Subject: RE: SWPC 501A5D Generator Damaged Aboard M/V INDUSTRIAL BRIDGE
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 07:27:00 -0700 (PDT)

It's certainly an alternative.  It might be prudent to hold off on the 
decision until we all meet with the adjuster and see if it is necessary based 
upon what she tell us about her position on the claim.  If we are still at an 
impasse and there is no open option against SWPC, then we can always have 
another expert of our choosing present when the next inspection takes place.

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Jacoby, Ben   On Behalf Of Ben F Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT
Sent: Friday, May 18, 2001 2:23 PM
To: Studdert, James P.
Cc: Booth, Chris; Studdert, James P.; Sole, Carlos; Mann, Kay
Subject: Re: SWPC 501A5D Generator Damaged Aboard M/V INDUSTRIAL BRIDGE

Do you recommend we do this?

From: James P Studdert/ENRON@enronXgate on 05/18/2001 02:12 PM
To: Ben Jacoby/HOU/ECT@ECT, Chris Booth/NA/Enron@Enron
cc: James P Studdert/ENRON@enronXgate 
Subject: SWPC 501A5D Generator Damaged Aboard M/V INDUSTRIAL BRIDGE

A thought.  As it appears that SW is insistent that the generator has been a 
total loss from the beginning, and that the surveyor/adjuster are not 
convinced of that, would you want to hire and outside expert to give an 
opinion?  I'm sure with the help of Jim Sutherland we can come up with a 
panel of experts for you to pick from to make an independent exam on our 
behalf.  Do you want me to pursue this?