Subject: Re: Work Request 574
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 05:19:00 -0800 (PST)

Greetings Mark,

Please add these four files to your finished deliverable for work request 574.

Indian Mesa (Clear Sky) met data for towers 0652 & 0653 are attached.  Rich 
usually likes working with the raw data files.  Since the February files 
start on 2/2, the January files (ending on 2/2) are included.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Matt Meyers

---------------------- Forwarded by Matthew Meyers/EWC/Enron on 03/21/2002 
01:34 PM ---------------------------

Hollis Kimbrough
03/21/2002 11:47 AM
To: Matthew Meyers/EWC/Enron@Enron
cc: Mark Fisher/EWC/Enron@Enron 

Subject: Re: Work Request

Matt,

Please package the data in hourly format (see Kurt's e-mail below).  As soon 
as we have Mark's part please combine the two outputs and send them to Kurt.

Thanks,
Hollis
---------------------- Forwarded by Hollis Kimbrough/EWC/Enron on 03/21/2002 
11:58 AM ---------------------------

Kurt Anderson
03/21/2002 11:43 AM
To: Hollis Kimbrough/EWC/Enron@ENRON
cc:  

Subject: Re: Work Request  

Thank you very much Hollis. I apologize for the mistake on the form. I have 
not spoken to the owner, not for lack of trying I might add.  I think we 
should move forward using hourly data. If this is unacceptable and will 
result in a lot of work for what could be of little value than proceed as you 
see fit. I will continue to attempt to reach the owner to obtain guidance on 
this issue.

Again, I appreciate your support on this task.

KA

Hollis Kimbrough
03/21/2002 09:44 AM
To: Information Services@ENRON
cc: Mark Fisher/EWC/Enron@Enron, Matthew Meyers/EWC/Enron@Enron, Kurt 
Anderson/EWC/Enron@ENRON 

Subject: Work Request

Please see attached.

Kurt - I changed the date to correct the typo.  It now reads 2/1/02 through 
2/28/02 versus the previous 2/1/02 through 2/1/02 date.  I also changed the 
wind requirement to read "average" wind speed dropping the 10 minute data 
requirement.  The second issue is still outstanding with regard to being 
acceptable.  Can  Rich use hourly data or not?  An alternative would be to 
provide nacelle mounted anemometer data for each turbine on a  10 minute 
basis - would that be helpful?

Regards,
Hollis