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