Message-ID: <29453407.1075840444028.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2002 03:00:00 -0700 (PDT) From: hollis.kimbrough@enron.com To: ilan.caplan@enron.com Subject: Re: Proposed Clipper Availability Cc: mark.fisher@enron.com, mark.walker@enron.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Bcc: mark.fisher@enron.com, mark.walker@enron.com X-From: Hollis Kimbrough X-To: Ilan Caplan X-cc: Mark Fisher, Mark V Walker X-bcc: X-Folder: \mark fischer 7-12-02\Notes Folders\All documents X-Origin: FISCHER-M X-FileName: mark fischer 7-12-02 LNotes.nsf Ilan, The first thing to jump out at me is the 36 hour per year limit on MT. Currently our standard is 48 hours per year and this may be aggressive. We can check into this some more but be aware that with this definition we just lost 25% of our maintenance time. Hollis From: Ilan Caplan on 04/17/2002 09:14 AM To: Mark Fisher/EWC/Enron@Enron, Mark V Walker/EWC/Enron@ENRON cc: Hollis Kimbrough/EWC/Enron@ENRON Subject: Proposed Clipper Availability Mark(s) - Please review the attached calculation which Clipper proposes for Availability. I will compare it with the contractual availability which have recently proposed, but would prefer your input. Thanks, Ilan ---------------------- Forwarded by Ilan Caplan/EWC/Enron on 04/17/2002 09:26 AM --------------------------- Mark Eilers 04/17/2002 09:02 AM To: Ilan Caplan/EWC/Enron@Enron cc: Subject: Availability Ilan Can you please give this a quick read to see if this my work. This is a take on our standard availability that Clipper is proposing. Let me know your thoughts. Mark