be another standard that makes 15 that attempt with a drive-- 16 MS. WIDDER: In concept anyway. 17 MR. ADIN: My understanding is the 18 1210 procedure is focused specifically on the 19 drive. 20 Is that correct? 21 MR. DELANEY: No, a motor and a drive 22 can be done with it, but it is obviously focused

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 221 1 on the fan industry. There is a little bit of 2 differences, but when you get down to the basic 3 physics and the testing of it, it?s not terribly 4 different. 5 C838 is a better standard when you look 6 at a motor to be used on any application. It 7 takes in essentially 20 points. I don?t care what 8 application you have, those 20 points are going to 9 cover it. 10 MS. WIDDER: Yes. Okay. 11 MR. ADIN: Thank you. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis? 13 MR. STARR: One last thing, I assume 14 on the motors, that is all three-phase power that 15 we are talking about on the motors? 16 MS. WIDDER: That?s a really good 17 point. 18 That?s the data that we have, but I know 19 pumps are sold with single phase and three-phase 20 in the scope that we are considering. I think 21 right now, a restriction based on phase has not 22 been established.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 222 1 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal. 2 The comments that I have been referring 3 to is part load loss, obviously testing, would all 4 be focused for our three-phase product. 5 MS. WIDDER: Right. 6 MR. DELANEY: Part load loss for 7 single phase would be dramatically different: 8 dramatically different. 9 MS. WIDDER: If we were to consider 10 pumps sold with three-phase and single phase and 11 wanted to consider testing single phase motors, 12 that would be a whole other ball of wax as Dan has 13 suggested. 14 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. What do 15 you do if the drive takes single phase power but 16 converts it into three or multi-phase to operate 17 the motor? How do we consider that? 18 Would that be considered single phase because we 19 are looking at what the drive goes up to or not? 20 MS. WIDDER: I think that is really a 21 question for the Working Group. 22 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 223 1 I guess I can answer that or at least I can make 2 an attempt at that. I don?t look at that 3 any differently even if it?s a paired system or 4 whether it is an off-the-shelf system. Most of 5 those are what we will call ?definite purpose 6 controls? or ?inverters.? In all those 7 cases, I would still be looking at the same part 8 load loss curves for a three-phase motor, since 9 all those are three-phase motors, yes, they are 10 definite purpose three-phase motors, but their 11 characteristics would be similar to either an ECM 12 or induction, depending on what type of motor that 13 product would be. 14 Regardless of whether it is three-phase 15 input or single phase input, while that changes 16 the efficiencies of the drive, what may be power 17 factors or other aspects, the part load loss 18 aspects of a three-phase motor should be unique to 19 an induction or ECM type product. 20 MS. WIDDER: Right. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thanks, Dan. 22 Are we ready to move on?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 224 1 MS. WIDDER: Sure. I encourage you 2 all to think about the question Louis raised about 3 single phase versus three-phase, and whether it 4 makes sense to move forward, continuing to 5 consider both single phase and three-phase motors 6 that would be paired with pumps within the scope 7 that we have established, or if further limitation 8 would be warranted just based on sales or other 9 things. 10 Lacking suggestions, I?m going to 11 consider my marching orders to develop test 12 procedures for single phase and three-phase, since 13 there has been no limitation so far. 14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 15 I don?t know if any sort of data is 16 available but is there a breakout in terms of 17 single phase or just three phase motors being used 18 with pumps that are being sold in commercial 19 buildings, industrial applications? 20 I was just wondering, does anyone know 21 what the relative ratio is? Is it 90/10? Is 22 it 50/50? If it?s 90/10, 90/5/5 for three-phase,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 225 1 you know. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel. Steve, 3 we don?t have actual data, but ballpark-- 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: It?s a question for 5 everybody. 6 MR. HANDZEL: 90/10. Obviously, the 7 smaller pumps, even some of the circulator 8 categories will stay single phase but virtually 9 everything else is going to be three-phase. 10 MR. STARR: Just from a design side, 11 with electrical, because we used to do that all 12 the time, above the half horse is a rule of thumb 13 to save copper in the wiring. You ran three14 phase. Usually that half to three-quarters is 15 where you switch from single phase to three-phase. 16 If you go out and there is not a 17 transformer available, then you will be using your 18 single phase 208 or 240 or something. 19 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 20 For the pump manufacturers, we offer 21 both single and three-phase in those ranges for 22 that exact reason.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 226 1 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 2 Our relative scope is one or more horsepower to 3 200. 4 That would kind of lean towards-- 5 MR. HANDZEL: Three-phase is a pretty 6 good place to focus. 7 MS. WIDDER: Yes. I think everyone 8 in the room, ourselves included, have focused on 9 three- phase. It just has never been explicitly 10 established. 11 The other thing worth noting is that by 12 limiting explicitly consideration of three-phase 13 motors, you are not necessarily limiting the 14 coverage of pumps because my understanding is a 15 bare pump could be sold with a single phase or a 16 three-phase motor. 17 I know it would be covered in the three18 phase application, and then maybe not required to 19 be certified if we were to limit the scope to 20 three-phase. 21 MR. STARR: The thing you might 22 consider is you don?t want the people to choose

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 227 1 single phase in order to avoid regulation, you 2 know. 3 They could actually use 1.5 horsepower 4 and choose to go one phase in order not to be 5 regulated. 6 Probably unlikely, but. 7 MS. WIDDER: Right. That is 8 something that we will welcome feedback on, 9 continue to consider. Moving forward, I 10 think where we were was we had talked through the 11 part load loss calculation, general framework, and 12 we had general agreement that was an appropriate 13 message, to develop a part load loss curve, and 14 that the variables seemed reasonable. 15 I know Dan is going to take these curves 16 and the data we have back to NEMA and provide some 17 explicit feedback on the number of curves, and 18 what those variables should be. 19 We are anxious for that. 20 I?m going to move on from motor losses, 21 unless there is any other explicit comment on 22 that. The last topic that is related to motors

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 228 1 that I wanted to bring up here was motor 2 efficiency, just in general, how we might address 3 motor efficiency for-- 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Pardon me. We have 5 received--a gentleman came in and said apparently 6 there is a wireless network that is emanating from 7 this room. We have received a request that 8 anybody that is creating or using a wireless 9 network--I don?t know how this is happening--if 10 you would discontinue doing that, then DOE would 11 appreciate it. Utilizing a wireless network, 12 please discontinue at this point. Okay. 13 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Thanks for that 14 note. Essentially, we don?t need to get into 15 details about this slide. This will again be 16 something that is addressed in excruciating detail 17 in the test procedure. 18 I did want to present at this time while 19 we?re talking about motor sizing and motor losses, 20 and for the purposes of determining a minimally 21 compliant pump for the standard, we need to decide 22 what standard efficiencies to assume for pumps

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 229 1 that are not currently covered by DOE?s 2 regulations. 3 Mostly, we think that is submersible 4 pumps and submersible motors that are prepared 5 with those pumps. There may be other pumps 6 that are sometimes sold with non-covered motors. 7 The approach that we would come up with 8 is to survey the market literature for efficiency 9 information about those types of motors and create 10 a similar default motor efficiency table that was 11 representative of the least efficient pump we 12 could find essentially, since we are not trying to 13 limit the efficiency of those non-covered motors 14 through this rule. 15 I?m just going to try to represent a 16 table that we can then reference to determine a 17 minimally compliant pump motor combination to 18 include in the standard denominator, and usually 19 submersible pumps aren?t sold without a motor, so 20 really this is for setting the standard for 21 submersible pumps. What do we assume for a 22 minimally compliant motor efficiency.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 230 1 Are there any other pump types that 2 might be sold with the non-covered motor where we 3 might have to make similar assumptions. 4 We have done this for submersible 5 motors, and I can show you that data. That might 6 be more appropriate for a test procedure 7 discussion. Really what I?m looking for is 8 feedback on if there is any other pump types or 9 motor types that we should go collect data on, 10 that a similar assumption might be needed. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve Rosenstock. 12 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 13 I?m sorry, I?m going to get in the weeds here. 14 That first bullet, ?Determination of PEI,? there 15 has been no decision about what our metric is 16 going to be, so determination of the efficiency 17 level, you know-- 18 MR. BROOKMAN: I think we were headed 19 towards PEI in our last conversation. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: It was mentioned. 21 There was no decision or discussion. 22 MS. WIDDER: Sure. Steve, I was

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 231 1 going to use that nomenclature throughout this 2 slide deck, just for consistency, recognizing that 3 it is all draft at this stage. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. The other aspect 5 is in terms of--with the submersible pumps, the 6 research that you did, was it using the same test 7 procedure as used for the covered pumps when they 8 showed their efficiency levels? 9 MS. WIDDER: I don?t know. I don?t 10 know how that motor efficiency was determined. 11 In general, we just want a default table that is 12 representative of--that?s a good question, but if 13 there is not data available, calculated using the 14 same--the DOE test procedure, we need assumptions 15 regarding the minimum full load efficiency of 16 submersible motors in general, that can just be 17 hard wired into the test procedure. 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Thanks. I appreciate 19 that. Again, I just worry about you say select 20 lowest efficiency available, since they are not 21 covered, it could be an imported motor from who 22 knows where, with just, I?ll just say 50 percent

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 232 1 efficiency because it?s not covered. There?s no 2 regulation. The average efficiency in that 3 market could be 85 percent. Again, I?m throwing 4 some numbers out. 5 If there?s a significant difference 6 between the lowest and the average, I think there 7 needs to be some adjustment because there is no 8 floor, literally. 9 MS. WIDDER: Right. 10 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I guess I get a little 11 worried about well, if we do the lowest, then 12 there could be a race to the bottom. Again, in 13 terms of game playing, unfortunately. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas Adin. 15 MR. ADIN: Just a brief response. 16 It?s a fair point. I think really what Sarah-- 17 the purpose of Sarah?s discussion of this 18 particular topic is to determine whether in fact 19 this is an appropriate way to measure the energy 20 efficiency of these pumps, given that we don?t 21 have this data available, based on a DOE test 22 procedure.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 233 1 It may be that the issue that you are 2 raising is a serious concern and this may not be 3 the best way to approach this issue for that 4 reason. We are just trying to find out is that 5 going to work. 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 7 Maybe another possible approach because 8 it is not covered and we are not sure about the 9 test procedures, try to use maybe a median value 10 or something that-- 11 MS. WIDDER: My concern with such an 12 approach, and I definitely recognize that, but my 13 concern with such an approach is we are then sort 14 of default regulating those motors. I really 15 believe that is not our intent. 16 MR. ADIN: Well, the other concern 17 is that if you establish the default at the 18 median, there could be motors that are less 19 efficient, so you?re allowing someone to make an 20 efficiency representation of a pump that uses 21 maybe a motor that is actually less efficient than 22 what the test procedure is assuming. That is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 234 1 another prospective issue you could run into. 2 You want to know it is at least as good 3 as some number and not have a possibility that it 4 is actually worse. 5 MS. WIDDER: Right, and to be clear, 6 this table of minimum efficiency values, similar 7 to what is in the CFR for general purpose motors, 8 would be used equivalently in the bare pump case, 9 although that?s very unlikely given the types of 10 pumps we?re talking about, but mostly for setting 11 the standard. 12 MS. WILLIAMS: This is separate from 13 the decision of how you would actually rate your 14 submersible pumps. I think one of the options 15 Sarah will discuss later is maybe those have to be 16 a wire to water test. We haven?t gotten there. 17 This is really as Sarah said to what the 18 minimum standard would be. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Greg? 20 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 21 Steve, I think to keep it within scope, 22 the numbers that HI put out for submersible pumps

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 235 1 that 2 HI provided to the DOE, it was about 104,000 units 3 that fall within the scope we are talking about. 4 I would be willing to guess that an 5 industry survey, survey of industry literature of 6 the motors that are used on those 104,000 units, 7 probably 95 percent will be what?s typically sold 8 in all the distributors here in the United States, 9 and less than five percent if even that high is 10 going to be potential bad motors that are not to a 11 fair minimum efficiency that she selects. 12 Personally, on behalf of Grundfos, I 13 think her methodology is probably as fair as any. 14 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 15 Yes, again, I don?t know what the range is, so 16 that is why I was thinking if we don?t know how 17 low the low point is, it just gets really-- 18 compared to other pumps where the baseline motor 19 is I?ll just say 90 percent versus a non-regulated 20 motor with the lowest number could be 50 percent. 21 That?s a huge difference in terms of what-- 22 MR. WIDDER: It?s actually not that

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 236 1 big of a difference. I?ll show you-- 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Again, I don?t have that 3 data. 4 MR. WIDDER: This isn?t actually the 5 data. This is the rolled up data. You will 6 notice there is one strange point at ten 7 horsepower that is significantly lower than the 8 others, but these are in general the ranges. 9 The minimum column that you see, 75, we 10 see it going from 75 to 87 at 250 horsepower, 11 those are the minimum efficiencies found in each 12 horsepower bin from the data we have collected so 13 far, and we are not done yet. We are still 14 collecting data. 15 This could change, but I wouldn?t expect 16 it to change significantly from this range, 17 especially the ten horsepower bin. We are 18 going to evaluate that a little bit more. 19 Another point that was on the previous 20 slide, we considered potentially even being more-- 21 I?m trying to think of a word besides 22 conservative --to try to be most representative or

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 237 1 cautious that this is in fact the minimum. 2 We could scale that number by two percent in this 3 case, like take 98 percent of what was the minimum 4 to ensure our literature survey was complete or as 5 complete as possible. 6 That is what the column on the right7 hand side represents. It is just 98 percent of 8 the minimum value found. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Mark Handzel. 10 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 11 Sarah, I?m not a res water guy, don?t 12 have a lot of knowledge in submersible pumps, but 13 I don?t think Franklin makes motors up to 250 14 horsepower, so I?m just trying to understand, 15 where is this data from? 16 This is primarily a sub-motor that goes 17 in the ground. We?re not talking vertical 18 turbines here. We?re talking residential well 19 water. 20 MS. WIDDER: Right. 21 MR. HANDZEL: I?m just concerned about 22 the range of horsepower you show there. If you

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 238 1 would stop at maybe 15 and 20, I would get it, but 2 you?re showing the 250. 3 MS. WIDDER: We did show the 250. 4 I?ll admit there is limited pumps in our scope 5 that are in that size range. We could limit 6 this table but 7 I would be concerned about that since it is 8 possible that there are submersible pumps up to 9 200 horse. 10 MR. HANDZEL: I?m just concerned about 11 these two manufacturers. I don?t disagree 12 there are other manufacturers. 13 MS. WIDDER: I apologize. Someone 14 else made this slide. 15 MR. HANDZEL: Okay. You take that 16 off, then I can accept that. 17 MS. WIDDER: This is out of date. 18 MR. HANDZEL: All I?m trying to say is 19 those two guys don?t make motors that-- 20 MS. WIDDER: There are at least four 21 manufacturers in this data that I know of. We 22 will continue collecting data to make sure we are

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 239 1 sufficient. This slide title was outdated. I 2 apologize for that. It wasn?t intended to be 3 in this slide deck anyway. 4 You can provide feedback on whether 5 these values look reasonable. As I mentioned, 6 they are preliminary at this point because we are 7 not done with data collection. 8 Steve, in response to your question, 9 they are not significantly different. 10 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 11 Thank you very much. Again, I didn?t 12 see any of this. Thank you. 13 MS. WIDDER: Right. Okay: great. 14 I haven?t heard any suggestions for other pumps 15 besides submersible, but I?m going to-- 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Open it up again, any 17 other pumps aside from submersible that should be 18 considered here? 19 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 20 I would just state all the rest of the 21 pump classifications that we have basically use 22 pretty much standard NEMA designed motors. I

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 240 1 think that is where the data is readily available 2 for those from many of the manufacturers who are 3 in the room or part of NEMA. I don?t think 4 there is really an issue with anything other than 5 the submersible pumps. 6 MS. WIDDER: That?s great. That was 7 our understanding as well. Thank you for 8 confirming that, Mark. 9 The other question is using the 10 methodology, would it be appropriate to apply this 11 98 percent scaling factor that we had seen in the 12 previous slide to ensure the value is in fact 13 representative of a minimum, or should we use just 14 the minimum. 15 Does anybody have any feedback on that? 16 You can consider it and provide feedback 17 later. 18 (No response.) 19 MS. WIDDER: Okay. Moving on, that 20 is really the end of the motor loss discussion. 21 We have covered motor size and motor losses. 22 I think with feedback from Dan we have a general

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 241 1 approach that we all agree on. That?s great. 2 We will look forward to other--once you get these 3 slides, anyone can provide feedback on that. 4 There are some other items that are all 5 very important and detailed items that we are 6 going to need to address in the test procedure. 7 Maybe we will be able to discuss that as 8 part of another meeting here, but we do want to 9 focus the rest of the meeting primarily on setting 10 standards, and these test procedure issues may 11 need to be addressed in a different format or 12 different venue. 13 It doesn?t mean there won?t be feedback, 14 there will, just a different venue. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: You?re not going to try 16 to take them up now? 17 MS. WIDDER: Not these issues. 18 We do have-- 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Why don?t you just list 20 them? 21 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: So they know these are

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 242 1 coming. 2 MS. WIDDER: Okay. I want to go 3 back to the architecture thing. Some issues, and 4 we welcome feedback also on these, accounting for 5 controls. We have discussed the default 6 method, a default system curve to account for 7 controls, what types of controls to give credit 8 to. 9 Alison mentioned earlier what pumps 10 would be tested using a wire to water test versus 11 a calculation. A calculation option, where you 12 would have a bare pump test and then default 13 motor, as we have been discussing mostly in these 14 meetings would be default for all pumps, and 15 optional testing, or if there is some pump type 16 such as submersible that might require a wire to 17 water test. 18 These are all test procedure issues we 19 are going to need to get into later. There are 20 some specific pump issues. 21 I think at this point, Doug, I?d like to 22 return to architecture, because we?re not going to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 243 1 talk about these. 2 Steve, I told you we would go back to 3 this slide because you had some comments on it. 4 We started talking about losses, so we 5 got away from it. I think at this point it 6 makes sense, if we generally agree on the approach 7 to motor sizing and motor losses, is this 8 something the Working 9 Group would like to recommend or vote on? In 10 absence of that, the team will probably continue 11 on the path we have been on, which is to keep 12 using this metric. 13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 14 Again, it is a matter of if you look at 15 the-- 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve, I couldn?t tell 17 from your comment whether you objected to the use 18 of index or whether you were just being a stickler 19 for detail surrounding the use of PER versus PEI. 20 MR. ROSENSTOCK: One of the issues is, 21 and in the slides we got the other day, everything 22 was predicated on PERs.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 244 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: As part of the basis for 3 some of the negotiations, now if we just say well, 4 we?re just going to drop that and go to PEI, that 5 could change-- 6 MS. WILLIAMS: Steve, this is Alison. 7 Whether or not it?s an index or just 8 PER, it makes no difference to Dan?s and my 9 analysis. 10 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. It might not 11 make a difference in the analysis but it will make 12 a difference in terms of how the efficiency is 13 represented in the marketplace. Again, I can?t 14 remember if this was discussed in previous 15 versions but again, I realize the slash is now CL 16 or VL, so I?m just thinking about some of the 17 issues that are coming up. 18 Does this mean there will need to be two 19 PEIs for each pump depending on the application, 20 constant load or variable load? 21 MS. WIDDER: Not depending on the 22 application, depending on whether or not the pump

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 245 1 has a control. If it has a control, it will be 2 assumed to be variable load. 3 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. There is that 4 possible issue of multiple metrics. There is 5 that issue, versus the PER, which is just one 6 metric regardless of whether it has a control or 7 not, just in terms of what people might be looking 8 at, and then in terms of this, again, just trying 9 to look at this, as a dimension less quantity, 10 basically this is the lower the PEI, the more 11 efficient it is: correct? 12 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 13 MR. ROSENSTOCK: There can be some issues 14 with that just because of the fact of-- 15 MR. DELANEY: State that again. 16 MS. WIDDER: The lower the PEI, the 17 more efficient the unit or the less energy use. 18 Like a 19 PEI of 0.5, which would be representative of a 20 VFD, would be better than a PEI of 0.9, which is 21 what you might get with a bare pump and a motor, 22 NEMA motor.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 246 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas Adin. 2 MR. ADIN: I just wanted to point 3 out one additional thing regarding use of the 4 index as opposed to PER, which I think had come up 5 at the last meeting, which is with PER, there 6 seemed like there was some general consensus that 7 the units just wouldn?t make sense, because it is 8 expressed in horsepower. 9 MS. WIDDER: It?s expressed in 10 horsepower. 11 MR. ADIN: Right. There was a view 12 that might be confusing as an energy rating having 13 it in horsepower, it might be confusing to a 14 consumer, so an index was a better way. 15 MS. WIDDER: I don?t have this slide 16 in here anymore. We did have a table of metric 17 options. 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: I remember that. 19 MS. WIDDER: This was one of them 20 that we had reached some consensus on because it 21 is somewhat similar to the approach being applied 22 in the EU with their EEI metric. There was some

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 247 1 general consensus that would be more harmonious to 2 do that, do it that way. 3 That is what we have moved forward with 4 so far. Some of the other options that could be 5 considered is un-ratioed, so the PER, just the PER 6 for constant or variable load, as represented on 7 top, without the standard value. That is in 8 horsepower. We could convert it to something 9 like kilowatt hours. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis, go ahead. 11 MR. STARR: This is Louis Starr, 12 NEEA. 13 I think at the last meeting the 14 advocates? position was we sort of like the way it 15 was but also we sort of left it up to the pump 16 guys. I think HI as a group sort of supported 17 what we ended up with. Maybe Mark can speak to 18 that. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: What we ended up with 20 was 21 PER or PEI? This morning, a little bit ago, 22 you said we keep going in and out of using PEI,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 248 1 and then we are pulled back because we are not 2 sure that?s-- 3 MR. HANDZEL: We started to look at-- 4 what we said was we supported this because we 5 needed to differentiate it. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. Conceptually, 7 that?s where I thought we were. 8 MS. WIDDER: We?re mixing issues 9 here, I think. The nomenclature issue, we 10 discussed earlier, and I just said in these 11 slides, I was going to represent PER as the 12 equally weighted value and PEI as the ratio, just 13 so when we are talking about them today in this 14 meeting, we could be clear what we are talking 15 about. 16 I think Mark had supported that and 17 reiterated they had thought similar things, 18 because it is confusing when you call everything a 19 PER and you?re not really sure. 20 The issue we are discussing today, like 21 right now, is not nomenclature, it is the 22 architecture. It is the equation itself, I

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 249 1 think. 2 If I'm understanding Steve?s feedback 3 correctly, he is questioning this index at all. 4 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock. 5 Also, just the matter of--it threw me 6 off a little bit just because of the fact that the 7 other slides were just showing everything in PERs. 8 PER 10 through 70, and this threw me off, like 9 well, okay, if this is the architecture, is that 10 going to replace these, you know. 11 MS. WIDDER: We would just change the 12 R to an I. 13 MR. ADIN: The 10 to 70 levels are 14 the same because they are cutoffs of the market. 15 It makes no difference. 16 MS. WIDDER: Right. R equals I. 17 MR. ROSENSTOCK: The other values--it 18 might get in the weeds of if you have a PEI of 19 let?s say-- 20 MS. WIDDER: The values will not 21 change at all, period, at all. It doesn?t change 22 the analysis at all. Like not even a little

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 250 1 bit. 2 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Okay. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: That is why I thought we 4 were on the original point that you raised. 5 MS. WIDDER: No, I don't think we are 6 talking about nomenclature. We're talking 7 about the equation. It could be either. You 8 could interpret it as either. 9 MR. CASE: Doug? 10 MS. WIDDER: Go ahead, Greg. 11 MR. CASE: I just spent last week 12 in Europe with the Euro pump guys. As Sarah mentioned 13 earlier, their index does have a lower what we 14 call PEI, what would be a better value, so we 15 support that. We also support the index 16 again for trying to keep things somewhat 17 harmonized between the two. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: In that construct, Greg, 19 that would mean what? 20 MR. CASE: We're in favor of this 21 PEI number instead of the PERs, as I think we have 22 stated, and also with the way she has it

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 251 1 presented, so that a lower PEI is a better value. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Thank you. 3 MS. WIDDER: The other nice thing 4 about this metric is that it is from zero to one, 5 so if you are greater than one, you fail. 6 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Do you still 7 have questions, Steve? 8 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 9 Again, one of my roles is to work with 10 some national customers, and I get questions from 11 them about different metrics and what does it 12 actually mean to me when I?m buying product X. 13 What does that mean to me if I go from a 10 to 11 14 EER, what does that mean. I say okay, in your 15 condition, it means this and this type of energy 16 savings, et cetera. 17 I?m just trying to think with the PEI 18 and all the discussions, if you go from a 0.5 to a 19 0.45 PEI, is that easily translatable to a 20 customer, with all the information that needs to 21 be done, will it be easily translatable to a 22 customer to say okay, that does equal a ten

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 252 1 percent energy savings. 2 I?m just pointing that out. Or is it 3 really, when you look at your pump and your 4 application, again, I?m just trying to think for 5 an end user, will this be easily translatable into 6 something they can use in terms of being able to 7 compare different pumps. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Do you think there is a 9 significant difference between PER and PEI, the 10 accessibility of those two, cluster of letters? 11 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Yes. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Go ahead, Louis. 13 MR. STARR: One of the things with 14 the metrics, it kind of assumes a load profile and 15 does a bunch of things already, so it is no more-- 16 it?s not like you can really take a reading off 17 your dishwasher at home and figure out how much 18 energy it is going to cost for you to run your 19 dishwasher at your house, unless you happen to 20 have the load profile that DOE used for the 21 dishwasher, and it is the same thing with this. 22 That is why, Gary, you are advocating

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 253 1 for lots of information so that if you get that 2 information, you can really design custom programs 3 or other things. 4 It gives you a general sense, it gives 5 some general information to the end user that VFD 6 is more efficient than not using a VFD. It gives a 7 general kind of sense. 8 I don?t know you are directly going to 9 be able to use the PEI to really calculate 10 savings, only in a general sense would you be able 11 to do that. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas? 13 MR. ADIN: Louis just made the 14 point I think I was going to make earlier. In 15 addition to whatever metric we are going to use 16 for comparing a product to the prescribed 17 standard, the statute does authorize us to 18 prescribe standardized methods for calculating 19 other useful measures of energy use. We can do 20 something like annual energy consumption or 21 something like that. 22 Inherent in any of those is some

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 254 1 assumption. In that case, we?d have to make an 2 assumption about operating hours. 3 Really I think it sounds like this is 4 what the group believes is the best way to capture 5 for each pump, to compare them in an uniform way, 6 a representative way of how they would perform. 7 We can provide other measures if they 8 might be useful, again, there will be assumptions 9 that are inherent in those measurements. 10 MS. WIDDER: This is just an example 11 of how that might go, but I?m changing the PER 12 numbers because they are not PER, there is some 13 other metric that could be calculated to be 14 consistent with nomenclature. 15 To get an annual energy use per year, as 16 Lucas mentioned, this is something that could be 17 specified in the test procedure as a way to 18 consistently represent annual energy use and 19 compare those very large annual energy use numbers 20 for two different types of pumps, pumps with 21 controls, pumps without controls, that could be 22 made in manufacturing literature or something like

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 255 1 that. 2 This is something that we could 3 consider. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: I?m going to cut to the 5 chase here as best I can. Steve, you seem to 6 be the only one that seems concerned about PEI so 7 far, that has voiced concern about it. Everyone 8 else seems to think PEI has advantages over PER. 9 That is what I?m interpreting. 10 MS. WIDDER: As a standard, as a 11 metric for the standard, there might be other 12 measures of energy use that are used to 13 communicate with consumers that are more valuable, 14 as Louis mentioned. 15 It might not even be productive for DOE 16 to do something like this because it is more 17 productive to have the data and apply it to a 18 specific pump application, but just in terms of 19 the metric that is used to establish compliance 20 with a standard. 21 MR. BROOKMAN: It seems based on what I 22 have heard it is pretty darn effective for being

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 256 1 able to show the comparisons between different 2 bare pumps and applications. 3 I want to try to provide you the 4 opportunity to voice your concerns, but I?m ready 5 to move us on as well. 6 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 7 Again, I probably want to write it out. 8 Again, off the top of my head I am kind of 9 thinking about that 50 versus 60 horsepower 10 example you showed earlier, and I?m wondering if 11 for some reason, and again, I?m trying to think 12 this out, suppose the ratio was--again, I?ll say 13 the pump and the motor- -if the 50 for whatever 14 reason--maybe with the control-- again, I?m trying 15 to think this out. 16 You have a 50 horsepower motor and the 17 ratio, the PEI, is 0.9. You have a 60 horsepower 18 motor and the ratio is 0.88. Someone will say 19 well, if you go to the 75 horsepower motor, your 20 PEI is down to 0.8. The ratio might be lower 21 but the energy savings might not be there because 22 you are starting with a higher base anyway. Do you

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 257 1 see what I?m saying? 2 MS. WIDDER: I think that is a 3 separate issue. That is a motor sizing issue. 4 That is going to be true if we have PER, energy 5 use per year, PEI, regardless of the metric we 6 choose, the way we have determined to establish 7 losses and use the full load losses, a higher 8 motor will result in a better rating. That is 9 independent of the metric architecture itself. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: I think it would be 11 beneficial for us to see if we can establish this 12 architecture and see if the Working Group is in a 13 position to essentially adopt or accept this 14 architecture. 15 We have already gone through the load 16 points, the bottom two bullets. I think everybody 17 is okay with that. The basic--I think we have 18 also gone through the equation you see at the top 19 of the page. I think folks are comfortable with 20 that. 21 The only thing that is apparently not 22 comfortable for one individual in the room is the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 258 1 index, the use of the letter I as opposed to R. 2 Do you want us to try to establish this 3 as an agreement on the part of the Working Group? 4 It seems like we are in a position to do 5 it. 6 MS. WIDDER: I think you 7 mischaracterized Steve?s concern, but it?s okay. 8 I understand Steve?s issue. I do 9 appreciate you wanting to reach a little bit of 10 consensus here. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: It is going to benefit 12 you, is it not? 13 MS. WIDDER: It will benefit me 14 greatly, and Alison and Dan also. They care 15 less than I do. The analysis can move forward 16 actually mostly independent of the metric 17 architecture, not totally though. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Does anybody have 19 significant concerns? 20 MS. WIDDER: Can we do the load 21 points and weights? That is what the analysis 22 team really needs. We can revisit this metric

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 259 1 architecture at another time. Let?s do the load 2 points and weights. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Fine. That sounds 4 good. 5 I thought we had gone through load 6 points and weights pretty substantially, and 7 basically said yep, that looks pretty good to me. 8 MS. WIDDER: We didn?t vote. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: Let?s go through them 10 again. 11 MS. WIDDER: For uncontrolled pumps, 12 the 13 PER CL, as it is represented here, for the 14 constant load application, we had load points of 15 110 percent, 100 percent, and 75 percent of BEP 16 flow at nominal speed, and equally weighting those 17 three points. 18 For pumps sold with controls, we would 19 apply a variable load curve using flow points of 20 25 percent, 50 percent, 75 percent, and 100 21 percent of BEP flow. We would equally weight 22 those four points.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 260 1 Those are the load points and weights 2 that we have previously established and used in 3 the analysis up to this point. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Does anyone have 5 reservations about those load points and those 6 weightings? That is consistent with the 7 significant amount of discussion we have had 8 previously. 9 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 10 Doug, I think in principle we don?t have 11 problems with them. I guess when I was 12 texting back and forth with Greg, we have kind of 13 our technical task group that we use for technical 14 matters, and 15 I would feel more comfortable if I gave them one 16 more shot at this and said let?s vote on this the 17 first day in June. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. 19 MR. HANDZEL: We can give you some 20 internal feedback if there is any, Sarah. 21 MS. WIDDER: Yes, and I?ll talk to 22 you on Friday.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 261 1 MR. HANDZEL: You are probably on that 2 call more than I am actually. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. On that 4 point, the analysis does depend on load points 5 somewhat, not a lot. I?m just throwing it out 6 there, that if there are changes made, there might 7 be some small changes to the analysis. I wouldn?t 8 worry about it that much, I just wanted it to be 9 clear. 10 MR. HANDZEL: Alison, I don?t think 11 there will be. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: We have gone over this. 13 This is not a surprise to anyone here: 14 right? We are not going to press that 15 any further. 16 Are there other architectural related 17 issues that you want to cover? 18 MS. WIDDER: I guess at this point, 19 there are two things we could do, and I will 20 welcome feedback from Lucas or the group. We 21 could talk about the labeling standard versus 22 labeling thing, or we could go back to the interim

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 262 1 report you have to report, or we could continue to 2 discuss the architecture that is presented here on 3 the page and request in specific alternative 4 recommendations. This seems to be a reasonable 5 construct from our perspective. 6 Those are three options. I have 7 some slides here on labeling. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: You have an hour left. 9 Let?s just do five minutes of the ASRAC 10 report right now, so I get feedback on that, and 11 then we will proceed, we will go as far as we can 12 go on the other topics. 13 Consulting with Lucas and also Tom 14 Eckman, the ASRAC is meeting, I believe, on June 15 6, or a conference call. We thought it 16 would be useful since they authorized and 17 originated this group to send them a little 18 report. 19 Let me emphasize that my intention as 20 the person who has been asked to write it was to 21 keep it quite small. I basically was intending 22 to say here?s the information we have covered to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 263 1 date. 2 Here?s the stuff we have agreed upon, 3 the scope, the pump types to be excluded, the 4 other kind of definitional things we have gone 5 through, the criteria, talk about the major issues 6 that we have discussed that we haven?t agreed upon 7 yet, and then talk about issues that lie ahead, 8 that we intend to take up and conclude in the time 9 that remains. 10 The other thing that I think I would say 11 is I think this group is doing very well, that we 12 have made a lot of progress, some logistical 13 things. 14 We have added an additional day to the 15 remaining two meetings, and I remain optimistic 16 and hopeful we will get through all this. I 17 think that is about the bulk of what I intend to 18 say. 19 It is probably two or three pages. 20 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 21 Would you be identifying--obviously, the 22 product and scope issue, we spent a lot of time

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 264 1 on, and where we directed the circulator and pool 2 pump, would that be part of this? 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. We obtained a 4 vote and a consensus on those points. Those 5 points for which we actually have a consensus, 6 like for example, you have now restricted the 7 scope to electric motors. That would be in 8 there. 9 MR. HANDZEL: Things we have agreed 10 to. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: The Working Group has 12 acted on that point. There are other points I 13 will list as areas of speculation, areas of 14 possible action, that sort of thing. 15 MR. HANDZEL: Things that we are 16 heading toward consensus on. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Right. I welcome 18 additional thoughts. That just seemed to me 19 like a common sense approach to a status update. 20 MR. HANDZEL: Will this just be turned 21 over to ASRAC members? Will it actually be 22 discussed?

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 265 1 MR. ECKMAN: Agenda item. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Okay. Will you be 3 asked to give the update? How do they do it? 4 MR. ECKMAN: Probably. 5 MR. ADIN: The meeting, Tom, if I?m 6 correct, is on June 6. 7 MR. ECKMAN: Teleconference. 8 MR. ADIN: It?s reasonable to 9 expect if we are going to get feedback from the 10 ASRAC, we could probably have it by the next 11 meeting of this group. 12 MR. ECKMAN: I think there is a room 13 in here, it is set for a room in here, but largely 14 it?s a webinar for most of the members. I don?t 15 think most will be in town. DOE staff may be 16 around the table, but I suspect no one else. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Either Lucas or I, 18 perhaps both of us, will be on the call listening 19 to that segment, so we can chime in as required. 20 MR. HANDZEL: We can all register to 21 listen in to that if we want to. 22 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes, that?s right.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 266 1 Good point. I had forgotten that. Louis? 2 MR. STARR: That is what I was going 3 to say. 4 MR. HANDZEL: Can we move on? 5 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. 6 MR. HANDZEL: Basically, we have two 7 meetings to go. We have about six days of meeting 8 time reserved. I, personally, feel it would be 9 helpful for us to have some type of list of 10 deliverables that this committee still needs to 11 reach consensus on. 12 We know some of the things. I just 13 get the feeling there might be some other things 14 that 15 DOE needs that we aren?t there yet on. If there 16 is a checklist, Lucas, or is there something that 17 maybe Navigant or somebody has, things that we 18 should be preparing for? 19 MR. ADIN: I think at this point, 20 it is relatively simple. I think this group 21 needs to agree on a standard level or multiple 22 ones, depending on whether you choose to break it

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 267 1 up by class or whatever. The standard levels 2 are the main deliverable for the term sheet. 3 To the extent we make other specific 4 recommendations, that is up to the Working Group 5 really to decide. It is not that DOE has a 6 prescribed list of things that we have to 7 accomplish. 8 The standard levels are really the main 9 thing, and whatever accompanies that set of 10 recommendations-- 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Now that we have already 12 established the scope, for example. 13 MR. ADIN: Right. 14 MR. HANDZEL: Being new to this, I 15 just wanted to make sure-- 16 MR. BROOKMAN: I would say as a bonus, 17 that if we are very efficient and we get through 18 the standards segment of this rapidly, then there 19 may be time to do some in-depth work on the test 20 procedure. That could be beneficial to all 21 the parties present, and perhaps advance DOE?s 22 efforts as well.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 268 1 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 2 Doug, I think we definitely would want 3 to do that just because we feel that is pretty 4 important. 5 What do we need to help that would be 6 important for us to start seeing that on the 7 horizon so that when we do get to that time, 8 assuming we will, that we are ready to discuss it. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: The other thing I wanted 10 to raise logistically, and I?m coming to you, 11 Louis, if we decide, for example, we make great 12 progress in the month of June, and this would be 13 just to confirm, June 17, 18 and 19, the third 14 day, June 19, probably we are going to end again 15 at 3:00 in the afternoon, and it was even 16 suggested by Chuck last time that maybe we would 17 reserve the third day for voting, but I would like 18 to do votes as we go, but that is an option. 19 Probably on the third day, we are going 20 to go from 8:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. If we make 21 huge progress or get most of it done in those 22 three days, then maybe we don?t need fully three

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 269 1 days in 2 July. We just have to evaluate that as we are 3 going, but don?t buy your plane tickets yet, is my 4 advice. 5 I think as a group we have made good 6 progress already. There is a nice 7 coalescence, a nice bit of cooperation that is 8 happening here. I would like to continue to see 9 that level of cooperation and flexibility as we 10 continue this standards discussion, just see how 11 quickly we can arrive at something everybody is 12 comfortable with. 13 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 14 I didn?t see it but one of our guys saw 15 the June 16 17 date is not in this building: is that 17 correct? 18 MR. ADIN: That?s true. You 19 scared me for a second there. It is not in 20 this building. 21 It is up the street, very close by. 22 It?s actually in the building where my office is.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 270 1 MR. BROOKMAN: It?s in the building 2 just right next door to L?Enfant Plaza Hotel, just 3 to the right, 950 is the number. We have a 4 conference room dedicated. Louis? 5 MR. STARR: Kind of going on Mark's 6 idea about maybe things--if it turns out all we 7 have to do is deliver standard levels for our 8 deliverable as the ASRAC Working Group, but I 9 think there is a lot of things in this test 10 procedure stuff in particular, so there are some 11 things that are kind of squishy. 12 One of them would be motors and other 13 things, how those VFDs and motors work together. 14 I think that maybe we have a list of 15 things where we feel like Dan has been pretty 16 helpful today, and he's probably one of the few 17 people that knows about motors in-depth at this 18 table, so I?m thinking there are some items like 19 that, really pieces of information that would be 20 helpful to have some industry input on. 21 I think when we can identify those 22 things, maybe we can feed some of that information

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 271 1 in prior to the meetings, so we have an idea what 2 those lists of items are, and we can line up 3 industry people to provide that information or 4 they can find the appropriate people to provide 5 that input, I think that would be helpful. 6 The reason I want to make sure this test 7 procedure works well is when it goes in for 8 utility programs, we need it to be pretty 9 accurate. I?m sure the pump people want them 10 accurate for another reason so they can compete on 11 equal footing. 12 MS. WIDDER: This is a tentative list 13 like that. I have a very comprehensive list 14 of items in the test procedure that could receive 15 industry input. I would actually want to maybe 16 start with this abbreviated list, because this is 17 like the highlights from my perspective that we 18 could really use some feedback on. 19 I do want to be cognizant of the primary 20 mission of the Working Group. Focus on 21 standards. 22 Sort of like Doug said, this is going to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 272 1 be a bonus, if we get done early, we can spend a 2 lot of time talking about these types of issues, 3 which are very important to everyone, especially 4 me. 5 I don?t want to have it take away from 6 standards, so that is why we haven?t really 7 discussed it at length yet. 8 These slides will go out. This is 9 a tentative list that I would encourage everyone 10 to start thinking about. These are probably the 11 items we would start with. In addition, some 12 of the motor losses data that we didn?t quite get 13 into but hopefully will. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: I would add another 15 bonus. Maybe I should say this off the record and 16 then you can tell me whether I should insert it on 17 the record. If we finish on time or early, 18 I?ll buy a round of drinks. 19 (Laughter.) 20 MR. BROOKMAN: For everyone. 21 MR. STARR: I heard a lot of 22 feedback from another meeting about two speed

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 273 1 motors. The motor guys were very down on the 2 two speed motor. 3 There are some other things that are 4 hidden in there that are not so obvious. 5 MS. WIDDER: Yes. There is some 6 more detail here. This is intended to include 7 multi- speed motors, three speed, whatever other 8 control types we would like to include. We need a 9 list. 10 Those are some things that we need to 11 consider, certainly. 12 That is why controls is first. In my 13 mind, this is almost a prioritized list. I 14 can change these to numbers, where controls should 15 go first and then these other things we can 16 address as we have time. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: Steve? 18 MR. ROSENSTOCK: Steve Rosenstock, EEI. 19 These are all important but again, this 20 is really dealing into the details of the test 21 procedure. 22 Isn't that kind of secondary? Are you

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 274 1 looking for recommendations? Are we really 2 tasked to make recommendations for these areas? 3 MR. ADIN: That is actually the 4 point I was just going to make. As of right now, 5 it is not. As part of this interim report, if 6 it is the sense of the group that it would be an 7 essential component of this overall recommendation 8 with standards to make specific recommendations on 9 the test method and the metric, then the best 10 thing to do would be for the interim report to 11 include a recommendation to the ASRAC that this 12 group specifically deliberate on the test method 13 and include in the term sheet specific proposals 14 for how that should be addressed. 15 We would receive a response from the 16 ASRAC that indicates yes, the scope of the 17 negotiation is to include those items. 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Gary? 19 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. I think 20 that is really an important aspect of what we are 21 doing, and I don?t know whether some action is 22 required, but we ought to include that in our

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 275 1 report to ASRAC. 2 MS. WILLIAMS: This is Alison. I just 3 want to comment also even if it is not formal, 4 obviously whatever is provided to Sarah, we are 5 asking for it for a reason. Even if it were 6 not formal, your feedback in this group would 7 certainly be included. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: Of course, as we both 9 said, this would be a bonus: it would be 10 supplemental based on our current assignment of 11 workload. Six days is a lot of days to have, 12 I think. We are getting down to--right now with 13 the proposals that are on the table today--we are 14 only going to go back and forth less than three 15 dozen times. 16 (Laughter.) 17 UNIDENTIFIED: Can we write that down 18 somewhere? 19 MR. BROOKMAN: One thing I have found 20 productive in negotiations like this is between 21 counterpoint proposal and counter proposal, it is 22 useful to have something else to talk about. To

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 276 1 allow individual caucuses to consult among 2 themselves and with their constituencies. 3 I have to think--I don?t want to pinch 4 us. The test procedure is really a fundamental 5 piece of this. We should help Sarah out there. 6 Dan? 7 MR. DELANEY: Dan Delaney from Regal. 8 It would be very helpful if I had a 9 summary, kind of like what you had there of those 10 items. It would be much simpler for me than 11 to go back through, certainly to bring the rest of 12 the NEMA team members up, but also to summarize 13 what we really want to provide, recommendations 14 versus just comments. 15 That would be helpful. I imagine it 16 would be helpful across all the slides that we 17 have seen. What are the specific comments in a 18 nice list that we are looking for. 19 MS. WIDDER: Okay. 20 MR. DELANEY: Just to quantify those 21 for everybody at the table so that we can 22 concentrate on those aspects and then maybe have

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 277 1 the ability to kind of jump between those. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Do you want me to 3 include in this report to ASRAC that it is the 4 sense of the Working Group that we would like to 5 take up and make recommendations surrounding the 6 test method, specific recommendations, in the 7 event we have time to do so? 8 MS. MAUER: This is Joanna. I don?t 9 have strong feelings on this, but it seems to me 10 like it would be very productive to have, to 11 discuss a lot of these test procedure issues. 12 From my perspective, I don?t know 13 whether it is so important to vote on things or 14 make specific recommendations as opposed to just 15 have good discussions. 16 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. What I wanted is 17 your sense of whether I should include this in my 18 report to ASRAC or rather we should just presume 19 if there is time, we are going to work it. 20 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 21 I just think if we have time, just 22 presume we will spend it on that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 278 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay: good. 2 MR. HANDZEL: Obviously, most of us 3 are pretty familiar with Hydraulic Institute test 4 standards. Obviously, Sarah has spent a lot 5 of time working with our group on that standard to 6 try to make it more palatable to the DOE. 7 I guess that is the part that not all of 8 us are all that familiar with, so kind of the 9 litmus test, is Sarah?s input enough or is there 10 still going to be further things that need to 11 change after the DOE gets a hold of it, I guess 12 that is some of the questions we have in our 13 minds. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Lucas? 15 MR. ADIN: Well, you?re talking 16 specifically about the 40.6 test method at this 17 point? I can?t tell you definitively that we are 18 completely done. We have been discussing 19 using that as the basis for the test method, and 20 Sarah?s involvement certainly is a critical part 21 of our being comfortable with using it. 22 I don?t personally have any reason to

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 279 1 believe there would be an issue from our 2 standpoint right now. Granted, we still have to 3 look at it and we still have to make a proposal. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: And a public comment 5 period. 6 MR. ADIN: Right. There may be 7 other comments we will receive from the public 8 that bear on the ultimate form of the test 9 procedure, things that we can?t really perceive 10 right now. 11 MS. WIDDER: From my perspective, in 12 terms of how we spend our time as a group 13 discussing the test procedure, you will notice 14 that the items on my list are all things outside 15 the scope of 40.6. That?s not an accident. 16 (Laughter.) 17 MS. WIDDER: There are many other 18 items that 40.6 doesn?t cover that I think we 19 still need to determine. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: That?s useful. I didn?t 21 know that. I didn?t know those items were all 22 not in 40.6.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 280 1 MS. WIDDER: These are all not. 2 40.6 is strictly a bare pump test standard. 3 MR. BROOKMAN: Louis? 4 MR. STARR: I was going to say it 5 would be a good idea that as we go through and 6 agree on things, we should vote on them just so we 7 kind of have a clear sort of understanding of what 8 we have gone through and what we have passed, so 9 we don?t revisit things. I could argue the same 10 thing ten days in a row. 11 MS. WIDDER: Right. 12 MR. STARR: Just for the sense of 13 kind of going forward, knowing where we are at. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: I?m big on obtaining 15 votes when the votes are there, I want you to know 16 that we have taken a vote every single time I 17 thought we had some agreement on something worth 18 voting on, and I will continue to do that. 19 Do you want to go to the labeling stuff? 20 I thought it would be useful to talk 21 about this. 22 It?s now 2:25. We could call it a day.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 281 1 Alison? 2 MS. WILLIAMS: Dan and I have another 3 subject to talk about, if there is a few minutes. 4 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. We always 5 welcome 6 Dan and you talking about a subject you would like 7 to bring up. 8 MR. ROSENSTOCK: How many slides do you 9 have on labeling? 10 MS. WIDDER: One, two, three, four, 11 five. Five slides. They are extremely brief. 12 They essentially present what we 13 discussed last time. You can review them at your 14 leisure when you have this deck, and then we will 15 bring it up first thing, maybe the second thing, 16 the next time. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: We don?t have another 18 webinar yet scheduled, do we? 19 MS. WIDDER: We don?t. 20 MR. BROOKMAN: I?m wondering if we 21 should schedule another webinar, if that would be 22 productive at this point, or what your thinking

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 282 1 is. 2 MR. ADIN: Doug, I?ll point out 3 that we did receive a question from the pump 4 manufacturers? caucus about whether a webinar 5 could be done specifically on the financial 6 analysis. I don?t know whether there is a 7 view that is still needed or be useful. 8 Whether we cover that topic or others, 9 we can look at it, if there are topics that need 10 to be covered between now and the June meeting. 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Great. My reflection is 12 that there is a lot of content in the webinar, and 13 I thought it was very useful, and I noticed that 14 prompted the Manufacturers? Caucus to come back 15 with specific questions to today?s meeting, so 16 that was useful to do it that way, and no one has 17 to travel across the country to get here for a 18 webinar. An hour or two of effort, it seems 19 like that is well placed. The technology is 20 pretty good. 21 I am wondering if we should try to 22 schedule that. Lucas? question on the table is

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 283 1 apparently a question came from the manufacturers 2 on the financial-- 3 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 4 One of the things we kind of came across 5 yesterday was just those of us here didn?t free 6 like we were strong enough financially to 7 completely be able to challenge some of the 8 calculations that were done. 9 I know Greg sent me an e-mail to Lucas 10 requesting that we do--we didn?t say a full 11 webinar, but we asked that we have a presentation 12 made from the consulting team again, so that we 13 could bring our financial people in so that they 14 could advise us as to whether or not we were 15 adequately seeing everything, if there is stuff we 16 need to be raising questions about, that type of 17 thing. 18 I don?t know if Greg said it, but we?d 19 like to get that presentation in advance so we 20 could give it to our financial people, maybe so 21 they would be ready for questions as we got into 22 that.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 284 1 MR. ADIN: Okay. I guess the 2 question then is--if we do a webinar, we need to 3 schedule it enough in advance that we can provide 4 public notice, it will have to be made known to 5 the public. 6 MR. HANDZEL: Sure. 7 MR. ADIN: If you think a webinar 8 would be needed to cover that material--there are 9 other topics that we need to cover anyway, it 10 doesn?t sound right now like there are, but 11 obviously if anyone has a topic they want us to 12 cover, we can do that. 13 What we can do is provide the financial 14 analysis, some slides on that, so that your group 15 can look at it. If there are questions we can 16 answer without a webinar, we will do that. If 17 it seems like a more interactive forum would be 18 needed-- 19 MR. HANDZEL: Greg, do we need a full 20 blown webinar? Would you rather just get the 21 slides and see what questions we develop? 22 MR. CASE: We could certainly do

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 285 1 just a question and answer session that works for 2 DOE. I sent the slides from yesterday on to two 3 members of our proposed financial team. Mark, you 4 said you could get somebody on possibly. There 5 may be 275 a couple of other members. A 6 teleconference may work. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Greg? 8 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 9 Maybe a suggestion, to send the 10 financial stuff to us to have our people review 11 it, and maybe what we have been doing with Sarah, 12 we schedule an internal meeting and then invite 13 the consultant to wouldn?t necessarily have to be 14 a DOE public meeting, because it is ours and we 15 are inviting them to answer questions. 16 MS. WIDDER: That?s what we have been 17 doing. 18 (Laughter.) 19 MR. ADIN: We will figure it out 20 and we will let you know. I?m not 21 aware offhand of a particular reason why we 22 couldn?t do that, but we just want to make sure.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 286 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Yes. Tom? 2 MR. ECKMAN: If there are 3 modifications and things that you guys need in 4 that analysis to be more representative, we want 5 to be aware of what those questions were. I 6 don?t think we have a concern about you guys 7 digging into it. 8 MR. BROOKMAN: That is one thing that 9 we did not clarify and maybe we should. Maybe 10 this will make it easier for DOE to say yes. If 11 the manufacturers come forward with questions and 12 DOE fields them, and then a consultant/DOE 13 listening in, answering those questions, that 14 would be available to all, right, and not just to 15 the 16 Manufacturers? Caucus. 17 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel. I think 18 we would certainly be willing to submit those 19 questions in writing so there could be answers in 20 writing. We?re not trying to do anything 21 off the record. We are just trying to make sure we 22 are as most knowledgeable as possible.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 287 1 MR. ADIN: Right, it is not a 2 concern about that. It is just really to the 3 extent there are recommendations or things that we 4 would change as a result of your input, we want to 5 make sure all the stakeholders know what they are 6 and everyone is informed. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Chris? 8 MR. LAU: Chris Lau from Navigant. 9 I have a third option. Recognizing 10 that this process takes a lot of resources, on 11 behalf of the manufacturers, and recognizing the 12 presentation yesterday, what I could do is get a 13 slide deck together that is a little more 14 sequential about the model assumptions and inputs, 15 and it is something your teams can review and see 16 what they are comfortable with, and then have a 17 discussion as part of a public forum, if that 18 makes sense 19 MR. HANDZEL: Chris, I think you are 20 getting to what our concerns are. Basically, 21 we saw some of the inputs and then we saw the 22 output.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 288 1 We didn?t see anything in between. 2 That is what we are really probably going to probe 3 a little more into. 4 MR. LAU: Absolutely. I?d be 5 happy to put it together. It is DOE?s 6 decision. I would be happy to give a primer as 7 well as a walk- through of the full analysis as 8 opposed to just a summary. 9 MR. BROOKMAN: As long as the walk10 through is available to everyone. 11 MR. LAU: Agreed. 12 MR. BROOKMAN: Joanna? 13 MS. MAUER: I was just going to say 14 if the manufacturers do put that together and 15 invite the consultants, if it could be open to us 16 as well, I think we would be interested. 17 MR. HANDZEL: Absolutely. I have 18 no issues with that, no issues whatsoever. 19 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. I think we are 20 going to move on to the issues that Dan wanted to 21 raise. Lucas? 22 MR. ADIN: Doug, I think we are

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 289 1 leaning towards if we are going to do some kind of 2 interactive session, whether it is a 3 teleconference or webinar, it would be better if 4 we did it in a public forum. DOE would set it 5 up and we would announce it, and we would just do 6 it that way. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Let?s establish a date 8 then. 9 MR. ADIN: Is the sense from the 10 group that you think we are going to need that, or 11 is it going to be dependent on--I suppose we could 12 set a date now. If after looking at the 13 material, you say well, we don?t really need a 14 webinar about it. 15 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel, Xylem. 16 I will just say we are on a pretty tight span here 17 between now and the next meeting. The 18 biggest challenge is we really have about two and 19 a half weeks and we are back here. 20 MR. ADIN: We will have to do it 21 next week. 22 MR. HANDZEL: Yes, we have to do it

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 290 1 next week. I think that is why Greg was asking 2 for a 3 Tuesday. We were all starting to say it is 4 coming up fast already. 5 MR. BROOKMAN: Presumably, you could do 6 it either week. The week of June 9 through 15, 7 that Monday through Friday. We are back here 8 on the 17th. 9 MR. HANDZEL: Yes, and I know a number 10 of us are back here the 9th or 10th for a National 11 Association of Manufacturers? meeting. Maybe not 12 at the DOE, but we are in town. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: What dates would likely 14 work for you? We have established we are going 15 to do them at 1:00 Eastern Daylight time, and mid16 week is what we are leaning towards, so Wednesday 17 would be the 4th. Thursday would be the 5th. 18 That would give you time to give notice 19 and set this up? 20 MR. HANDZEL: Guys, Wednesday morning? 21 I can?t answer for our financial people, 22 that is our difficulty.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 291 1 MR. BROOKMAN: It would be Wednesday, 2 1:00 Eastern Time. 3 MR. LAU: I don?t know what is on 4 the agenda for the next meeting, but if we were to 5 circulate a more complete primer, that could 6 hopefully anticipate and address a bulk of the 7 questions, and then we just do Q&A as part of the 8 next meeting, and maybe-- 9 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 10 The only reason I would say we would 11 rather not wait is because we want to be able to 12 vote. 13 MR. LAU: That?s true. 14 MR. HANDZEL: We could wait but it may 15 lead to more questions and we would have no time 16 to follow up. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: If you want to do it 18 mid- week, that would be June 4. We have 19 already established that 1:00 would be a good time 20 to do that for the West Coasters and the East 21 Coasters. 22 MR. HANDZEL: I would just say we

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 292 1 would accept 1:00 on Wednesday. 2 MR. BROOKMAN: Then you are going to 3 just get as many folks as you can. 4 MR. HANDZEL: Right. We obviously 5 have been dropping a lot of things to make sure we 6 are working with this, so we will make it happen. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. Confirming, the 8 webinar, can you do a webinar on Wednesday of next 9 week? 10 MR. ADIN: I think we would have to 11 look at logistically-- 12 MR. BROOKMAN: DOE needs to confirm. 13 Once they do confirm-- 14 MR. HANDZEL: Is there a notice period 15 you have to honor? 16 MR. ADIN: Yes. 17 MR. BROOKMAN: They need to confirm, 18 but our hope and expectation is once they do 19 confirm, that a webinar will be launched on June 4 20 at 1:00 21 Eastern Time, that would be 10:00 Pacific. 22 Chris, you are going to send out a slide

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 293 1 deck in advance? You wouldn?t have time to 2 get it done? 3 MR. LAU: It would be hard for me 4 to commit to that. 5 MR. BROOKMAN: Chris, I got confused. 6 Pardon me. Let me back up here. 7 MR. LAU: For a webinar next week, 8 I think I could commit a slide deck 24 hours in 9 advance. 10 MR. BROOKMAN: Sure, 24 hours in 11 advance, I think that is sufficient. By 12 Tuesday, noon-ish, you are going to send something 13 out the door? 14 MR. LAU: Yes. 15 MR. BROOKMAN: We?re good. I 16 thought you were looking at your calendar there. 17 Chris is going to send out his primer 24 hours in 18 advance of the call, and DOE is going to confirm 19 it is possible to put it on June 4 at 1:00. 20 Now, Dan? 21 MR. WEINTRAUB: We are definitely 22 switching gears now. We have alluded to an

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 294 1 issue already, and the manufacturers have already 2 kind of responded to this, the overall issue is we 3 still have to establish efficiency levels for the 4 VTS and RSV product classes. There are a few 5 issues we have to work through. 6 These slides were released through the 7 webinar, during the webinar, but we never got to 8 present them due to time. Manufacturers have 9 offered some of their responses, and now I?m going 10 to go through, re-present what the issue is and 11 the options, and I want to see if we can get 12 consensus on both sides for how we want to proceed 13 forward. 14 The first and largest issue are the 15 RSVs. For all these equipment classes, we have to 16 set the efficiency levels, which are the C values. 17 The dataset that we have for RSVs, it is 18 not large enough and it doesn?t have enough 19 manufacturers in it to represent the industry. 20 What we had been alluding to yesterday 21 while we were discussing it was that the RSV 22 product is a global product. What is here is in

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 295 1 the EU, same products. That is the general gist 2 of it. 3 One of the proposals for how we may be 4 able to set efficiency levels is to do our best to 5 harmonize with the EU for the C values. 6 The issue that comes up for this in 7 general is we are using PER, they have MEI. We 8 want to try to cut off the same pumps that are cut 9 off there here. 10 Option one for setting the C values 11 would be to try to translate the EU MEI levels, C 12 values, to our PER values. If you remember 13 the difference here, MEI, you had three points, 14 your part load, BEP, 110 percent of BEP, you had 15 to meet it at every single point. 16 That meant the C value that you failed 17 at was a less efficient C value, it was the worse 18 of all three, is what failed. 19 PER, it is the weighted average of all 20 three. That C value effectively is in general a 21 little bit more efficient in our system than it is 22 in the EU system.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 296 1 You can compare--we have a lot of pumps 2 and you can calculate the C values--the C value 3 that a pump fails at under MEI and then the C 4 value that same pump fails at under PER, and in 5 general, the PER value will be slightly smaller or 6 a more efficient value. 7 To translate, there is no direct 8 translation because each pump is different, but on 9 average, for looking at the small set of RSV pumps 10 that we have, on average, if you compare the MEI 11 failing C value for a pump and the PER failing C 12 value for a pump, the MEI one is--let me put this 13 in full screen, sorry--the MEI one is on average 14 0.53 points--sorry. 15 The PER value is 0.53 points more 16 efficient. If a pump were to fail at a C 17 value of 132 under MEI, it would fail at a C value 18 of 131.5 under PER. 19 What we are proposing to do is take the 20 MEI C values, shift them by this average, and get 21 us as close as possible to harmonization with the 22 EU in this product class. That is the best

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 297 1 method we have right now. 2 I guess the first general question to 3 the group is is the group up for harmonization 4 with the EU in this product class, because we know 5 that it is a global product class, as compared to 6 the other equipment classes where there are 7 separate products in the U.S. and in the U.S. 8 We know the manufacturers have already 9 e- mailed, and their response was they are for 10 harmonization in that product class. 11 MR. HANDZEL: Daniel, Mark Handzel 12 from 13 Xylem. Obviously, looking at the 14 charts, the RSV is not really going to contribute 15 anything to energy savings: is that right? 16 MR. WEINTRAUB: Yes. 17 MR. HANDZEL: I?m just trying to think 18 through what is the value of setting a ruling if 19 it is not really--I guess it is more for any new 20 product. 21 MR. WEINTRAUB: Yes. We are saying 22 currently right now, there is nothing below MEI 40

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 298 1 on the market that we are aware of, we are not 2 expecting to find below MEI 40 because all the 3 products are the same in the EU and U.S. 4 Yes, you?re setting a standard in order 5 to stop people from undercutting what the market 6 is right now. That?s the idea. 7 MR. HANDZEL: Even though there is no 8 energy savings. 9 MR. WEINTRAUB: Yes, we?re not going to 10 be counting on energy savings if we set a standard 11 at PER 40 or lower. If we harmonize, we?re not 12 going to be showing energy savings in our 13 analysis. The idea is how are we going to do 14 this, because it is in scope, and we want to try 15 to set a standard. 16 I am proposing the best way that we can 17 see to do this is to try and translate those 18 values. Once we give you those C values with this 19 translation factor, you, manufacturers of this 20 product, can give us feedback, whether we are 21 cutting off pumps that should not be cut off. 22 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel again from

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 299 1 Xylem. I think we would like you to tell us where 2 you think you would like that value to be and let 3 us run the analysis before we get back here at the 4 next meeting, and then be able to make a decision 5 on it. 6 MR. WEINTRAUB: Yes. 7 MR. HANDZEL: Greg, you and I are 8 probably the guys with the biggest skin in the 9 game in the room on this. 10 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 11 Yes, I agree with Mark, if you could 12 provide us with numbers. It is a matter of 13 plugging them in and getting back to you, and we 14 can move forward. 15 MR. WEINTRAUB: As long as the advocates 16 are on board, we are just trying to do our best to 17 harmonize to the EU standard, to the MEI 40 EU 18 standard. 19 MR. ECKMAN: We will try to 20 harmonize. 21 MR. WEINTRAUB: All right. They are 22 in one of the presentations that I sent to you

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 300 1 guys in tabular format, the PER C values. With 2 that translation factor, they are there, so you 3 can put them right into those tables and see how 4 it works. 5 That is one down. 6 The other issue, vertical turbine 7 submersible. In the EU, they only regulated two 8 poles, so 3,600 RPM, and I believe that is because 9 that dominates the market there, there really is 10 not a market for the four pole. 11 We collected the data on these. Less 12 than one percent of shipments in the data we saw 13 were four pole. Everything that seems to be going 14 out the door is two pole. From discussions 15 with manufacturers, if a product goes out the door 16 with a four pole motor on it, it is the same pump 17 as the two pole, it just has a different motor on 18 it. 19 There is no independent designs going on 20 there. 21 The options here, I put two options, 22 there can actually be more. What the

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 301 1 manufacturers are in favor of and what I would 2 propose first is use the two pole data only, and 3 we regulate only the two pole models, which is in 4 line with what the EU is doing. 5 The assumption is anything that is being 6 shipped out the door as a four pole, which are a 7 very small percentage, is going to be regulated by 8 windfall. The shipments are so small, you?re 9 not missing out on any energy savings in the 10 calculations because it is one percent of 11 shipments of that product class. 12 On the other hand, you could try to 13 regulate four pole by using the same C values as 14 two pole if you wanted to do that. I think 15 the first proposal would be what is here as option 16 two. I think the manufacturers have shown support 17 for that. It would mean that we would not 18 have an equipment class for four pole. 19 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. I?m 20 concerned that we not create a loophole here, 21 unless I?m not understanding this correctly, if we 22 essentially exempted four pole, someone could

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 302 1 skirt the regulation by utilizing the four pole 2 design. 3 I would be in favor of just extending 4 the two pole regulation to the four pole design. 5 MS. MAUER: This is Joanna. Dan, I 6 just wanted to ask, is there a challenge you have 7 run into? Is it a data question? 8 MR. WEINTRAUB: Good question. It is a 9 data question. Because there are so few four pole 10 shipments, no one is submitting any data on four 11 pole. We just don?t have data on four poles. 12 They are all shipped as two pole. 13 That is all the manufacturers have. 14 When we collected the data, send us your 15 shipments and the performance data with it. 16 If we wanted to go down the path, I?m 17 sure the manufacturers can pull up their two pole 18 data, I?m not sure, but we don?t have it, so we 19 have no basis for setting C value on two pole-- 20 sorry--we have no basis for setting C values on 21 four pole. That is the main issue, we have no 22 basis for setting it.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 303 1 We have a very large basis for setting 2 it on two pole because that is the standard in the 3 industry. 4 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary again. 5 I think there is very little risk in extending the 6 two pole regulation to four pole, since four pole 7 seems to be largely vacant from the marketplace 8 anyway. 9 MR. WEINTRAUB: I would put it to the 10 manufacturers to discuss. 11 MR. FERNSTROM: I?ve seen this loophole 12 thing happen before and have very unexpected and 13 adverse consequences. I?m just very concerned 14 about that, even though you point out it is a 15 minuscule problem now. 16 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 17 As a manufacturer of VTS products, in 18 our submitted data, in the last three years, we 19 have not shipped any four pole VTS products to the 20 market. 21 We don?t have a problem. The only 22 concern is utilizing one set--I?d have to go back,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 304 1 my computer is dead--utilizing the same set of C 2 values for both speeds, the concern is if those C 3 values fail at a four pole and not a two pole, but 4 the pump is designed for two pole hydraulic, and 5 all of a sudden we have to redesign to make a four 6 pole, which we never ship. 7 MR. WEINTRAUB: I?ll comment on the data 8 side of that. If we look at the C values in all 9 the other equipment classes, with your two pole 10 and four pole option, the two pole option, the 11 faster one, is generally slightly less efficient, 12 slightly less efficiency values than the four pole 13 in all of our equipment classes. 14 Yes, there could be some unintended 15 consequences of trying to use the same C values to 16 cover both. You may be removing an utility 17 from the market, something that someone wanted but 18 they no longer can have because of that. 19 MS. MAUER: This is Joanna. You said 20 the data showed the two pole models were less 21 efficient than the four pole? 22 MR. WEINTRAUB: Yes, the ones run at

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 305 1 higher speeds, so the 3,600 RPM versus 1,800 RPM, 2 the 3,600 RPM pumps, the two poles, would 3 generally have a C value that is slightly higher, 4 which indicates a population of slightly lower 5 efficiency. 6 MS. MAUER: The four pole models in 7 general are more efficient? 8 MR. WEINTRAUB: Slightly, yes. 9 MS. MAUER: I guess I don?t 10 understand the potential unintended consequences. 11 MR. WEINTRAUB: Okay. That is a good 12 point. 13 MR. FERNSTROM: This is Gary. That 14 circumstance would work in the favor of a four 15 pole. 16 MR. WEINTRAUB: You are right. You are 17 correct. I will look to the manufacturers 18 to double check that, but I think you are correct. 19 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 20 I understand if that is truly the case with these 21 products, but as you are trying to close a 22 loophole, we don?t necessarily want an unintended

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 306 1 consequence that there might be that one hump. 2 MR. FERNSTROM: I understand the issue. 3 I would ask that we investigate this 4 further to find if we can?t just extend the two 5 pole regulation to four pole, without the 6 consequence of unnecessarily eliminating product, 7 but with the benefit of avoiding a loophole. 8 MR. WEINTRAUB: There are kind of two 9 paths we can do here. Manufacturers can submit 10 us data and us report back, or since there is a 11 very limited subset of manufacturers making these, 12 if you guys are willing to put your data into the 13 calculator for your four pole pumps, if you feel 14 okay with it, let the group know. 15 Either option works. It is just a 16 little slower to have to collect data and send it 17 to us. 18 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 19 Obviously, we are another one of the 20 people in this category. We will put the stuff 21 in. I don?t have enough knowledge to give a 22 yea or nay. I don?t see an issue. We will

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 307 1 look at it. 2 MR. WEINTRAUB: Okay. I think we have 3 a consensus that you guys will go off, check it 4 out. 5 If there is no issue, as we don?t expect 6 there to be, then the proposal seems to be one set 7 of C values for both equipment class based off two 8 pole. 9 MR. HANDZEL: I just got a text. 10 We had no sales last year of four poles. 11 MR. WEINTRAUB: That is it. That is 12 our two points. That is all I have. 13 MR. BROOKMAN: Great. Alison? 14 MS. WILLIAMS: I just wanted to follow 15 up very briefly on that. I think since we 16 have made those decisions, I am thinking unless 17 someone really wants it, we will not do analysis, 18 on at least the VTS four pole, potentially the RSV 19 also, because we are basically going to say there 20 is no energy savings. If someone thinks we should, 21 let me know. 22 MR. WEINTRAUB: Alison, technically we

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 308 1 would be saying for RSV, we are setting a standard 2 at the baseline. 3 MS. WILLIAMS: Right. 4 MR. WEINTRAUB: You know that by 5 default, there is no change, because we have 6 market data that tells us that is the baseline. 7 MR. BROOKMAN: That is a good 8 clarification. Mark? 9 MR. HANDZEL: Mark Handzel from Xylem. 10 Charlie is listening on his way to the 11 airport. 12 He sent me a note that says Regarding 13 the RSV, if the regulation prevents future 14 development of non- compliant products, it would 15 seem that we should get some savings credit. 16 We kind of have to think that through. 17 MR. ECKMAN: (Off microphone.) 18 MR. BROOKMAN: Okay. I?m going to do 19 a very brief summary, and then I will entertain 20 any closing remarks. 21 Once again, we have had a very 22 productive meeting. We had detailed

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 309 1 presentation on life cycle costs, shipments and 2 the National 3 Impact Analysis. The National Impact 4 Analysis, I think, really provided a lot of useful 5 information for all the parties in the room. 6 Those presentations completed the major 7 analyses that the consultant analysis team was 8 going to complete. 9 That led to two major proposals, an 10 exchange of proposals, surrounding standard 11 setting, which was very productive. We 12 followed that with a detailed presentation on 13 metrics again, and I thought we were so close to 14 agreeing on the general architecture that I could 15 almost smell it, but we didn?t quite get there. 16 We will get there soon. 17 We talked a little bit about a summary 18 report to ASRAC that I am going to prepare. I 19 am going to at least give Lucas a day or so to 20 take a peek at it before I sent it off to them. 21 We considered some other key issues on 22 the test procedure with an eye toward thinking

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 310 1 that if this group has any potential to do so, we 2 are going to weigh in on the test procedure 3 issues, especially those that Sarah highlighted. 4 We have established a webinar for June 5 4, provided DOE can get it together and make that 6 happen. Chris has committed to send out a primer 7 24 hours in advance. 8 Just a reminder, we will be back here in 9 Washington at 650 L?Enfant Plaza, which is right 10 up the road, June 17, 18 and 19. That is 11 when we are meeting next. 12 MS. WIDDER: All three days? 13 MR. ADIN: No, just the first day. 14 MR. BROOKMAN: Just the first day. 15 Yes, 16 Greg? 17 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos. 18 Is it possible that Chris can send that 19 out by 20 Tuesday, whether we get that scheduled or not? 21 MR. LAU: Yes. 22 MR. TOWSLEY: Thanks, Chris.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 311 1 MR. BROOKMAN: Chris says yes. I would 2 entertain any final comments here before we call 3 it a day. Alison? 4 MS. WILLIAMS: We will probably update 5 our analyses on a few things, but I think unless 6 we hear otherwise or someone requests something, 7 you don?t need anything else from us, but please 8 let me know otherwise. 9 MR. HANDZEL: One last question, I?m 10 sorry. Are there any planned updates to the 11 calculator? 12 MS. WIDDER: I just received a 13 request from a manufacturer to update the 14 calculator with additional C values. We can do 15 that. Other than that, there are no changes that 16 are necessary. 17 MS. WILLIAMS: (Off microphone.) 18 MS. WIDDER: Let?s stick with the 19 calculator for now. 20 (Ms. Widder and Ms. Williams 21 conferring.) 22 MR. TOWSLEY: Greg Towsley, Grundfos.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 312 1 There was some work being done in 2 looking at the HI NEMA-- 3 MS. WIDDER: Right. Alison was just 4 saying that the C values might change based on 5 aggregating the data. The other thing I thought 6 of with the calculator which will change, I was 7 going to add the new motor efficiency. 8 Right now, it is the motor efficiency 9 that is effective today, so update the motor 10 efficiency tables and add a submersible motor 11 efficiency table. 12 Those items, I cannot think of anything 13 else at this time, but I might think of other 14 things, but if I do, I will send it out with an 15 itemized list. 16 MR. TOWSLEY: That will be V.12? 17 MS. WIDDER: Yes, V.12. 18 MR. ADIN: Why don?t we do this? 19 We will put out a list of things that we are 20 proposing to incorporate in V.12, and if there are 21 other things you guys think we should. That way, 22 we don?t end up with this back and forth.

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 313 1 MR. HANDZEL: One version rather than 2 four more coming. 3 MS. WIDDER: Yes. 4 MR. HANDZEL: Sarah, I would like to 5 get my submersible motors as part of your 6 database. 7 MS. WIDDER: Yes, please do. Everyone 8 send us submersible motor data. I?ve never had a 9 manufacturer offer it before. 10 (Laughter.) 11 MR. BROOKMAN: Thanks to all of you. 12 Great session these last two days. 13 Safe travels. 14 (Whereupon, at 2:58 p.m., the 15 meeting was concluded.) 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

### Capital Reporting Company Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee 05-29-2014

1 CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC 2 I, CHRISTINE ALLEN, the officer before whom the 3 foregoing hearing was taken, do hereby certify 4 that the witness whose testimony appears in the 5 foregoing deposition was duly sworn by me; that 6 the testimony of said witness was recorded by me 7 and thereafter reduced to typewriting under my 8 direction; that said deposition is a true record 9 of the testimony given by said witness; that I am 10 neither counsel for, related to, nor employed by 11 any of the parties to the action in which this 12 deposition was taken; and, further, that I am not 13 a relative or employee of any counselor attorney 14 employed by the parties hereto, nor financially or 15 otherwise interested in the outcome of this 16 action. 17 18 19 20 21 22

# ~J21~**INE** ALLEN Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia

(866) 448 - DEPO 

### www.CapitaIReportingCompany.com © 

### 2014 304

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 1

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 0 0.1 46:18 0.24 93:18 106:12 107:16,19 0.25 33:1 34:19 41:18,21 56:22 65:22 70:13,18 87:4 95:7 104:8 108:17 0.4 46:18 107:19 0.45 251:19 0.5 69:7 245:19 251:18 0.53 296:14,15 0.8 256:20 0.88 256:18 0.9 245:20 256:17 0.95 123:6 205:2 0.985 123:6 1 1 4:2 118:13,15 135:17 206:6,11,13 1,000 148:21 149:11,16 1,000--let?s 148:19 1,800 208:19 305:1 1.5 227:3 1:00 290:15 291:2,19 292:1,20 293:19 10 32:2 37:19 50:20 68:12 113:6,7 135:6,9 162:16 172:20 249:8,13 251:13 10/15/20 146:4

10:00 292:21 10:05 105:14 100 97:5 118:6 119:17 133:6 136:1 149:1,2,10,19,20 174:2 183:14 194:20 202:22 259:15,20 1000 1:7 104,000 235:2,6 105 4:2 10th 290:10 11 135:7,8 251:13 11:45 197:21 198:8 110 118:6 132:6,18 133:6 136:1 195:21 207:19 259:15 295:14 112 162:15 112B 194:5 199:7 219:6,16 220:3 113 117:18 12:45 198:5 12:55 198:12 120 132:6,9,15,19 133:7,9 134:1 135:20,22 195:18 1210 220:11,14,18 131.5 296:18 132 296:17 134 138:22 15 31:17 36:2,14 45:6,11,16 53:9 55:20 83:13 103:12,14 105:13 238:1 290:6 150 38:10 17 268:13 269:16 310:10 175 207:20 17th 290:8 18 156:7 268:13 310:10 19 268:13,14 310:10 2 2 4:2 118:13,17 2.5 92:14 2:25 280:22 2:58 313:14 20 23:5 38:20 40:6,10,20 45:14 67:9,12 93:15 102:16 103:11 136:15,20 154:16 156:4 162:16 183:14 221:7,8 238:1 200 97:5 206:6,11,13 213:7 226:3 238:9 2004 203:11 2007 46:21 2014 1:10 5:7 2015 46:16,17,18 50:3,7 103:21 109:1 2016 94:15 2019 50:10 94:12 103:11,13 2020 103:22 2021 94:18 2027 50:12 2040 203:9 208 225:18 21 67:12 24 293:8,10,17 310:7 24/7 146:3 240 225:18 25 46:4 47:4 48:13 83:12 113:6,7 114:16 119:16 121:13,18 126:4 156:5 177:14 186:5 194:19 195:14 202:21 210:19 212:4 219:16 259:20 25/30 109:21 250 4:4 236:10 237:13 238:2,3 275 285:5 28 56:4 93:17 29 1:10 5:7 3 3 4:4 3,000 27:18 3,600 208:18 300:8 305:1,2 3.9 208:2 3:00 28:21 268:15,20 30 38:12 46:5 47:4

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 2

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 48:14 107:3 108:14 300 27:16 173:3 177:11 32 108:4 34 108:4,5 4 4 291:18 292:19 293:19 310:5 40 36:14 37:15,18,19 38:20 41:10 44:8 45:19 46:20,21 48:12 50:3,8 68:19 70:3 83:12 108:22 109:13,17,21 113:7 162:16 183:14 212:6 297:22 298:2,11 299:17 40.6 24:11,13 278:16 279:15,18,22 280:2 40.7 24:13 429 23:12 43.8 137:9 431 172:21 44 43:6 106:9 47 136:11 4th 290:17 5 5 4:2 50 52:11 68:12 119:17 123:13 126:4 140:21 141:3,17 146:13 147:15,18 149:12,16,17 174:1 194:20 202:21 219:16 231:22 235:20 256:9,13,16 259:20 50/50 224:22 50598 164:13 55 36:14 5th 290:17 6 6 262:15 265:6 60 38:19 52:10 123:15 124:5,9,17 134:6,9 140:21 141:1,17 147:15,19,20 174:1 183:14 219:15 256:9,17 650 310:9 7 70 139:4 249:8,13 75 118:5 119:17 126:4 133:6 147:16,17 194:20 202:21 219:16 236:9,10 256:19 259:15,20 8 8:00 268:20 8:07 1:11 5:2 80 139:5 183:14 838 199:18 85 149:10,15 232:3

87 236:10 9 9 290:6 9:50 105:13 90 102:11 148:20,21 149:1,9,10,11 235:19 90.1 144:4,6 90/10 224:21,22 225:6 90/5/5 224:22 90--I149:14 94 149:15,19 95 235:7 950 270:3 98 237:3,7 240:11 9th 290:10 A a.m1:11 5:2 198:8 268:20 abbreviated 271:16 ability44:17 47:8 139:12 154:6 168:16 277:1 able 8:4,16 50:21 52:17 55:3 56:3 60:18 73:10 75:2 128:11,14 130:20 241:7 252:6 253:9,10 256:1 283:7 291:11 295:4 299:4 about--we 34:9

absence47:7 243:10 absolutely50:17 159:5 288:4,17 absorb 37:13 AC 155:9 161:18 accept 25:21 46:1 54:10 238:16 257:13 292:1 accepted164:22 accessibility 252:10 accessible13:20 61:21 accident279:15 accommodate 72:2,4 138:6 accommodates 132:13 138:13 accommodating 129:8,16 accompanies 267:9 accomplish 32:6 36:7 267:7 accomplished 166:4 191:1 accordance169:12 189:8 according188:16 account102:5 126:3,15 127:13 131:2 150:16 152:1 200:4 217:12 242:6 accounting124:19 150:15 151:16

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 3

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 242:4 accrued60:1 accuracy 167:15 176:10,22 183:20 185:16 212:19 accurate36:22 48:11 78:6 88:21 89:13 90:1 115:4 152:2,8 158:5 164:3,17 175:18 176:19 180:1,15 271:9,10 achieve33:2 35:3 68:19 achieved59:1 achieves 77:2 acquisition 162:20 acquisition--data 162:20 across 18:8 33:3 42:4 82:11 91:4,7 97:10 127:10 154:13 162:1,7,8 173:4 174:10 175:7 176:6 220:9 276:16 282:17 283:4 acted264:12 action 20:2 264:14 274:21 314:13,18 active210:16 activities 19:6 activity 9:11 actual62:4 99:5 109:4 128:10 153:1,5 160:16 171:5 175:18 176:19 182:15 203:14 225:3 actually9:9 15:7 24:16 33:2 35:11 49:10 62:6 69:14 94:13 101:11 103:15 117:2 126:19 128:18 133:22 135:9 137:8 138:7,9 140:5 142:2 144:1 148:12 151:20 153:14 157:5 164:1,7 165:3,9 180:8 184:11 192:3 202:4 206:2 210:22 216:19 217:13 227:3 233:21 234:4,13 235:22 236:4 251:12 258:16 261:2 264:5,21 269:22 271:15 274:3 300:22 actually--if

72:20 actually--without 49:8 add 42:9 60:8 62:9 85:1 107:11 140:11 158:12 165:4 206:22 213:14 214:12 272:14 312:7,10 added 159:16 208:7 263:14 adding 99:9 123:9 addition 60:12 73:18 155:3,5 157:6 162:15,22 253:15 272:11 additional 18:10

20:16 61:18 63:17 65:6 90:9,13 106:1,3,4 110:17 150:9 153:10 163:12 180:2,3 185:22 186:6 246:3 263:14 264:18 311:14 additionally 192:8 address 28:8 63:22 143:3 184:15 228:2 241:6 273:16 291:6 addressed 11:12 184:18 228:16 241:11 274:14 addressing 28:4 119:9 adequate 78:2,22 adequately283:15 Adin 2:4 7:4 10:8,10 11:11 15:3 16:16 17:22 18:3,6 19:7 24:16,22 25:7,10 27:21 28:6 59:10,13 63:21,22 99:13,14 107:9,10 129:5,6 152:16 153:5 158:17 160:7 166:8,16 168:1 170:4 174:20 179:16 181:13,18 190:16,20 219:22 220:17 221:11 232:14,15 233:16

246:1,2,11 249:13 253:13 265:5,8 266:19 267:13 269:18 274:3 278:15 279:6 282:2 284:1,7 285:19 287:1 288:22 289:9,20 292:10,16 310:13 312:18 adjusted 124:9 adjusting 205:17 adjustment232:7 administrative 27:19 admit 238:4 adopt11:16 54:4 257:13 adopted 12:12 210:14 adoption 11:13 advance 267:21 283:19 284:3 293:1,9,11,18 310:7 advanced 154:18 155:8 167:19 182:7 advantage53:10 84:9 advantages 78:2 255:8 adverse303:13 advice 163:11 171:19 269:4 advise 283:14 advising 69:6

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 4

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 ADVISORY

1:4 advocates 9:1 32:12 41:17 65:19 82:7 144:6 173:13 247:14 299:15 advocating252:22 AEDM23:16 172:21 173:1,9,16 174:15 175:1 176:7 187:11 AEDMs 174:21 affect4:4 16:2 217:5,8,11 affected 142:7 affecting 44:15 55:15 87:15 afternoon 28:14,17 29:1 268:15 afterwards 47:14 against80:12 211:2 agenda26:7 29:14 105:20 265:1 291:4 aggregate42:11 aggregating312:5 ago 13:1 51:14 247:21 agreed29:11 30:1 33:21 154:5 263:2,6 264:9 288:11 agreeing309:14 agreement9:22 10:3 227:12 258:3 280:17

ahead 18:18 20:21 66:4 73:7 93:21 115:12 128:3 129:18 152:15 159:14 172:13 190:15 192:14 197:22 218:21 247:10 250:10 252:12 263:7 AHRI 24:4 220:11,13 air24:5 63:11 airport308:11 akin 9:1 Al8:7 align 54:2 alignment

54:3 Alison 3:19 7:5 44:5 45:15 94:11 98:7,9 99:20 100:14 101:13 103:10 106:16 160:21 182:11 191:14 193:20 206:21 213:13,15 242:9 244:6 258:14 261:3,10 275:2 281:1 307:13,22 311:3 312:3 Alison?s 113:5 Allen 1:14 314:4,20 Alliance 3:8 6:17 allocate26:9 allow 31:20 64:13 65:4 179:21 181:6 276:1 allowance 172:21

allowed 47:10 160:13 173:10 allowing 65:8 78:8 155:3 168:3 175:8 233:19 allows 13:2 168:10 173:12 194:16 195:13 alluded 293:22 alluding 294:20 already19:9 41:9 49:15 74:18 86:18 90:17 100:11 130:14 131:3 139:8 157:19 158:11 168:6 172:7 180:4 184:10,20 186:8 191:7 194:5,6,7 202:1 252:15 257:15 267:11 269:6 290:4 291:19 294:1 297:8 alternative175:2 262:3 alternatives 133:13 am27:11 48:11 65:18 66:2 186:4 187:13 256:8 261:2 282:21 298:16 307:16 309:18,19 314:11,14 amended 47:22 amendment

48:1 America51:16 55:7,13 American 3:3

48:16,22 49:3 51:15 52:7 among42:8 276:1 amount 57:19 81:11 260:7 analyses 309:7 311:5 analysis 81:12 85:8 87:1 88:3 92:2 97:14 103:8 106:9 123:7 141:21 244:9,11 249:22 258:15,21 260:3 261:4,7 282:6 284:14 286:4 288:7 298:13 299:3 307:17 309:3,4,7 analysts 106:5 210:15 analytical102:18 analyze 124:15 analyzed 96:6 animal148:3 announce 289:5 annual 253:20 254:15,18,19 annualized 66:21 answer9:8 24:16 44:22 45:1 67:16 116:17,22 117:3 118:14 137:6 140:10 206:19 216:22 223:1 284:16 285:1,15 290:21 answered 9:7

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 5

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 answering 286:13 answers 286:19 anticipate29:3,10 45:7 67:10 98:5 130:20 291:6 anxious 227:19 anybody35:21 228:8 240:15 258:18 anymore246:16 anyone 106:1 111:11 153:9 215:8 224:20 241:3 260:4 261:13 284:11 any--thank

26:21 anything 10:11 11:9 20:19 27:1,5 29:7 34:2 75:21 82:14 86:5 104:17 106:6 107:11 111:12 183:3,5 240:4 286:20 288:1 297:15 301:5 311:7 312:12 anyway65:8 120:12 182:12 220:16 239:3 256:22 284:9 303:8 anywhere 37:1 apiece38:12 apologize 117:15 121:10 137:12 198:20 238:13 239:2 apparently228:5 257:21 283:1 appeared 214:8

appearing 47:4 appears 44:22 47:3 314:6 apple 88:19 apples 66:17 Appliance 1:3 2:20 6:22 applicable 12:8,21 13:18 14:15 64:7 application 52:12 75:11,16 85:15 118:3 119:15 125:10 138:11,19 139:20 142:20 221:6,8 226:18 244:19,22 252:4 255:18 259:14 applications 80:21 82:2 112:6 217:16 224:19 256:2 applied 135:3 152:5 205:13 209:3 246:21 apply80:6 86:14 96:14 173:11 240:10 255:17 259:19 applying 205:12 appreciate197:18 215:6 228:11 231:18 258:9 approach 30:20 34:22 35:1 53:3,7,10 62:1 71:16 74:5 76:16 79:17 81:9,17,19,22 88:15 115:12 134:17 152:9 154:10 158:6 164:15 173:9 182:14 187:11 202:17 208:16 209:7,15 211:13,15 219:8,12 229:7 233:3,7,12,13 241:1 243:6 246:21 264:19 approach--what 215:10 appropriate 17:4,7 205:16 217:16 219:9,13,17 227:12 230:6 232:19 240:10 271:4 appropriately 28:8 65:4 138:9 approval168:18 approved 77:15 architectural 261:16 architecture 29:15 110:13,19 120:19 124:22 126:10 242:3,22 248:22 249:9 257:9,12,14 258:17 259:1 262:2 309:14 area27:8 74:6 89:22 143:19 144:1 areas 10:21 68:22 264:13 274:2 aren?t 50:19 55:3 71:2 100:11

130:14 181:15 229:19 266:15 argue80:12 280:9 arrangement 153:7 arrive56:22 269:11 articulate170:5 articulated170:13 artifact214:18 Ashley63:6 64:1,2 ASHRAE 25:19 86:13 144:4,6 aside 52:1 239:17 asking--TSL-3 56:5 aspect58:8 88:6 167:17 218:12 231:4 274:20 aspects 72:18 223:17,18 276:22 ASRAC 1:4 2:3 16:14 26:10 29:5 262:9,14 264:21 265:10 270:8 274:11,16 275:1 277:3,18 309:18 assembled 179:1 assessment51:7 assign 12:17 assigned 12:7 assignment

275:10 associated71:22 73:17 206:15 Association

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 6

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 290:11 assume36:2 38:8,10 62:5 96:7 103:11 151:5,12 158:7 221:13 228:22 229:21 assumed95:16 120:5 151:10 160:13 245:2 assumes 252:14 assuming103:12 163:18 209:11 218:21 233:22 268:8 assumption 48:18 99:17 152:20 171:8 203:18 219:1 230:10 254:1,2 301:5 assumptions 98:2 150:20,22 151:10 171:9 176:5 215:18 230:3 231:14 254:8 287:14 assured 163:20 attempt45:16 220:8,15 223:2 attempting 46:12 attorney 314:15 authority14:12 19:9 90:11 authorize253:17 authorized262:16 automatic 162:20 available 25:1,5 37:6 61:20 71:6 112:2 120:7 151:1 152:11 154:2 157:17 159:3 171:14 185:8 186:9 201:20 204:20 211:9 224:16 225:17 231:13,20 232:21 240:1 286:14 288:10 Avenue1:7 average15:8 21:10 62:18 98:21 111:22 112:3,19 113:15 119:11 177:16 232:2,6 295:19 296:9,10,13,20 avoid 227:1 avoiding 306:7 aware 75:17 89:13 285:21 286:5 298:1 awareness 2:20 7:1 74:21 away41:13 67:22 68:8 191:8 243:5 272:5 axis 205:9 B background 88:6 95:13 96:1 backing 36:11 back-up 179:10 181:9 208:19 bad 9:8 235:10 badges 105:15 baked 43:17 balance 64:18 80:11 82:9 balancing 109:6 Baldor2:21 218:15 ball45:13 86:18 222:12 ballot24:11 ballpark 37:8,22 225:3 Baltimore5:12 bang 85:17 bar32:4 47:13 Barbour8:6 bare 34:21 65:16,20 81:3 82:6 84:6 86:4 87:17 91:22 102:8,16 118:4,21 120:22 161:1,8 182:10 190:3 200:4 208:7 226:15 234:8 242:12 245:21 256:2 280:2 base 78:11 97:12 98:21 99:6 100:18 101:3,14 102:22 103:6 256:22 based 12:16,20 15:6,19 17:5,8 31:11 33:18,19 57:21 59:18 62:6 75:12 78:11 81:14 96:6 103:19 108:11 120:5 131:6,10 132:2,20 134:5 135:14,20,22

137:3,6,10,20 138:2 147:6 151:4 157:2 164:20 175:9,16 188:3,7 189:14 199:8 207:7 214:10 221:21 224:8 232:21 255:21 275:10 307:7 312:4 baseline 44:8,10 77:19 181:4,11 235:18 308:2,6 bases 82:1 basic 12:6,18,20 15:16 16:4 19:15 23:7 163:2,17 173:3 221:2 basically31:18 36:2 37:17 45:18 52:14,15 55:6 56:3 58:10 76:6 92:10 95:20 96:14 144:12 145:14 146:2 162:14 177:10 186:15 190:8 193:20 207:14 239:21 245:10 259:7 262:21 266:6 287:20 307:19 basically--because 96:4 basically--this 14:19 basic--I257:17 basing 92:18 103:21 basis 21:6 45:9 72:6 82:11 96:14

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 7

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 178:1 244:2 278:19 302:19,20,22 303:1 bear279:8 bearing122:9 178:20,21 bears 191:3 become 51:13,20 52:2 65:12 becomes 173:5 205:19 begin 9:10 29:19 behalf 73:9 235:12 287:11 behind 180:6 be--I?ll201:1 believe 11:22 18:12 62:21 65:13 105:16 107:4 171:15 180:1 182:3 233:15 262:14 279:1 300:8 believes 254:4 Beloit2:12 6:19 22:20 161:11 beneficial163:15 257:11 267:20 benefit27:1 34:5 40:15 57:20 59:22 60:5 65:1 67:6 80:4 82:10 120:8 129:10 163:13 258:11,13 306:7 benefits 53:11 57:15,16,20,22 59:16 183:1 benefits--we 57:14

BEP 114:5 118:6 119:18 121:13,18 123:8,9 132:6,9,12,15,18 ,19 134:2 146:14 147:10,17 195:21 207:21 259:15,21 295:14 be--particularly 34:13 Berkeley3:19 7:7 besides 133:19 202:1 236:21 239:15 best18:6 21:9 23:19 40:1 76:17 78:18 201:19 233:3 254:4 255:5 274:9 295:4 296:22 298:16 299:16 bet127:2 be--this 123:19 Betsy2:5 7:2 17:19 47:18 62:21 64:4 72:3 90:6 91:15 94:7 106:19 166:9 Betsy?s 63:5 92:10 105:2 213:16 better 22:15 23:19 42:10 57:17 58:20,22 62:8 66:6 75:5,18 84:5 100:10 126:20 128:8 129:12 142:10 143:10,22 155:19 157:7,10

160:16 173:7 201:12 215:21 221:5 245:20 246:14 250:14 251:1 257:8 289:3 be--we 213:21 beyond 65:16,20 87:5 bi-annual 178:1 bias 205:3 bigger51:21 139:7 biggest10:20 289:18 299:8 bin 134:11 236:12,17 bins 131:17 213:13,21,22 bit17:22 22:10,14 37:20 39:5 56:2,9,11 70:17 75:1 76:22 77:6 83:10 95:12 99:16 100:15 104:1 108:11 112:12 133:11 137:13 142:10 164:5 173:15 187:8 201:18 203:11 204:6 216:20 221:1 236:18 247:21 249:6 250:1 258:9 269:7 295:21 309:17 Blackberry70:6 blend 85:2 blitzed 212:2 blocking 111:16 blown 284:20

blue 133:7,8 205:6,11 206:15 board 42:4 82:11 91:5,7 176:6 299:16 boat87:21 Bob 8:6 body25:19,20 bonus 267:16 272:1,15 275:9 Boteler153:18 bottom33:6 125:15 133:4 142:9 144:12 147:18,19,21 207:18 232:12 257:16 box158:2,14 193:18 brake 136:8,10 143:16 break 36:15 70:3,7,12 103:9,10 104:19 105:13,14 197:9 209:3 266:22 breaking 34:3 39:7 214:9 breakout224:16 breaks 36:3 Brent2:21 Brian 2:18 6:5 8:7 brief 7:21 8:18 29:4 59:4 96:20 105:18 151:21 232:15 281:11 308:19

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 8

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 briefly210:7 307:15 bring 14:3 69:12 217:7 228:1 276:11 281:7,15 283:13 broad-based 77:12 broader53:6 broke 198:15 210:3 broken 119:4 Brookman2:2 5:3,11,20 7:12,15,18 8:14 9:17 10:13 18:10,15 20:5,16,20 22:18 24:2,9,15,20 25:3,15 26:13,17 28:20 29:2 30:2,6,14 32:10 34:17 35:22 38:2 41:2,17 42:21 43:3,8,22 44:12 46:14 47:16 48:9 49:6,17 50:4 51:8 52:19 53:14 54:19 55:18 56:13 57:11 59:3,12 60:7,22 62:10,20 63:21 65:10 66:10 67:7 69:3,20 70:8,20 71:19 72:8 73:4,7,20 74:8,12 77:7,22 79:8 80:15 82:3,13 83:22 87:8 88:7,10 90:3,6 91:15 92:8 93:3,12,21 94:5,21 95:5,10 96:19 98:6 100:12 101:18 104:4 105:12,19 107:9,14 108:1,15 109:20 110:4,7 112:14 114:22 115:5,15,20 116:6 117:6,10 122:4,11,15 124:12 125:6 127:6 128:3 129:4,18 130:6 136:4 143:11 145:4,16 146:9 148:16 150:3 152:13 153:11,22 155:11 156:19 158:16 159:2,14 160:4,18 161:4,9 163:10 164:9 165:1 166:6 167:1 168:17 169:7 170:10,21 171:12 172:13 177:3 178:4 179:15 181:20 182:20 186:11 187:12 189:16 190:15 191:9 192:11,14,18 193:13 195:5 196:4 197:8,13 198:3,13,19 199:1,20 200:14,18 209:18 210:13 211:12,21 212:22 214:21 215:8 216:1,3,11 221:12 223:21 228:4 230:11,18 232:14 234:19 237:9 239:16 241:15,19,22

243:16 244:1 246:1 247:10,19 248:6 250:3,18 251:2,6 252:8,12 253:12 255:4,21 257:10 258:11,18 259:3,9 260:4,18 261:12 262:8 264:3,11,17 265:17,22 266:5 267:11,16 268:9 270:1 272:14,20 273:17 274:18 275:8,19 277:2,16 278:1,14 279:4,20 280:3,14 281:4,17,20 282:11 285:7 286:1,8 287:7 288:9,12,19 289:7 290:5,13 291:1,17 292:2,7,12,17 293:5,10,15 307:13 308:7,18 310:14 311:1 313:11 brought48:16 63:6 154:11 218:14 buck 85:17 budget17:17 budgeting 17:21 build 76:20 building 5:9 39:16 89:5 139:3 143:18 144:7 146:5 269:16,20,22 270:1

buildings 139:14 144:15 145:19 146:1,2 224:19 built 95:20,21 167:17 177:12 bulk29:13 263:17 291:6 bullet114:1 132:8 230:14 bullets 257:16 bunch 69:18 201:15 212:2 216:3 252:15 burden 28:4 32:8 38:16 63:17 64:19 65:2,6 128:13 129:13 158:9 165:2 167:15 170:2 175:7,17 183:8,18 184:1 185:22 burdening 51:4 burdens 180:2 183:1 burdensome 157:16 158:4 175:6 185:5 192:9 200:2 business 51:14,19 55:13 72:3 80:3 85:13 businesses 22:16 87:16,21 busy117:9 buy163:1 178:19 183:11 269:3 272:18

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 9

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 buying 251:12 bypass 35:20 C C390 162:15 199:18 C838 162:14 194:9 199:10,18 219:11 220:2,6 221:5 calculate62:4 99:5 160:20 173:19 207:10,17 253:9 296:2 calculated120:3,5 126:13,20,22 128:12,15 136:8 147:5 171:5,7,11 177:18 187:4 207:19 231:13 254:13 calculate--use 207:9 calculating60:14 215:21 253:18 calculating-- suppose 156:4 calculation 43:18 129:11 155:14,18 156:5,14 157:18 175:9 197:1 227:11 242:11 calculations 100:16 150:21 179:6 283:8 301:10 calculator124:14 130:13,15 134:14 135:12,19 136:2,3 137:8 197:4 306:13 311:11,14,19 312:6 calendar293:16 calibrating174:3 calibration 173:20 California 2:15 6:11,13,15 21:2,3 143:13 can?t36:8 52:13 99:10 149:14 211:14,17 244:13 278:17 279:9 290:21 306:4 capability44:16 capacity 38:4 163:7 183:17 capital1:14 87:19 Cappellino 2:8 6:2 34:17,18 35:12,16 51:10 54:19,20 73:4,5 74:1,11,17 79:9 83:6 87:6 95:5,6,11 98:9 117:11,14,20 137:18 138:1 140:12 145:4,5,12 148:16,17 159:16,21 181:22 182:9,18 192:19 193:1,5,12,15,19 194:10,21 capture104:10 120:10,12 130:17 219:21 254:4 captures 120:8

capturing148:1 care165:7 221:7 258:14 Carrying207:8 case8:9 25:12 64:8 68:10 69:1,5 70:12 78:13 90:19 97:12 98:21,22 99:6,7 100:18 101:3,15 102:22 103:6 119:19 122:19 127:22 128:2,4,16 132:10 133:10 134:5 136:12 139:6 140:20,22 142:16 157:15 165:13 200:1,2 203:1 208:13 209:12 234:8 237:3 250:9,11,20 254:1 284:22 305:20 Case(via2:10 cases 75:13 76:11 102:11 175:16 176:7 223:7 categories 33:3 38:11,15 41:16 42:12 72:18 97:8,10 155:9 217:19 225:8 category 34:15 38:6 97:5 106:11 306:20 caucus 8:22 9:1,5 32:13 71:18 282:4,14 286:16 caucuses 8:19 30:9

56:17 276:1 cause 39:20 cautions 89:12 cautious 237:1 CCE 23:10 CCMS 13:7 center 46:10 centers 145:22 146:1 certain 21:4 67:21 86:8 179:2 certainly 22:6 23:21,22 27:11 39:7 53:17 61:4 67:21 71:17 77:11 83:14 144:13 146:13 153:4 155:9 156:11 165:10 167:13 199:12 201:20 215:16 217:19,21 273:11 275:7 276:11 278:20 284:22 286:18 CERTIFICATE 314:1 certification 12:5,19 13:7 23:9,11 170:9 certified 12:9 13:13 14:14 61:16 151:4 169:4,18 170:6 188:3 189:7 191:7 226:19 certify13:2 169:2 188:20 190:13 314:5

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 10

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 certifying12:19 188:2,6,15 189:14 cetera75:12 251:16 CFR 172:20 234:7 challenge 46:1 52:6 54:17 201:16 203:4 204:21 206:4 283:7 289:18 302:6 chance18:12,17 210:10 change 45:2 48:5 69:17 94:9 101:16 102:21 106:18 123:14 213:12 219:3,5 236:15,16 244:5 249:11,21 273:14 278:11 287:4 308:5 312:4,6 changed 113:5 203:17 changes 28:12,13,18 37:20 45:1 150:18 203:16 216:15 223:15 261:6,7 311:15 changing 99:6 103:22 112:12 219:15 254:11 characteristics 15:20 16:2 17:5 41:5 161:20 162:6 163:4 223:11 characterization 48:11 charge186:4 Charles 2:8 Charlie 6:2 34:17,18 51:8,10 54:19,20 73:4,22 74:1 77:8 79:8 82:4,18 83:1 84:17 85:13 95:5,6 96:20 117:7,10 137:18 139:15 140:11 145:4 148:16 159:14 181:20 192:11,18 194:3 308:10 Charlie?s 58:18 84:2 107:1 149:9 chart95:9 201:15 charts 32:7 297:14 chase 255:5 check 25:8 134:16 305:18 307:3 checklist266:16 chime265:19 choice60:2 75:18 168:13 170:8 176:1,21 choices 60:4 75:4 140:21 choose42:2,8 140:22 147:2 168:12 226:22 227:4 257:6 266:22 chose 141:17 chosen 31:14 Chris 70:11 287:7,8,19 292:22 293:5,17

310:6,18,22 311:1 Christine 1:14 314:4,20 Christopher3:13 Chuck 8:8 268:16 circulate291:5 circulator225:7 264:1 circumstance 305:14 circumstances 19:20 CL 116:11 117:17 244:15 259:13 clarification 43:11 94:8 107:15 181:19 189:12 308:8 clarified 41:8 100:14 103:20 187:19 clarify20:5 48:3 61:13 94:12 99:13 100:1,13 107:21 170:20 286:9 clarity163:12 170:22 class 107:20 267:1 296:22 297:4,5,10 301:11,18 307:7 classes 40:8 41:3 91:1,8 105:3 294:4,15 297:6 304:9,13 classifications 239:21

clear40:4,12 65:12 78:17 82:10 91:16 98:12,17 111:4 112:13 113:16 115:19 133:13 166:5 167:7 174:12,14 176:6 183:8 185:11 204:8 213:1 214:18 234:5 248:14 261:9 280:7 clearly30:22 35:13 41:11 47:5 82:17 84:4 122:6 129:10 137:4 158:5 clearly--we61:8 clients 69:6 close5:22 29:18 32:3 37:1,17 79:9 183:22 187:15 269:21 296:21 305:21 309:13 closed 39:11,18 40:9 97:19,20,21 118:16,17 closely54:1 closer43:22 56:8 197:6 closing 308:20 closure9:14 56:16 105:8 cluster252:10 co 146:2 coalescence269:7 Coasters

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 11

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 291:20,21 coffee 105:17 cognizant42:6 87:18 271:19 coin 30:12 collaboratively 74:4 colleague218:15 collect 64:22 158:22 230:9 306:16 collected169:11 236:12 300:11 302:14 collecting236:14 238:22 collection 239:7 column 236:9 237:6 columns 61:18 combination 163:8 229:17 combinations 28:3 161:17 175:5 combine 209:1 comes 21:1 28:6 57:10 78:15 106:6 127:1 132:16 295:6 comfortable 110:18 150:8 257:19,22 260:15 269:12 278:21 287:16 coming 27:4 54:9 68:17 90:8 108:21 242:1 244:17 268:10 290:4 313:2

comment 16:20 18:1 20:9,12,21 44:6 52:22 54:21 59:8 100:9 105:2 108:17 127:22 129:3,7 159:3 206:1 211:13,14,18 215:8 227:21 243:17 275:3 279:4 304:7 comments64:22 106:1 110:5,17 113:19 115:21 130:3 164:11 186:14 187:18 202:2 222:2 243:3 276:14,17 279:7 311:2 commercial5:5 39:16 90:14 139:3,14 145:19 175:13 224:18 Commission 21:3 143:13 commissioning 143:15 144:14 commit 293:4,8 committed 310:6 committee 1:4 209:7 266:10 common26:2 39:6 68:3 139:2,9,14 264:19 communicate 75:17 255:13 communicated8:2 companies 27:3 37:13 49:9 55:1,2,5,15,17

74:18 83:11 company1:14 2:18 6:7,13,14,15 51:22 68:19 79:20 company?s 71:12 compare 211:5 252:7 254:5,19 296:10 compared 65:1 155:15 235:18 297:5 compare--we 296:1 comparing 126:6 253:16 comparison 74:14 109:19 211:19 comparisons 153:21 256:1 compel160:9 compete271:10 competition 88:5 competitive88:3 complaints 14:6 complete 69:17 176:13 237:4,5 291:5 309:8 completed 309:6 completely27:22 54:12 130:15,20 278:18 283:7 complex 93:10 97:11 complexity90:2 159:17,18 compliance

12:8,18 13:7 19:13 20:1 23:11 24:7 31:21 85:20 86:2 90:10 91:2 94:13 255:19 compliant14:14 112:4 117:18 118:11 119:9,12 122:2,17,20 123:8 125:15 142:11 200:3 204:15 228:21 229:17,22 308:14 complicated 10:5 28:3 89:10 132:3 135:10 160:3 175:6 179:10 192:17 204:6,12 212:20 216:21 complicated--no 200:21 complies 12:21 118:12 comply84:21 86:7 87:22 93:8 159:22 complying 41:9 64:6 component51:6 73:3 189:1 274:7 comprehensive 271:13 computer304:1 concentrate 276:22 concept 15:15 38:17 67:13 148:11 220:16

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 12

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 concepts 79:15 conceptually10:3 248:6 concern 21:21 22:22 35:18 36:16 164:5,7 171:4 233:2,11,13,16 255:7 258:7 286:6 287:2 303:22 304:2 concerned237:21 238:7,10 255:6 301:20 303:13 concerns 22:7 31:1,9 256:4 258:19 287:20 concise179:17 conclude 263:8 concluded 313:15 condition 137:20 138:6 251:15 conditioning 24:5 63:12 Conducting 188:22 conference262:15 270:4 conferring311:21 confidence 141:7,8 178:7,13 configuration 134:7 confirm28:20 106:11 160:4 268:13 292:12,13,17,19 293:18 confirmed116:7 164:7 confirming240:8 292:7 confused 18:21 20:1 114:5,7 121:9 293:5 confusing 94:16 113:8 117:5 246:12,13 248:18 confusion 39:20 connects 59:6 consensus 246:6,20 247:1 258:10 264:4,5,16 266:11 294:12 307:3 consequence 306:1,6 consequences 303:13 304:15 305:10 Conservation 2:14 6:21 conservative108:6 152:21 155:14 156:15 160:15 205:7,20,21 207:6 236:22 consider16:21 44:7 55:17 88:21 92:20 110:18 133:21 134:12 186:7 202:14,19 205:22 217:14 222:9,11,17 224:5,11 226:22 227:9 240:16 255:3 273:11 considerably

27:19 consideration 199:14 226:12 considered16:9 84:12 134:3 222:18 236:20 239:18 247:5 309:21 considering 94:19 193:18 202:3 206:10 215:2 221:20 considers 58:6 consistency231:2 consistent118:7 120:8 254:14 260:6 consistently135:3 254:18 consists 178:17 consolidation 51:19 constant89:3,4 111:21 112:6 113:12 114:10 117:1 118:1,3 122:7 217:20 244:20 247:6 259:14 constantly136:20 constituencies 276:2 constrained 104:21 constraints 91:19 105:5 construct 122:12,14 250:18 262:5

constructed 176:15 consult203:6 276:1 consultant285:13 309:7 consultant/DOE 286:12 consultants 3:12 39:4 43:5 86:19 95:12 288:15 consultation 7:21 consulting 32:11 71:4 139:11 262:13 283:12 consumer 57:13,14,16,19,2 0 58:1 60:2 65:22 67:2 72:15 80:9 109:6 246:14 consumers 13:21 58:3 60:4 82:10 255:13 consumption 15:21 16:1 59:17 60:15 253:20 Cont3:1,2 contain 187:20 contains 188:4 191:17 content 282:12 continue 4:2 57:17 227:9 238:22 243:10 262:1 269:8,10 280:18 continuing 224:4

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 13

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 contour10:4 contractor71:4 contribute297:14 contributors 77:10 control72:14 81:10 84:10 89:2,4 113:11 138:3 143:9 184:2 219:9 245:1,6 256:14 273:8 control--if

134:19 controlled 121:19,21 125:9,13 127:11 217:15 controls 112:2 120:1,3 121:1 223:6 242:5,7 254:21 259:18 273:12,14 conversation 8:18 88:14 90:8 172:1 230:19 conversations 171:4 conversions 124:16 convert 204:7 247:8 converts 222:16 cooling 146:3 cooperation 269:7,9 copper225:13 copyright25:13 Corp 3:6 Corporation 2:17 5:19 6:3 correct43:9 45:4 93:1 94:10 104:13 134:7,8 166:21 220:20 245:11 265:6 269:17 305:17,18 correctly63:5 66:16 104:9 249:3 301:21 correlation43:7 cost43:2 67:4 69:14,16 75:6,7,11 83:17 89:19 191:2,3 252:18 cost/benefit76:17 costs 44:16 76:12 77:18 92:7 309:1 couldn?t91:5 190:17 243:16 285:22 Council2:14 6:21 counsel2:6 7:3 314:12,15 counter275:21 counterbalance 50:18 counterparts 54:6 counterpoint 275:21 counting 298:10 country282:17 couple 39:3,11,18 40:9 117:3 119:5 120:14 129:1 132:4 136:5 162:12 185:8 194:3 197:1

210:12 211:4 285:5 coupled 118:17,18 course16:21 65:10 275:8 Court314:20 cover24:5 82:1 90:15 221:9 261:17 279:18 282:8 284:8,9,12 304:16 coverage226:14 covered90:17 146:6 172:6 180:5 226:17 229:1 231:7,21 232:1 233:8 240:21 262:22 282:10 covers 175:4 206:7 create11:3 17:16 52:3 209:2 229:9 301:20 create--actually 213:10 creates 146:18 creating42:15 180:18 228:8 credibility71:22 77:17 credit41:18 65:21 242:7 308:15 crept 46:22 47:3 criteria263:5 critical173:2 215:15 278:20 cross 36:10 42:13 48:18

crosswalk

46:3 crowd 198:1 CSA162:14 194:9 199:10 219:10 220:2 cubic 200:8,14,18 201:2,14 206:18,20 207:3 cue 10:13 curious 95:22 97:6,10 current 46:14,17 47:2 131:14,22 150:21 275:10 current--in 131:14 currently 28:10 96:8,12,16 97:16 98:1,2,19 103:3 135:5 136:2,3 193:11 229:1 297:22 curve108:14 120:6 132:11,13 133:3,4,5,22 136:21 138:2,5,12 140:1,2,3,17 142:9,12 147:10,13 148:6,11,14 152:4,6 153:6 154:7,13,16,17 155:1,7 157:4,6,14,17 158:7,8 160:10 161:2 163:18 165:5,18,20,21 167:17,22 168:12 180:7 182:3,4,6 183:16

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 14

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 184:21 187:4 191:8 197:3 200:4,9 202:9,18,20 203:14 204:14 205:1 206:14,15 207:7,9,15 208:15 209:2,12 213:12 216:3 217:14 218:9 227:13 242:6 259:19 curves 126:15 137:21 140:7,8 152:19 153:1 154:20 155:5,6 157:1 159:10 162:8 164:2 172:10 182:4,15 197:3 202:5,7,14 208:19,21 209:5,8,15,21 210:2 212:12 213:4 214:14 215:9 216:4 218:7 223:8 227:15,17 cushion 139:6 custom81:12 253:2 customer67:5 72:17 74:20 75:3,14 76:8 77:13 78:11,21 79:3 81:2,20 102:9,12 141:1,7 143:8 144:22 251:20,22 customers 40:1 66:16 75:17 78:10 89:17 138:1,12 251:10 cut82:10 255:4 295:8 298:21 cutoffs 249:14 cutting298:21 cycle75:6,11 309:1 D D.C 1:8 5:8 Dan 2:12 6:18 18:15 22:18,19 27:12 46:3 96:22 100:2,9,12 118:14 146:9,10 153:16 154:3,4 159:15 161:9,10 164:9,10 166:21 167:1 168:7 171:13 172:13,14 175:1 177:4 186:12,13 192:2 194:2 195:5 198:19,20 209:18,19 211:12 212:22 215:3 216:19 217:1,17 220:1 222:1,12,22 223:21 227:15 240:22 258:14 270:15 276:6,7 281:2,6 288:20 293:20 302:5 Dan?s 113:6 168:17 215:15 244:8 Daniel3:16 7:8 41:7 297:11 darn 255:22 data13:8,11,15 19:14 31:12 43:13 46:21 49:3 60:13 61:19 63:1 64:5 66:13,15

89:16 132:21 137:6,10 145:22 146:1 151:1 153:8,10,13,15 159:20,21 163:21,22 165:10,12,13,15, 16 166:1 168:4 169:3,11,18 170:8 172:11 174:3,7 180:2,10,18 181:7 184:9 185:8,11,14 188:13 189:13,14 200:7,16 201:2,15,19,21 202:21 203:6,20 204:5,20 205:5,6,8,10 206:9,21 209:1,10 210:22 211:1,8,16,19 212:17 213:8,11 214:18 215:13 221:18 224:15 225:3 227:16 230:5,9 231:13 232:21 236:3,5,12,14 237:15 238:21,22 239:7 240:1 255:17 272:12 300:11,12 301:2 302:7,9,10,11,14 ,15,18 303:18 304:7,20 306:10,12,16 308:6 312:5 313:8 database 11:3 13:19 61:14,17 63:15 178:21 204:21 205:10 211:9 313:6 dataset 45:16 294:17 data--they

189:13 date 90:10,13 94:13,19 238:17 263:1 269:16 289:7,12 dated 201:18 203:11 dates 91:2 290:13 day5:5 7:20 9:12 105:17 162:12 243:21 260:17 263:14 268:14,17,19 280:22 309:19 310:13,14 311:3 Daylight290:15 days 162:12 266:7 268:22 269:1 275:11 280:10 310:12 313:12 dead--utilizing 304:1 deal27:22 46:20 55:6,12 80:14 dealing 24:7 102:18 179:18 273:20 decide 228:21 267:5 268:11 decided 152:2,3 decides 154:8 decision 16:14 22:1 230:15,21

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 15

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 234:13 288:6 299:4 decisions 126:8 307:16 deck 111:11 210:5 231:2 239:3 281:14 287:13 293:1,8 decrease142:2,3 148:13 decreasing126:16 dedicated270:4 deem65:5 77:12 deep 14:20 150:4 default101:14 134:19 135:2 152:4,6 154:7 157:4,13,14,17 161:1 163:18 167:16,22 168:12 172:10 179:6 180:7 182:2,6 184:21 186:8 191:8 196:13 200:1 202:13 218:8 229:10 231:11 233:14,17 242:5,6,12,14 308:5 defaults 212:13 define 154:17 167:10 176:1,4 defined 73:11 75:8 111:20 160:14 177:1 182:7 190:1,2 defines 123:2 172:19 defining 118:1 175:19 definite 218:1,5 223:5,10 definitely41:6 145:3 233:12 268:2 293:21 definition 117:14 163:3 definitional 263:4 definitively 278:17 degree21:4 Delaney2:12 6:18 18:16 22:18,19 96:22 100:13 146:9,10 154:4 155:3 161:10 164:10 167:2 168:7 172:14 177:6 186:13 194:2,11,13 195:8,12 198:20,21 199:2 209:19 210:11,18 211:4,10,14 213:1,6 217:17 218:12,20 219:5 220:6,13,21 222:1,6,22 245:15 276:7,20 deliberate274:12 deliver89:15 90:2 270:7 deliverable 267:2 270:8 deliverables 266:10 delta101:16 demands 50:18 demonstrate 176:18

denominator 112:9 117:12 229:18 Department1:3,7 2:4,6 12:9,19 13:11 14:4,6,10,11 20:13 88:3 163:13 175:6 176:16 181:16 Department?s 179:20 departments 31:2,20 51:5 depend 261:4 dependent289:11 depending 108:5,13 138:10 139:22 140:1 162:16 223:12 244:19,21,22 266:22 depends 15:3 141:6 146:15 deposition 314:7,10,14 depth 37:5 97:22 110:14 116:18 derive62:17 derived 96:21 describe125:6 126:12 183:4,6 described 92:22 187:3 208:22 describing 186:15 187:6 188:5 description 26:22 design 2:11 32:15 42:19 59:20 60:19 68:1 69:6 96:5 99:8,20 136:6,13,17,19 137:20 139:9 140:6 141:8,11 225:10 253:2 302:2,4 designed 47:2 52:7,9 80:19 81:2 96:17 143:3,17 199:13 239:22 304:4 designer140:14 designing 38:18 59:15 68:7 80:18 140:20 designs 41:3 58:20,22 300:19 desire175:17 despite 10:4 detail11:8 112:8 116:22 122:2 127:18 210:10 228:16 243:19 273:6 detailed 35:7 72:6 92:2 120:17 157:1 241:5 308:22 309:12 details 130:1 219:20 228:15 273:20 details--a187:7 determination 48:4 175:2 230:14,16 determine 15:13,16 21:5 47:21,22 64:12

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 16

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 121:1 123:4,7 131:13 135:15 165:17 166:1 201:9 203:14 208:8 229:16 232:18 279:19 determined 90:12 98:4 120:16 121:19 122:21 132:20 135:12 147:8 150:19 151:4 152:12 156:1 196:18 197:2 201:13,15 231:10 257:6 determined--in 135:11 determining 131:8 228:20 detrimental122:9 develop 31:3,5 79:15 172:10 224:11 227:13 284:21 developed 188:7 192:7 194:9 developing 22:1 60:17 127:12 191:11 development2:11 21:16 308:14 devote85:22 Diagnostics 2:11 dial145:12,14 dictates 177:10 didn?t10:20 34:5 38:22 39:22 65:5 94:9 107:10 123:18 126:12 157:19 211:12 213:10 217:7 239:11 259:8 269:14 272:12 279:20,21 283:5,10 288:1 309:15 Diego 6:14 difference 31:13 34:14 124:9 149:22 156:3 186:15 187:9 216:21 218:7 232:5 235:21 236:1 244:8,11,12 249:15 252:9 295:13 differences 52:12 100:22 221:2 different11:2,22 13:10 23:14 33:17 34:4,11 40:8 41:4 56:17 59:18 60:15 62:14 64:13,15 66:19 70:7 75:4 80:21 86:7 89:1,2 90:18 91:1,2 97:5,8,9 105:4,8 111:2,3,5 112:5 114:6 119:16 127:13 129:8,16 140:6 157:2 161:16,19 162:2 175:11,14 182:22 195:22 202:6,7,8 208:21 210:1,2 212:3,11 213:13,21,22 214:8,17 217:4 221:4 222:7,8 239:9 241:11,12,14

251:11 252:7 254:20 256:1 296:8 300:17 differentiate 248:5 differently223:3 different--we 202:4 differing 16:1 difficult18:1 121:17 143:5 145:7 178:8 difficulty290:22 digging 286:7 Digital314:20 diligence 25:18,21 dimension 245:9 dire 138:21 direct95:3 296:7 directed264:1 direction 52:5 67:18 68:5 115:6 116:7 314:10 directional 171:1,3 directly71:2 253:8 disadvantage 154:11 disagree116:4 181:6 238:11 disciplined 22:10 discontinue 228:10,12 discount58:3 107:13 discounting 107:6 discourage129:12

discrepancy156:9 discrete131:17 discuss 4:2 28:16 34:16 115:19 125:8 127:18 128:22 182:19 184:22 196:19,21 201:3 234:15 241:7 262:2 268:8 277:11 303:10 discussed 16:22 21:18 29:11 90:16 118:1,5 119:5 133:14 151:15 156:10 196:12 242:5 244:14 248:10 263:6 264:22 272:7 281:13 discussing 10:18 28:15 242:13 248:20 278:18 279:13 294:21 discussion 29:8,19,20 30:10 33:5,16 37:3 43:17 53:19 56:19 59:4 61:14 74:9 83:8 100:19 103:19 104:2 105:20 108:20 109:8 110:21 121:12 127:16 133:1 152:14 163:11 169:15 170:21 172:16 178:9 182:19 197:14 198:16 202:10 213:4 217:10 230:7,21 232:17 240:20

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 17

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 260:7 269:10 287:17 discussions 35:7 111:1 219:21 251:18 277:15 300:14 dishwasher 252:17,19,21 display 163:22 distinctive 41:4 distribute 25:14 distributed 38:9 distribution 175:13 distributors 235:8 divided 149:15,16 diving 150:3 doable 83:18 document

25:11 DOE 7:2,4 10:8 11:1,12 12:3,17 15:15 16:17,20 17:16 19:4 20:2,6 24:21 25:16,17 39:15 50:10 54:4 58:6 60:17 62:22 72:1,2,3,4 75:21 77:15 80:1 88:4 91:19 102:19 128:20 131:6 165:2 166:16,17 169:16 170:7 175:4 178:14,21 184:20 185:13 187:20,22 188:3,4,7,16 189:8,14,18 191:16 193:10 201:16 228:10 231:14 232:21 235:2 252:20 255:15 265:15 266:15 267:5 278:6,11 285:2,14 286:10,12 289:4 290:12 292:12 293:18 310:5 DOE?s 11:20 16:13 118:12 131:14 151:1,2 191:16 203:4 229:1 267:21 288:5 doesn?t28:11,13 36:13 58:21 70:4 73:12 75:20 102:21 120:11 121:16 128:5 134:19 135:1 138:20 144:12,19 158:12 160:5 217:8 241:13 249:21 279:18 284:10 294:18 dominates 300:9 don?t10:10 11:9 16:1 18:11 19:19 25:10 26:11 30:11 33:11 34:8 35:6,9 40:15 43:20 45:19 47:22 56:15 58:16 60:20 66:14 70:4 86:17 87:19 116:4 120:10 122:7 124:22 125:1 129:11 130:19 137:4 140:10 141:18 145:7 149:6 157:22

158:18,22 160:8 163:7 166:12 168:11 172:8 174:16,18 176:8 178:15 179:3,9 180:1,2,3 181:1,11 186:5 187:6,7 190:12 195:14,20 196:2 207:22 209:9 211:13 213:11 215:1,16 216:16 221:7 223:2 224:15 225:3 226:22 228:9,14 231:9 232:20 235:15,16 236:2 237:11,13 238:11,19 240:3 241:19 246:15 253:8 260:10 261:10 265:14 268:22 269:3 272:5 274:21 276:3 277:8,12 278:22 280:9 281:17,19 282:6 283:18 286:6 289:13 291:3 302:11,18 303:21 305:9,22 306:21,22 307:5 311:7 312:18,22 done 19:21 25:19,21 29:12 47:13 56:1 66:1 68:19 76:19 77:1 87:1 88:9 125:4 135:15 136:8 144:15 162:8 167:14 171:9 173:20 176:3,9 187:13 191:9,10 192:3 204:19

220:22 230:4 236:13 239:7 251:21 268:21 272:1 278:18 282:5 283:8 293:2 312:1 done--if 162:19 door78:16 196:2 270:2 293:13 300:14,15 301:6 dots 205:6,7 206:15 double 32:2,3 305:18 doubt84:8 Doug2:2 5:11 8:10,13 10:12 24:18 26:6 74:2 90:5 110:2,9 206:19 242:21 250:9 260:10 268:2 271:22 282:2 288:22 Doug?s 85:1 Douglas 3:3 do--we 283:10 dozen 275:15 draft231:3 dramatically 148:14 222:7,8 drastic156:9 drinks 272:18 drive 28:12 71:10 72:13,22 84:13 88:19 89:4 95:20 100:5 120:10,13,18 127:11 145:10

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 18

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 178:18 190:3 199:14 217:13 218:22 219:8,13 220:8,15,19,21 222:15,19 223:16 driven 143:7 148:9 driver81:7,10 drives 86:15,17,21 89:2 98:15 103:4 drop 83:15 149:18 244:4 dropping 37:18,19 292:5 drops 212:5 duck 90:20 due 25:18,21 103:9 137:2 294:8 duly314:7 duration 106:19 during 294:7 duty216:14 218:1 E eager192:12 earlier58:19 74:2 182:11 202:10 208:22 216:20 242:9 248:10 250:13 253:14 256:10 early7:20 197:22 272:1,17 ease96:9 easier51:22 286:10 easily61:20 96:15 162:7 163:3 251:19,21 252:5 East291:20 Eastern 290:15 291:2 292:21 easy38:9 61:19 145:9 194:4 echo 108:16 Eckman 2:13 6:20 32:14,19 34:8 35:6,13,17 41:22 43:19 44:2 46:2,9,16 57:11,12 58:18 63:8 83:22 84:1 85:6,11 87:7 104:20 106:15 201:5 262:14 265:1,4,7,12 286:2 299:19 308:17 ECM128:5 159:9 208:15 209:10,12,16 215:2,5 223:11,19 ECMs 202:13 economic 42:5 57:13,14,16 economics 74:21 Edison 3:5 6:13 18:14 educated76:9 209:11 education 77:11,13 80:1 EEI 66:12 69:22 72:9 80:16 87:9 93:4 101:20 108:2 113:22 116:9 123:11

124:22 129:20 130:1 134:4 141:16 142:15 155:12 171:21 190:7 224:14 243:13 246:22 251:8 256:6 273:18 EER 251:14 effect11:7 42:15 50:10,12,15 159:9 effective 60:19 75:2 80:7 173:10 255:22 312:9 effectively168:5 295:20 effects 57:21 96:17 efficiencies 152:9 161:13 162:4 173:9,12,19 174:10 175:19 183:10,19 184:11 186:22 192:20 194:5 195:9 199:4,5,14 203:15 220:9 223:16 228:22 236:11 efficiency3:8 6:17 8:22 22:2 32:12 34:21 49:4,10,12 50:1 62:13 65:17,19 67:14 75:10 79:13 80:7 82:7 84:6 95:16 96:5,8,9 97:6 98:14 99:1,3,4,6,7 100:4 102:3,20 103:1 119:13 120:10,13,18

122:20 123:2,4,7 126:16 127:9 131:11 147:6 148:1,3,7,11 149:5 150:17 151:3,5,8,22 154:12 157:1,6,13 158:3 162:22 163:5 166:2,19 167:19 171:10 174:8 175:2 183:17 184:20 185:3,7,11 186:10,19,21 187:5 189:9 191:17 193:2 200:6 202:21 203:3,16,18 204:5,7,16 210:2 212:5,8 217:13 228:2,3 229:8,10,13,22 230:16 231:8,10,15,20 232:1,2,20 233:20 234:6 235:11 244:12 294:3,16 295:4 304:12 305:5 312:7,8,10,11 efficient77:19 99:18,22 100:3,8 148:22 149:3,11,12 229:11 233:19,21 245:11,17 253:6 267:17 295:17,21 296:6,16 304:11,21 305:7 effort27:19 36:6

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 19

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 57:4 80:5,6 282:18 efforts 164:14 267:22 Eight48:8 either9:2 48:4 91:4,7 131:5 168:11 175:4 223:11 250:7,8 265:17 290:6 306:15 either/or160:6 elaborate77:10 electric2:21 3:5 6:12,14 18:14 52:10 264:7 electrical111:22 138:8 225:11 electricity89:20 element14:2,10 elements 19:14 64:5 165:9 186:7 elicited168:18 eliminated135:21 eliminating306:6 else 20:19 51:6 76:13 79:21 80:9 82:15 104:17 106:6 138:22 159:22 164:4 178:20 183:4,5 225:9 238:14 255:8 265:16 275:22 311:7 312:13 e-mail283:9 emanate 178:12 emanating 228:6 emphasize134:18 262:19 emphasizes85:5 employed 314:12,16 employee 314:15 employs 134:14 enable 64:11 74:14 76:4 enable--we 179:21 enclosures 214:16 encourage92:1 126:21 154:20 174:5 224:1 272:9 Encourages 85:6 endorsement 153:22 energy 1:3,7 2:4,6 3:8 6:17 8:22 15:20,22 16:2 20:14 21:3 32:12 33:2,7 35:8 44:15 49:10 59:17,18 60:1 62:13 64:14 65:19 66:21 67:3 73:11 74:4 75:7,18 76:5,10,12 78:6 79:4 80:8 81:4,13,18,21 87:1 88:17,22 89:9,18 92:4,6 95:20,21 96:13 98:11,13,21 101:17 103:6 107:5,11 109:6 112:20,22 125:12 141:13 143:13 172:5 190:5 232:19

245:17 246:12 251:15 252:1,18 253:19,20 254:15,18,19 255:12 256:21 257:4 297:15 298:8,10,12 301:9 307:20 enforce19:9 enforcement10:15 11:17,20 12:3 17:17 18:22 19:3,5,8 20:2 22:9 23:11 26:22 61:14 169:16 engineer71:4 139:11 141:10 144:18 engineer?s 141:7 engineering 31:2,19 51:5 84:18 85:21 105:5 engineers 79:11,12,14 139:3 enormous 31:19 ensure 64:6 129:16 180:15 237:4 240:12 ensures 173:14 ensuring 15:9 171:6 entertain 308:19 311:2 entirely18:4 112:14,16 envisioning 61:16 EPACT 101:5

equal58:13 251:22 271:11 equality47:6 equally118:8 119:1,10,18 122:17 125:10,16 129:17 248:12 259:16,21 equals 155:14 249:16 equate103:12 equated 126:5 equates 93:18 equation 118:22 119:8,13,20 120:19 121:5 122:3,21 123:1,14,17,21 124:15 151:14 165:22 201:4 204:7 211:17 248:22 250:7 257:18 equations 113:6 117:22 121:2 124:8 125:21 126:2 equipment

40:8 90:14 138:7,14 156:13,14 175:4,12,13 188:19,20 294:15 297:6 301:18 304:9,13 307:7 equivalent46:5 equivalently234:8 Erica3:14 7:16

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 20

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 error 203:8 215:20 especially 72:10,16 81:1 102:9 134:1,12 145:19 151:1 236:17 272:3 310:3 essential274:7 essentially 15:18,22 24:19 59:14 60:13 78:7 107:17 119:10 125:11 132:10 147:8 155:8 167:9 171:13 173:18 196:1 203:22 204:1,9 205:14 221:7 228:14 229:12 257:13 281:12 301:22 establish 20:8 47:20 133:17,18 181:8,11 193:21 220:9 233:17 255:19 257:6,11 258:2 289:7 294:3 established 20:6 25:18 57:2 169:12 199:22 221:22 224:7 226:10 260:2 267:12 290:14 291:19 310:4 establishes 190:4 establishing 19:9 74:13 178:10 181:2 185:21 estimate43:14 62:1,8 73:11 89:22 96:13 139:6

estimated108:7 estimates 72:7 89:19 144:20 estimating 66:20 145:13 estimation 78:6 et75:12 251:16 EU45:20,21 46:5,12,14 47:6 49:12 50:3,7,14 51:2 68:20 108:22 118:7 122:22 123:7 246:22 295:1,5,11,22 296:22 297:4 298:3 299:17 300:7 301:4 Euro 54:1 250:12 Europe 32:1,5 48:20 51:17 52:11 68:18 124:3 250:12 European 31:7 41:9 48:15 49:4 51:17 54:6 68:10 Europeans 53:4,7 evaluate14:13 64:16 78:3 215:3 236:18 269:2 evaluating 77:16 evenly38:8 event277:7 everybody

26:20 40:13 52:2 71:5 80:13 95:8 185:14 225:5 257:16 269:11 276:21

everyone5:4 65:13 105:16 110:15 161:11 163:6 166:5 176:5 226:7 255:7 272:3,9,20 287:6 288:10 313:7 everyone?s 74:15 everything16:21 51:6 52:1 76:13 79:21,22 80:9 97:14 113:4 159:22 200:21 225:9 243:21 248:18 249:7 283:15 300:13 everything--if 124:8 everywhere 143:19 exact 208:19 225:22 exactly 27:10 85:7 92:21 102:15 104:7 112:8 120:18,19 136:1,3 170:12,13 181:2 185:15,16 186:16 example 10:15 27:7 39:16 41:11 52:9 62:9 65:18 95:15,19 133:3 137:7,10 138:17,18 141:17,19 146:13 148:18,19 149:10,17 162:10,14 177:9

208:17 254:10 256:10 264:6 267:12 268:11 examples 135:14 147:15 Excel13:9 except 118:16 120:20 158:7 exceptions 15:5 exchange309:10 excluded 263:3 exclusive 75:22 excruciating 228:16 exempted 301:22 exist45:10 174:19 189:9 191:22 existing63:15 185:20 exists 192:2,19 expand 194:6 expanding 84:20 expect 218:6 236:15 265:9 307:5 expectation 21:7,11 63:20 292:18 expected210:20 expecting298:2 expert 144:3 expertise197:16 experts 163:14 explain 39:14 57:7 explaining 187:10

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 21

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 explicit135:18 227:17,21 explicitly226:9,12 exploration 74:7 expressed246:8,9 extend306:4 extended34:22 35:1,14 44:18 53:2,7,9 58:19,22 59:7,16 60:3 62:1 63:14 65:14 68:20 71:10,15 74:5,19 76:15 77:19 79:5,16 80:2 81:17,19,20 82:5,12 84:2,6,20 85:2,15,22 86:6 87:3,12,20 88:14 95:17 145:8 164:14 170:18 178:16 182:13 217:3 219:8,12 extending302:3 303:5 extent 44:17 59:1 166:10 267:3 287:3 extra55:22 136:10,22 158:12 183:8 184:1 extrapolated 135:22 161:22 162:7 extrapolating 187:1 extreme 148:18 149:10,17 extremely144:16 281:11 eye309:22 F face 5:22 22:1 205:17 FACILITATOR 2:2 facing 158:20 fact10:4 14:14 126:3,15 145:6 146:17 147:12 150:17 158:3,8 176:18 192:4 203:11 232:18 237:1 240:12 245:14 249:6 factor88:1 104:1 127:12 140:19 201:11,12,13 205:2,12,13,21 207:11 208:5 240:11 298:19 300:2 factors 58:6 69:18 96:14 143:18 147:7 223:17 factor--yes 200:11 fail 180:20 251:5 296:16,17 304:3 failed 16:8 180:13 295:16,18 failing 296:11 fails 296:3,4 fair 45:19 232:16 235:11,13 fairly42:5 44:3 57:18 75:2 77:12,13 86:15 124:17

faith 169:7 fall 160:12,18 170:2 235:3 falls 123:7 familiar18:22 25:16 112:7 220:2,3 278:3,8 families 39:4,8 127:14 161:19 162:1,9 family41:7 127:8 162:1 fan 221:1 fancy66:1 fashion 77:2 fast290:4 faster304:11 favor164:17,19 168:10 250:20 301:1 302:3 305:14 favorable 218:10 favorite 218:16 favorites 80:20 feasible 69:9 121:15 feature20:2 Federal1:4 96:8 97:2,9,17 100:20 101:10,22 102:20 163:19 feed 270:22 feedback 135:20 202:16 209:6,14 210:1,9,15 214:13 215:4,15 227:8,17 230:8 239:4

240:15,16,22 241:3,13 242:4 249:2 260:20 261:20 262:10 265:9 271:18 272:22 275:6 298:20 feel10:21 31:18 39:22 57:3 71:7 110:18 127:16 150:7 260:15 266:8 268:3 270:15 306:13 feeling 266:13 feelings 277:9 feels 164:16 felt32:4 190:17 Fernstrom2:15 6:10 20:20,22 42:21,22 62:11 63:4,9 65:3 71:20 73:8 77:7,8 82:3,4 91:11,18 93:19,22 115:10,11 127:6,7 128:9 154:11 178:5 192:15 214:22 222:14 274:19 301:19 303:4,11 305:13 306:2 field 35:19 49:11 62:7 146:18 fields 13:10 286:12 figure 32:21 47:10 74:3 76:20,21 107:18 182:1 252:17 285:19 figures 96:21

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 22

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 final 47:20 48:6 94:14 95:3 110:4 311:2 finalize 4:4 29:16 financial 282:5 283:2,13,20 284:13 285:3,10 290:21 financially 32:8 283:6 314:16 fine 87:14 114:21 130:5 194:11 216:4 259:3 fingertips 213:11 finish 28:15 272:17 finished 24:19,20 first15:14 18:15 30:13 47:17 51:8 73:6 93:6 111:12 129:3 132:1 143:22 153:11 165:12 194:10 230:14 260:17 273:12,15 281:15 294:14 297:2 301:2,15 310:13,14 fit175:7 206:18 five 36:11 38:7,11,14 40:7 45:1 47:11,14,16,17 90:12,13,21 91:6 92:12,18 93:11,14 94:17 103:20 106:18 137:13,14 145:20 167:11 177:10,11,12,17 183:21 191:12 213:22 235:9 262:9 281:11 fixed 75:5 143:2 flat140:2,3,7 159:10 flattening 212:7 flatter108:10 flexibility 63:13 269:9 flip 30:12 floor232:8 flow 114:5 118:6 119:18 121:18,20 133:4,17 134:2 135:16 136:15,21 138:20 139:7 207:21 259:16,19,21 flows 114:2 Flowserve3:6 5:18 43:4 104:5 focus 49:10 68:20 83:10 144:14 196:13,22 215:1 226:6 241:9 271:20 focused 166:18 220:18,22 222:4 226:8 focusing 85:3 folks 90:10 184:4 257:19 292:3 footing 271:11 footnote 155:13 footprints 55:2 force22:9 foregoing 197:14 314:5,7 forget70:14 forgetting161:7 forgive 75:1 forgotten 266:1 forgot--we97:19 form67:17 68:5 77:2 279:8 formal 275:3,6 format 241:11 300:1 formatted 13:9 Forrestal5:8 forth 37:3,21 54:15 56:14 109:12 173:21 260:12 275:14 312:22 Forty56:7 68:14,15 Forty-five 198:1 forum284:17 287:17 289:4 forward 25:5,12 54:18 94:20 111:15 116:19 224:4 227:9 241:2 247:3 258:15 280:13 286:11 294:13 299:14 forwarded 25:5 foundries 31:3 fraction 203:21 204:1,4 fractional205:9 208:6 frame39:10,17

40:9 50:14 frames 33:4 framework

73:17 131:15 180:9 192:6 227:11 Franklin 237:13 frankly 55:11,15 74:19 76:16 79:11 free 14:3 283:5 frequently25:17 Friday 260:22 290:7 friendly 168:15 friends 92:1 front9:3 79:2 120:13 176:4 199:17 frustrated54:7 full 6:1 9:14 102:1,2 119:21 131:8,9,10,20 147:5 151:3,5,8,22 152:4 157:3,12 162:12 166:19 182:2 184:20 185:3 186:20 187:5 188:22 191:16 200:9,12 201:10 204:3,10,16 205:16 207:21 208:4 231:15 257:7 283:10 284:19 288:7 296:13 full--how 39:14 fully 104:6 187:8

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 23

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 268:22 function--a 212:4 fundamental 276:4 future 68:2 143:1 146:7,17 203:10 219:21 308:13 G game35:15 115:12 143:5 232:13 299:9 gaming142:22 143:4 181:10 Gary 2:15 6:10 20:20 21:15 42:21 62:9,10 70:22 71:19,20 73:5,7 77:7 80:1 82:3,4 90:4 91:11 93:19 104:9 109:5 115:10,11 127:6,7 128:4,9 154:10 177:5 178:4,5 192:11,14,15 194:21 214:21,22 215:6 222:14 252:22 274:18,19 301:19 303:4 305:13 Gary?s 129:7 159:10 Gas 6:12,14,15 gate47:9 gather98:8 gathered201:16 gathering153:10 gauge 83:18 geared73:2 gears 293:22 Gen 2:6 general7:2 29:15 49:11 67:13 94:1 109:22 110:13 115:6 118:15 120:19 124:21 125:12 126:9 129:21 130:12 133:21 140:13 143:13 209:7,15 211:13,15 217:14 227:11,12 228:2 231:11,16 234:7 236:8 240:22 246:6 247:1 253:4,5,7,10 295:1,7,20 296:5 297:2 305:7 309:14 generally11:19 12:4 15:15 57:12 243:6 304:11 305:3 generate43:1 generated24:10 184:22 185:12 206:14 207:7 Generating 202:20 generic209:2 generically154:21 210:11 gentleman 228:5 gets 117:9 139:19 160:3 235:17 278:11 getting18:21 20:1 35:9 53:6 58:21 74:7,20,21 78:12 79:2 87:4 105:7 114:7 115:12 116:10 130:1 140:4 143:21 166:13 176:22 181:22 188:12 199:4 217:3 275:12 287:20 299:13 gist295:1 given 12:5 75:16 79:13 93:7 131:16 196:12 232:20 234:9 314:11 gives 43:7 105:1 253:4,6 giving 27:3 72:11 168:8 215:12 global41:8 44:7 51:13,20,22 52:3 55:1,3 294:22 297:5 glory118:22 goal32:20,22 33:8 35:3,7,8 42:2 57:1 76:4,5 130:16 goals 77:2 gone 74:13 257:15,18 259:5 261:12 263:4 280:8 Goodman 63:11 gotten 234:16 graduate201:6 granted21:5 279:2 graph 200:16

206:4 graphs 212:1 great 8:14 9:17 28:5 29:16 30:4 83:22 92:7 122:1,16 130:10 196:8 210:4 239:13 240:6 241:1 268:11 282:11 307:13 313:12 greater 167:22 251:5 greatly 258:14 green 70:9 133:8 205:6 Greg2:10 3:10 6:8 8:9,12 69:1,3,20 124:12,13 128:2,3,9 135:4 144:3 234:19,20 250:10,18 260:12 283:9,18 284:19 285:7,8 290:1 299:7,10 303:16 305:19 310:16,17 311:22 ground 152:12 237:17 group 1:4 5:7 10:22 15:21 16:6,9,12,18 20:9 25:6 29:4 53:1,5 54:2 61:8 79:19 92:11 94:1 115:6 125:1 130:18,22 197:15 222:21 243:9 247:16 254:4 257:12

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 24

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 258:3 260:13 261:20 262:17 263:11 264:11 265:11 266:20 267:4 269:5 270:8 271:20 274:6,12 275:6 277:4 278:5 279:12 284:14 289:10 297:3 306:14 310:1 group?s 202:16 grouped 15:19 16:3 groups 61:3,10 86:13 growth 140:20 Grundfos 3:11 6:8 124:13 135:4 234:20 235:12 285:8 299:10 303:16 305:19 310:17 311:22 guess 9:12 41:19 55:19 79:2 86:18 92:19 103:5 114:4,6 123:20 136:5 139:18 169:14 170:1 177:4 209:20 217:18 223:1 232:10 235:4 260:11 261:18 278:7,11 284:1 297:2,19 305:9 guessing 140:22 guests 83:4 guiding 61:5 guy186:11 237:11 guys 14:22 20:19 27:13,15 30:22 35:2 37:4 57:9,22 60:21 69:8 76:4 79:18 86:20,22 106:13 126:19 136:22 137:5 143:20 158:12 159:13 168:13 184:10 215:16 216:6,9 238:19 247:16 250:12 269:14 273:1 286:3,6 290:20 299:8 300:1 306:12 307:3 312:21 H hadn?t116:3 half 9:21 10:1 28:22 29:1 38:13 143:16 225:12,14 289:19 hand 29:6 73:6 208:11 237:7 301:12 handle 15:1 68:6 128:12 hands 59:9 144:21 Handzel2:16 6:4 8:12 10:14,17 14:17 16:10 17:15 18:2,5 20:18 21:14 24:13 26:6,20 28:5 30:13,15,16 32:18 33:13 34:12 36:20 39:2 40:14 41:6,19 42:20 45:4,12,18 46:7,17 47:5,17 49:1,7 50:16 53:15 56:7,21 60:22 61:1,22

67:15 68:14,16 70:17,21 82:16,21 83:2,3,6,7 85:1,7 86:10 88:9 92:9,17 93:2 94:6,7 99:1,21 102:14 103:18 105:11 106:7,8,16,22 107:8 109:10 110:1 115:22 122:5,6,13 137:22 139:1,21 141:5 144:2 145:10 151:9,16 153:11,12,20 159:20 170:11 171:2 195:10,16 215:11 216:5 225:2,6,19 226:5 237:9,10,21 238:10,15,18 239:19 248:3 260:9,19 261:1,10 263:20 264:9,15,20 265:2,20 266:4,6 267:14 268:1 269:13 277:20 278:2 283:3 284:6,19 286:17 287:19 288:17 289:15,22 290:9,20 291:9,14,22 292:4,14 297:11,17 298:7,22 299:7 306:18 307:9 308:9 311:9 313:1,4 happen 20:10 35:20 58:17 69:14 80:5 86:2 144:11,12 252:19 292:6 303:12 310:6 happened 46:22 48:20 happening--47 137:9 happening--if 228:9 happens 127:5 141:4 happy28:9 150:10 288:5,6 hard 231:17 293:3 harmonious 247:1 harmonization 35:17 46:11 49:20,21,22 50:19 52:1,22 53:12,17,22 54:11 55:11 58:14,16 108:21 109:16 296:21 297:3,10 harmonize52:15 295:5 298:11 299:17,20 harmonized 54:12 250:17 hash 121:7 hasn?t203:17 hate 126:22 have--I137:4 haven?t21:15 29:7 55:9 123:16 155:22 174:20 234:16 239:14

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 25

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 263:6 272:6 having 25:21 35:20 45:11 62:16 69:8 71:21 77:15 78:2,22 84:9 95:18 113:2 117:8 129:11 142:2 201:5 246:12 He?s 144:5 201:5 head 76:2 133:4 183:17 256:8 head--90 149:15 headed 116:7 230:18 heading 163:11 264:16 heads 37:22 115:8 168:18 hear58:15 69:2 150:9,10 193:6 216:8 311:6 heard 20:3 24:11 30:22 31:6 72:2 104:9 150:16 171:12,17 172:9 182:3,21 184:8 202:10 239:14 255:22 272:21 hearing88:14,15 150:12 171:22 314:5 heating24:5 heavily172:18 help 21:17 27:6 44:19 53:12 61:10 71:8,15 77:14 143:3 148:18 201:21 268:5 276:5 helped 149:7

helpful 23:6,18 25:4 27:9 56:11 60:11 66:22 73:21 91:16,20 109:18 173:7 187:18 199:22 206:5 266:9 270:16,20 271:5 276:8,15,16 helping 67:1 79:6 163:14 helps 77:16,17 Henry2:18 6:5 8:7 here?s 29:10,11 75:5,11 117:22 124:19 133:3 262:22 263:2 hereby314:5 here--just190:2 here--let?s 147:14 hereto 314:16 hertz52:10,11 123:14,15 124:2,5,10,17 219:15 he's 270:16 hesitant10:1 hey52:14 107:19 174:1 Hi21:16 23:22 24:10,18 37:17 52:20 63:2 234:22 235:2 247:16 312:2 HI?s 25:13 hidden 273:4 high 41:12 44:10,13 69:11,19 167:15

235:9 higher38:17,20 40:21 43:1 44:9,11,19 47:2 49:4 56:1 67:20,22 68:7 70:18 81:13 87:2,14 103:5 127:1 132:12 134:1 145:21 154:12 155:14 171:6 205:11 210:20 256:22 257:7 305:1,3 highest68:17 134:11 205:8,10 highlighted 310:3 highlights 271:17 hire 12:14 hit58:4 136:18 195:7 hold 22:3,5 278:11 home252:17 homework

22:15 37:5 honest40:16 honor292:15 hook 180:13 hope 98:8 127:12 292:18 hopeful 263:16 hopefully 8:15 197:6 209:5 272:13 291:6 hoping 156:8 163:10 187:13 horizon 268:7 horse 225:12 238:9 horsepower127:8 132:4,18,21 134:6,9,10,11 136:9,10,16,18,2 2 140:21 143:16 144:9 146:14 147:2,3,15,18,19 ,20 148:20,21,22 149:1,2,16,19 162:2 206:6 213:6,7,13,22 214:5,11 226:2 227:3 236:7,10,12,17 237:14,22 246:8,10,13 247:8 256:9,16,17,19 Hotel270:2 hotels 63:10 hour66:21 198:3,4 262:8 282:18 hours 89:20 116:12,14 247:9 254:2 293:8,10,17 310:7 house 252:19 Huber8:7 huge 9:18 58:2 108:7,12 235:21 268:21 hump 306:1 hundreds 55:5 hurt88:4,5 HVAC 28:2 175:13

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 26

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 hybrid 187:3,10 hydraulic 2:10 34:1 53:20 96:4,7,18 123:3 278:3 304:4 I i)?s 114:6 I?d 53:1 62:11 150:10 209:14,21,22 242:21 288:4 I?ll19:5 28:18,22 32:14 73:2 108:5 116:12 150:2 167:17 231:22 235:19 236:1 238:4 256:12 260:21 272:18 282:2 304:7 I?m9:15 18:21 19:8 27:14 28:9 29:5,6 32:10 36:14 48:12 49:18 51:9 70:15 74:22 75:21 76:1 80:11 82:14 86:8 88:9,13,14,15 90:7,8 93:19 97:6,10 107:1 111:13 114:4,6 115:12 116:17,18 120:4 126:18 129:1,3,4 130:4,8,11 132:3 136:14 137:5,15 140:22 141:1 150:14 153:16 154:2 155:13,16,17 163:10,18 166:21 169:1,14 171:22 177:4,5 181:5,6 183:3,8 187:16 191:20 192:12 193:5 194:21 196:12,22 205:4 216:13 220:2,3 224:10 227:20 229:15 230:7,13 232:3 236:21 237:11,14,21 238:10,18 239:15 244:16 251:12,17 252:2,4 254:11 255:4,9 256:4,10,11,14 257:1 261:5 265:5 268:10 270:18 271:9 280:14 281:20 285:20 294:9 297:17 301:19,21 302:16,18 303:13 308:18 311:9 I?ve 7:21 56:1 69:5 171:12 172:15 182:20 211:16 303:11 313:8 idea 17:3 23:13 95:18 115:3,18 143:22 154:2 156:17 160:7 180:6 270:6 271:1 280:5 298:6,13 ideal9:16 158:6 ideally72:16 ideas 41:20 identical15:22 54:5 119:21 142:13 167:2

identified 220:4 identify 270:21 identifying 19:12 identifying-- obviously 263:21 IEEE 162:15 165:6 219:4,6,16 220:3 illustrate 148:18 illustration 197:14 I'm249:2 imagine169:20 276:15 immediately45:20 95:8 impact 37:11 42:5 43:6 49:14 72:19 82:9 87:3 98:4 101:16 106:9 108:7,12 111:6 149:8 171:10 194:22 200:5 309:3 impacted 106:17 107:5,6 impacts 57:15 83:11 87:21 109:5,7 impeller 139:7 144:8 145:6,11 implement11:1 156:18 212:21 Implementation 4:2 implemented 135:18 137:7 important 53:16 58:7 60:9 62:17 85:4 100:16 101:2,4,7 150:16 189:12 199:15 219:20 241:5 268:4,6 272:3 273:19 274:20 277:13 imported 231:21 impose153:9 180:2,3 imposing168:3 impossible 120:1 121:17 impressed 83:2 improve86:3 improved 84:10 154:19 167:18 203:17 improvement

82:8 84:19 improvements 98:14 improving85:16 Inc 3:9 incentive 81:5,8,9,14 incentives 72:12 include 190:4 229:18 273:6,8 274:11,13,17,22 277:3,17 included 21:20 114:4,8 125:3 226:8 275:7 includes 13:17 including 110:19

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 27

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 208:8 inclusive 190:3 incorporate 120:18 130:19 153:2 167:20 312:20 incorporated 126:9,11 130:15 165:10 incorporate--let?s 154:18 incorporation 25:2 increase65:17 90:1 154:14 increasing78:10 incremental77:18 Independence 1:7 independent257:9 258:16 300:19 in-depth 267:19 270:17 index 113:1 115:3,9,16 125:12 126:2 243:18 244:7 246:4,14 249:3 250:13,15 258:1 indicate 214:5 indicates 207:2 274:16 305:4 indicating 210:6 individual 133:17 257:22 276:1 individually83:10 individuals 9:4 25:16 56:18 168:19 induction 154:15 155:7 167:22 182:5 202:11 209:2 210:21 217:20 218:9 223:12,19 industrial2:9 3:6 5:5 138:19 139:15 224:19 industry2:7 3:2 14:11 23:20 28:7 32:9,16 33:8 42:19 51:19 63:12 65:5,15 71:18 82:10 92:1 101:3,9 164:21 167:13,21 168:10 194:1 220:7 221:1 235:5 270:20 271:3,15 294:19 303:3 inefficient 126:4 inflated 170:1 influence 145:2 influences 197:20 inform 201:21 information 13:12,17,20,22 14:3,9 17:1,11 28:9 60:18 61:9,15 64:17,19 72:17 73:1 75:3,9,14 77:11,12 78:2,4 79:1 90:9 104:20 109:3 113:3 131:12,21 133:12 137:5 157:20 158:18 159:1 170:13 173:11,17 176:11,17

183:13,16 184:3 185:2 229:9 251:20 253:1,2,5 262:22 270:19,22 271:3 309:5 informed287:6 inherent59:14 168:2 170:9 253:22 254:9 initial 40:18 41:22 42:18 43:17 111:17 initially 115:18 in-line 39:18 40:10 input 16:19 17:14 28:7 29:9 111:22 112:3,19 113:15 119:1,4,11 122:18 123:5 132:5 133:22 135:13 147:9,11,16 149:13,19,20 156:11 158:1 208:7,8 223:15 270:20 271:5,15 278:9 287:4 input/output 167:5 inputs 287:14,21 insert272:16 inside 98:12 insight57:9 95:13 199:1 insights 106:4 installed 86:21 144:7 instead 47:1 103:17 107:19 113:6 133:15 174:6 184:9 250:21 Institute2:10 3:5 18:14 34:1 53:20 278:3 insulation 216:18 217:4 integrated73:16 178:17 intelligent76:6 intend 263:8,17 intended 239:2 273:6 intending 262:21 intent42:19 233:15 intention 262:19 interactive284:17 289:2 interchangeability 39:5 interest 40:1 56:18 76:15 78:14,18,20 104:17 204:3 interested35:14 65:14 66:17 81:2 92:4 166:3 199:9 203:7 288:16 314:17 interested--if 66:15 interesting74:6 142:20 210:21 211:6 interim58:21 261:22 274:5,10

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 28

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 internal111:1 164:21 260:20 285:12 internally56:12 international 46:13 internationally 58:11 interpolate133:15 165:22 195:6 interpolated 183:15 interpolating 195:9 interpolation 196:3 interpret 250:8 interpreting255:9 interrupting93:20 introduce 18:12,16 introductions 5:13 inverter 216:14 218:1,4,6 inverters 223:6 investigate14:6 306:3 investment70:2 Investor6:11 invite 285:12 288:15 inviting 285:15 involved 16:12 involvement

61:2 278:20 IOUs 2:15 is--?FX 203:22 is--I?m202:1 is--if 284:2 is--let296:12 isn?t42:14 55:12 73:9 81:20 83:19 86:16 96:11 138:5 139:18 148:2 178:21 212:4 236:4 Isn't273:22 issue 42:14 52:4,16 125:2 143:4 168:2 178:10 179:17 196:16 233:1,3 234:1 240:4 245:4,5 248:9,20 257:3 258:8 263:22 279:1 294:1,2,10,14 295:6 300:6 302:21 306:2,22 307:5 issues 4:4 57:8 91:3 160:22 185:9 241:10,17 242:3,18,20 243:20 244:17 245:13 248:8 261:17 263:5,7 272:2 277:11 288:18,20 294:5 309:21 310:3 is--well187:6 is--you 51:12 it?s 11:8 14:16 19:1 25:10 33:11,12 36:6 40:4,18 41:9 43:17 51:6,11 56:7,9 63:17

79:19,20 80:22 81:10,11 85:8 87:12 92:12,19 97:13,20 98:11,16 99:1,9,20 100:5,9 102:12 103:16 107:20 108:10 109:6,16 114:9 115:3 121:15,17 122:8 130:12 133:10 135:8,9 137:11,17 139:2,22 140:2,12 142:19 143:5 144:16 151:16 167:2,7 174:2 182:18 187:3 191:20 193:10 195:16 196:17 203:8,10 210:18 213:2 214:17 215:12 221:3 223:3 224:22 225:4 232:1,16 235:22 244:7 246:9 252:16 258:7 265:8,14 269:22 270:1 280:22 item105:19 158:2 173:5 196:15 265:1 itemized 312:15 items 28:19 29:2 31:10 130:17 173:5 241:4,5 270:18 271:2,14 272:11 274:17 276:10 279:14,18,21 312:12

ITT 2:9 6:2 34:19 51:11 54:21 74:2 95:7 137:19 J January46:17,18 103:21,22 Jay3:6 5:18 8:7 43:3,4 51:9 52:19,20 104:4,5 Joanna 2:19 6:22 48:2 49:17 50:17 51:11 52:21 53:15 60:7 61:12 108:15 109:11 146:22 165:3 168:20 181:21 187:12 191:10 277:8 288:12 302:5 304:19 Joanna?s 62:12 job 76:19 79:1 Johnson 3:14 7:16 join 8:16 July269:2 jump 40:20 69:2 111:10 142:17 277:1 jumping218:21 jumps 211:6 June 260:17 262:14 265:6 268:12,13,14 269:15 282:10 290:6 291:18 292:19 293:19 310:4,10 Justice88:3

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 29

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 K key31:9,10 65:3 77:10 309:21 kilowatt66:21 116:12,13 247:9 knew 10:19 61:7 62:3,7 67:19 68:12 115:5 knowledge 237:12 306:21 knowledgeable 57:21 286:22 known 176:2,5 284:4 Kohl2:5 7:2 47:18 48:7 90:5,7 91:14 92:16 93:1 94:10 L L?Enfant 270:2 310:9 lab 7:7,11,17 12:15 label4:3 59:21 111:6 130:9 labeling 23:8 76:3 89:7 261:21,22 262:7 280:19 281:9 Laboratory 3:15,18,19 labs 188:20 lack 201:12 Lacking 224:10 landed 58:5 152:14 language 47:19 large15:5 26:1 57:19 138:6 142:19 150:1 254:19 294:18 303:1 largely29:10 265:13 303:7 larger55:1,15 68:22 138:13 140:4 141:21 142:2 147:3 largest 294:14 last8:3 9:18 10:18 24:11 30:17 37:7 51:13,18 60:10 77:17 79:13 82:17 108:11 110:14 115:16 152:8 172:16 173:8 199:3 211:4 213:22 221:13 227:22 230:19 246:5 247:13 250:11 268:16 281:13 303:18 307:10 311:9 313:12 latches 59:6 later28:21 100:15 114:20 119:14 152:7 184:22 234:15 240:17 242:19 latitude 21:4 Lau 3:13 287:8 288:4,11 291:3,13 293:3,7,14 310:21 Laughter32:17 82:20 83:5 91:13 94:4 169:9 192:13 194:12

200:22 201:7 210:17 213:19 272:19 275:16 279:16 285:18 313:10 launched 292:19 launching 9:10 Lawrence 3:19 7:6 laying 105:3 191:20 LCC 98:22 lead 21:15 291:15 leadership 53:2 lean 226:4 leaning 289:1 290:16 leap 169:7 learned 96:2 learning 48:19 least21:12 42:7 47:12 64:14 92:3 93:8,11,22 116:19 157:16 162:11 200:1 223:1 229:11 234:2 238:20 307:18 309:19 Leave155:21 led 309:9 leeway91:9 legacy52:6 legislative 91:19 leisure 281:14 length 210:8 272:7 less 42:10 59:18 80:7 94:2 148:4,5 149:4 165:2 176:2,11,22 218:2 220:2 233:18,21 235:9 245:9,17 258:15 275:14 295:17 300:11 304:11,12,20 let?s 26:18 38:8,9 80:22 83:16 105:12 114:12 117:6 127:15 149:9 155:17 162:19 164:21 167:21 173:12,15 186:11 194:10 195:2 197:21 198:3,13 208:15 249:19 259:1,9 260:16 262:9 289:7 311:18 Let's 5:3,12 letter 88:4 258:1 letters 252:10 level35:19 36:2 38:20 42:16 43:10,14 45:6,11,16 46:5 47:2,9 49:4 50:20 56:1,5,6 58:13 67:14,22 68:7,17 69:11,12 70:2 73:12,13 97:7 101:5 107:17,20 108:19 109:2,17 113:13 146:18 185:21 230:17 266:21 269:9 levels 4:2 11:15 34:10 43:10

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 30

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 44:19 45:2 49:12 50:1,14 67:10,20 69:19 96:6 97:4,7,11 101:8,17 103:13 146:14 164:17 167:21 231:8 249:13 267:1,8 270:7 294:3,16 295:4,11 leverage79:6 Li201:9 204:1 lie 263:7 lies 145:15 179:11 life 75:6,11 122:9 309:1 like--I?m95:15 likely8:10 17:8 290:13 limit 38:19 84:7 226:19 229:13 238:5 limitation 224:7,13 limited79:11 238:4 306:11 limiting217:9 226:12,13 line 13:1,3 33:6 61:14 67:14 85:2 93:9 119:3 123:13 133:8 142:14 144:12 145:20 154:8 168:15 214:3 271:2 301:4 linear132:20,22 133:12,14,19,22 135:14 linearally133:6,15

lines 33:10 42:1,22 70:9 161:15 174:11 175:8 187:1 linkage 74:8 list32:11 90:18 241:19 264:13 266:9 267:6 270:14 271:12,13,16 272:9 273:9,13 276:18 279:14 312:15,19 listed 29:3 90:17 listen 265:21 listening 66:3 265:18 286:13 308:10 lists 271:2 lists--if 72:4 literally28:2 232:8 literature207:1 229:8 235:5 237:4 254:22 litmus 278:9 little 14:19 17:22 18:21 22:10,14 29:8 37:20 39:5 49:19 56:1,9,11 70:17 75:1 76:22 77:6 83:10 84:18 95:12 99:16 100:15 104:1 108:11 110:12 112:12 114:4,7 122:1 133:11 137:13 142:10,11 161:16 164:5

173:15 177:7 187:8 201:18 203:4,11 204:6,11 209:11 210:20 216:20 218:7 221:1 232:10 236:18 247:21 249:6,22 258:9 262:17 287:13 288:3 295:21 303:5 306:16 309:17 lives 54:11 load 4:5 59:19 60:15 62:4,7,15,16 64:12 66:20 70:22 71:14,21 73:10,18 75:12 78:5 89:20 102:1,2,5 110:19 111:21,22 112:6 113:11,12 114:10,17 117:1 118:2,3 119:15,21 120:20 121:2 122:7 123:5 125:7,9,16 126:1,2,16 127:12 128:17,18,20 131:8,9,10,14,20 144:9 147:6,7,9,12 150:21,22 151:3,5,8,22 152:4,9 153:15 154:13,19 155:1,4,6,7 157:1,2,3,12,20 158:3,7,8 159:10 160:10 161:13 162:4,13 163:4

164:2 165:5,10,16,18,1 9 166:2,11,19,20 169:21 171:16 172:5 173:9 174:8 181:3,7,8 182:2 183:10,15,19 184:10,20 185:3,7,11 186:19,22 187:5,21 188:5,7 189:9,15,19 190:21 191:11,16,17 192:20 193:1 194:4,6,14,15 195:7,9,10,11 199:4,5,13 200:9,11 201:8,9,10,12,13 ,19 202:5,21,22 203:1,2,20 204:2,3,10 205:9,16 207:2,9,13,17,22 208:4,5,6,9 213:2,3,5 214:17 217:20 218:22 219:1,6,16 222:3,6 223:8,17 227:11,13 231:15 244:20 245:2 247:6 252:14,20 257:7,15 258:20 259:1,5,14,19 260:1,5 261:4 295:14 loading 64:13,15 100:7 118:5 119:16 126:8 130:2,10 148:5

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 31

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 150:18 151:6 200:5 203:16 205:19 loads 151:11 load--sorry

113:11 local51:15 located146:2 locus 46:10 logical67:19 logistical7:22 263:12 logistically268:10 292:11 long 24:1 34:1 35:15 50:13 53:18 94:3 288:9 299:15 longer44:20 94:2 304:18 loop 79:9 loophole 42:15 301:20 303:11 305:22 306:7 lose 26:11 215:1 loss 102:5 126:15 148:2 151:13 152:4,6,18 153:1,5 154:7,13,15,20 155:1,4,6,7 157:3,4,13,17,20 158:3,7,8 160:10 161:1 163:18 165:5 167:3,8,16,22 168:12 172:10 178:10 180:7 182:3 184:21 185:3 187:4 191:8 194:4 197:3,11 200:4,9,11 201:12,13,19 202:5,7,9,13,17, 20 203:21 205:8,9 207:9,15 208:5,6 213:12 217:14 222:3,6 223:8,17 227:11,13 240:20 losses 4:5 111:8 118:20 119:5,21 123:9 126:11,13 127:16 128:6 129:2 131:9,14,20 142:8,13 147:5,6 150:15 151:6 152:1,4 166:1 169:21 178:11 179:3,5 182:2 188:6,7 189:15 199:13 200:10 201:10 204:2,3,6,7,10,1 7,22 207:2,10,22 208:4,14 217:13 227:20 228:19 240:21 243:4,7 257:7 272:12 losses--the157:12 lost59:4 66:9 81:21 lot10:3,17 11:2 30:17 34:13,20 35:10 42:13 46:21 51:19 52:16 54:12 55:2 57:20 72:11 78:9 80:4,5 84:19 86:11,13 89:18 97:9 109:3,8 136:21 138:12 144:17 170:22 175:3 176:2 185:6 196:10 200:7 208:21 212:5 237:12 261:5 263:12,22 270:9 272:2,21 275:11 277:11 278:4 282:12 287:10 292:5 296:1 309:4 lots 33:4 34:22 35:20 78:4,22 125:21 143:18 253:1 loud 74:22 Louis 3:7 6:16 35:22 36:1,22 38:2 39:3 40:5 44:13 45:13 48:9 55:18 66:4 67:7,15 77:22 80:18 93:12 103:9,18 107:14 108:17 114:22 125:20 136:4 139:2 143:11 144:3 150:17 163:16 164:11 169:1 172:8 216:11,12 217:7 221:12 224:2 247:10,11 252:12 253:13 255:14 266:1 268:11 270:4 280:3 low 126:4 235:17 lower40:11 42:17 59:17 103:6 147:16,17 155:17 210:5 236:7 245:10,16

250:13 251:1 256:20 298:11 305:4 lowest109:2 210:19 231:20 232:6,11 235:20 Lucas 2:4 7:4 10:8 16:10 20:15 24:15 26:21 29:6 59:8 61:13 62:21 63:21 99:14 107:9 129:4,5 152:15 154:2,6 158:16 163:3 166:6 170:12 174:18 179:15 181:5 190:15 220:2 232:14 246:1 253:12 254:16 261:20 262:13 265:17 266:16 278:14 282:22 283:9 288:21 309:19 lunch 197:9,21,22 198:14,16 199:1 200:1 luncheon 198:9 M magic108:17 magnet 155:9 mailed297:9 main 36:16 267:2,8 302:21 maintain 22:3,4 127:9 maintained192:9 maintenance 22:11

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 32

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 major29:7 30:9 78:1 263:5 309:6,9 maker 179:5,12 manage159:22 management13:7 89:5 manner 172:17 manners 100:17 manufacture 14:21 manufacturer 12:4,11 13:12 14:5 64:12,15 70:2 93:7 102:13 128:19 131:6 153:6,7 154:8 157:21 159:6,7 160:9 161:12,16 164:6,16,20 169:5,19 170:2 173:6 175:21 176:13 178:19,22 179:4 180:11 184:1 186:2,3 187:2 188:2,6,11,12 189:4,5,7,13 190:18,22 195:20 303:17 311:13 313:9 manufacturer?s 176:1 manufacturers 8:22 9:5 10:21 13:2 14:3,8 21:5 41:15 42:6 51:5 58:12 64:20 65:21 69:13 87:11,22 89:16 109:5 121:14 134:12 135:21 143:9 152:22 153:14 154:6 155:4 156:11,12,22 158:1,10,20 159:4,13,18 163:21 165:11 168:3,4,11,14 169:2 170:7 172:12,18 173:17,18 174:9 175:8 178:16 179:7,22 183:2,9,18 184:2,17 185:7,13,22 186:16 188:19 190:9 192:4 211:1 212:16 225:20 238:11,12,21 240:2 282:4,14 283:1 286:11,16 287:11 288:14 290:11 294:1,8,19 297:8 298:19 300:15 301:1,16 302:13,17 303:10 305:17 306:9,11 manufacturers-- the 78:8 manufacturing 44:16 57:15 109:7 254:22 marching 224:11 margin 215:20 Mark 2:16 6:4 8:15 10:14 20:17 21:14 26:5 30:14,16 33:13 36:20 39:2 41:2 45:12 49:1,18

50:16 53:14 56:20 60:22 61:1 67:15 70:20 82:15 83:3,6 86:10 88:8 92:8 94:5 103:18 106:7,8 109:10 115:21,22 122:5 139:1,21 141:5 144:2 145:5 151:9 153:11,12 170:10,11 215:10,11 225:2,19 237:9,10 239:19 240:8 247:17 248:16 260:9 263:20 268:1 269:13 277:20 283:3 285:3 286:17 289:15 291:9 297:11 298:22 299:11 306:18 308:8,9 market35:18 46:22 47:3,4 48:16,22 49:3,5 52:8 62:14,17 68:10 69:10 72:7 139:3,15 143:8 144:15 229:8 232:3 249:14 298:1,5 300:9,10 303:20 304:17 308:6 marketing 79:21 marketplace 39:14,21 244:13 303:7 markets 58:10,13 market--so 58:9 Mark's 270:5

match 100:6 144:8 matches 206:21 matching 58:12 material69:17 131:4 289:13 material--there 284:8 math 56:1 93:14 137:15 149:14 173:18 174:3 177:19 203:22 matrix23:7 38:18 matter36:13 51:3 58:17 63:11 71:7 84:11 124:4 243:14 249:5 299:12 matters 260:14 Mauer2:19 6:22 48:2,8 49:18 50:5 60:8 61:12 62:3 108:16 109:18 146:22 150:2 168:22 169:8,14 187:16 188:10,15,18,22 189:11 191:11 277:8 288:13 302:5 304:19 305:6,9 max 69:9 117:11,17 125:14 132:14 205:7 maximum113:13 132:5,16 133:10 204:22 205:14 may 1:10 5:7 34:13,16 41:12

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 33

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 47:21 58:19,20 62:9,20 89:9 101:9 136:7 143:20 145:1 154:16 164:2 189:9 218:10 223:16 229:5 233:1,2 241:10 265:15 267:19 279:6 285:5,6 291:14 295:3 304:16 maybe9:7 23:3,19 26:7 30:6 33:18 34:4,10 38:16 41:17 48:10,18,20 50:5 56:9 59:3 61:13 63:3,7 65:7 75:9 96:19 98:9 103:6 110:19 115:11 124:20 125:22 127:17 130:2,21 136:22 137:1 143:21 148:17 149:10,11,19 154:14,15 159:1 160:19 164:3 169:14 178:11,13,18 186:5 202:11 203:17 216:4 217:1 226:18 233:7,9,21 234:15 238:1 241:7 247:17 266:17 268:16,22 270:6,14,22 271:15 272:15 276:22 281:15 283:20 285:9,11 286:9 290:11 291:8 McManis 2:21

mean 151:11,19 155:18 241:13 244:18 250:19 251:12,13,14 301:17 meaning 182:4 meaningful 214:10 means 12:5 15:18 48:15 49:20 64:8 90:21 93:17 97:9 113:5 153:2 193:22 251:15 meant37:15 50:7 181:15 295:16 meantime28:9 measure 232:19 measured 152:9 158:2 161:13,21 162:4 163:4 173:8 174:7 183:14 186:10,19 187:5,8 193:1 199:3 measurements 254:9 measures 190:5 253:19 254:7 255:12 mechanical100:22 101:6 mechanism 104:10 median 233:9,18 meet13:18 33:9 146:14 295:15 meeting 5:7 8:3 9:19,20 10:18 30:19 45:6 58:11

60:11 63:7 64:3 83:21 86:12 110:14 241:8,9 246:5 247:13 248:14 262:14 265:5,11 266:7 272:22 282:10,15 285:12,14 289:17 290:11 291:4,8 299:4 308:22 310:11 313:15 meetings 31:1 210:15 242:14 263:15 266:7 271:1 meets 140:17 Meg8:2 MEI 31:13 32:1 37:14,15,19,22 41:9 44:8 46:20 48:12 50:3,8,20 53:4 54:5,8,15 68:12 69:6,11,19 108:22 109:13,14,21 119:13 123:1 295:7,11,13 296:3,10,12,13,1 7,20 297:22 298:2 299:17 members 8:15 209:22 264:21 265:14 276:12 285:3,5 mentioned 38:22 61:13 63:13 74:2 84:3 103:11 104:8 115:15 150:17 164:13 174:13 192:2 218:15 230:20

239:5 242:9 250:12 254:16 255:14 menu 82:18 83:3 message 227:13 method 12:17 15:8 17:7 112:13 129:8,11 134:2,15 135:18 155:15 156:5,6,14 160:20 162:15 166:14,17,18 167:4 169:12 175:3,20 176:2 185:5 186:10 193:2,7,9 196:3 242:6 274:9,12 277:6 278:16,19 297:1 methodology 77:16 128:12,15 235:13 240:10 methods 25:2 171:14 253:18 metric 4:2,4 28:16,22 59:14,15,21 60:9 64:9 74:14 75:9 76:21 77:1 84:4,14 110:11,13 111:5 112:21 113:4 118:2 121:2 124:1 126:10 198:16 230:15 243:12 245:6 246:16,22 251:4 253:15 254:13 255:11,19 257:5,9

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 34

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 258:16,22 274:9 metrics 9:13,14,18 10:4 17:1 29:15 74:9 79:6 105:20 110:8 245:4 251:11 252:14 309:13 MG-1 220:4 MIA32:7 microphone 7:14 59:9 63:8 87:7 102:14 137:22 308:17 311:17 microphones 5:15 mid290:15 291:18 middle90:8 152:12 182:1 mike44:1 millions 28:2 mind66:8 95:4 202:17 273:13 minds 278:13 minimally112:3 117:17 118:11,12 119:8,11 122:2,17,19 123:8 125:14 142:7,11 200:3 204:15 228:20 229:17,22 minimum15:6 73:13 87:10,15 96:8 97:3,9,17 100:21 101:10,16,22 131:6 231:15 234:6,18 235:11 236:9,11 237:1,3,8 240:13,14

minor 26:1 minus 183:21 minuscule303:15 minute105:13 minutes 86:12 97:22 198:1 262:9 281:3 mischaracterized 258:7 mishear 172:12 misheard63:3 missed29:7 136:13 missing43:18 301:9 mission 271:20 misunderstood 96:19 mixing248:8 model 12:7,18,20 14:20 15:6 16:4,5 19:15 23:7 61:17 100:9 161:14 162:9 163:1,2,8 174:4,11 177:19 287:14 modeling66:1 71:6 98:17,20 models 13:13 15:11,16,19,21 16:6 17:8 24:6 27:16,18 37:18 38:19,20,21 44:21 45:7,10,14,17 55:21 61:15 67:9 83:15 99:10 173:19 175:5 176:20 301:3 304:20 305:6 modifications 26:1,2 101:6 286:3 modify99:10 modifying 102:6 moment20:18 144:5 Monday290:7 money 86:8 monitor 11:4 monster89:10 month191:12 268:12 months 50:15 morning 5:4,10 7:22 8:4,19,20 28:16 29:1 95:8 169:15 170:14 198:6 247:21 290:20 most--I97:18 mostly51:16,17 217:8 229:3 234:10 242:13 258:16 motor4:5 27:13,15 66:6 71:10 72:21,22 73:15 75:10 81:7 84:11 88:18,19 95:16,19 96:7,9 97:18 98:14 99:4,6,7,18,22 100:6 101:14 102:2,16,20 103:1 111:7 112:1 118:9,10,19,20,2

1 119:5,22 120:2,22 123:9 126:8,11,12,15,1 6 127:8,13,15 128:5,17 129:1,2,9 130:1,10 131:4,5,7,15,16, 18 132:1,2 133:9 134:6,9,20,21 137:19 138:2,5,9,13 139:8,13 140:4,17,21 141:12,20 142:1,8,13 143:2,6,10 144:20 147:3,5,10,18 148:2,5,6,9,21 149:1,2,4,13,16, 20,21 150:15,18,22 151:3,5 152:5,18 153:6,13 155:4 156:12 157:1,5,20 158:1,10 159:4,6,9,13,18 160:2,11 161:1,12 162:5 165:9,18 168:3 169:3,18,21 171:9 172:2,4,5,11,18 173:17,18 174:9 177:9 178:10,11,12,18 179:3,4,5 180:10,11 181:7,8 182:5,7,15 183:9,18 184:1,3,6,10,11,

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 35

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 12,16 185:3,4,7,11,20, 22 186:3,11,16 188:11,12 189:4,6,9,13 190:3,9,11,13,14 ,17,18,22 191:7,15,17 193:21 194:17 195:11,17,20 196:1,17 197:11 200:5,7 201:15,16 202:5,7,9,13,17, 18,20,21,22 203:1,4,17,21 204:5,15,18,21 206:3 207:2,10,13,15 208:9,14 212:5 213:12 216:9,15 217:5,13,14,20 218:1 219:13 220:5,7,8,21 221:6 222:17 223:8,12,18 226:16 227:20 228:1,3,19 229:10,17,19,22 230:2,9 231:10,21 233:21 235:18,20 240:20,21 242:13 243:7 245:21,22 256:13,16,18,19 257:3,8 272:12 273:1,2 300:16,17 312:7,8,9,10 313:8 motors 12:1 15:2 23:4,16 27:7 97:2,15 100:3,4,17 101:22 118:11,15 126:3 127:9,11 130:4 139:4 141:21,22 142:2 143:21 150:20 151:2 152:11 155:7 157:2 161:5,18 163:7,20 166:11,17,18 169:3 172:6,11 175:12 183:11 184:7,21 189:19 201:20 202:5,10,11 206:7,9 208:15,18,21 209:10 212:3,11 213:3 215:2,5 218:9 221:14,15 222:11 223:9,10 224:5,17 226:13 227:22 229:4,6,9,13 230:5 231:16 233:14,18 234:7 235:6,10 237:13 238:19 239:22 264:7 270:12,13,17 273:1,7 313:5 mount 40:9 mounts 39:10,17 move52:5 58:4 86:3 88:22 89:9,22 105:20 110:5 116:19 130:22 150:14 183:6 192:12 223:22 224:4 227:20 256:5 258:15 266:4 288:20 299:14

moved 105:22 247:3 movement

145:14 moves 138:5 moving54:13 65:14,15,21 110:7 111:15 170:17 196:5 199:22 206:16 227:9 240:19 much--what156:2 multi 145:19 273:7 multi-phase 222:16 multiple14:22 30:22 70:22 97:4,7 159:17 162:13 245:4 266:21 multiplied 207:21 208:4 multiplies 159:18 200:11 multitude62:13 mutually 75:22 myself 59:5 N N/A43:12 nameplate184:20 191:6 napkins 82:17 narrowing 77:18 national 3:15,18,19 7:7,11,17 43:6 106:9 107:5 251:10 290:10

309:2,3 nature14:5,7 Navigant3:13,16 7:9 266:17 287:8 nay306:22 nearest 134:10 nearly56:16 necessarily

19:19 44:10 63:17 73:12 127:11 158:22 160:5,9 176:8 181:1 214:15 226:13 285:13 305:22 necessary

13:17 64:6 174:6 311:16 necessity 135:21 NEEA36:1 125:20 216:12 247:12 needs--I?ve 145:21 negative70:10 negotiating28:15 197:17 negotiation 9:11 65:11 95:2 274:17 negotiations 4:2 9:2 244:3 275:20 neither314:12 NEMA23:3,21 73:15 157:12,16 184:19 191:6 209:22 216:6 227:16 239:22 240:3 245:22 276:12 312:2

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 36

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 net58:2 70:10 network 228:6,11 network--I228:9 neutral80:19 newer72:14 news 158:11 159:8 NGOs 56:22 104:7 NIA96:4 98:20 nice 5:10 159:9 251:3 269:6,7 276:18 Nidec?s 153:18 night10:18 30:18 37:7 82:17 nightmares 201:5 nine 202:6 NIST 177:21 nodding 20:15 nods 168:18 nomenclature 110:22 111:13,19 112:9,11 113:19 114:20 116:20 231:1 248:9,21 250:6 254:14 nominal166:19 259:16 non 143:20 195:16 308:14 non-compliance 14:4 non-compliant 16:9 non-covered 229:6,13 230:2 none 11:10 150:12 202:8 non-overloading 139:4,12 141:12 non-regulated 235:19 noon-ish 293:12 nor32:19 314:12,16 normal 19:5 47:11 normalizing 203:15 normally 11:13 19:21 78:15 136:17 139:19 North 49:3 51:15,16 52:7 55:7,13 Northwest2:14 3:8,15,18 6:16,20 7:11,17 NOTARY314:1 note 22:21 146:11 168:17 192:12 210:13 219:7 228:14 308:12 noted 31:22 105:21 192:16 notes 9:20 107:2 109:20 nothing 213:20 297:22 not--I213:9 notice20:12 208:16 236:6 279:13 284:4 290:18 292:14 noticed 115:7 282:13 notification 24:18

noting 226:11 NPV 107:6,12 numerator112:8 116:11 119:2 208:11 numerous 171:4 NVLAP177:21 O objected243:17 obligations 27:2 obtain 152:22 153:8 160:9,17 165:12 171:19 176:13 203:20 obtained 12:20 166:12 176:12 177:2 180:21 181:3 264:3 obtaining 163:12 280:14 obvious 131:18 273:4 obviously18:3 21:22 22:21 23:2 27:2 30:18 40:14 57:5 61:6 64:18 67:16 68:4,18 81:10 86:11 92:17,18 100:20 108:7 109:11 118:19 141:12 152:19 161:14 164:12 186:17 199:12 212:16 215:14,18 219:14 220:22 222:3 225:6 275:4 278:2,4 284:11 292:4

297:13 306:19 occurring146:15 occurs 174:16 odd 90:20 ODP202:5 208:18 214:7 offer 23:3,21 74:18 86:6 87:12,17,19 98:15,16 160:2 225:20 313:9 offered 294:9 offering 86:17 95:19 104:7 offerings 84:20 86:1,4 offhand 285:21 office 146:1,2 269:22 officer314:4 offshore 164:4 off-the-shelf

223:4 of--I 123:20 of--I?ll212:7 of--it249:5 of--that?s 231:12 of--we 11:1 71:7 169:15 of--with 231:5 Oh 193:8 okay8:14 10:13 18:2,17 19:22 24:20 25:3,9,15 28:5 29:2 30:4,14 32:10 35:12,16 54:13

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 37

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 66:10 67:3 69:5,20 73:7,8 77:22 82:13 83:16 88:7 90:3 92:8 101:18 104:3 105:12 106:22 110:4,7,9 114:14 115:14 116:5,15 117:4,22 121:8 122:16 124:2 126:17 131:3 146:21 150:7 151:16 193:12,19 194:11 196:5,7,8 198:18 199:19,20,21 200:18 208:14 211:11 216:1,2 218:20 219:18,19 221:10 223:21 228:12,13 231:4 238:15 239:13 240:19 241:21 242:2 244:10 245:3 249:9 250:2 251:2,6,14,22 257:17 258:7 260:18 265:2 276:19 277:16 278:1 284:1 288:19 292:7 305:11 306:14 307:2 308:18 old 72:12 86:12 102:16 ones 63:9 158:22 214:7 266:22 304:22 on--I 289:11 open 10:21 97:19 106:5 138:4 239:16 288:15 opening 10:9 91:21 opens 138:4,15 operate222:16 operating138:14 144:7 254:2 operation 89:20 146:15 opinions 67:17 opportunities 61:11 opportunity16:19 34:16 35:1 41:12 55:8,9 81:21 82:12 92:3 98:12 105:1,22 145:1,6,15 179:22 256:4 opposed 13:3 35:8 71:13 164:1 203:14 246:4 258:1 277:14 288:8 optimistic263:15 optimize92:6 option 12:14 92:14 96:5,16 99:8,20 102:8 112:10,11,17 114:3 154:5,9 155:5,6 157:5,15 165:11 166:5 168:8 173:7,8 180:10 182:10,14 184:9,16,17 186:9 192:10 195:3

196:13,14,15 197:1 199:3 242:11 268:18 287:9 295:10 301:15 304:10 306:15 optional185:5 186:10 196:15 242:15 options 85:21 105:7,9 112:18 113:18 129:17 133:20 137:19 150:15 151:7 161:6 191:5,20 196:12 197:5 201:4 234:14 246:17 247:4 262:6 294:11 300:21 order29:22 30:2 36:7 51:7 111:9,10 163:22 165:15 178:13 214:1 227:1,4 298:4 orders 224:11 organization/ affiliation 5:14 original14:1 121:4 250:4 originally143:17 originated 262:17 other--once241:2 others 39:19 43:1 171:13 205:22 236:8 282:8 otherwise 12:13 166:20 180:4 181:9 311:6,8 314:17

ought87:20 128:14 178:12,14 274:22 our--as 154:10 ours 285:14 ourselves 116:2 226:8 outcome 59:2 314:17 outdated 239:1 output287:22 output/input 167:9 outputs 176:14 outset10:7 26:5 outside 17:17 19:3 279:14 outstanding 29:12 overall43:15 104:9 141:8 195:1 274:7 294:2 overburden 31:19 overloading 143:21 195:17 oversized143:15 overview 23:4,12,22 Owned 6:11 owners 71:3 P p.m198:12 268:20 313:14 Pacific3:15,18

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 38

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 6:12 7:10,16 292:21 packet43:8 page 4:1 82:5 114:13,19 127:4 129:15 257:19 262:3 pages 263:19 paired 118:10,21 119:22 143:7 223:3 224:6 palatable 278:6 paper13:3 papers 95:9 Pardon 228:4 293:6 parking 45:13 PARTICIPANTS 2:7 3:2 particular34:15 111:10 175:20 220:4 232:18 270:10 285:21 parties 267:21 309:5 314:13,16 partly187:21 party12:14 20:11 63:2 78:12 172:10 188:20 passed 280:8 past23:5 path 243:11 302:16 paths 306:9 patient168:20 patterns 31:4 Patterson 2:18 6:5 Pause30:5 pay144:19 PCM/ECM127:8 PDF203:6 peek 309:20 PEI4:3 113:7 116:10,11 142:5,6 146:19 147:17 155:18 156:1 208:12 230:14,19 243:19 244:4 245:10,16,19,20 247:21,22 248:12 249:18 250:14,21 251:1,17,19 252:9 253:9 255:6,8 256:17,20 257:5 PEIs 244:19 people 54:22 58:9 79:19,20 103:3 110:17 126:21 140:22 143:4 145:7 164:4 177:3 181:10 226:22 245:7 270:17 271:3,4,9 283:13,20 285:10 290:21 298:5 306:20 per4:3 31:13,16 36:8 37:20,21 40:6,10,20 41:12,20 43:10 44:8,19 45:6,19 48:13 53:9 54:7,15 55:19 56:5,6 60:12,14 61:18 62:6 64:8,10 65:20 67:1,12 69:12

70:2,3 85:3 87:14 93:17 103:12,14 109:12,13,21 110:22 111:1,20,21 112:5,19 113:5,6,11,13 117:11,17 125:13,14 126:20 142:2,3 143:10 146:20 155:14,21,22 156:2,4,5,6 243:19 244:8 245:5 246:4,5 247:5,21 248:11,19 249:8 252:9 254:11,12,15 255:8 257:4,5 259:13 295:7,12,19 296:4,5,11,15,18 298:11 300:1 perceive279:9 percent 36:14 37:15,18 38:19,20,21 45:14,17 46:21 55:20 56:2,4 67:9 87:6 93:15,16 102:11 103:11,16,17 118:5,6 119:17 121:13,18 132:6,9,15,19 133:6,7,9 134:1 135:20,22 136:1,10,12,15,2 1 137:13,14,15,17 139:5 146:4 147:16

149:11,12 154:16 183:14,21 184:5 186:5 195:18 202:22 207:20 210:19 212:4,6 231:22 232:3 235:7,9,19,20 237:2,3,7 240:11 252:1 259:15,20,21 295:14 300:12 301:10 percentage 45:9,10 71:14 86:20 96:12,14 103:3 114:2,5 139:19 149:5 301:7 percentages 103:15 perform21:8 141:9 150:20 179:2,8 254:6 performance 32:20,22 35:8 41:5 118:9 120:3 131:5,7 156:12,13 165:18 176:19 196:17 216:15 217:4 302:15 performed 161:22 162:11 performing 21:9,10 204:17 perhaps 9:14 10:8,16 34:10 50:11 93:18 152:17 265:18 267:21

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 39

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 period 31:21 44:20 75:7 107:3 249:21 279:5 292:14 periodically14:12 permanent155:8 PERs 208:12 243:22 249:7 250:21 person 20:11 67:19 78:15 262:20 personal93:6 personally93:22 112:13 113:9 179:18 235:12 266:8 278:22 perspective49:22 57:5 71:13 72:16 81:18 109:13 168:8 195:20 262:5 271:17 277:12 279:11 pertained170:14 phase 30:20 31:22 33:18 34:4 221:19,21 222:7,10,11,15,1 8 223:15 224:3,5,12,17 225:8,14,15,18 226:9,15,18 227:1,4 phased 44:20 127:10 phone 2:10 3:3 8:9,11,12 physical15:20 175:10 physics 221:3 pick 5:22 42:1,2,8 177:10,11 194:17 195:2 picking 84:1 106:13 107:17 140:1 piece34:3 158:17 276:5 pieces 34:20 35:3 113:3 131:12,21 270:19 pinch 276:3 placed 282:19 plan 19:16 plane 269:3 planned 311:10 platform41:8 44:7 play80:20 played 51:16,17 players 51:16,17 playing 35:19 49:11 146:18 232:13 plays 103:8 Plaza270:2 310:9 please 5:13,17 6:1 7:12,15 59:12 69:3 90:6 111:12 228:12 311:7 313:7 plug 128:19 145:8 207:11 208:11 plugged 135:13 plugging 299:13 plus 82:11 112:1 120:22 154:16 155:1 157:13 173:3 177:11 183:20,21

plus/minus 21:19 PM161:18 pocket9:3 point9:2 25:1,11 29:13 30:10 31:15 32:5,13 36:15 37:8 38:18 44:12 45:22 47:7 50:1 58:18 60:10 62:12,19 63:5 67:21 69:17 70:3,12 71:14 74:16 79:13 82:15 84:2 91:10,22 92:10 94:18 104:17 114:2 115:6 122:6 128:4 133:9 135:22 136:1,13,19 147:9 150:13 159:11 167:4 174:22 183:4 185:10 189:9 197:9 201:9,10,22 204:2,10 205:10 207:17 208:6,9 209:17 210:19 211:6 215:13 217:7,10,21 220:9 221:17 228:12 232:16 235:17 236:6,19 239:6 242:21 243:5 246:2 250:4 253:14 260:3 261:4,18 264:12 266:1,19 274:4 278:17 281:22 282:2 295:15 303:14 305:12

pointing 252:2 points 4:5 59:19 60:15 63:14 64:13,16 65:11 66:13 69:10 70:7 71:1 78:5 105:4 110:20 118:5,8 119:19 120:20 121:2 123:5 125:7,9,17 133:7,16,17 135:16 151:6 162:13,16,18,19 165:17,18,19 166:2,11,20 167:6,8,10 172:5 181:3 183:15 186:21 194:7,14,15,16 195:7,11,15,21 205:8 219:16 221:7,8 257:16 258:21 259:2,6,14,17,19 ,22 260:1,5 261:4 264:4,5,12 295:13 296:15 307:12 points--sorry 296:14 pole 131:17 300:10,13,14,16, 17 301:2,3,6,13,14, 18,22 302:1,4,9,11,12, 17,19,21 303:2,6,19 304:3,4,6,9,10,1 2,20,21 305:6,15 306:5,13 307:8,18

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 40

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 poles 131:18 202:6 300:8 302:11 305:2 307:10 policing 11:5 polynomial 200:8,19 201:3,14 206:14,18,20 pool40:17,18 264:1 population 15:10 305:4 portfolio 86:1 portion 115:9 position 57:10 164:18 247:14 257:13 258:4 positive 70:10 possession 24:21 possibilities 66:3 possibility 64:16 234:3 possible 9:9 14:4 17:4 20:8 88:15 140:19 165:3 217:19 233:7 237:5 238:8 245:4 264:14 286:22 293:19 296:21 310:18 possible--I 66:14 possibly 95:2 285:4 post-meeting 33:15 potential42:8,11 103:7 105:3 106:18 111:15 197:3 235:10 305:10 310:1

potentially28:14 45:2,3 50:14 89:10,18 157:15 184:17 209:8 236:20 307:18 Potts 8:10 Potts(via3:3 pour31:4 power2:14 6:21 60:14 99:5 112:1,3,19 113:15 116:13 119:2,4,11 122:18 123:3,5 132:5,11,12,13,1 5 133:5 135:13 147:9,11,16 148:2,3,4,8,14 149:4,13,20 208:7,8 219:15 221:14 222:15 223:16 Powers 8:8 practice139:9 141:11 210:14 practices 140:7 preached53:21 precisely77:9,20 preclude 73:12 predicated243:22 predictability 88:16 predictable159:12 predominately 141:14 preface32:14 prefer54:10 94:1 138:1

preliminary

9:22 239:6 premium 73:15,16 75:10 95:19 100:4 prepare83:21 309:18 prepared229:4 preparing266:18 prescribe253:18 prescribed12:17 190:21 253:16 267:6 prescribing60:2 prescription 90:20 prescriptive35:9 73:14 81:11 86:15 present58:2 70:10 75:3 129:1 130:12 228:18 267:21 281:12 294:8 presentation 70:11 150:6 209:20 283:11,19 287:12 309:1,12 presentations 299:22 309:6 presented31:12 66:15 110:14 115:18 120:6,15 131:3 151:7 205:22 214:7 251:1 262:2 presenting75:13 press 261:14 pressure89:3,4

presumably 190:22 290:5 presume63:1 277:18,22 presuming95:16 pretty 33:10 36:22 37:17 46:7 52:6 53:21 68:3 84:5,14 86:8 96:3,15 100:4 133:22 150:8 160:3 187:13,15 206:21 226:5 239:22 255:22 259:6,7 268:3 270:15 271:8 278:3 282:20 289:16 prevent 181:10 prevents 308:13 previous 131:4 152:13 236:19 240:12 244:14 previously118:1,5 132:7 192:2 260:2,8 price69:10 primarily

139:6 237:16 241:9 primary 182:10 186:9 196:14,22 271:19 primer 288:6 291:5 293:17 310:6 principal8:19 principle 260:10 prior271:1

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 41

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 prioritized273:13 probably8:9 14:19 44:7 47:1 55:12 100:15 120:16 132:14 140:16 149:17 157:11 158:6 165:14 174:5 192:3 211:5,8 212:15 227:6 235:7,13 243:10 256:7 261:1 263:19 265:4,10 268:14,19 270:16 272:10 288:2 299:8 311:4 probe 288:2 problem69:13 179:4 193:6 215:17 216:14 303:15,21 problematic 152:10 problems 35:10 143:19 260:11 procedure11:15 17:1 18:20 19:1,2,19 20:8 24:10 25:19 60:16 63:16 64:11 65:7 89:11 97:16 98:3 110:11 120:17 123:18 125:2 130:19 131:1 153:2 160:14 163:20 164:12 165:6,14 169:13 181:9,12 185:1,21 186:1,20 187:20,22 188:4,8 189:8,15,18 190:1,4,10 191:7,15,19 192:5 193:22 194:1 196:16,22 212:20 219:20,21 220:3,18 228:17 230:6 231:7,14,17 232:22 233:22 241:6,10 242:18 254:17 267:20 270:10 271:7,14 273:21 276:4 277:11 279:9,13 309:22 310:2 procedures 11:16 19:8 25:17 167:12 172:3,4 177:22 224:12 233:9 proceed8:20 20:14 26:3 262:11 294:12 proceeds 9:12 16:15 process 2:9 11:6,20 12:3 13:3,16 16:15,18 23:8 27:11 36:5,19 49:13 58:13 74:13 76:3 164:21,22 173:20 190:21 191:12,13 287:10 produce 69:15 producing 49:11 product11:17,21 12:2,6 15:4 19:6,17 21:10,11

22:2 33:3 34:22 35:1,14 42:12,13,16 46:13 52:7 53:3,7,10 59:7,17 62:1 64:6 65:14 67:4 68:1 71:10,15 74:19 75:7,16 76:6,13,16 77:19 78:18 79:5,16 80:2,9 81:19,20 82:6,12 84:6,20 85:2 86:1,6 87:3,12,14,20 88:15 90:17 91:1,8 100:20 101:6 105:3 145:8 154:7,22 161:15 162:13 164:1,14 168:15 170:18 174:11 178:16,17 179:12 180:5,12,16,20 182:13 186:20 187:1 188:3 189:1,2 217:3,21 218:2,4,6 219:8,12 222:4 223:13,19 251:12 253:16 263:22 294:4,22 296:22 297:4,5,10,20 298:20 300:15 301:11 306:6 production 17:9 productive39:8 59:7 74:15 82:14 255:15,17 275:20 277:10 281:22 308:22 309:11

products 11:2,14 13:18 14:12,13 17:2,5 18:8 21:7 23:2 27:22 37:16 44:11 49:11 52:3 58:19 59:1 60:3 65:17 68:21,22 74:5 79:16 84:2 85:15 93:9,10 95:17 97:8 99:18 126:22 128:11 153:17,18 154:12 169:17 175:3,8,17,19 295:1 297:7 298:3 303:17,19 305:21 308:14 product--when 39:15 profile 62:4,7 75:12 121:20 128:17,18 252:14,20 profiles 62:15 66:20 89:21 program23:17 80:19,22 81:11,12 89:8 104:12 143:14 151:2 153:15 173:14,16 177:8,17,19,22 201:17 203:4 206:4 programs 17:21 60:19 62:13 65:9 72:11 73:1 139:11 253:2 271:8 progress 9:18 196:10 198:7,15

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 42

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 263:12 268:12,21 269:6 prohibitions 91:4 project 2:20 7:1 39:16 promote 79:16 80:2 promotes 59:6 prompted 282:14 proofing 146:7 properly17:20 proposal46:10 75:15 80:12 116:16 275:21 279:3 301:15 307:6 proposals 30:8 111:18 150:9 274:13 275:13 295:3 309:9,10 propose 301:2 proposed 16:20 20:13 25:2 48:4 97:16 98:3 120:9,12 134:3 146:16 158:15 167:21 180:8 285:3 proposing 160:19 296:19 298:16 312:20 prospective234:1 prospectively 129:10 protect 144:18 provide 16:19 23:22 28:9 56:14 60:17 79:7 80:21 105:22 144:22 153:16 154:6 158:11 159:13 179:22 183:10 186:16 210:14 215:3 227:16 239:4 240:16 241:3 254:7 256:3 271:3,4 276:13 284:3,13 299:12 provided 13:16 17:2 180:14 189:6 235:2 275:4 309:4 310:5 provides 160:12 184:4 providing 72:3 164:20 186:17,18 prudent153:21 PTAC 63:7 public 5:11 13:19,21 25:11 279:4,7 284:4,5 285:14 287:17 289:4 314:1 publication 94:14 publicly 61:20 176:2,11 publish 48:3,6 published 164:6 pull 20:18 211:2 302:17 pulled 248:1 pulling 34:6 116:2 pump 2:11,18 6:6 10:21 14:22 23:20 33:17,18,20 34:6,21 36:8

51:14 54:2,22 58:20,22 62:2 65:16,20 67:13,21 68:22 71:9 72:13,21,22 73:16 75:5 78:8 80:7 81:3,4,6,10 82:6,8 84:6 85:16,22 86:4,5 88:16,18,19 89:16 99:1,3 100:6 102:8,13,17 104:11 112:1,4,19,20,22 113:15 117:18 118:10,11,12,21 119:2,4,9,12,18, 22 120:1,22 121:16,21 122:2,7,17,18,19 ,20 123:2,4,8,13 125:12,13,15 126:19,21 131:7,10,11,16,1 9 132:5,18,21 133:3,21 134:7,15,20,21 135:12 136:21,22 137:3,5,6 138:4 139:22 142:11 143:7,9,20 144:20 147:9,11,15 148:4,12 152:22 153:6 156:22 157:13,21 158:11,19 159:7,13 160:2,11 161:8 165:11,19 168:3,13,15 169:2,5,13 170:2,7,15

173:6,16 174:17 178:15,18,19,20, 22 179:1,5,7,12,21 181:8 182:11 183:2,16 184:1,12,16 185:13 186:2 188:1 189:3,22 190:3,9 195:10 200:3 203:1 207:22 208:7,8 219:13 225:20 226:15 228:21 229:11,17 230:1,8 233:20 234:8 239:21 242:12,15,20 244:19,22 245:21 247:15 250:12 252:3 254:5 255:18 256:13 263:3 264:2 271:9 280:2 282:3 296:3,4,8,11,12, 16 300:16 304:4 pump?s 195:21 pumping80:22 146:4 pumps 1:4 3:6 5:6 11:22 14:22 15:13 19:13 34:11 36:3,10,11 38:8,10 39:18 40:7,22 41:3 56:4 60:13 66:19 78:4 87:17 90:16,19 91:22 93:15 103:16 118:4,10,16,18 121:18 134:13 135:3 136:7

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 43

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 143:15 161:1,5 169:3 185:17 190:1,2 197:18 200:4 206:10 221:19 222:10 224:6,18 225:7 226:14 228:22 229:4,5,19,21 231:5,7 232:20 234:10,14,22 235:18 237:12 238:4,8 239:14,17 240:5 242:9,14 252:7 254:20,21 256:2 259:11,18 295:8 296:1,9 298:21 305:2 306:13 purchase 162:5 purely80:6 81:2 purpose 99:11 118:15 218:1,5 223:5,10 232:17 234:7 purposes 196:18 228:20 pursuing 59:4 push 38:16 68:21 71:8 pushes 58:19 puts 17:16 putting 71:13 134:6 Q Q&A291:7 quad 43:21 44:2 104:8 106:12 quads 33:1 34:19 41:18,21 43:10 57:1,6 65:22 87:5 95:7 100:18 108:17 qualify 73:13 quality197:19 quantifiable 89:8 quantify 276:20 quantity245:9 quarter43:20 44:2 question 14:2 18:11 20:21 21:1 27:15 43:5 45:5 51:11 62:20 67:16 70:22 95:15 97:1 98:7 104:16 106:10,17 114:1 116:17,22 118:14 120:21 125:1 147:1 168:1 169:1 195:8 196:5 206:3,19 218:8 220:1 222:21 224:2 225:4 231:12 239:8 240:9 282:3,22 283:1 284:2 285:1 297:2 302:7,8,9 311:9 questioning 249:3 questions 9:6 10:15 14:18 20:17 26:4 30:18 106:4 119:6 136:6 163:18 180:21 215:4 251:7,10 278:12 282:15 283:16,21 284:15,21 285:15 286:5,11,13,19

291:7,15 questions/ comments10:7 quick 43:5 50:22 114:1 117:11 147:1 206:2 220:1 quickly 162:21 269:11 quite 26:2 32:3 45:21 98:5 202:4 262:21 272:12 309:15 R R&D 79:19 race232:12 radar100:21 radioed 113:16 raise268:10 288:21 raised 47:13 224:2 250:4 raising 87:21 233:2 283:16 ramifications 85:19 ran 148:21 149:1 225:13 range46:6,11 109:22 127:10 134:1,2 195:14 206:5 235:15 236:16 237:22 238:5 ranges 21:19 194:16 225:21 236:8 rapidly267:18

rare144:16 rate58:3 107:13 118:6 119:18 134:2 234:13 rated131:9,19 200:10 201:10 202:22 203:1 204:1,16 209:3 216:14 rates 157:2 rather32:15 62:18 67:22 91:16 150:3 172:11 175:10 277:18 284:20 291:11 313:1 rating12:7,17,20 16:5 112:20 136:18 146:16 170:6 176:12 180:1,14,19 246:12 257:8 ratings 13:14 173:4 175:9 177:1,10,11 180:17 ratio 112:5 123:3 125:12 142:5,6 147:8 224:21 248:12 256:12,17,18,20 ratioed112:22 119:1 re107:18 reach 32:6 45:3,11 56:15 121:18 258:9 266:11 reached246:20 reaching50:14

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 44

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 103:13 readily240:1 reading252:16 ready37:2 223:22 256:4 268:8 283:21 real29:18 38:9 69:13 117:11 177:7 198:6 realistic108:11 realities 51:12 reality80:13 173:6 realize60:6 79:18 244:15 really5:20,22 14:16 17:6,12 19:11 29:13 31:9,14 34:2,5 36:8,16 38:4,21,22 40:16 41:8 44:14,16 45:19 49:3 50:13 53:5 54:3,11 59:20 60:2,9 61:19 66:17 67:3 69:19 71:7 78:5 79:1,3,16 85:4 88:13 91:20 103:5 106:14 107:10,20 111:9 115:3 116:3 121:6,14 123:17 129:6,21 130:16 132:14 138:21 139:18,20,22 141:2 144:21 145:9 146:14 151:20 158:2 180:6 187:6 191:18 193:22 196:9,16,19 197:18 198:15 211:14,17 212:15 214:9 216:5 217:6 221:16 222:20 229:20 230:7 232:16 233:14 234:17 235:17 240:4,20 248:19 252:3,16 253:2,9 254:3 258:22 267:5,8 270:19 271:18 272:6 273:20 274:1,20 276:4,13 279:9 287:2 288:2 289:13,18 297:14 300:9 307:17 309:4 really--I297:19 reason 11:21 22:13 27:14 54:14 108:19 126:17 145:18 147:4 157:19 199:7 206:20 214:16 225:22 233:4 256:11 271:6,10 275:5 278:22 285:21 291:10 reasonable82:8 134:15,17 140:16 146:12 197:9 227:14 239:5 262:4 265:8 reasonably156:15 reason--maybe 256:14 reasons 199:11 reassess 37:10 rebate72:11 73:17 104:12

rebates 73:14 77:14 79:7 recall178:9 recapture104:6 receive271:14 274:15 279:7 282:3 received24:18 228:7 311:12 received--a228:5 recess 105:18 198:9 recognize59:16 112:12 113:8 154:14 233:12 recognized77:15 111:2 203:12 recognizing42:4 231:2 287:9,11 recollection 214:6 recommend31:15 122:7 243:9 recommendation 16:14 92:12 182:3 274:7,11 recommendations 16:12 33:21 124:20 130:17 131:2 262:4 267:4,10 274:1,2,8 276:13 277:5,6,14 287:3 recommending 53:9 record122:5 272:15,17 286:21 314:10 recorded314:8

records 176:14 recreate191:21 redesign 36:4,10,13,17 38:4,10,13 40:17 41:1,14 43:2 45:8,11 56:4 67:11,13 68:18 69:16 92:3 96:4,7,18 103:11,16 304:5 redesigned55:21 redesigning 37:15 67:10,21 93:15 redesigns 48:20 49:9 84:15 reduce38:15 128:13 144:9 175:7 reduced147:20 314:9 reduces 148:14 reducing100:5 refer111:2 113:14 reference25:22 165:14 191:19 193:15 199:6,8,10,16 215:13 229:16 referenced10:14 193:10,14 194:1 references 191:16 referred112:18 referring111:5 114:9 222:2 refined 73:12 reflect 28:11,13

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 45

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 109:20 reflected9:21 148:8 reflecting63:5 130:13 reflection 282:11 reflects 29:14 85:10 regained67:8 Regal2:12 6:18 22:19 96:22 146:10 154:4 161:10 164:10 168:7 172:14 186:13 194:2 198:21 209:19 217:17 222:1,22 276:7 Regal?s 153:16 regard179:3 regarding150:20 156:12 213:12 231:15 246:3 308:12 regardless 101:9 124:3 223:14 245:6 257:5 regional55:6 register 102:20 177:8 265:20 registration23:8 177:21 regressed 133:6 regression 132:20,22 133:12,14,18 135:14 regs 28:10 regulate18:9 301:3,13 regulated39:15 101:1 227:5 300:7 301:7 regulating233:14 regulation 11:1 22:8 39:19 40:5 49:8 151:2 178:12 227:1 232:2 302:1,4 303:6 306:5 308:13 regulations 44:18 118:13 229:2 reinvest 68:1 reiterate 167:18 184:13 reiterated 248:17 related52:22 148:15 196:17 227:22 261:16 314:12 relationship 214:10 relationships 78:9,11 relative149:9 224:21 226:2 314:15 relatively 162:21 266:20 released294:6 relevant 97:14 reliability80:9 reliable 76:13 120:9 165:13 relies 12:4 14:8 172:18 reluctant 61:7 relying60:3 remain 263:15 remaining 263:15 remains 263:9 remarks 10:9 308:20 remember

55:14 67:1 88:2 101:2 102:11 108:3 244:14 246:18 295:12 remind 110:15 reminder310:8 remove 105:4 201:2 removing 304:16 repeat 98:10 rephrase98:6 replace81:4 199:9 249:10 replacement72:16 73:3 replacements 72:12 replacing72:12 81:6 report 19:15 21:7,9 26:10 27:3 29:4,5,9 65:5 163:22 181:16 262:1,10,18 274:5,10 275:1 277:3,18 306:10 309:18 reported1:14 21:8 63:1 64:17 72:1 178:14,21

Reporter 314:20 reporting1:14 63:14 64:5,10,20 65:6 179:12 reports 13:4 178:2 179:4 represent 16:5 63:16 169:11 204:17 218:9 229:15 248:11 254:18 294:19 re-present294:10 representation 108:4 233:20 representations 64:14 175:18 representative 15:9 17:4 63:12 121:20 204:15 209:12 215:12 216:7 229:11 231:12 236:22 240:13 245:19 254:6 286:4 representativenes s 212:19 REPRESENTATI VES 2:3 represented 55:16 74:18 244:13 247:6 259:13 representing2:10 6:11 179:7,13 207:16 represents 178:22 237:7 reputable 164:3 request33:11,12

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 46

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 88:16 135:19 159:6 168:4 228:7 262:3 311:13 requesting283:10 requests 311:6 require58:22 64:5,10 75:20 128:10 133:16 150:21 180:8,17 186:3 242:16 required 14:9 89:1 151:3 163:19 165:1 226:18 265:19 274:22 requirement12:12 153:10 168:5 181:4 requirements 13:11 19:12 100:6 180:4 requires 150:19 184:21 requiring 64:17 148:4 res 237:11 research 231:6 reservations 260:5 reserve268:17 reserved 266:8 resident144:3 residential237:18 resolution 197:6 resolve130:20 resource24:4 52:4,17 resources 18:7 31:1 37:6 50:18 79:10 287:10

respect 16:22 19:13 21:2 85:20 91:22 92:7 129:7,17 152:18 178:6 respond 21:1 32:13,19 71:21 129:5 186:12,14 responded 294:2 response110:6 129:7 150:11 215:4 232:15 239:8 240:18 274:15 297:9 responses 294:9 responsibility 12:10 170:6 178:6 179:11 180:15 189:4 rest 116:19 239:20 241:9 276:11 restrict 135:1 restricted 264:6 restriction 221:21 restrictions 25:13 restrooms 105:16 result33:1 57:3 197:20 257:8 287:4 result--I139:17 results 98:5 resume 105:14 198:5 retention 180:17 retro 143:14 retrofit 72:19 81:1 102:9,12 return 9:13 198:17

242:22 review47:13 210:10 281:13 285:10 287:15 reviewing 110:13 revise155:17 revisit202:2 258:22 280:9 rigor173:15 185:15,21 rigorously22:12 risk 141:13 303:5 road 55:10 142:21 145:2 181:2 310:10 Rob 73:9 153:17 Rob?s 73:9 role21:15 53:2 roles 251:9 roll43:15 rolled 236:5 room5:13 9:21 65:13 105:14 144:5 197:16 198:5 226:8 228:7 240:3 257:22 265:12,13 270:4 299:9 309:5 Rosenstock

3:4 18:11,13,19 19:22 24:2,3 66:11,12 69:21,22 70:9,14,19 72:8,9 80:15,16 87:8,9 93:3,4 95:1 101:19,20 102:6,15 104:14 108:1,2 113:22 114:11,14,21 116:8,9 117:4 121:4,8,11 123:11 124:2,7 127:21 129:20 134:4 140:18 141:15,16 142:4,15,19 145:17 155:12,21 171:20,21 189:17 190:7 191:2 200:12 206:2,11 211:22 212:15 224:14 225:4 226:1 230:11,12,20 231:4,18 232:10 233:6 235:14 236:2 239:10 243:13,20 244:2,10 245:3,13 246:18 249:4,17 250:2 251:8 252:11 256:6 273:18 281:8 roughly43:21 45:13 46:4 round 134:9 272:18 rounding 132:9 row182:2,15 280:10 rows 43:11 RPM 300:8 305:1,2 RPMs 208:18,20 212:3 RSV40:10 41:6

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 47

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 44:6 294:4,21 296:9 297:14 307:18 308:1,13 RS-V43:12 RSVs 34:14 294:15,17 ruffling 95:8 rule 11:6 23:10,11 48:4,6 84:22 85:5,10 94:14 95:3 139:18 225:12 229:14 rulemaking1:3 11:12 16:18 17:13,15 18:21 19:1,4,19 20:3,7,11,13 25:17 33:1 57:2 64:22 88:2 120:17 131:1 193:16 rulemaking--how 59:5 rules 176:12 177:20 ruling 297:18 run 33:8 114:12 146:13 234:1 252:18 299:3 302:7 304:22 running 122:7 runs 206:5 S S.W1:7 Safe 313:13 safety140:19 143:18 sake 100:18 sales 78:15 107:3 224:8 307:10 same--the231:14 sample15:2,6,9 216:7 samples 31:4 177:12,14 sampling17:7 19:16 San 6:14 Sarah 3:17 7:10 9:15 40:3,15 110:8 127:7 129:14,19 135:5 141:15 147:1 150:5 151:9 158:21 166:8 167:4 181:14 187:5,17 198:6,17 214:14 232:16 234:15,17 237:11 250:12 260:20 275:4 276:5 278:4 285:11 310:3 313:4 Sarah?s 21:17 232:17 278:9,20 satisfies 85:15 satisfy13:10 save 74:4 76:9,12 88:17 89:18 130:8 202:2 225:13 saving 88:22 212:8 savings 33:2,7 35:8 43:2 44:15 60:1 62:5,6,8,18 72:7 73:11 75:18 76:5 77:16 78:6

79:4 80:8,21 81:4,13,14,18,21 87:1 89:9 92:4,5,6 95:20,21 96:6,13 98:11,13 101:17 103:7 104:8 106:12 107:5,12 108:7 109:4,7 251:16 252:1 253:10 256:21 297:15 298:8,10,12 301:9 307:20 308:15 saw45:13 46:8 49:2 51:8 109:1 110:1 122:3 147:10 165:3 174:15 175:7 212:2 217:18 269:14 287:21 300:12 scale237:2 scaled 97:15 205:3 scaling 205:1,12,13 240:11 scared269:19 scattered 214:4 scenario 120:4 121:19 141:20 schedule 281:21 282:22 284:3 285:12 scheduled 281:18 310:20 scheme 195:1 scope 14:21 19:3 33:20 34:6 101:5 206:9 221:20

224:6 226:2,19 234:21 235:3 238:4 263:3,22 264:7 267:12 274:16 279:15 298:14 scratch191:21 screen182:1 184:14 200:13 296:13 seat213:17 second 5:5 114:15 165:16 269:19 281:15 secondary273:22 section 36:10 188:5 sector 62:17 72:7 sectors 62:14 see--I?m 142:21 seeing35:14 48:11 66:19 144:14 268:6 283:15 seem120:11 255:5 308:15 seemed 108:10 214:4 227:14 246:6 264:18 seems 38:15 44:14 47:4 48:13 140:16 146:11 255:6,8,21 258:4 262:4 277:9 282:18 284:17 300:13 303:7 307:6 seen 27:17 85:8 145:21 196:11 211:16 240:11

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 48

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 276:17 303:11 segment106:2 265:19 267:18 segregated 167:3,7 select 104:11 138:2 231:19 selected136:19 152:6 selecting36:2 136:20 141:22 146:19 204:21 selection 131:4 139:10 143:8 153:15 182:5 selections 139:5 selects 235:11 self 11:4 12:4 163:21 self-certification 23:15 self-policing 14:2,10 sell71:15 76:6,7 78:16 120:1 134:19,21 163:22 184:6 selling 39:17 58:10 78:18 79:2 178:17 179:12 send 29:4 262:17 285:9 292:22 293:12,17 302:14 306:16 310:6,18 312:14 313:8 sense 38:22 45:6 68:3 115:4,6,9 134:13 137:1 150:1 224:4 243:6 246:7 253:4,7,10 264:19 274:6 277:4,17 280:12 287:18 289:9 sent283:9 285:2 299:22 308:12 309:20 separate20:7 81:8 113:2,3,14 119:9 172:7 234:12 257:3 297:7 separately

19:20 34:4 115:2 194:9 217:15 sequence117:7 sequential214:1 287:14 sequentially214:3 series 9:6 serious 233:2 seriously105:6 session 285:1 289:2 313:12 set--I?d303:22 setting9:10,11 15:14 17:12 29:20 32:4 36:18 38:5 106:2 196:18 200:2 216:17 217:9,11 229:20 234:10 241:9 295:10 297:18 298:4 302:19,20,22 303:1 308:1 309:11 settled155:22 seven 56:3 58:6 90:22 91:7 92:13 93:16 106:18

several 140:4 177:3 severe32:8 37:12 shaft118:21 119:4 123:5 132:5,18,21 133:22 135:13 147:11,15 190:3 208:7 shaking 115:8 shape 10:3 33:10 132:11 140:2 shapes 162:2 share 21:21 27:5 90:10 174:19 shared 61:8,9 sheet125:4 188:13 267:2 274:13 shelf 21:12 shift 296:20 shifts 107:12 ship 304:6 shipment 108:13 shipments 300:12 301:8,11 302:10,15 309:1 shipped 301:6 302:12 303:19 shop 105:17 shorter92:18 94:2 shortly68:2 shot260:16 showed 46:3 70:1,7 231:8 256:10 304:20 showing 59:17 81:13 94:13 98:13 114:6 238:2 249:7 298:12 shown 27:17 301:16 shows 106:12 174:3 177:17 shut138:7,10 shutoff 122:8 shuts 138:16 sides 77:3 294:12 sight26:11 signal84:5 significant 27:19 42:5,14 57:19 84:9 232:5 252:9 258:19 260:7 significantly 91:9 236:7,16 239:9 similar54:5 73:15 112:3 168:22 192:4 208:16 209:1 220:11 223:11 229:10 230:3,10 234:6 246:21 248:17 simple33:11,12 95:15 96:3 266:20 simpler 54:12 276:10 simplicity

96:9 167:15 simplification 195:3 simply23:4 69:9 75:2 175:4 178:22 192:20

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 49

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 210:16 simulation 175:9,20 176:2,19 simulations 176:14 sine 199:8 219:2,6,14 single 167:4 221:19 222:7,10,11,15,1 8 223:15 224:3,5,12,17 225:8,15,18,21 226:15 227:1 280:16 295:15 sit23:22 213:16 site 203:5 sitting 8:6,7,8 situation 72:17 102:10,18 121:16 138:14,16,21 158:19 178:16 situations 81:1 145:22 Sivigny3:6 5:18 8:8 43:3,4,9 52:19,20 104:5,16 six 5:7 47:14,16,19 48:3 50:15 94:9 103:16 191:12 266:7 275:11 size 97:18 131:15,16,20 132:14 134:20,21 136:6 137:19,20 138:2 142:1 143:3,4,10 146:6 147:10,18 149:5,6 162:2 206:7 207:14 214:11 238:5 240:21 sizeable 44:3 56:7 sized 132:2 138:6,8 150:8 206:9 sized--the132:1 sizes 134:15 sizing 4:5 97:15 111:7 127:16 129:2 132:7,9 133:9 134:17 136:16 137:1,9,14,17 139:19 141:20 145:13,18 146:12 149:22 228:19 243:7 257:3 skin 299:8 skip 130:9 skirt302:1 slash 244:15 slide 43:6 70:4,6 98:8 106:9 107:16 108:3,4,5,10,18 112:15,17 116:18 119:9 120:15 124:20 125:19 126:9 129:21 130:3 151:20 187:14 192:21 193:3 196:11 198:21 201:22 202:3 203:5 207:12 208:1 210:5 218:16,17

228:15 231:2 236:20 238:14 239:1,3 240:12 243:3 246:15 287:13 292:22 293:8 slides 70:1 107:2 110:10 114:13,18 116:21 117:3,7 120:7 129:1 130:16 152:7 156:17 197:2 208:19 241:3 243:21 248:11 249:7 262:7 272:8 276:16 281:8,11 284:14,21 285:2 294:6 slightly148:13 205:11 296:5 304:11,12 305:3,4,8 slope 108:10,13 slower306:16 small 55:2,5 87:15,21 98:5 137:11 149:8 157:21 195:1 261:7 262:21 296:9 301:7,8 smaller 34:3 55:16 57:20 63:10 127:8 141:21 158:21 225:7 296:5 smell 309:15 sold 118:11 120:22 131:7,19 169:3 204:18 221:19 222:10 224:18

226:15 229:6,19 230:2 235:7 259:18 soliciting 17:13 solution 193:5 Solutions 5:12 somebody63:2 138:4,14 178:20 195:3 266:17 285:4 somehow 89:15 126:5 165:22 178:14 someone 68:6 71:9 164:4 233:19 238:13 256:18 301:22 304:17 307:17,20 311:6 somewhat61:6 246:21 250:16 261:5 somewhere 33:9 36:15 46:4 47:19 48:13 109:14 111:11 275:18 sorry 70:15 90:7 93:20 106:21 137:15 151:10 155:17 181:5 230:13 311:10 sorry--the 296:13 sorry--we302:20 sort18:22 30:20 33:6 58:5 84:9 94:16 104:10,12 110:15 111:16 122:3 131:14,18 132:3,12 135:9 137:11 143:3

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 50

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 147:22 148:9 151:13 152:12 172:9 178:7 180:22 196:3 211:7 224:15 233:13 247:14,15,16 264:14 271:22 280:7 sound 6:1 69:4 140:13 284:10 sounded 172:9 sounds 140:19 254:3 259:3 Southern 6:13,15 span 289:16 speak 11:19 177:4 215:16 247:17 speaking 19:8 57:13 67:18 special82:22 specific 10:11 11:16,18 16:19 17:14 19:12,14 62:17 77:13 80:12 90:13 97:18 135:16 139:20,22 154:7 166:2 177:20 194:14 217:22 242:20 255:18 262:3 267:3 274:8,13 276:17 277:6,14 282:15 specifically35:4 75:21 166:18 174:20 187:7 220:18 274:12 278:16 282:5 specified 179:8 254:17 specifies 141:11 144:22 specify139:4,12 166:11 specifying 143:20 speculation 264:13 speed 10:22 75:5 84:10 98:15 100:5 103:4 126:1,2 127:10 213:2 259:16 272:22 273:2,7 speeds 52:10 126:4 209:3 212:11 214:8,16 304:2 305:1 spend 77:6 84:17 272:1 277:22 279:12 spending 197:17 spent10:17 30:17 34:13 250:11 263:22 278:4 spilling 172:1 split36:8 38:22 splitting 38:6 115:2 spoke 139:15 spoken 64:1 spread 18:8 43:2 square 133:8 squeeze79:12 squishy 270:11 staff 265:15 stage231:3 stakeholders 287:5 stand 7:12 standard 4:3,4 9:10,11 11:14 12:6,8,22 21:16 25:22 42:16,17 45:21 46:5,12,15 47:1,7,8,20 50:10,11 52:15 63:18 64:7,9 67:19 75:15 85:16,21 86:2 87:11,13,15 91:6 93:6 99:8 102:22 103:13 104:15 106:2 113:13 128:6,20 130:9 131:6 132:2 172:7 174:17 182:5 185:20 192:19 195:13 200:2,3 217:9,11 218:5 219:9 220:7,14 221:5 228:21,22 229:18,20 234:11,18 239:22 247:7 253:17 255:10,11,20 261:21 266:21 267:1,8 270:7 278:5 280:2 298:4,10,15 299:17,18 303:2 308:1 309:10 standardize 164:15 standardized 131:5 253:18 standards 1:3 2:20 4:2 7:1 11:13,17 12:4 13:18 14:15 15:14 29:19,20 30:10 31:8 32:20 38:16 54:2 58:11 86:14 98:21 99:7,12 101:15,22 102:2,22 118:19 122:19 172:2 196:18 197:18 241:10 267:18 269:10 271:21 272:6 274:8 278:4 standing 25:20 standpoint52:2,17 53:8 279:2 stands 175:2 stark 84:5 142:17 starkly84:14 Starr3:7 6:16 35:22 36:1 38:3 44:13,14 45:5 46:19 48:10 55:18,19 56:8 58:8 66:5 67:8 68:9,15 77:22 78:1 93:12,13 103:9,10 104:3 107:14,15 115:1 125:20 126:17 136:5 138:18 139:17 140:13 143:12 163:17 165:4 216:12 221:13 225:10 226:21 247:11 252:13 266:2 270:5 272:21 280:4,12 start 5:3,12 7:20 9:8 10:6,11 27:3

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 51

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 30:6,11 31:8,15 37:3 50:19 53:5 55:10 83:8,18 89:21 105:17 110:12 111:13 162:18 198:6,13 211:19 212:17 268:6 271:16 272:10,11 started32:1 47:10 49:5,6,7,13 112:20 171:3 243:4 248:3 starting9:2 30:10 31:14,22 32:5 37:8 44:12 60:10 68:20 116:1 256:22 290:3 state176:12 239:20 245:15 stated77:9 99:20 157:12 250:22 statement96:21 97:2 States 235:8 stating32:15 statistical

15:8 17:7 19:16 status 24:10 264:19 statute19:11 90:18 253:17 statutory 47:19 90:11,20 91:4 stay148:12 225:8 steep 140:3,8 step 53:6 68:17 100:2 158:12 204:13 Steve3:4,9 6:9 8:6 18:11,13,17 24:2,3 66:10,12 69:21,22 72:8,9 80:15,16 87:8,9 88:7,10,11 93:3,4 94:22 95:1 101:18,20 108:1,2 113:21,22 114:20 116:8,9,18 120:21 123:10,11 124:14 127:21 129:2,18,20 130:6 134:4 140:18 141:6,15 142:15 145:16,17 155:11,12 156:19,20 159:2 160:1 171:19,21 178:11 181:21 183:5,7 185:6 186:14 189:16,17 190:7 195:5 206:1 211:21,22 224:14 225:2 226:1 230:11,12,22 233:6 234:21 235:14 239:8,10 243:2,13,16 244:6 249:4 251:7,8 255:5 256:6 273:17,18 Steve?s 249:2 258:7,8 stick 114:19 311:18 stickler243:18 stop 238:1 298:5

story 84:14 straight60:16 136:17 strange211:8 236:6 strategic67:17 strategically42:7 85:12,14 strategies 89:2 strategy 89:4 street 269:21 strict 141:3 strictly 280:2 strike 80:10 strong76:15 277:9 283:6 struggle17:20 71:2 struggles 74:20 stuck 111:21 studies 37:16 83:9 stuff 26:8 58:10 72:14 86:12 89:21 215:19 263:2 270:10 280:19 283:15 285:10 306:20 style 218:4 subject12:6 25:12 281:3,6 submersible 229:3,4,19,21 230:4 231:5,16 234:14,22 237:12 238:8 239:15,17 240:5 242:16 300:7 312:10 313:5,8

submit12:18 14:20 286:18 306:9 submittal

13:8 submitted13:15 303:18 submitting302:10 sub-motor

237:16 subsequent11:12 50:11 156:17 subset306:11 substantially10:2 259:6 substitutes 42:17 substitution 42:14 Subtype 118:13,15,17 suction 39:10,11,17 40:8,9 118:16,17 sudden 146:3 304:5 sufficient 239:1 293:11 suggest10:6 200:17 202:9 suggested54:4 178:11 195:5 222:13 268:16 suggesting157:4 160:5 suggestion 38:6 152:17 156:16 168:18 198:2 285:9 suggestions 61:4 127:19 130:14

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 52

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 150:10 224:10 239:14 suggests 182:22 summarize276:12 summarizing 179:17 summary276:9 288:8 308:19 309:17 super97:13 supplemental 275:10 supplied 173:4 182:16 suppliers 51:6 supply 52:10 72:5 155:4 supplying 14:9 190:18 support17:17,21 22:16 62:11 250:15 301:16 supported 247:16 248:4,16 supporting 171:13 supports 71:18 suppose 169:5 256:12 289:11 sure 26:9 29:6 32:14 36:15 40:4,12 66:5 71:18 78:20 79:3 80:10 85:5,9 87:4 92:21 101:11 105:15 109:15 114:18 124:7 126:18 127:5 136:9,11 141:1 142:22 153:16 156:14 157:9 160:15 161:7 162:3 163:6 165:2 171:1 174:12,13 185:14,18 194:15 215:1 216:13 224:1 230:22 233:8 238:22 248:2,19 267:15 271:6,9 284:6 285:22 286:21 287:5 292:5 293:10 302:17,18 surface 123:1 surprise 261:13 surprising 210:18 surrounding 29:9 197:17 243:19 277:5 309:10 survey229:8 235:5 237:4 suspect35:9 265:16 switch 225:15 switched 29:22 switches 103:15 switching 293:22 sworn 314:7 sync 51:2,3,4 synchronization 31:7 system13:2,6,7 53:10 73:3 81:8,17 89:3,6 100:7 120:6 138:8,10,16 141:8 144:7 148:11,12,14 173:12,13,22

174:2 190:6 223:3,4 242:6 295:21,22 T table 33:22 54:9 66:4 71:6 77:3 86:17 87:16 104:18 134:5 137:11 168:19 182:22 207:18 229:10,16 231:11 234:6 238:6 246:16 265:16 270:18 275:13 276:21 282:22 312:11 tables 300:3 312:10 tabular300:1 Taco 3:9 6:9 88:12 156:21 183:7 tail132:12 taking 31:11 36:11 53:2 97:18,19 102:4 123:3 184:9 186:22 189:4 talent105:5 talk 19:7 51:1 56:10,12 89:7 97:22 105:2 110:11 111:7 119:14 120:4 126:7,14 129:14 131:22 132:3 141:19 152:5 161:12 162:3 197:2,5 199:2 217:21 243:1 260:21 261:21 263:5,7 275:22

280:20 281:3 talked 33:16 34:20 41:7 71:1 86:13 90:22 95:7 96:10 99:15 116:3 119:16 132:7,8 133:1 145:5 152:18 170:14 182:11 199:4 204:13 206:6 216:19 217:19 227:10 309:17 talking 24:12 27:18 30:17 34:9 50:8,13 53:12 81:16 97:12 100:8 103:2 111:14 112:21 113:17 161:14,15,21,22 162:5 166:9 172:2 175:1 183:9 193:4 194:22 206:3 221:15 228:19 234:10 235:3 237:17,18 243:4 248:13,14 250:6 272:2 278:15 281:6 tall45:22 51:7 52:6 target 33:6 106:13 task 260:13 tasked 89:14 274:2 tasking 158:13 tax92:19 taxed31:3 team76:19 79:20 243:10 258:22

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 53

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 276:12 283:12 285:3 309:7 teams 287:15 tech 69:9 technical260:13 technically152:2 195:17 307:22 technologies 77:20 129:9 154:19 167:20 technology48:19 79:15 129:12,17 155:8 159:9 182:7 282:19 TEFC 202:5 208:21 214:7 teleconference 265:7 285:6 289:3 templates 13:8,9 ten 37:19 51:13,14,18 80:3 92:14 108:11 136:10,12 137:15,17 145:20 236:6,17 251:22 280:10 tenant145:19,21 tend 127:9 tentative271:12 272:9 term 94:3 113:14,15 116:2 125:4 201:12 267:2 274:13 terms 11:1 20:1 34:7 49:15 57:6 66:8,13 70:10 72:19 98:14,15 105:7 113:2 114:7 115:19 139:18 142:21 156:3 170:19 171:9 204:16 212:2,4 214:17 217:12 224:16 231:5 232:13 235:21 244:12 245:7,8 252:6 255:18 279:12 terribly221:3 test 11:15 12:17 14:12 15:11 16:22 18:20 19:2,18 20:2,8 21:16 24:10 25:2,19,22 60:16 63:16 64:11 65:7 89:2,11 97:16 98:3 110:11 120:17 123:18 124:4 125:2 126:19,21 127:1 129:8,13 130:19 131:1 153:2 156:6 160:14 162:9,16,22 163:8 165:14,17 166:14,16,17,19 167:3,12 168:5 169:11,12,13 171:6 172:3,4,19 174:3,7,10,17 175:17 177:18,22 178:3 180:17 181:7,8,9,12 184:12 185:1,20 186:1,20 187:20,21,22 188:4,7 189:1,8,14,18 190:1,4,10,12,17 ,21

191:7,12,15,19 192:5,22 193:22 194:1,8 196:1,16,21 199:6,7,16 212:20 219:20,21 224:11 228:17 230:6 231:6,14,17 232:21 233:9,22 234:16 241:6,10 242:10,12,17,18 254:17 267:19 270:9 271:6,14 273:20 274:9,12 276:4 277:6,11 278:3,9,16,19 279:8,13 280:2 309:22 310:2 tested15:17 16:5,8 17:6 21:12 128:7 132:21 137:11 156:13 165:9 166:1 177:14 179:8 180:12 188:10,16 242:10 testimony 314:6,8,11 testing12:13,14,15 14:21 15:6 17:18 19:16 22:11 24:8 63:14 128:11,13 133:16 155:15,19,20 162:11,13,15 163:19 169:17,22 170:15,19 173:20 175:5,10 176:18 180:4 182:11 184:15 185:17 188:1

189:1,5 190:11 191:17 192:4 221:3 222:3,11 242:15 tests 12:16,21 161:22 text 121:9 307:9 texting260:12 thank 7:15 20:4 24:9 32:18 35:12,16 69:20 70:15,19 73:20 77:21 90:3 91:11 93:2,5 94:5,21 110:9 117:5 121:8,11 122:15 130:6 146:21 181:18 192:18 199:18,20,21 200:13 206:11 209:20 212:1 215:7 221:11 239:11,12 240:7 251:2 thanks 7:18,19 8:14 10:12 19:22 88:7 142:16 198:5 223:21 228:13 231:18 310:22 313:11 that?s 5:20 14:20 19:11,16 27:21 29:13 30:1 33:10 34:3 36:22 45:22 46:7 61:14 68:16 73:20 75:20 76:1 87:14,15 88:1 92:15 100:4 101:2 102:17 105:9 106:22 110:1 114:21 117:4 118:10,21

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 54

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 131:5 135:15,18 143:22 148:7 151:18 158:17 166:12 169:12 173:2 179:5 193:17 194:11 196:4 203:8 208:14 216:10 221:16,18 234:9 235:21 240:6 241:1 248:2,7 265:22 269:18 279:15,20 285:16 291:13 298:6 That?s--I?d 25:7 that--I72:2 their--would 190:10 themselves 157:2 276:2 theoretical214:16 theory 58:12 there?s 11:21 26:21 232:1,5 thereafter

314:9 Therein 145:15 they?re10:5 They?ve 24:20 things--if 270:6 thinkers 94:3 think--I 276:3 third 12:14 63:2 78:12 81:9,15 114:1 119:3 172:10 182:15 188:19 199:3 268:13,17,19 287:9 this--a39:15

this--I 209:9 Thompson 3:9 6:9 8:6 88:10,11 156:19,20 158:9 159:5 183:7 thought--higher 156:2 thoughts 20:19 38:3 106:3 264:18 thousands 24:6 three-phase 221:14,19 222:4,10 223:8,9,10,14,18 224:3,5,12,22 225:9,15,21 226:5,12,16,20 three-quarters 225:14 threw249:5,8 throttled121:16 throughout206:7 231:1 throw53:1 86:18 throwing 232:3 261:5 thrust159:3 thumb 28:12 139:18 225:12 thumbs 174:1 Thursday1:10 290:17 tickets 269:3 tie 159:10 tier47:8 tiered218:16,18

tiering91:4 tight289:16 tighten 144:1 times--the132:4 tiny142:12 title239:1 today5:7 10:11 26:9 28:21 29:9,17 30:1 56:14,16 73:9 101:3,10 102:19 116:20 120:5 126:14 130:21 164:13 167:13 168:10 192:5 196:13,20 197:1 209:5 210:9 218:3 248:13,20 270:16 312:9 today?s 282:15 today--we275:13 tolerance23:1 133:17 177:15 tolerances 17:9 185:16 Tom2:13 6:20 33:15 34:19 43:22 46:8 56:21 57:11 83:22 85:1 95:7 104:8 106:10 109:5 262:13 265:5 286:1 Tom?s 38:5 91:21 tool173:7 175:15 tooling 22:4,7 tools 71:6 top 133:5 142:8 168:5 200:10 247:7 256:8 257:18 topic 174:21 227:22 232:18 282:8 284:11 topics 262:12 282:9 284:9 to--right 275:12 torque159:10 total203:21 totality 104:10 totally148:15 258:17 to--the143:6 touched 166:8 174:21 touching 38:21 tough 144:17 212:10 toward 30:19 41:18 65:21 73:2 82:12 264:16 309:22 towards 30:7 53:6 65:14,15 163:11 226:4 230:19 289:1 290:16 town 265:15 290:12 Towsley3:10 6:8 121:22 124:13 135:4 234:20 285:8 299:10 303:16 305:19 310:17,22 311:22 312:16 track 59:5

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 55

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 trade57:21 58:5 tradeoff 175:22 212:19 trades 42:12 trading176:10 traditional20:7,10 train 66:8 transfers 41:21 transformer 225:17 transformers 175:14 transition 30:7 52:18 55:4,8 translatable 251:19,21 252:5 translate136:16 295:11 296:7 298:17 translated48:21 translates 55:20 205:14 translation 296:8 298:19 300:2 travel 282:17 travels 313:13 trend214:2 trends 108:12 triangles 133:7 205:11 tried46:10 57:7 trim144:8 145:6 trimmer 145:11 true49:22 207:5 257:4 269:18 291:13 314:10 truly37:11 44:6 83:17 305:20 trust165:13 190:17 truth 64:2 try9:13 17:3 22:14 40:19,20 50:20 52:5 69:6 87:2 92:2 111:3 130:11,18 152:21 177:7 229:15 233:9 236:22 241:15 256:3 258:2 278:6 282:21 295:8,11 298:14,17 299:19 301:12 trying40:6 50:17 52:2,13 58:9 69:11,14 76:2,20 77:9 78:16 79:12 80:11 138:11 143:10 158:6 169:1 187:16 195:2 229:12 233:4 236:21 237:14 238:18 245:8 250:16 251:17 252:4 256:11,14 286:20,21 297:17 299:16 304:15 305:21 TSL 43:10 TSL-3 42:3 106:11 TSL-5 57:17 TSLs 42:8 Tuesday290:3 293:12 310:20 turbine 300:6 turbines 237:18

Turn 145:12 turned 264:20 turning 5:15 turns 44:3 69:12 107:18 270:6 two-thirds 38:14 type 12:1 27:8 36:8 43:13 81:8 101:6 132:13 154:22 168:15 173:9 202:11 217:4 223:12,19 242:15 251:15 266:9 283:16 types 15:1 21:18,19 33:18,20 34:6,11 38:7 39:11 90:14 97:5 127:13 129:9 175:3,11 202:18 210:2 220:5 229:9 230:1,8,9 234:9 242:7 254:20 263:3 272:2 273:8 typewriting 314:9 typical75:11 162:7 typically19:18 51:15 57:1 62:22 64:4 93:10 94:17 141:10 235:7 U U.S 2:4,6 123:15,17,22 124:3,4 201:20 297:7 298:3 uh-huh 92:16

ultimate67:5 279:8 ultimately179:11 uncertainty

63:19 uncontrolled 112:4 118:4 119:12 125:9,13,14 208:13 217:15 259:11 undercutting 298:5 underlying 180:17 understand 22:14 23:6,19 27:10 40:14 57:7 61:10 80:13 83:10 87:2 100:16 101:4,8,11 104:6 133:21 147:1 163:14 166:21 167:14 169:1 170:16 186:18 187:17 237:14 258:8 305:10,20 306:2 understanding 16:7 18:7 27:15 31:13 34:14 109:15 180:12 187:18 191:15 214:15 220:17 226:14 240:7 249:2 280:7 301:21 understands 161:11 understood 27:22 92:21 96:2 162:3 163:7

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 56

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 unexpected303:12 unfortunately 211:15 232:13 UNIDENTIFIED 7:14 82:22 198:2 275:17 uniform 254:5 unintended 304:14 305:10,22 unique 113:15 223:18 unit245:17 United 235:8 units 15:7 69:15 123:17,22 124:1 235:2,6 246:7 unless 5:21 19:1 227:21 252:19 301:21 307:16 311:5 unlikely 227:6 234:9 unnecessarily 306:6 un-ratioed247:5 update 118:18 123:22 264:19 265:3 311:4,13 312:9 updated 123:16 updates 311:10 upgrade 128:5,7 144:20 upgrading 88:16,18 146:17 upon 12:4,16 15:19 33:21 60:4 78:11 153:9 164:20 263:2,6 uptake 65:22 USA3:11 usage 103:6 172:5 useful 65:8 115:7 158:17 170:22 175:15 253:19 254:8 262:16 275:22 279:20 280:20 282:7,13,16 309:4 user252:5 253:5 users 96:11,12 104:11 us--I 92:10 using--we 97:15 usually 93:10 143:16 178:1 225:14 229:18 us--we 42:3 utilities 6:12 60:11,18 65:9 66:14 78:8 79:7 utility78:3,13,19 79:1 80:18 81:3,22 271:8 304:16 utility?s 81:17 utilization 65:15 utilize 21:6 utilizing 228:11 302:1 303:22 V V.12 312:16,17,20 vacant303:7 valid 13:17 22:22

validated 172:22 173:13 174:2 validates 177:17,22 validation 13:16 176:18 valuable 255:13 value 42:9 44:3 49:3,20 58:2 62:1 76:17 112:22 113:16 119:1 123:13,19,20 127:1 128:8 132:10 135:20 155:19 157:13,16 179:6 191:6 204:22 205:15,16,17 207:19 208:10 233:9 237:8 240:12 247:7 248:12 250:14 251:1 295:16,17,20 296:2,4,5,6,11,1 2,15,17 297:18 299:2 302:19 305:3 values 60:13 62:16 70:11 71:14,21 73:10,19 101:14 106:17 119:16 126:11,20 132:16 135:13,16 160:10,13,15,17 164:6 171:5,6,11 178:11,13 181:15 189:6 203:3 206:18 207:7 208:12 234:6 239:5

249:20 294:16 295:5,10,12 296:20 298:18 300:1 301:13 302:20 304:2,3,8,12,15 307:7 311:14 312:4 values--it249:17 values--the296:2 valve 138:4,15 variability152:20 variable 84:10 92:20 98:15 103:4 105:11 106:19 111:21 113:11,12 114:10,17 117:1 118:2 119:15 126:1,2 151:12 171:16 218:21 219:1,6 244:20 245:2 247:6 259:19 variables 112:5 131:13 227:14,18 variation 17:8 21:22 22:22 177:19 218:2 varies 140:8 149:5 various 33:3 187:1 vary23:2 162:1 varying34:10 vehicle 174:14,17,18 vendor80:19 160:2 183:11 184:3

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 57

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 vendor?s 182:15 183:12 vendors 184:6 vendor--the184:3 venue 241:12,14 verification 169:17 verified 164:1 verify169:6,21 versa77:11 version 135:6,7,8,9,17 313:1 versions 244:15 versus 20:2 70:10 73:3 85:22 86:3 112:6 114:10 128:11 133:4 141:17 147:19 164:21 168:13 171:5 194:17 224:3 235:19 242:10 243:19 245:5 256:9 261:21 276:14 305:1 vertical 237:17 300:6 vested78:13,17 vestige147:22 211:8 VFD 121:17 126:4 199:15 216:18 245:20 253:5,6 VFDs 270:13 vice77:11 view51:21 59:10,13 62:12 63:5 74:16 93:7 179:20 246:11 282:7 viewing 13:20 virtually142:13 225:8 vision 47:5 visit203:6 VL 116:11 244:16 voice256:4 voiced 255:7 void 11:9 volume40:22 43:1 voluntary82:11 vote9:22 37:2 110:19 124:20 125:2 243:9 259:8 260:16 264:4 277:13 280:6,16 291:12 votes 268:18 280:15 voting125:11 268:17 280:18 vs 4:3 VSD 96:11,12 VTS 294:4 303:17,19 307:18 W wait130:7 291:11,14 waiting 183:3 walk288:7,9 wall 63:10 Waltner8:2 warrant19:21 warranted 48:5 224:8 warrants 125:3 was--again 256:12 Washington 1:8 5:8 310:9 wasn?t70:2 72:3 121:14 135:18 213:1 239:2 wasting 141:12 water3:3 24:5 138:20 145:21 146:4 184:15 234:16 237:11,19 242:10,17 watts 116:12,14 wave 199:8 219:2,6,14 wax 222:12 way--about177:1 ways 23:14 28:4 91:20 111:15 120:14 150:14 194:3 we?d 32:22 33:7 35:10 99:17 254:1 283:18 we?ll28:7 30:13 112:7 140:17 201:9 we?re24:12 27:17,20 37:1 40:19,20 41:13 53:9 55:14 56:13 57:5 71:3 80:20 85:11,12 97:15 99:5 107:20,21 110:10,12,21 111:3,14 126:14 127:16 141:2,3

150:3 156:8 178:6 191:9 194:22 196:5 228:19 234:10 237:17,18 242:22 244:4 248:8 286:20 293:15 298:9,11 we?ve 174:1 wear105:15 wears 22:4,8 webinar 115:17 120:6 123:12 265:14 281:18,21 282:4,12,18 283:11 284:2,7,16,20 289:3,14 292:8,19 293:7 294:7 310:4 website 183:12 Wednesday 290:16,20 291:1 292:1,8 weeds 116:10 230:13 249:18 week 213:22 250:11 289:21 290:1,6,16 291:18 292:9 293:7 weeks 289:19 weigh 310:2 weighing 57:14 58:1 weight259:21 weighted 59:19 111:22 112:2,19

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 58

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 113:14 119:1,11 122:17 125:10,16 248:12 295:19 weighting 118:8 119:19 208:12 259:16 weightings 260:6 weights 4:5 110:20 123:6 125:15 258:21 259:2,6 260:1 Weintraub 3:16 7:8 293:21 297:16,21 298:9 299:6,15,21 302:8 303:9 304:7,22 305:8,11,16 306:8 307:2,11,22 308:4 weird 132:11 welcome5:4,10 83:3,6 91:14 198:14 201:21 202:15 210:8 227:8 242:4 261:20 264:17 281:5 well--over51:12 We're250:6,20 West291:20 what?s 8:16 27:4 40:16 55:9 130:12 184:14 235:7 whatever16:20 40:22 43:16 68:13 75:8 149:15 154:8,16 161:17 165:6 167:11 168:6 180:18 253:15 256:13 267:1,9 273:7 275:4 whatsoever19:6 288:18 where--then 108:5 Whereupon 198:8 313:14 whether14:13 21:9 25:13 36:14 65:19 83:11,12 89:2 92:12 120:21 124:3 140:2 155:22 158:1 159:7 167:10 168:2 188:10 215:9 216:14,20 223:4,14 224:3 232:18 239:4 243:17,18 244:7,22 245:6 266:22 272:16 274:21 277:13,17 282:4,6,8 283:14 289:2 298:20 310:20 whichever 157:6,10 whole 16:9 69:18 76:3 95:18 112:5 143:14 170:18 178:9 192:6 222:12 whom 314:4 whomever

13:21 whose 178:6 314:6 Widder3:17 7:10 9:16 25:4,9 26:15,19 28:11,22 29:21 30:4 40:3 97:21 110:8,9 112:16 114:9,12,17 115:14,17 116:5,15 117:8,13,15,22 121:6,10,15 122:1,16 123:16 124:6,11,18 125:8 126:7 127:3,15 128:21 130:8 134:8 135:8 137:3 141:18 142:6,18 143:2 146:21 147:4 149:8 150:7,12 151:14,18 153:4,19 155:2,10,16 156:8 157:9 158:14 161:3 165:8 166:15 169:10 181:5,17 182:8,17 184:13 188:9,14,17,21 189:3,20 190:12,19 191:4,22 192:22 193:3,8,17,21 195:19 196:8 197:10 198:17,18,22 199:19,21 200:15,20 201:1,8 206:8,13 207:4 210:4 211:3,7,11,20 212:14,18 213:5,9,16 214:6,20 215:6 216:2 217:6 218:11,18

219:3,18,19 220:11,16 221:10,16 222:5,9,20 223:20 224:1 226:7 227:7 228:13 230:22 231:9 232:9 233:11 234:5 235:22 236:4 237:20 238:3,13,17,20 239:13 240:6,19 241:17,21 242:2 244:21 245:12,16 246:9,15,19 248:8 249:11,16,20 250:5,10 251:3 254:10 255:10 257:2 258:6,13,20 259:8,11 260:21 261:18 271:12 273:5 276:19 279:11,17 280:1,11 281:10,19 285:16 310:12 311:12,18,20 312:3,17 313:3,7 wide 138:4 widely 151:1 Williams 3:19 7:5 44:5 45:15 94:11 96:3 97:13 98:1,19 99:3 101:13 102:4 106:21 107:4 160:21 161:5 191:14 207:1 213:15,20

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 59

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 214:12 234:12 244:6 261:3 275:2 281:2 307:14 308:3 311:4,17,20 willing 9:21 65:5 72:5 235:4 286:18 306:12 win 76:7,8 wincing 17:19 windfall301:8 winding 216:19 window 27:4 94:8 wire 184:15 234:16 242:10,16 wired 231:17 wireless 228:6,8,11 wiring 225:13 wish 10:9 32:11,13 72:4 82:15 177:3 wishes 106:1 witness 314:6,8,11 won?t149:18 241:13 wonder 212:6 Wonderful196:9 wondering 49:18 65:18 82:14 95:11 136:14 224:20 256:10 281:20 282:21 wondering--I 43:12 work 11:6 21:2 29:12 30:3 37:9 52:16 59:14 74:3,12 77:1 105:2 120:11 169:2 170:3 171:16 176:17 187:17 198:7 201:6 233:5 251:9 267:19 270:13 277:19 285:6 290:14 294:5 305:14 312:1 worked 54:1 141:19 working 1:4 5:6 16:11 20:9 21:17 29:4 37:21 71:2,3 82:12,17 115:5 125:1 130:18,21 159:17 179:13 222:21 243:8 257:12 258:3 264:11 267:4 270:8 271:20 277:4 278:5 292:6 workload 275:11 works 11:20 60:4 126:6 157:7,10 271:7 285:1 300:4 306:15 world 28:2 51:13 55:10 218:1 worms 170:19 worried 232:11 worry231:19 261:8 worse 21:10 155:19 234:4 295:17 worst157:15 204:17

worth 59:4 176:22 214:9 226:11 280:17 wouldn?t 8:3 24:1 27:9 32:8 39:8 50:11 62:5 95:2 100:21 101:1 128:16,19 148:22 153:8 210:20 236:15 246:7 261:7 285:13 293:1 would--unless 12:11 write 29:5 157:11 160:8 256:7 262:20 275:17 writes 88:4 writing 27:6 286:19,20 written 27:1 157:11 wrong 50:5 94:17 166:22 wrote 9:20 26:17 82:18 107:2 X Xi207:12 Xylem2:17 6:4 21:14 30:16 33:15 36:22 39:2 45:12 49:1 50:16 61:1 86:10 106:8 109:10 115:22 139:1,21 141:5 144:2 151:10 153:12 170:11 215:11 225:19 237:10 239:19 260:9 263:20

268:1 269:13 277:20 283:3 289:15 291:9 297:13 299:1 306:18 308:9 Y yea306:22 years--one91:6 yellow70:9 158:2,14 173:5 186:18 193:18 196:15,21 205:7 yep 259:7 yesterday

20:6 26:8 28:13 31:12 33:16 34:15 41:7 44:22 46:3 49:2 70:1 91:1 99:16 103:20 109:19 116:2 171:3 283:5 285:2 287:12 294:20 yesterday?s 43:8 yesterday--I 84:3 yet98:4 116:3,8 155:22 156:1 170:5 174:21 236:13 263:7 266:15 269:3 272:7 281:18 Yi201:11 207:11,21 you?re63:4 91:14 92:15 98:13 103:2,4 128:10 136:14 142:10 149:6 157:18 159:17 172:2 181:13 193:4

### Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014 Page 60

(866) 448 - DEPO www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012 203:7 212:7 216:17 233:19 238:2 241:15 248:19 278:15 298:4 301:8 yourself 18:16 203:6 Z zero 43:20 195:14 251:4