Here is an email: Hi Scott, I have some questions: The obligation to try to improve performance about the specific performance (ie minimum) standards frequently has a time limit, say 6 months. Do you have a sense for the appropriate time period here? Would it make sense to require them to work longer on the first 2.0 and 2.4 than the rest? Will we have a drawing number for a standard foundation design, or will we need to put words around it. I know we discussed the need for pilings as the most significant change. Do you think that this difference is enough? Did I understand that we want them to pay us at the end for non-standard foundations (as opposed to a credit).
What is a potential subject line for this email?
FuelCell contract questions