‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message

‐‐‐‐‐

From: Caskey, John [mailto:Joh_Caskey@nema.org]

Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 5:54 PM

To: Robert Berman

Cc: Robert Berman; Hirsch, Bruce R; Steve Nadel; Phil Hopkinson;

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com; jerry.schoen@aksteel.com; Maxine (EMAB) Savitz;

mhyland@appanet.org; Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com; maheshsampat@bellsouth.net;

tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com; dbrender@cda.copper.org; James.Lass@cleco.com;

chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com; frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com;

ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com; Aaron Meyers; Antonio Trujillo; Jack C Moore;

Jerry L Corkran; tballo@earthjustice.org; carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com;

eduardorobles@eaton.com; Emily (CONTR) Marchetti; Jeremiah (CONTR) Freeman; Jim

Raba; John Cymbalsky; srosenstock@eei.org; DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com;

rick.anderson@faypwc.com; bsmith@federalpacific.com; rgreeson@federalpacific.com;

carlos.gaytan@ge.com; artrosenfeld@gmail.com; greg.coulter405@gmail.com;

ned.efbrush@gmail.com; Richard Parker; Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com; jhodge@howard.com;

Daniel Cohen; cabolduc@lbl.gov; gjrosenquist@lbl.gov; kcoughlin@lbl.gov;

ScottB@LVMetals.com; dave.millure@metglas.com; kwinder@mleainc.com;

jrossetti@mlgw.org; Brian Coffey; Caitlin Johnson; Matthew Nardotti; Michael

Rivest; Zhimei Luo; Creevy, Jim; mwaltner@nrdc.org; rroy@nrdc.org;

robert.saint@nreca.coop; Teckman@nwcouncil.org; vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com;

gbf1@pge.com; chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com; ahofmann@publicpower.org;

pkumar@publicpower.org; adelaski@standardsASAP.org; jmauer@standardsasap.org;

wes.patterson@us.abb.com; chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com;

thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com; charlied@uus.org

Subject: Re: Negotiated Rulemaking

‐ Distribution Transformers Teleconference

For the record, Green Mountain Power only has 90,000 customers and had an average

rate of 12.4 cents per kilowatt hour in 2010. I would personally not support

creating a national standard around the experience of this tiny utility.

Sent from John Caskey

AVP

‐ NEMA

‐ Industry Operations

Office 703.841.3233

Mobile 703.350.6886

On Nov 14, 2011, at 3:58 PM, "Robert Berman"

<bermaneconomics@gmail.com<mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com>> wrote:

You have an argument into my statement that is not there. I do not assert that

efficiency was THE reason for the purchase; only that the price of making a

transformer with M3 at that efficiency was not a deterrent as the transformer was

produced and sold. The if high efficiency were not a relevant factor, they could

have been produced and sold at lower efficiencies with the other specs. They were

not. I also note that Green Mountain Power, for example, has bought M3

efficiencies as high as 99.59%; and efficiency is their primary concern.

Finally, it's not clear to me that Jaguar and Cadillac purchases are analogous to

transformers. I don't know of anyone who buys transformers for status or comfort

‐‐ probably not for mpg either.Regards,

Robert A. Berman, Principal

Berman Economics

1915 Grand Court

Vienna, VA 22182

703.281.0490

703.655.8398 (cell)

<mailto:Berman.Economics@gmail.com>Berman.Economics@gmail.com<mailto:Berman.Econo

mics@gmail.com>

<http://www.BermanEconomics.com>www.BermanEconomics.com<http://www.BermanEconomic

s.com>

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 14, 2011, at 3:14 PM, "Caskey, John"

<<mailto:Joh_Caskey@nema.org>Joh_Caskey@nema.org<mailto:Joh_Caskey@nema.org>>

wrote:

Robert

You continue to reference the ABB data presented by Wes Patterson as indicating

that since a transformer was sold at the EL3 or EL4 efficiency level that this

level is cost effective. Specifically, you state “Market sales data, however, is

quite real. In this case it unambiguously says that the transformers at EL4 are

an economically reasonable choice

‐‐ the market has, in fact, selected that

choice on multiple occasions”. This is simply NOT TRUE.

Just because a person buys as Jaguar for $100k that gets 25 mpg in place of a

$40k Cadillac that gets 20 mpg; does NOT mean that the $60k delta will ever be

“economically reasonable” for the extra 5 mpg. You seem to be assuming that all

of the transformers purchased from ABB that meet the efficiency levels were

purchased for efficiency reasons. This is simply not fact. The fact is that one

large transformer manufacturer was able to produce distribution transformers at

EL3 and EL4 using M3 steel. To my knowledge, Wes did not state the price for

these transformers. In addition, just because one company can produce this

product doesn’t mean that all transformer manufacturers can make this product at

this level using M3 steel.

My hope is that we can all understand the facts and the analysis results better

over the next few weeks so that we can negotiate a solution that benefits the

consumers, the ratepayers, the manufacturers, the environment, etc. I plan to

stay at the table till the end of the negotiation process.

Regards,

John

John F. Caskey, CEMAssistant Vice President, Industry Operations National Electrical Manufacturers

Assoc. (NEMA)

1300 North 17th Street

‐ Suite 1752

Rosslyn, VA 22209

john.caskey@nema.org<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org>

703

‐ 841

‐ 3233 Voice

703

‐ 841

‐ 3333 FAX

703

‐ 350

‐ 6886 Cell

From: Robert Berman [mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com]

Sent: Monday, November 14, 2011 1:19 PM

To: Hirsch, Bruce R

Cc: 'Steve Nadel'; Robert Berman; Phil Hopkinson;

<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>;

<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>; Maxine (EMAB) Savitz;

<mailto:mhyland@appanet.org> mhyland@appanet.org<mailto:mhyland@appanet.org>;

<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>

Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>;

<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>

maheshsampat@bellsouth.net<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>;

<mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>

tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com<mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>;

<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>

dbrender@cda.copper.org<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>;

<mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com> James.Lass@cleco.com<mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com>;

<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com>

chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>

frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>

ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>; Aaron

Meyers; Antonio Trujillo; Jack C Moore; Jerry L Corkran;

<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>

tballo@earthjustice.org<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>;

<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>

carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>;

<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>

eduardorobles@eaton.com<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>; Emily (CONTR) Marchetti;

Jeremiah (CONTR) Freeman; Jim Raba; John Cymbalsky; <mailto:srosenstock@eei.org>

srosenstock@eei.org<mailto:srosenstock@eei.org>; <mailto:DYoung@energy

‐

solution.com> DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com<mailto:DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com>;

<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>

rick.anderson@faypwc.com<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>;

<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>

bsmith@federalpacific.com<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>

rgreeson@federalpacific.com<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com> carlos.gaytan@ge.com<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com>;

<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>

artrosenfeld@gmail.com<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>;

<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>greg.coulter405@gmail.com<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>;

<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>

ned.efbrush@gmail.com<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>; Richard Parker;

<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com> Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com>;

<mailto:jhodge@howard.com> jhodge@howard.com<mailto:jhodge@howard.com>; Daniel

Cohen; <mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov> cabolduc@lbl.gov<mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov> gjrosenquist@lbl.gov<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov> kcoughlin@lbl.gov<mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com> ScottB@LVMetals.com<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com>;

<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>

dave.millure@metglas.com<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>;

<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com> kwinder@mleainc.com<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com>;

<mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org> jrossetti@mlgw.org<mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>;

<mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>

brian.coffey@navigant.com<mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>;

<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>

caitlin.johnson@navigant.com<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>;

<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant.com>

matthew.nardotti@navigant.com<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant.com>;

<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com> mrivest@navigant.com<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com>;

<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>

zhimei.luo@navigant.com<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>; Creevy, Jim; Caskey,

John; <mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org> mwaltner@nrdc.org<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org>;

<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org> rroy@nrdc.org<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org>;

<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>

robert.saint@nreca.coop<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>;

<mailto:Teckman@nwcouncil.org>

Teckman@nwcouncil.org<mailto:Teckman@nwcouncil.org>;

<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>

vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>;

<mailto:gbf1@pge.com> gbf1@pge.com<mailto:gbf1@pge.com>;

<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>

chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>;

<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>

ahofmann@publicpower.org<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>;

<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>

pkumar@publicpower.org<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>;

<mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>

adelaski@standardsASAP.org<mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>;

<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>

jmauer@standardsasap.org<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>;

<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>

wes.patterson@us.abb.com<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>;

<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:charlied@uus.org> charlied@uus.org<mailto:charlied@uus.org>

Subject: Re: Negotiated Rulemaking

‐ Distribution Transformers Teleconference

Bruce,Those upfront transformer costs are compared to the fuel cost savings in the LCC

approach. The discounting process values fuel cost saving in the future at less

than the costs incurred today. The positive LCC means that that the efficiency

advocates are not ignoring costs, but comparing them with benefits and finding

that the consumer is better off and will be paying less. One does not, however,

need to rely on the LBL analysis to see this. The ABB sales data shows M3

transformers being delivered at EL4 efficiency. As a modeler, I am always

skeptical of model results

‐‐ people do not live in computers and certainly not

on in some of the back

‐ of

‐ the

‐ envelope calculations that we have seen from

others. Market sales data, however, is quite real. In this case it unambiguously

says that the transformers at EL4 are an economically reasonable choice

‐‐ the

market has, in fact, selected that choice on multiple occasions.

To the extent that there are dug

‐ in positions, again the evidence does not

support that it is the efficiency advocates that are dug

‐ in. Although EL4 is

achievable and beneficial based both on market data and LBL analyses, the

proponents of greater efficiency indicated a willingness to compromise. It is

certain representatives of the industry who have consistently said either no

change, or a fractional change. It is those industry representatives who appear

to be advancing the "my position or nothing" attitude. Although I happen to agree

that substantial movement towards more efficient distribution systems, I also

note that these are incredibly expensive meetings. We have a large number of very

senior people devoting substantial time to the meetings, their preparation and

non

‐ trivial travel costs. These people have other things competing for their

time. If you and others honestly believe that you cannot agree to a higher

standard, and place no value on regulatory certainty, then let's not waste

additional time and money. Let's just say that we gave it a good shot, cut our

losses here, and make our respective cases to DOE outside the negotiation process

and let DOE make it's own decision. I believe that they certainly have sufficient

information to support their position in a February NOPR. I can't imagine what

else they would need.

Regards,

Robert A. Berman, Principal

Berman Economics

<http://www.BermanEconomics.com>www.BermanEconomics.com<http://www.BermanEconomic

s.com>

1915 Grand Court

Vienna, VA 22182

703

‐ 281

‐ 0490

703

‐ 655

‐ 8398 (cell)

<mailto:BermanEconomics@gmail.com>BermanEconomics@gmail.com<mailto:BermanEconomic

s@gmail.com>

On Nov 14, 2011, at 11:49 AM, Hirsch, Bruce R wrote:

Steve,I am disappointed with your approach to this assignment.

It appears that negotiation to you is defined as agreeing with your position

‐‐‐

or calling it off. It is unfortunate that you believe the American public,

especially in these trying economic times, should be expected to foot the (very

large) bill for more efficient transformers when it is still not certain that

there is value in doing so. You have clung to one suspect calculation that

indicates there may be a payback

‐‐‐ in the distant future

‐‐‐ and only if all

the assumptions being made pan out. You choose to ignore the costs, not yet

factored in, on US jobs, US businesses and the reliability of supply of an item

so desperately needed for our economy to expand.

This is not a “cut and dried” economic decision but is one that needs to be taken

seriously for the major impact it could have on the electric supply of the US and

the financial position of the American public. If DOE makes the final decision on

this, I would expect them to do “due diligence” in considering all the effects

there decision would have on US businesses and the US economy.

Let it be known that the Utility Industry has not pulled out of the negotiation

process and will continue to work with DOE to reach the right decision.

Bruce.

From: Steve Nadel [mailto:snadel@aceee.org]<mailto:[mailto:snadel@aceee.org]>

Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 2:16 PM

To: Robert Berman; Phil Hopkinson

Cc: <mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>;

<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>; Maxine (EMAB) Savitz;

<mailto:mhyland@appanet.org> mhyland@appanet.org<mailto:mhyland@appanet.org>;

<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>

Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>;

<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>

maheshsampat@bellsouth.net<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>; Hirsch, Bruce R;

<mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>

tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com<mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>;<mailto:dbrender@cd

a.copper.org>dbrender@cda.copper.org<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>;

<mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com> James.Lass@cleco.com<mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com>;

<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com>

chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>

frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>

ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>; Aaron

Meyers; Antonio Trujillo; Jack C Moore; Jerry L Corkran;

<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>

tballo@earthjustice.org<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>;

<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>

carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>;

<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>eduardorobles@eaton.com<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>; Emily (CONTR) Marchetti;

Jeremiah (CONTR) Freeman; Jim Raba; John Cymbalsky; <mailto:srosenstock@eei.org>

srosenstock@eei.org<mailto:srosenstock@eei.org>; <mailto:DYoung@energy

‐

solution.com> DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com<mailto:DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com>;

<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>

rick.anderson@faypwc.com<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>;

<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>

bsmith@federalpacific.com<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>

rgreeson@federalpacific.com<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com> carlos.gaytan@ge.com<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com>;

<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>

artrosenfeld@gmail.com<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>;

<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>

greg.coulter405@gmail.com<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>;

<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>

ned.efbrush@gmail.com<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>; Richard Parker;

<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com> Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com>;

<mailto:jhodge@howard.com> jhodge@howard.com<mailto:jhodge@howard.com>; Daniel

Cohen; <mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov> cabolduc@lbl.gov<mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov> gjrosenquist@lbl.gov<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov> kcoughlin@lbl.gov<mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com> ScottB@LVMetals.com<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com>;

<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>

dave.millure@metglas.com<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>;

<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com>

kwinder@mleainc.com<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com>;<mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>jrosse

tti@mlgw.org<mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>; <mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>

brian.coffey@navigant.com<mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>;

<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>

caitlin.johnson@navigant.com<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>;

<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant.com>

matthew.nardotti@navigant.com<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant.com>;

<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com> mrivest@navigant.com<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com>;

<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>

zhimei.luo@navigant.com<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>;

<mailto:Jim.creevy@nema.org> Jim.creevy@nema.org<mailto:Jim.creevy@nema.org>;

<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org>

john.caskey@nema.org<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org>;<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org>mwalt

ner@nrdc.org<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org>; <mailto:rroy@nrdc.org>

rroy@nrdc.org<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org>; <mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>

robert.saint@nreca.coop<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>;

<mailto:Teckman@nwcouncil.org>

Teckman@nwcouncil.org<mailto:Teckman@nwcouncil.org>;

<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>

vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>;

<mailto:gbf1@pge.com> gbf1@pge.com<mailto:gbf1@pge.com>;

<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>

chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>;

<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>

ahofmann@publicpower.org<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>;<mailto:pkumar@publicpo

wer.org>pkumar@publicpower.org<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>;<mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>

adelaski@standardsASAP.org<mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>;

<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>

jmauer@standardsasap.org<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>;

<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>

wes.patterson@us.abb.com<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>;

<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:charlied@uus.org> charlied@uus.org<mailto:charlied@uus.org>

Subject: RE: Negotiated Rulemaking

‐ Distribution Transformers Teleconference

Phil,

We're in the middle of negotiations and some of us have made clear that no or

little change to the standard is not acceptable as the DOE analysis justifies

higher standards (higher levels are technically feasible and cost

‐ effective on a

life

‐ cycle cost basis). The efficiency groups would rather leave the decision to

DOE than agree to subpar standards. If you and other participants want to veto

any significant change in the standard, then we might as well save some time,

break off negotiations and just make our respective arguments to DOE. Is that

what you want to do? If the answer is no, then let's start talking about how to

make higher standards acceptable rather than continue to make arguments about why

low standards are needed. We're all busy and if we're going to make progress we

need to break new ground and not rehash old ground.

Steve

>>> Phil Hopkinson

>>> <<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com>phopkinson@hvolt.com<mailto:phopkinson

>>> @hvolt.com>> 11/11/2011 1:16 PM >>>

Hello Robert and all:

You must not have looked at Jerry Corkran’s message because he found the cost to

be $17/watt, which is pretty close to my number, where both Jerry and I have used

M3 core steel to derive the cost curve. The fact is that the cost curve is very

steep with M3 and quickly hits the brick wall.

1. I have checked Carlos Gaytan’s cost curves as well and he is finding

about the same relationship with M3.

2. I have checked Wes Patterson’s data as well and he is finding an M3

cost curve about the same as mine.

3. I have checked the OPS data with M3 as well and it too is very close to

$20/watt.

a. For example, for design line 1 they show an efficiency at 50% load of

99.08% which translates to 232 watts of loss and sells for $1,960.73.

b. They show another M3 design with an efficiency of 99.26% which translates

to 186 watts of loss and sells for $2962.11.

c. The change in selling price is $2,962.11

‐ $1,906.11 or +$1,001.38

d. The change in watts is 232

‐ 186 or ‐ 46 watts.

e. The OPS $/watt is therefore, $1,001.38/46 watts or $21.77f. Hence we see that all data sources are pointing to cost per watt of

~$20 /watt saved to go from the current mandatory standard to EL1. I get

$30/watt to go to EL2 and $53/watt to go to EL3

4. The fact is that M3 is about out of gas and the DOE did a good job in

the last rule making.

5. The fact also is that a push to anything beyond present does not show

economic value and I do not support it.

6. The fact also is that a push to higher efficiencies will kill the new

transformer market and open up the rebuild market, destroying jobs at the new

transformer manufacturers and resulting in transformers of lower efficiency which

will cost energy and not save it.

Best regards,

Phil

Philip J Hopkinson, PE

President & CEO HVOLT Inc.

3704 High Ridge Rd.

Charlotte, NC 28270

<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com>phopkinson@hvolt.com<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com>

Ph 704

‐ 846

‐ 3290

Fx 704

‐ 845

‐ 2520

Cell 704

‐ 236

‐ 3320

<http://www.hvolt.com/>www.hvolt.com<http://www.hvolt.com>

From: Robert Berman

[mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com]<mailto:[mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com]>

Sent: Friday, November 11, 2011 11:16 AM

To: Phil Hopkinson

Cc: Corkran, Jerry L; Richard Parker; Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR);

<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>

rick.anderson@faypwc.com<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>;

<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>

tballo@earthjustice.org<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>;

<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com> ScottB@LVMetals.com<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com>;

<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org> john.caskey@nema.org<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org>;

Cymbalsky, John; <mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>

adelaski@standardsASAP.org<mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>;<mailto:Teckman@nwc

ouncil.org>Teckman@nwcouncil.org<mailto:Teckman@nwcouncil.org>;

<mailto:gbf1@pge.com> gbf1@pge.com<mailto:gbf1@pge.com>;

<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com> carlos.gaytan@ge.com<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com>;

<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>

rgreeson@federalpacific.com<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com>

bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com<mailto:bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com>; <mailto:jhodge@howard.com>

jhodge@howard.com<mailto:jhodge@howard.com>; <mailto:mhyland@appanet.org>

mhyland@appanet.org<mailto:mhyland@appanet.org>;

<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>

dave.millure@metglas.com<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>;

<mailto:snadel@aceee.org>

snadel@aceee.org<mailto:snadel@aceee.org>;<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>wes.patterson@us.abb.com<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>;

<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>;

<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>

Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>;

<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>

artrosenfeld@gmail.com<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>;

<mailto:srosenstock@eei.org> srosenstock@eei.org<mailto:srosenstock@eei.org>;

<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org> rroy@nrdc.org<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org>;

<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>

robert.saint@nreca.coop<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>;

<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>

chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>;<mailto:kwinder@mleai

nc.com>kwinder@mleainc.com<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com>;

<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org> mwaltner@nrdc.org<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org>;

<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>;

<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com> Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com>;

<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>

ahofmann@publicpower.org<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>;

<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>

pkumar@publicpower.org<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>;

<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>

bsmith@federalpacific.com<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>

greg.coulter405@gmail.com<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>;<mailto:jmauer@standa

rdsasap.org>jmauer@standardsasap.org<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>; Cohen,

Daniel; Meyers, Aaron; <mailto:Jim.creevy@nema.org>

Jim.creevy@nema.org<mailto:Jim.creevy@nema.org>; <mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>

jrossetti@mlgw.org<mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>; <mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov>

cabolduc@lbl.gov<mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov>; <mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov>

kcoughlin@lbl.gov<mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov>; <mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>

brian.coffey@navigant.com<mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>;

<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com> mrivest@navigant.com<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com>;

<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov>

gjrosenquist@lbl.gov<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov>;<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigan

t.com>caitlin.johnson@navigant.com<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>;

<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>

zhimei.luo@navigant.com<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>; Marchetti, Emily

(CONTR); <mailto:charlied@uus.org> charlied@uus.org<mailto:charlied@uus.org>;

<mailto:DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com> DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com<mailto:DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com>; <mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com>

James.Lass@cleco.com<mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com>;

<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>

maheshsampat@bellsouth.net<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>;<mailto:matthew.nar

dotti@navigant.com>matthew.nardotti@navigant.com<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant

.com>; Raba, Jim; Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); <mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>

tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com<mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>;

<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com>

chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>

ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>;<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>

frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>;<ma

ilto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>ned.efbrush@gmail.com<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>;

<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>

dbrender@cda.copper.org<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>;

<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>

eduardorobles@eaton.com<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>;

<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>

vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>;

<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com<mailt

o:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>; Robert Berman; Trujillo, Antonio; Moore, Jack C

Subject: Re: Negotiated Rulemaking

‐ Distribution Transformers Teleconference

Even if it were that high (and Mr. Hopkinson is the only one I've seen who has

put the number anywhere near that), the efficiency objective is saving Watt

‐ hours

(energy) not Watts (the capacity to save energy)

. One Watt saved for 8,760 hours

per year for 30 years is 262.8 kWh (not counting leap years). Even at Mr.

Hutchinson's $20, that's just over 7¢ / kWh. If Mr. Hutchinson will examine his

electric bill, as he has reported, he will see that even as high as 7¢ it's a

good buy, and that assumes we put a ZERO value on any environmental benefits

(which is why DOE agreed to reconsider its 2007 MEPS in the first place.

Indeed, the cost of losses per Watt (roughly the A factors that OPS has been

using) are no where near the $20 claimed here. Moreover, as ABB and others have

pointed out, the proper approach would have been to minimize cost subject to

efficiency, not A & B, which would have resulted in a lower, flatter curve to the

asymptote. ABB's actual market data

‐‐ physical transformers produced and

delivered

‐‐ shows a competitive market for M3 transformers even at EL4

efficiency. You can make all the hypothetical claims you want to, gentlemen, the

market is the real world.

Regards,

Robert A. Berman, Principal

Berman Economics

<http://www.BermanEconomics.com>www.BermanEconomics.com<http://www.BermanEconomic

s.com>

1915 Grand Court

Vienna, VA 22182

703

‐ 281

‐ 0490

703

‐ 655

‐ 8398 (cell)

<mailto:BermanEconomics@gmail.com>BermanEconomics@gmail.com<mailto:BermanEconomic

s@gmail.com>

On Nov 10, 2011, at 6:53 PM, Phil Hopkinson wrote:Well stated Jerry

That is also what my analysis and report said. If you restrict to M3 then the

cost of EL1 rises to about $20/watt.

Phil

Phil Hopkinson,P.E.

HVolt Inc.

704

‐ 846

‐ 3290

F: 704

‐ 845

‐ 2520

C: 704

‐ 236

‐ 3320

<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com>phopkinson@hvolt.com<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com>

On Nov 10, 2011, at 18:04, "Corkran, Jerry L"

<<mailto:Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com>Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com<ma

ilto:Jerry.Corkran@CooperIndustries.com>> wrote:

To Mr. Parker and the DOE working group,

The reason for the request for the incremental cost of the losses is that the

current DOE efficiency levels can be obtained if the design is optimized at about

$4 per core watt and $1 per winding watt at full load. At the DOE 50% kVA

rating, this is the same as evaluating the losses or optimizing the design at

about $4 per total watts loss.

The present DOE efficiency loss level results in transformer designs about like

many utilities were purchasing their transformers before 2007. The utilities

were purchasing the efficiency levels that were justified based on the cost of

losses. A few utilities were purchasing higher efficiency that the 2007

efficiency rules because of the calculated cost of energy being higher than the

$4/$1 loss evaluation.

What came up in the discussion last week was even for loss level 1, the

incremental cost of losses was about $17 per watt for the design checked, between

the present DOE losses an efficiency level of DEL1. The added cost of $17 per

watt is so much higher than the typical cost of the energy for the utilities,

that it is very questionable that the DOE payback estimates are accurate. A 3%

interest rate may be a factor in the payback calculations.

Jerry Corkran

From: Richard Parker

[mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com]<mailto:[mailto:richardparkerdc@gmail.com]>

Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2011 3:23 PM

To: Robert Berman

Cc: Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR); <mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>

rick.anderson@faypwc.com<mailto:rick.anderson@faypwc.com>;

<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>

tballo@earthjustice.org<mailto:tballo@earthjustice.org>;<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com> ScottB@LVMetals.com<mailto:ScottB@LVMetals.com>;

<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org> john.caskey@nema.org<mailto:john.caskey@nema.org>;

Corkran, Jerry L; Cymbalsky, John; <mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>

adelaski@standardsASAP.org<mailto:adelaski@standardsASAP.org>;<mailto:Teckman@nwc

ouncil.org>Teckman@nwcouncil.org<mailto:Teckman@nwcouncil.org>;

<mailto:gbf1@pge.com> gbf1@pge.com<mailto:gbf1@pge.com>;

<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com> carlos.gaytan@ge.com<mailto:carlos.gaytan@ge.com>;

<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>

rgreeson@federalpacific.com<mailto:rgreeson@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com>

bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com<mailto:bruce.r.hirsch@bge.com>; <mailto:jhodge@howard.com>

jhodge@howard.com<mailto:jhodge@howard.com>; <mailto:mhyland@appanet.org>

mhyland@appanet.org<mailto:mhyland@appanet.org>;

<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>

dave.millure@metglas.com<mailto:dave.millure@metglas.com>;<mailto:snadel@aceee.or

g>snadel@aceee.org<mailto:snadel@aceee.org>; <mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>

wes.patterson@us.abb.com<mailto:wes.patterson@us.abb.com>;

<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>

Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com<mailto:Eric.Petersen@aksteel.com>;

<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>

Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com<mailto:Raymond.Polinski@ATImetals.com>;

<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>

artrosenfeld@gmail.com<mailto:artrosenfeld@gmail.com>;

<mailto:srosenstock@eei.org> srosenstock@eei.org<mailto:srosenstock@eei.org>;

<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org> rroy@nrdc.org<mailto:rroy@nrdc.org>;

<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>

robert.saint@nreca.coop<mailto:robert.saint@nreca.coop>;<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgn

mail.com>chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com<mailto:chuck.simmons@pgnmail.com>;

<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com> kwinder@mleainc.com<mailto:kwinder@mleainc.com>;

<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org> mwaltner@nrdc.org<mailto:mwaltner@nrdc.org>;

<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>

jerry.schoen@aksteel.com<mailto:jerry.schoen@aksteel.com>;

<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com> Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com<mailto:Paul.Ryan@hitmet.com>;

<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>

ahofmann@publicpower.org<mailto:ahofmann@publicpower.org>;

<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>

pkumar@publicpower.org<mailto:pkumar@publicpower.org>;<mailto:bsmith@federalpacif

ic.com>bsmith@federalpacific.com<mailto:bsmith@federalpacific.com>;

<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>

greg.coulter405@gmail.com<mailto:greg.coulter405@gmail.com>;

<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>

jmauer@standardsasap.org<mailto:jmauer@standardsasap.org>; Cohen, Daniel; Meyers,

Aaron; <mailto:Jim.creevy@nema.org>

Jim.creevy@nema.org<mailto:Jim.creevy@nema.org>; <mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>

jrossetti@mlgw.org<mailto:jrossetti@mlgw.org>; <mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov>

cabolduc@lbl.gov<mailto:cabolduc@lbl.gov>; <mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov>

kcoughlin@lbl.gov<mailto:kcoughlin@lbl.gov>;<mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>bri

an.coffey@navigant.com<mailto:brian.coffey@navigant.com>;

<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com> mrivest@navigant.com<mailto:mrivest@navigant.com>;

<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov> gjrosenquist@lbl.gov<mailto:gjrosenquist@lbl.gov>;

<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>

caitlin.johnson@navigant.com<mailto:caitlin.johnson@navigant.com>;<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>

zhimei.luo@navigant.com<mailto:zhimei.luo@navigant.com>; Marchetti, Emily

(CONTR); <mailto:charlied@uus.org> charlied@uus.org<mailto:charlied@uus.org>;

<mailto:DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com> DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com<mailto:DYoung@energy

‐ solution.com>; <mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com>

James.Lass@cleco.com<mailto:James.Lass@cleco.com>;

<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>

maheshsampat@bellsouth.net<mailto:maheshsampat@bellsouth.net>;

<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com> phopkinson@hvolt.com<mailto:phopkinson@hvolt.com>;

<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant.com>

matthew.nardotti@navigant.com<mailto:matthew.nardotti@navigant.com>; Raba, Jim;

Savitz, Maxine (EMAB); <mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>

tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com<mailto:tpetrosino@carolina.rr.com>;<mailto:chris.brown

@cogentpowerinc.com>chris.brown@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:chris.brown@cogentpower

inc.com>; <mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>

ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:ted.johnstone@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>

frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com<mailto:frank.guilbault@cogentpowerinc.com>;

<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>

ned.efbrush@gmail.com<mailto:ned.efbrush@gmail.com>;

<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>

dbrender@cda.copper.org<mailto:dbrender@cda.copper.org>;

<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:chad.kennedy@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>

eduardorobles@eaton.com<mailto:eduardorobles@eaton.com>;

<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>

vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com<mailto:vijay.tendulkar@onyxpower.com>;

<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com> thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com<mailto:thomas.patzner@us.schneider

‐ electric.com>;

<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>

carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com<mailto:carlosgsiqueiros@eaton.com>

Subject: Re: Negotiated Rulemaking

‐ Distribution Transformers Teleconference

Robert,

I understand the DOE staff are working on the incremental Watts calculations and

will get that out to group as soon as it's ready.

best wishes,

Richard

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Robert Berman

<<mailto:bermaneconomics@gmail.com>bermaneconomics@gmail.com<mailto:bermaneconomi

cs@gmail.com>> wrote:

Thank you Richard. That clarification is helpful.

In the liquid

‐ filled meeting we were told that we would receive an analysis of

incremental Watts saved by DL for all ELs, as well as the incremental cost. When

will that analysis be available? For many of us, that analysis is the basis for

additional, perhaps extensive analyses, so it should come with enough lead time

before any additional meetings or teleconferences to that we can give it the

required consideration. It would be most helpful if the incremental cost wereprovided separately for transformer and installation, with any pole component of

the installation identified.

For the MV Dry and LV Dry meetings, it would be most helpful if you would also

circulate an agenda with objectives, hopefully this week, so that we are able to

prepare for those meetings.

Regards,

Robert A. Berman, Principal

Berman Economics

<http://www.BermanEconomics.com/>www.BermanEconomics.com<http://www.BermanEconomi

cs.com>

1915 Grand Court

Vienna, VA 22182

703

‐ 281

‐ 0490<tel:703

‐ 281

‐ 0490>

703

‐ 655

‐ 8398<tel:703

‐ 655

‐ 8398> (cell)

<mailto:BermanEconomics@gmail.com>BermanEconomics@gmail.com<mailto:BermanEconomic

s@gmail.com>

On Nov 10, 2011, at 11:14 AM, Richard Parker wrote:

Dear Colleagues:

The telcon on the 17th is currently planned for medium

‐ voltage dry

‐ type and the

telcon on the 21st is reserved for low

‐ voltage. There will be revised analysis

circulated in advance of both calls per our discussion yesterday. Each call has

substantial chunks of time allocated, though I hope we won't need all that time.

It may be prudent to schedule a liquid

‐ filled call at some point as well, but I

propose that we hold off on that for day or so, until we can clarify when revised

analysis for liquid

‐ filled will be ready.

Thanks for your very constructive participation in the meetings over the last two

days.

Richard Parker

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 10:05 AM, Freeman, Jeremiah (CONTR)

<<mailto:Jeremiah.Freeman@ee.doe.gov>Jeremiah.Freeman@ee.doe.gov<mailto:Jeremiah.

Freeman@ee.doe.gov>> wrote:

When: Thursday, November 17, 2011 1:00 PM

‐ 5:00 PM (GMT

‐ 05:00) Eastern Time (US &

Canada).

Where: Webinar and Phone

Note: The GMT offset above does not reflect daylight saving time adjustments.

*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*

Dear Colleagues,This event is to save the time slot on your calendar based on our discussion at

yesterday's meeting. Later today further information will be sent regarding the

registration information for our November 17 and November 21 webinars. After

registering you will get the link for the webinar and a toll free number.

Please call with questions or concerns.

Very Respectfully,

Jeremiah Freeman

202

‐ 431

‐ 4243<tel:202

‐ 431

‐ 4243> (cell)

202

‐ 586

‐ 1867<tel:202

‐ 586

‐ 1867> (office)

>>> This e

‐ mail and any attachments are confidential, may contain legal,

professional or other privileged information, and are intended solely for the

addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, do not use the information in

this e

‐ mail in any way, delete this e

‐ mail and notify the sender. CEG

‐ IP2