"This invention (Energy Economizer Technology - a.k.a. EET) was originally submitted to the Office of Energy-Related Inventions (OERI) for evaluation ... on December 7, 1977. "

"Early in this rather lengthy evaluation process it was recognized that the invention as submitted to OERI was a workable invention and was based on sound engineering principles. However, it was seen as similar in many respects to an invention patented by Frank J. Nola, Patent #4,052,648 (assigned to NASA). Mr. Montgomery was directed to focus in his review on establishing differences between the two devices."

"The invention ... has the effect of reducing the power loss in the motor due to copper and iron loss. The main difference between the two inventions (NASA/Nola versus EET) is in the manner in which they sense the loading on the motor. It is in this aspect of the inventions that it is believed that this invention (Energy Economizer) has a significant advantage over the Nola (NASA) invention."

"As explained in the report by G. Franklin Montgomery, ...this difference is considered to be significant enough ... an advantage over the Nola (NASA) device that will cause the (Energy Economizer Technology) to come into more widespread use."

"The Energy Economizer is based on sound technical principles and can be expected as claimed... "

"... there is evidence that a significant amount of energy can be saved through widespread use of this device."

"There is enough of a difference between the Energy Economizer and the Nola (NASA) device with the ENERGY ECONOMIZER HAVING SIGNIFICANT POTENTIAL ADVANTAGES, TO WARRANTY GOVERNMENT SUPPORT...

"The parker energy economizer (EE) and Nola power factor control (PFC) conserve energy by reducing the voltage applied to an induction motor as its mechanical load decreases.

"...to do so, the EE...regulates speed reliably, and is capable of nearly optimum energy saving. The PFC.. Does not regulate speed reliably, and does not provide optimum energy saving. The PFC defect is a fundamental consequence of its sensing method."

"...thus, the PFC measures neither PF nor the phase angle upon which PF depends, and it is perhaps surprising that the PF works as well as it does at light loads.

"The EE operates only at motor speeds exceeding approximately 95 percent of synchronous speed, thereby avoiding stability problems that might arise in the low-speed range where the available torque is less than the maximum, or pull-out, torque. For the same reason, the invention does not interfere with normal, full-voltage motor starting. The PFC likewise makes provision for starting without control interference, but it is not obvious that the PFC becomes inoperative (if it does) at low speeds that may occur transiently during normal operation. Failure to "disconnect" may cause some of the reported instability in PFC operation."

"Based on the materials contained in OERI file 003145 on this date, I conclude: "the (energy economizer) ... Is a fundamentally sound system for automatically reducing the electrical energy used by an induction motor at less than full mechanical loads. In practice, it appears to achieve nearly optimum energy saving.

The Nola PFC,...concept of power factor sensing fails to implement the concept in practice. It appears to fall substantially short of achieving optimum energy saving."