Subject: GE- World Hunger
From: [email-masked]
To: [email-masked]
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 15 May 2001 08:36:00 -0700 (PDT)

John:
I have reviewed the insurance article and would not mind recommending a few 
minor changes but respect your wishes not to. However, I did find a couple of 
places where it is definitely needed.

After speaking with a few marine experts at Wortham I have found our Hull & 
P&I wording to be deficient [did this on another project]. I believe Clause 
19.1.4 should be changed to the following recommended wording. You are 
welcome to change the limit [$10 million] but I think the wording is more 
appropriate for all agreements going forward.

Hull & Machinery and Protection and Indemnity Insurance. Seller shall ensure 
that if any owned or non-owned watercraft of any kind is used for performance 
of the Work, Hull & Machinery and Protection and Indemnity insurance shall be 
provided for the vessels in the amounts as follows:

Hull & Machinery:
Full current market value of the watercraft.

Protection &Indemnity including excess collision liability [unless otherwise 
provided by the hull coverage]:
$10,000,000 each occurrence or the full current market value of the vessel, 
whichever is greater.

Such insurance may be provided by the vessel operator or by Seller as Seller 
deems appropriate.

The aircraft clause needs a couple of changes:

In Clause 19.1.6 insert &aircraft8 after &non-owned8 in the third line.

Such insurance may be provided by the aircraft operator or by Seller as 
Seller deems appropriate.

Please let me know if you have any questions.
Paul

 -----Original Message-----
From:  Rigby, John  
Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2001 5:07 AM
To: Marshall, David; Parrish, Paul E.
Cc: Tweed, Sheila; Mann, Kay; Dieball, Scott
Subject: GE- World Hunger

David and Paul:

As you are aware Sheila Tweed has been championing achieving a standardized 
turbine purchase agreement with GE for domestic applications.  Attached is 
the current draft of such document.  Please review the insurance provisions 
to see if there are any changes needed.   I believe the current drafting is 
what we have used in the past.   

Given the technology issues of late do we need to make any changes.  This 
would be for 7FA and LM6000 applications which I believe the market views as 
proven technology so I assume we will not need to shift collateral damage to 
GE and expose GE to insurer subrogation.

Scott Dieball and I are in London- Enron House.  Today Tuesday our telephone 
number is  44-207-783-0517.   Please call at your earliest convenience so we 
can discuss conceptually.

I would prefer not to make drafting changes for the sake of style at this 
point.

 << File: GE Agreement - Version 4(jr).DOC >>