From:	Marc C Ross
Sent:	Monday, December 07, 2009 8:37 PM
To:	ilc-ops-availability@desy.de; star@slac.stanford.edu; 
nantista@slac.stanford.edu
Cc:	Nobu Toge (toge@lcdev.kek.jp); Marc C Ross
Subject:	Draft Availability section - with question list for tomorrow's meeting
Attachments:	AvailDraft20091207_1.docx

As mentioned in the earlier mail, I have a short list of questions, below. 

I have also made a few , mostly superficial, changes.

Nobu – please post / distribute as you see fit. This includes John’s input in its entirety. 


Questions on the availability draft (some stylistic or typographical error or reflects my 
misunderstanding):

1)	‘the IP does not really cause 13% downtime’. What is another way of saying this? (Tom)
2)	‘the actual downtime caused by the cryo plants is 2.8%’. I thought this was a ‘set’ parameter, 
closer to 1.5%? (Tom)
3)	Figure 3: scheduled maintenance downtime – 19%. We should explain this since it appears out 
of context with the other entries in the pie chart. (Tom)
4)	‘comparable to the best achieved at any accelerator and some are…’. Is this explained in John’s 
section (4)? (John)
5)	Near the end of the DRFS section: ’54 person-hours’?? (Shigeki / Tetsuo)
6)	Section 4.3 – either because I changed the figure (or some other reason), the column and row 
headings are lost. Also, the explanatory text is a bit cumbersome. (John)
7)	‘An indication of the degree of difficulty deemed necessary to meet the SB2009 MTBFs can be 
gleamed by comparing the Final MBTFs with the Input MTBFs in Columns J-N’. Is this what we 
would like to say? (John)
8)	Need more on LLRF / KCS availability (Chris A)

Marc