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--I 149:14

94 149:15,19

95 235:7

950 270:3

98 237:3,7 240:11

9th 290:10

A

a.m 1:11 5:2 198:8

268:20

abbreviated

271:16

ability 44:17 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

absence 47:7

243:10

absolutely 50:17

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

accepted 164:22

accessibility

252:10

accessible 13:20

61:21

accident 279:15

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

accordance 169:12

189:8

according 188:16

account 102:5

126:3,15 127:13

131:2 150:16

152:1 200:4

217:12 242:6

accounting 124:19

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

accrued 60:1

accuracy 167:15

176:10,22

183:20 185:16

212:19

accurate 36:22

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

achieve 33:2 35:3

68:19

achieved 59:1

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

acted 264:12

action 20:2 264:14

274:21

314:13,18

active 210:16

activities 19:6

activity 9:11

actual 62:4 99:5

109:4 128:10

153:1,5 160:16

171:5 175:18

176:19 182:15

203:14 225:3

actually 9:9 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

adequately 283:15

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

adjustment 232:7

administrative

27:19

admit 238:4

adopt 11:16 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

advantage 53:10

84:9

advantages 78:2

255:8

adverse 303:13

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

advocating 252:22

AEDM 23:16

172:21

173:1,9,16

174:15 175:1

176:7 187:11

AEDMs 174:21

affect 4:4 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

against 80:12

211:2

agenda 26:7 29:14

105:20 265:1

291:4

aggregate 42:11

aggregating 312:5

ago 13:1 51:14

247:21

agreed 29:11 30:1

33:21 154:5

263:2,6 264:9

288:11

agreeing 309:14

agreement 9:22

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

air 24:5 63:11

airport 308:11

akin 9:1

Al 8:7

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

allocate 26:9

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

already 19:9 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

alternative 175:2

262:3

alternatives

133:13

am 27:11 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

America 51:16

55:7,13

American 3:3

48:16,22 49:3

51:15 52:7

among 42:8 276:1

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

analytical 102:18

analyze 124:15

analyzed 96:6

animal 148:3

announce 289:5

annual 253:20

254:15,18,19

annualized 66:21

answer 9:8 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

anticipate 29:3,10

45:7 67:10 98:5

130:20 291:6

anxious 227:19

anybody 35:21

228:8 240:15

258:18

anymore 246:16

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

anyway 65:8

120:12 182:12

220:16 239:3

256:22 284:9

303:8

anywhere 37:1

apiece 38:12

apologize 117:15

121:10 137:12

198:20 238:13

239:2

apparently 228:5

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

apply 80:6 86:14

96:14 173:11

240:10 255:17

259:19

applying 205:12

appreciate 197:18

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

approval 168:18

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

area 27:8 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

argue 80:12 280:9

arrangement

153:7

arrive 56:22

269:11

articulate 170:5

articulated 170:13

artifact 214:18

Ashley 63:6 64:1,2

ASHRAE 25:19

86:13 144:4,6

aside 52:1 239:17

asking--TSL-3

56:5

aspect 58:8 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

assessment 51:7

assign 12:17

assigned 12:7

assignment 275:10

associated 71:22

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

assume 36:2

38:8,10 62:5

96:7 103:11

151:5,12 158:7

221:13 228:22

229:21

assumed 95:16

120:5 151:10

160:13 245:2

assumes 252:14

assuming 103:12

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

attempt 45:16

220:8,15 223:2

attempting 46:12

attorney 314:15

authority 14:12

19:9 90:11

authorize 253:17

authorized 262:16

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

Avenue 1:7

average 15:8

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

away 41:13 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

Baldor 2:21

218:15

ball 45:13 86:18

222:12

ballot 24:11

ballpark 37:8,22

225:3

Baltimore 5:12

bang 85:17

bar 32:4 47:13

Barbour 8:6

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

basically 31:18

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--I 257:17

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

bear 279:8

bearing 122:9

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?ll 201:1

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

Beloit 2:12 6:19

22:20 161:11

beneficial 163:15

257:11 267:20

benefit 27:1 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

Berkeley 3:19 7:7

besides 133:19

202:1 236:21

239:15

best 18:6 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

bet 127:2

be--this 123:19

Betsy 2:5 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

bigger 51:21 139:7

biggest 10:20

289:18 299:8

bin 134:11

236:12,17

bins 131:17

213:13,21,22

bit 17:22 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

Blackberry 70:6

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

boat 87:21

Bob 8:6

body 25:19,20

bonus 267:16

272:1,15 275:9

Boteler 153:18

bottom 33:6

125:15 133:4

142:9 144:12

147:18,19,21

207:18 232:12

257:16

box 158:2,14

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

breakout 224:16

breaks 36:3

Brent 2:21

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

briefly 210:7

307:15

bring 14:3 69:12

217:7 228:1

276:11 281:7,15

283:13

broad-based

77:12

broader 53:6

broke 198:15

210:3

broken 119:4

Brookman 2:2

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

brought 48:16

63:6 154:11

218:14

buck 85:17

budget 17:17

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

bulk 29:13 263:17

291:6

bullet 114:1 132:8

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

busy 117:9

buy 163:1 178:19

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

calculate 62:4 99:5

160:20 173:19

207:10,17 253:9

296:2

calculated 120:3,5

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

calculating 60:14

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

calculator 124:14

130:13,15

134:14

135:12,19

136:2,3 137:8

197:4 306:13

311:11,14,19

312:6

calendar 293:16

calibrating 174:3

calibration 173:20

California 2:15

6:11,13,15

21:2,3 143:13

can?t 36:8 52:13

99:10 149:14

211:14,17

244:13 278:17

279:9 290:21

306:4

capability 44:16

capacity 38:4

163:7 183:17

capital 1:14 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

capture 104:10

120:10,12

130:17 219:21

254:4

captures 120:8

capturing 148:1

care 165:7 221:7

258:14

Carrying 207:8

case 8:9 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(via 2:10

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

certify 13:2 169:2

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

certifying 12:19

188:2,6,15

189:14

cetera 75:12

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

chance 18:12,17

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

charge 186:4

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

chart 95:9 201:15

charts 32:7 297:14

chase 255:5

check 25:8 134:16

305:18 307:3

checklist 266:16

chime 265:19

choice 60:2 75:18

168:13 170:8

176:1,21

choices 60:4 75:4

140:21

choose 42:2,8

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

Christopher 3:13

Chuck 8:8 268:16

circulate 291:5

circulator 225:7

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

clarify 20:5 48:3

61:13 94:12

99:13 100:1,13

107:21 170:20

286:9

clarity 163:12

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

clear 40:4,12

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

clearly 30:22

35:13 41:11 47:5

82:17 84:4 122:6

129:10 137:4

158:5

clearly--we 61:8

clients 69:6

close 5:22 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

closely 54:1

closer 43:22 56:8

197:6

closing 308:20

closure 9:14 56:16

105:8

cluster 252:10

co 146:2

coalescence 269:7

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

cognizant 42:6

87:18 271:19

coin 30:12

collaboratively

74:4

colleague 218:15

collect 64:22

158:22 230:9

306:16

collected 169:11

236:12 300:11

302:14

collecting 236:14

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

comments 64:22

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

commercial 5:5

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

common 26:2 39:6

68:3 139:2,9,14

264:19

communicate

75:17 255:13

communicated 8:2

companies 27:3

37:13 49:9

55:1,2,5,15,17

74:18 83:11

company 1:14

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

compel 160:9

compete 271:10

competition 88:5

competitive 88:3

complaints 14:6

complete 69:17

176:13 237:4,5

291:5 309:8

completed 309:6

completely 27:22

54:12 130:15,20

278:18 283:7

complex 93:10

97:11

complexity 90:2

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

compliant 14:14

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

comply 84:21 86:7

87:22 93:8

159:22

complying 41:9

64:6

component 51:6

73:3 189:1 274:7

comprehensive

271:13

computer 304:1

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

conceptually 10:3

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

concerned 237:21

238:7,10 255:6

301:20 303:13

concerns 22:7

31:1,9 256:4

258:19 287:20

concise 179:17

conclude 263:8

concluded 313:15

condition 137:20

138:6 251:15

conditioning 24:5

63:12

Conducting

188:22

conference 262:15

270:4

conferring 311:21

confidence 141:7,8

178:7,13

configuration

134:7

confirm 28:20

106:11 160:4

268:13

292:12,13,17,19

293:18

confirmed 116:7

164:7

confirming 240:8

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

conservative 108:6

152:21 155:14

156:15 160:15

205:7,20,21

207:6 236:22

consider 16:21

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

considered 16:9

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

consistency 231:2

consistent 118:7

120:8 254:14

260:6

consistently 135:3

254:18

consists 178:17

consolidation

51:19

constant 89:3,4

111:21 112:6

113:12 114:10

117:1 118:1,3

122:7 217:20

244:20 247:6

259:14

constantly 136:20

constituencies

276:2

constrained

104:21

constraints 91:19

105:5

construct

122:12,14

250:18 262:5

constructed

176:15

consult 203:6

276:1

consultant 285:13

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

Cont 3:1,2

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

contour 10:4

contractor 71:4

contribute 297:14

contributors 77:10

control 72:14

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

copper 225:13

copyright 25:13

Corp 3:6

Corporation 2:17

5:19 6:3

correct 43:9 45:4

93:1 94:10

104:13 134:7,8

166:21 220:20

245:11 265:6

269:17

305:17,18

correctly 63:5

66:16 104:9

249:3 301:21

correlation 43:7

cost 43:2 67:4

69:14,16

75:6,7,11 83:17

89:19 191:2,3

252:18

cost/benefit 76:17

costs 44:16 76:12

77:18 92:7 309:1

couldn?t 91:5

190:17 243:16

285:22

Council 2:14 6:21

counsel 2:6 7:3

314:12,15

counter 275:21

counterbalance

50:18

counterparts 54:6

counterpoint

275:21

counting 298:10

country 282:17

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

course 16:21 65:10

275:8

Court 314:20

cover 24:5 82:1

90:15 221:9

261:17 279:18

282:8 284:8,9,12

304:16

coverage 226:14

covered 90:17

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

create 11:3 17:16

52:3 209:2 229:9

301:20

create--actually

213:10

creates 146:18

creating 42:15

180:18 228:8

credibility 71:22

77:17

credit 41:18 65:21

242:7 308:15

crept 46:22 47:3

criteria 263:5

critical 173:2

215:15 278:20

cross 36:10 42:13

48:18

crosswalk 46:3

crowd 198:1

CSA 162:14 194:9

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

curve 108:14

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

custom 81:12

253:2

customer 67:5

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

cut 82:10 255:4

295:8 298:21

cutoffs 249:14

cutting 298:21

cycle 75:6,11

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

Daniel 3:16 7:8

41:7 297:11

darn 255:22

data 13:8,11,15

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

day 5:5 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

Daylight 290:15

days 162:12 266:7

268:22 269:1

275:11 280:10

310:12 313:12

dead--utilizing

304:1

deal 27:22 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

decrease 142:2,3

148:13

decreasing 126:16

dedicated 270:4

deem 65:5 77:12

deep 14:20 150:4

default 101:14

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

definitely 41:6

145:3 233:12

268:2 293:21

definition 117:14

163:3

definitional 263:4

definitively 278:17

degree 21:4

Delaney 2:12 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

deliberate 274:12

deliver 89:15 90:2

270:7

deliverable 267:2

270:8

deliverables

266:10

delta 101:16

demands 50:18

demonstrate

176:18

denominator

112:9 117:12

229:18

Department 1:3,7

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

dependent 289:11

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

derive 62:17

derived 96:21

describe 125:6

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

designer 140:14

designing 38:18

59:15 68:7 80:18

140:20

designs 41:3

58:20,22 300:19

desire 175:17

despite 10:4

detail 11:8 112:8

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--a 187:7

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

detrimental 122:9

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

development 2:11

21:16 308:14

devote 85:22

Diagnostics 2:11

dial 145:12,14

dictates 177:10

didn?t 10:20 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

different 11:2,22

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

differently 223:3

different--we

202:4

differing 16:1

difficult 18:1

121:17 143:5

145:7 178:8

difficulty 290:22

digging 286:7

Digital 314:20

diligence 25:18,21

dimension 245:9

dire 138:21

direct 95:3 296:7

directed 264:1

direction 52:5

67:18 68:5 115:6

116:7 314:10

directional

171:1,3

directly 71:2 253:8

disadvantage

154:11

disagree 116:4

181:6 238:11

disciplined 22:10

discontinue

228:10,12

discount 58:3

107:13

discounting 107:6

discourage 129:12

discrepancy 156:9

discrete 131:17

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?t 28:11,13

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?t 10:10 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

door 78:16 196:2

270:2 293:13

300:14,15 301:6

dots 205:6,7

206:15

double 32:2,3

305:18

doubt 84:8

Doug 2:2 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

draft 231:3

dramatically

148:14 222:7,8

drastic 156:9

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

driver 81:7,10

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

duly 314:7

duration 106:19

during 294:7

duty 216:14 218:1

E

eager 192:12

earlier 58:19 74:2

182:11 202:10

208:22 216:20

242:9 248:10

250:13 253:14

256:10

early 7:20 197:22

272:1,17

ease 96:9

easier 51:22

286:10

easily 61:20 96:15

162:7 163:3

251:19,21 252:5

East 291:20

Eastern 290:15

291:2 292:21

easy 38:9 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

ECM 128:5 159:9

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

educated 76:9

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

effect 11:7 42:15

50:10,12,15

159:9

effective 60:19

75:2 80:7 173:10

255:22 312:9

effectively 168:5

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

efficiency 3:8 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

efficient 77:19

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

effort 27:19 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

Eight 48:8

either 9:2 48:4

91:4,7 131:5

168:11 175:4

223:11 250:7,8

265:17 290:6

306:15

either/or 160:6

elaborate 77:10

electric 2:21 3:5

6:12,14 18:14

52:10 264:7

electrical 111:22

138:8 225:11

electricity 89:20

element 14:2,10

elements 19:14

64:5 165:9 186:7

elicited 168:18

eliminated 135:21

eliminating 306:6

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-mail 283:9

emanate 178:12

emanating 228:6

emphasize 134:18

262:19

emphasizes 85:5

employed

314:12,16

employee 314:15

employs 134:14

enable 64:11 74:14

76:4

enable--we 179:21

enclosures 214:16

encourage 92:1

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

enforce 19:9

enforcement 10:15

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

engineer 71:4

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

entirely 18:4

112:14,16

envisioning 61:16

EPACT 101:5

equal 58:13

251:22 271:11

equality 47:6

equally 118:8

119:1,10,18

122:17

125:10,16

129:17 248:12

259:16,21

equals 155:14

249:16

equate 103:12

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

equivalent 46:5

equivalently 234:8

Erica 3:14 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

essential 274:7

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

estimate 43:14

62:1,8 73:11

89:22 96:13

139:6

estimated 108:7

estimates 72:7

89:19 144:20

estimating 66:20

145:13

estimation 78:6

et 75:12 251:16

EU 45:20,21

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

evaluate 14:13

64:16 78:3 215:3

236:18 269:2

evaluating 77:16

evenly 38:8

event 277:7

everybody 26:20

40:13 52:2 71:5

80:13 95:8

185:14 225:5

257:16 269:11

276:21

everyone 5:4

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

everything 16:21

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

Excel 13:9

except 118:16

120:20 158:7

exceptions 15:5

exchange 309:10

excluded 263:3

exclusive 75:22

excruciating

228:16

exempted 301:22

exist 45:10 174:19

189:9 191:22

existing 63:15

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

expected 210:20

expecting 298:2

expert 144:3

expertise 197:16

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

explicit 135:18

227:17,21

explicitly 226:9,12

exploration 74:7

expressed 246:8,9

extend 306:4

extended 34:22

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

extending 302:3

303:5

extent 44:17 59:1

166:10 267:3

287:3

extra 55:22

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

extremely 144:16

281:11

eye 309:22

F

face 5:22 22:1

205:17

FACILITATOR

2:2

facing 158:20

fact 10:4 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

factor 88:1 104:1

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

fairly 42:5 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

familiar 18:22

25:16 112:7

220:2,3 278:3,8

families 39:4,8

127:14 161:19

162:1,9

family 41:7 127:8

162:1

fan 221:1

fancy 66:1

fashion 77:2

fast 290:4

faster 304:11

favor 164:17,19

168:10 250:20

301:1 302:3

305:14

favorable 218:10

favorite 218:16

favorites 80:20

feasible 69:9

121:15

feature 20:2

Federal 1:4 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

feel 10:21 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

felt 32:4 190:17

Fernstrom 2:15

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

first 15:14 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

fit 175:7 206:18

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

flat 140:2,3,7

159:10

flattening 212:7

flatter 108:10

flexibility 63:13

269:9

flip 30:12

floor 232:8

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

Flowserve 3:6

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

force 22:9

foregoing 197:14

314:5,7

forget 70:14

forgetting 161:7

forgive 75:1

forgotten 266:1

forgot--we 97:19

form 67:17 68:5

77:2 279:8

formal 275:3,6

format 241:11

300:1

formatted 13:9

Forrestal 5:8

forth 37:3,21

54:15 56:14

109:12 173:21

260:12 275:14

312:22

Forty 56:7

68:14,15

Forty-five 198:1

forum 284:17

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

fractional 205:9

208:6

frame 39:10,17

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

frequently 25:17

Friday 260:22

290:7

friendly 168:15

friends 92:1

front 9:3 79:2

120:13 176:4

199:17

frustrated 54:7

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

game 35:15 115:12

143:5 232:13

299:9

gaming 142:22

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

gate 47:9

gather 98:8

gathered 201:16

gathering 153:10

gauge 83:18

geared 73:2

gears 293:22

Gen 2:6

general 7:2 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

generally 11:19

12:4 15:15 57:12

243:6 304:11

305:3

generate 43:1

generated 24:10

184:22 185:12

206:14 207:7

Generating 202:20

generic 209:2

generically 154:21

210:11

gentleman 228:5

gets 117:9 139:19

160:3 235:17

278:11

getting 18:21 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

gist 295:1

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

global 41:8 44:7

51:13,20,22 52:3

55:1,3 294:22

297:5

glory 118:22

goal 32:20,22 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

graduate 201:6

granted 21:5

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

Greg 2:10 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

guy 186:11 237:11

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?t 116:3

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

Handzel 2:16 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

happy 28:9 150:10

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

harmonize 52:15

295:5 298:11

299:17,20

harmonized 54:12

250:17

hash 121:7

hasn?t 203:17

hate 126:22

have--I 137:4

haven?t 21:15

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

hear 58:15 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

hearing 88:14,15

150:12 171:22

314:5

heating 24:5

heavily 172:18

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

Henry 2:18 6:5 8:7

here?s 29:10,11

75:5,11 117:22

124:19 133:3

262:22 263:2

hereby 314:5

here--just 190:2

here--let?s 147:14

hereto 314:16

hertz 52:10,11

123:14,15

124:2,5,10,17

219:15

he's 270:16

hesitant 10:1

hey 52:14 107:19

174:1

Hi 21:16 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

higher 38:17,20

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

highest 68:17

134:11 205:8,10

highlighted 310:3

highlights 271:17

hire 12:14

hit 58:4 136:18

195:7

hold 22:3,5 278:11

home 252:17

homework 22:15

37:5

honest 40:16

honor 292:15

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

horsepower 127:8

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

Hotel 270:2

hotels 63:10

hour 66:21

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

Huber 8:7

huge 9:18 58:2

108:7,12 235:21

268:21

hump 306:1

hundreds 55:5

hurt 88:4,5

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?ll 19:5 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?m 9:15 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

ideal 9:16 158:6

ideally 72:16

ideas 41:20

identical 15:22

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'm 249:2

imagine 169:20

276:15

immediately 45:20

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

implement 11:1

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

impose 153:9

180:2,3

imposing 168:3

impossible 120:1

121:17

impressed 83:2

improve 86:3

improved 84:10

154:19 167:18

203:17

improvement 82:8

84:19

improvements

98:14

improving 85:16

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

increase 65:17

90:1 154:14

increasing 78:10

incremental 77:18

Independence 1:7

independent 257:9

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

individually 83:10

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

industrial 2:9 3:6

5:5 138:19

139:15 224:19

industry 2:7 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

informed 287:6

inherent 59:14

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

insert 272:16

inside 98:12

insight 57:9 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

Institute 2:10 3:5

18:14 34:1 53:20

278:3

insulation 216:18

217:4

integrated 73:16

178:17

intelligent 76:6

intend 263:8,17

intended 239:2

273:6

intending 262:21

intent 42:19

233:15

intention 262:19

interactive 284:17

289:2

interchangeability

39:5

interest 40:1 56:18

76:15

78:14,18,20

104:17 204:3

interested 35:14

65:14 66:17 81:2

92:4 166:3 199:9

203:7 288:16

314:17

interested--if

66:15

interesting 74:6

142:20 210:21

211:6

interim 58:21

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

internal 111:1

164:21 260:20

285:12

internally 56:12

international

46:13

internationally

58:11

interpolate 133:15

165:22 195:6

interpolated

183:15

interpolating

195:9

interpolation

196:3

interpret 250:8

interpreting 255:9

interrupting 93:20

introduce

18:12,16

introductions 5:13

inverter 216:14

218:1,4,6

inverters 223:6

investigate 14:6

306:3

investment 70:2

Investor 6:11

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?m 202:1

is--if 284:2

is--let 296:12

isn?t 42:14 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't 273:22

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--well 187:6

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

item 105:19 158:2

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

January 46:17,18

103:21,22

Jay 3:6 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

July 269:2

jump 40:20 69:2

111:10 142:17

277:1

jumping 218:21

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

Justice 88:3
Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

Page 29

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012

K

key 31:9,10 65:3

77:10 309:21

kilowatt 66:21

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

Kohl 2:5 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

label 4:3 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

large 15:5 26:1

57:19 138:6

142:19 150:1

254:19 294:18

303:1

largely 29:10

265:13 303:7

larger 55:1,15

68:22 138:13

140:4 141:21

142:2 147:3

largest 294:14

last 8:3 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

later 28:21 100:15

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

Laughter 32:17

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

least 21:12 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

Leave 155:21

led 309:9

leeway 91:9

legacy 52:6

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

level 35:19 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

leverage 79:6

Li 201:9 204:1

lie 263:7

lies 145:15 179:11

life 75:6,11 122:9

309:1

like--I?m 95:15

likely 8:10 17:8

290:13

limit 38:19 84:7

226:19 229:13

238:5

limitation

224:7,13

limited 79:11

238:4 306:11

limiting 217:9

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

linear 132:20,22

133:12,14,19,22

135:14

linearally 133:6,15

lines 33:10 42:1,22

70:9 161:15

174:11 175:8

187:1

linkage 74:8

list 32:11 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

literally 28:2

232:8

literature 207:1

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

local 51:15

located 146:2

locus 46:10

logical 67:19

logistical 7:22

263:12

logistically 268:10

292:11

long 24:1 34:1

35:15 50:13

53:18 94:3 288:9

299:15

longer 44:20 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--the 157:12

lost 59:4 66:9

81:21

lot 10:3,17 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

lower 40:11 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

lowest 109:2

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

magic 108:17

magnet 155:9

mailed 297:9

main 36:16

267:2,8 302:21

maintain 22:3,4

127:9

maintained 192:9

maintenance

22:11
Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

Page 32

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012

major 29:7 30:9

78:1 263:5

309:6,9

maker 179:5,12

manage 159:22

management 13:7

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

market 35:18

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

material 69:17

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

matrix 23:7 38:18

matter 36:13 51:3

58:17 63:11 71:7

84:11 124:4

243:14 249:5

299:12

matters 260:14

Mauer 2:19 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

maximum 113:13

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

maybe 9:7 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

meant 37:15 50:7

181:15 295:16

meantime 28:9

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

mechanical 100:22

101:6

mechanism 104:10

median 233:9,18

meet 13:18 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

Meg 8:2

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

MIA 32:7

microphone 7:14

59:9 63:8 87:7

102:14 137:22

308:17 311:17

microphones 5:15

mid 290:15 291:18

middle 90:8

152:12 182:1

mike 44:1

millions 28:2

mind 66:8 95:4

202:17 273:13

minds 278:13

minimally 112:3

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

minimum 15:6

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

minuscule 303:15

minute 105:13

minutes 86:12

97:22 198:1

262:9 281:3

mischaracterized

258:7

mishear 172:12

misheard 63:3

missed 29:7

136:13

missing 43:18

301:9

mission 271:20

misunderstood

96:19

mixing 248:8

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

modeling 66:1

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

modify 99:10

modifying 102:6

moment 20:18

144:5

Monday 290:7

money 86:8

monitor 11:4

monster 89:10

month 191:12

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--I 97:18

mostly 51:16,17

217:8 229:3

234:10 242:13

258:16

motor 4:5

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

move 52:5 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

moving 54:13

65:14,15,21

110:7 111:15

170:17 196:5

199:22 206:16

227:9 240:19

much--what 156:2

multi 145:19 273:7

multi-phase

222:16

multiple 14:22

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

multitude 62:13

mutually 75:22

myself 59:5

N

N/A 43:12

nameplate 184:20

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

nature 14:5,7

Navigant 3:13,16

7:9 266:17 287:8

nay 306:22

nearest 134:10

nearly 56:16

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

NEEA 36:1 125:20

216:12 247:12

needs--I?ve

145:21

negative 70:10

negotiating 28:15

197:17

negotiation 9:11

65:11 95:2

274:17

negotiations 4:2

9:2 244:3 275:20

neither 314:12

NEMA 23:3,21

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

net 58:2 70:10

network 228:6,11

network--I 228:9

neutral 80:19

newer 72:14

news 158:11 159:8

NGOs 56:22 104:7

NIA 96:4 98:20

nice 5:10 159:9

251:3 269:6,7

276:18

Nidec?s 153:18

night 10:18 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

nominal 166:19

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

nor 32:19

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

Northwest 2:14

3:8,15,18

6:16,20 7:11,17

NOTARY 314:1

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--I 213:9

notice 20:12

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

numerator 112:8

116:11 119:2

208:11

numerous 171:4

NVLAP 177:21

O

objected 243:17

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

obviously 18:3

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

occurring 146:15

occurs 174:16

odd 90:20

ODP 202:5 208:18

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

officer 314:4

offshore 164:4

off-the-shelf 223:4

of--I 123:20

of--I?ll 212:7

of--it 249:5

of--that?s 231:12

of--we 11:1 71:7

169:15

of--with 231:5

Oh 193:8

okay 8:14 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

operate 222:16

operating 138:14

144:7 254:2

operation 89:20

146:15

opinions 67:17

opportunities

61:11

opportunity 16:19

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

optimistic 263:15

optimize 92:6

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

optional 185:5

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

order 29:22 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

original 14:1

121:4 250:4

originally 143:17

originated 262:17

other--once 241:2

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

ought 87:20

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

output 287:22

output/input

167:9

outputs 176:14

outset 10:7 26:5

outside 17:17 19:3

279:14

outstanding 29:12

overall 43:15

104:9 141:8

195:1 274:7

294:2

overburden 31:19

overloading

143:21 195:17

oversized 143:15

overview

23:4,12,22

Owned 6:11

owners 71:3

P

p.m 198:12 268:20

313:14

Pacific 3:15,18
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

packet 43:8

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

paper 13:3

papers 95:9

Pardon 228:4

293:6

parking 45:13

PARTICIPANTS

2:7 3:2

particular 34:15

111:10 175:20

220:4 232:18

270:10 285:21

parties 267:21

309:5 314:13,16

partly 187:21

party 12:14 20:11

63:2 78:12

172:10 188:20

passed 280:8

past 23:5

path 243:11

302:16

paths 306:9

patient 168:20

patterns 31:4

Patterson 2:18 6:5

Pause 30:5

pay 144:19

PCM/ECM 127:8

PDF 203:6

peek 309:20

PEI 4:3 113:7

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

per 4:3 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

perceive 279:9

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

perform 21:8

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

periodically 14:12

permanent 155:8

PERs 208:12

243:22 249:7

250:21

person 20:11

67:19 78:15

262:20

personal 93:6

personally 93:22

112:13 113:9

179:18 235:12

266:8 278:22

perspective 49:22

57:5 71:13 72:16

81:18 109:13

168:8 195:20

262:5 271:17

277:12 279:11

pertained 170:14

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

physical 15:20

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

piece 34:3 158:17

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

platform 41:8 44:7

play 80:20

played 51:16,17

players 51:16,17

playing 35:19

49:11 146:18

232:13

plays 103:8

Plaza 270:2 310:9

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

PM 161:18

pocket 9:3

point 9:2 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

pool 40:17,18

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

potential 42:8,11

103:7 105:3

106:18 111:15

197:3 235:10

305:10 310:1

potentially 28:14

45:2,3 50:14

89:10,18 157:15

184:17 209:8

236:20 307:18

Potts 8:10

Potts(via 3:3

pour 31:4

power 2:14 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

practice 139:9

141:11 210:14

practices 140:7

preached 53:21

precisely 77:9,20

preclude 73:12

predicated 243:22

predictability

88:16

predictable 159:12

predominately

141:14

preface 32:14

prefer 54:10 94:1

138:1

preliminary 9:22

239:6

premium 73:15,16

75:10 95:19

100:4

prepare 83:21

309:18

prepared 229:4

preparing 266:18

prescribe 253:18

prescribed 12:17

190:21 253:16

267:6

prescribing 60:2

prescription 90:20

prescriptive 35:9

73:14 81:11

86:15

present 58:2 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

presented 31:12

66:15 110:14

115:18 120:6,15

131:3 151:7

205:22 214:7

251:1 262:2

presenting 75:13

press 261:14

pressure 89:3,4

presumably

190:22 290:5

presume 63:1

277:18,22

presuming 95:16

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

previously 118:1,5

132:7 192:2

260:2,8

price 69:10

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

principal 8:19

principle 260:10

prior 271:1
Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

Page 41

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012

prioritized 273:13

probably 8:9

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

problem 69:13

179:4 193:6

215:17 216:14

303:15,21

problematic

152:10

problems 35:10

143:19 260:11

procedure 11:15

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

proceed 8:20

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

product 11:17,21

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

productive 39:8

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

program 23:17

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

properly 17:20

proposal 46:10

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

prospective 234:1

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

prudent 153:21

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

pumping 80:22

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

purely 80:6 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&A 291:7

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

quality 197:19

quantifiable 89:8

quantify 276:20

quantity 245:9

quarter 43:20 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/

comments 10:7

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

race 232:12

radar 100:21

radioed 113:16

raise 268:10

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

range 46:6,11

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

rapidly 267:18

rare 144:16

rate 58:3 107:13

118:6 119:18

134:2 234:13

rated 131:9,19

200:10 201:10

202:22 203:1

204:1,16 209:3

216:14

rates 157:2

rather 32:15 62:18

67:22 91:16

150:3 172:11

175:10 277:18

284:20 291:11

313:1

rating 12:7,17,20

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

ratioed 112:22

119:1

re 107:18

reach 32:6 45:3,11

56:15 121:18

258:9 266:11

reached 246:20

reaching 50:14
Capital Reporting Company

Commerical Industrial Pumps Working Group 05-29-2014

Page 44

(866) 448 - DEPO

www.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2012

103:13

readily 240:1

reading 252:16

ready 37:2 223:22

256:4 268:8

283:21

real 29:18 38:9

69:13 117:11

177:7 198:6

realistic 108:11

realities 51:12

reality 80:13 173:6

realize 60:6 79:18

244:15

really 5:20,22

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--I 297:19

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

reasonable 82:8

134:15,17

140:16 146:12

197:9 227:14

239:5 262:4

265:8

reasonably 156:15

reason--maybe

256:14

reasons 199:11

reassess 37:10

rebate 72:11 73:17

104:12

rebates 73:14

77:14 79:7

recall 178:9

recapture 104:6

receive 271:14

274:15 279:7

282:3

received 24:18

228:7 311:12

received--a 228:5

recess 105:18

198:9

recognize 59:16

112:12 113:8

154:14 233:12

recognized 77:15

111:2 203:12

recognizing 42:4

231:2 287:9,11

recollection 214:6

recommend 31:15

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

record 122:5

272:15,17

286:21 314:10

recorded 314:8

records 176:14

recreate 191:21

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

redesigned 55:21

redesigning 37:15

67:10,21 93:15

redesigns 48:20

49:9 84:15

reduce 38:15

128:13 144:9

175:7

reduced 147:20

314:9

reduces 148:14

reducing 100:5

refer 111:2 113:14

reference 25:22

165:14 191:19

193:15

199:6,8,10,16

215:13 229:16

referenced 10:14

193:10,14 194:1

references 191:16

referred 112:18

referring 111:5

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

reflected 9:21

148:8

reflecting 63:5

130:13

reflection 282:11

reflects 29:14

85:10

regained 67:8

Regal 2:12 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

regard 179:3

regarding 150:20

156:12 213:12

231:15 246:3

308:12

regardless 101:9

124:3 223:14

245:6 257:5

regional 55:6

register 102:20

177:8 265:20

registration 23:8

177:21

regressed 133:6

regression

132:20,22

133:12,14,18

135:14

regs 28:10

regulate 18:9

301:3,13

regulated 39:15

101:1 227:5

300:7 301:7

regulating 233:14

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

related 52:22

148:15 196:17

227:22 261:16

314:12

relationship

214:10

relationships

78:9,11

relative 149:9

224:21 226:2

314:15

relatively 162:21

266:20

released 294:6

relevant 97:14

reliability 80:9

reliable 76:13

120:9 165:13

relies 12:4 14:8

172:18

reluctant 61:7

relying 60:3

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

reminder 310:8

remove 105:4

201:2

removing 304:16

repeat 98:10

rephrase 98:6

replace 81:4 199:9

249:10

replacement 72:16

73:3

replacements

72:12

replacing 72:12

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

reported 1:14 21:8

63:1 64:17 72:1

178:14,21

Reporter 314:20

reporting 1:14

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-present 294:10

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

representing 2:10

6:11 179:7,13

207:16

represents 178:22

237:7

reputable 164:3

request 33:11,12
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

requesting 283:10

requests 311:6

require 58:22

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

requirement 12:12

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

reserve 268:17

reserved 266:8

resident 144:3

residential 237:18

resolution 197:6

resolve 130:20

resource 24:4

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

response 110:6

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

result 33:1 57:3

197:20 257:8

287:4

result--I 139:17

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

review 47:13

210:10 281:13

285:10 287:15

reviewing 110:13

revise 155:17

revisit 202:2

258:22 280:9

rigor 173:15

185:15,21

rigorously 22:12

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

role 21:15 53:2

roles 251:9

roll 43:15

rolled 236:5

room 5:13 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

roughly 43:21

45:13 46:4

round 134:9

272:18

rounding 132:9

row 182:2,15

280:10

rows 43:11

RPM 300:8

305:1,2

RPMs 208:18,20

212:3

RSV 40:10 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-V 43:12

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

rulemaking 1:3

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.W 1:7

Safe 313:13

safety 140:19

143:18

sake 100:18

sales 78:15 107:3

224:8 307:10

same--the 231:14

sample 15:2,6,9

216:7

samples 31:4

177:12,14

sampling 17:7

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

satisfy 13:10

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

saw 45:13 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

scale 237:2

scaled 97:15 205:3

scaling

205:1,12,13

240:11

scared 269:19

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

scratch 191:21

screen 182:1

184:14 200:13

296:13

seat 213:17

second 5:5 114:15

165:16 269:19

281:15

secondary 273:22

section 36:10

188:5

sector 62:17 72:7

sectors 62:14

see--I?m 142:21

seeing 35:14 48:11

66:19 144:14

268:6 283:15

seem 120:11 255:5

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

segment 106:2

265:19 267:18

segregated 167:3,7

select 104:11

138:2 231:19

selected 136:19

152:6

selecting 36:2

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

sell 71:15 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

sent 283:9 285:2

299:22 308:12

309:20

separate 20:7 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

sequence 117:7

sequential 214:1

287:14

sequentially 214:3

series 9:6

serious 233:2

seriously 105:6

session 285:1

289:2 313:12

set--I?d 303:22

setting 9:10,11

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

settled 155:22

seven 56:3 58:6

90:22 91:7 92:13

93:16 106:18

several 140:4

177:3

severe 32:8 37:12

shaft 118:21 119:4

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

sheet 125:4 188:13

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

shorter 92:18 94:2

shortly 68:2

shot 260:16

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

shut 138:7,10

shutoff 122:8

shuts 138:16

sides 77:3 294:12

sight 26:11

signal 84:5

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

similar 54:5 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

simple 33:11,12

95:15 96:3

266:20

simpler 54:12

276:10

simplicity 96:9

167:15

simplification

195:3

simply 23:4 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

sit 23:22 213:16

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

Sivigny 3:6 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--the 132:1

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

skirt 302:1

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

slightly 148:13

205:11 296:5

304:11,12

305:3,4,8

slope 108:10,13

slower 306:16

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

somebody 63:2

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

somewhat 61:6

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--we 302:20

sort 18:22 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

special 82:22

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

specifically 35:4

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

specify 139:4,12

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

spent 10:17 30:17

34:13 250:11

263:22 278:4

spilling 172:1

split 36:8 38:22

splitting 38:6

115:2

spoke 139:15

spoken 64:1

spread 18:8 43:2

square 133:8

squeeze 79:12

squishy 270:11

staff 265:15

stage 231:3

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

standpoint 52:2,17

53:8 279:2

stands 175:2

stark 84:5 142:17

starkly 84:14

Starr 3:7 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

started 32:1 47:10

49:5,6,7,13

112:20 171:3

243:4 248:3

starting 9:2 30:10

31:14,22 32:5

37:8 44:12 60:10

68:20 116:1

256:22 290:3

state 176:12

239:20 245:15

stated 77:9 99:20

157:12 250:22

statement 96:21

97:2

States 235:8

stating 32:15

statistical 15:8

17:7 19:16

status 24:10

264:19

statute 19:11

90:18 253:17

statutory 47:19

90:11,20 91:4

stay 148:12 225:8

steep 140:3,8

step 53:6 68:17

100:2 158:12

204:13

Steve 3:4,9 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

stickler 243:18

stop 238:1 298:5

story 84:14

straight 60:16

136:17

strange 211:8

236:6

strategic 67:17

strategically 42:7

85:12,14

strategies 89:2

strategy 89:4

street 269:21

strict 141:3

strictly 280:2

strike 80:10

strong 76:15 277:9

283:6

struggle 17:20

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

subject 12:6 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

submit 12:18

14:20 286:18

306:9

submittal 13:8

submitted 13:15

303:18

submitting 302:10

sub-motor 237:16

subsequent 11:12

50:11 156:17

subset 306:11

substantially 10:2

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

suggest 10:6

200:17 202:9

suggested 54:4

178:11 195:5

222:13 268:16

suggesting 157:4

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

summarize 276:12

summarizing

179:17

summary 276:9

288:8 308:19

309:17

super 97:13

supplemental

275:10

supplied 173:4

182:16

suppliers 51:6

supply 52:10 72:5

155:4

supplying 14:9

190:18

support 17:17,21

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

survey 229:8

235:5 237:4

suspect 35:9

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

system 13:2,6,7

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

tabular 300:1

Taco 3:9 6:9 88:12

156:21 183:7

tail 132:12

taking 31:11 36:11

53:2 97:18,19

102:4 123:3

184:9 186:22

189:4

talent 105:5

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

tall 45:22 51:7

52:6

target 33:6 106:13

task 260:13

tasked 89:14 274:2

tasking 158:13

tax 92:19

taxed 31:3

team 76:19 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

technical 260:13

technically 152:2

195:17 307:22

technologies 77:20

129:9 154:19

167:20

technology 48:19

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

tenant 145:19,21

tend 127:9

tentative 271:12

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

terribly 221:3

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

tested 15:17 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

testing 12:13,14,15

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

texting 260:12

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--I 72:2

their--would

190:10

themselves 157:2

276:2

theoretical 214:16

theory 58:12

there?s 11:21

26:21 232:1,5

thereafter 314:9

Therein 145:15

they?re 10:5

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--a 39:15

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

threw 249:5,8

throttled 121:16

throughout 206:7

231:1

throw 53:1 86:18

throwing 232:3

261:5

thrust 159:3

thumb 28:12

139:18 225:12

thumbs 174:1

Thursday 1:10

290:17

tickets 269:3

tie 159:10

tier 47:8

tiered 218:16,18

tiering 91:4

tight 289:16

tighten 144:1

times--the 132:4

tiny 142:12

title 239:1

today 5:7 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--we 275:13

tolerance 23:1

133:17 177:15

tolerances 17:9

185:16

Tom 2:13 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

tool 173:7 175:15

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

torque 159:10

total 203:21

totality 104:10

totally 148:15

258:17

to--the 143:6

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

Towsley 3:10 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

trade 57:21 58:5

tradeoff 175:22

212:19

trades 42:12

trading 176:10

traditional 20:7,10

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

translate 136:16

295:11 296:7

298:17

translated 48:21

translates 55:20

205:14

translation 296:8

298:19 300:2

travel 282:17

travels 313:13

trend 214:2

trends 108:12

triangles 133:7

205:11

tried 46:10 57:7

trim 144:8 145:6

trimmer 145:11

true 49:22 207:5

257:4 269:18

291:13 314:10

truly 37:11 44:6

83:17 305:20

trust 165:13

190:17

truth 64:2

try 9:13 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

trying 40:6 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

Tuesday 290:3

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

typical 75:11

162:7

typically 19:18

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

ultimate 67:5

279:8

ultimately 179:11

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

unexpected 303:12

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

unit 245:17

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-ratioed 247:5

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

USA 3:11

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

user 252:5 253:5

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

utility 78:3,13,19

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

vacant 303:7

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--it 249:17

values--the 296:2

valve 138:4,15

variability 152:20

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

vary 23:2 162:1

varying 34:10

vehicle

174:14,17,18

vendor 80:19

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--the 184:3

venue 241:12,14

verification

169:17

verified 164:1

verify 169:6,21

versa 77:11

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

vested 78:13,17

vestige 147:22

211:8

VFD 121:17 126:4

199:15 216:18

245:20 253:5,6

VFDs 270:13

vice 77:11

view 51:21

59:10,13 62:12

63:5 74:16 93:7

179:20 246:11

282:7

viewing 13:20

virtually 142:13

225:8

vision 47:5

visit 203:6

VL 116:11 244:16

voice 256:4

voiced 255:7

void 11:9

volume 40:22 43:1

voluntary 82:11

vote 9:22 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

voting 125:11

268:17 280:18

vs 4:3

VSD 96:11,12

VTS 294:4

303:17,19

307:18

W

wait 130:7

291:11,14

waiting 183:3

walk 288:7,9

wall 63:10

Waltner 8:2

warrant 19:21

warranted 48:5

224:8

warrants 125:3

was--again 256:12

Washington 1:8

5:8 310:9

wasn?t 70:2 72:3

121:14 135:18

213:1 239:2

wasting 141:12

water 3:3 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--about 177:1

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?ll 28:7 30:13

112:7 140:17

201:9

we?re 24:12

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

wear 105:15

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

weight 259:21

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

welcome 5:4,10

83:3,6 91:14

198:14 201:21

202:15 210:8

227:8 242:4

261:20 264:17

281:5

well--over 51:12

We're 250:6,20

West 291:20

what?s 8:16 27:4

40:16 55:9

130:12 184:14

235:7

whatever 16:20

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

whatsoever 19:6

288:18

where--then 108:5

Whereupon 198:8

313:14

whether 14:13

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

Widder 3:17 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

windfall 301:8

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?t 149:18

241:13

wonder 212:6

Wonderful 196:9

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

worry 231:19

261:8

worse 21:10

155:19 234:4

295:17

worst 157:15

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

Xi 207:12

Xylem 2:17 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

yea 306:22

years--one 91:6

yellow 70:9

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

yet 98:4 116:3,8

155:22 156:1

170:5 174:21

236:13 263:7

266:15 269:3

272:7 281:18

Yi 201:11

207:11,21

you?re 63:4 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