Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 1 of 45

00001 1 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS 2 VERIDYNE CORPORATION, : 3 4 v. Plaintiff, : : No. 06-150C : (Judge Christine O.C. Miller)

5 THE UNITED STATES 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Defendant. : : Pages 1 - 44

Deposition of RITA JACKSON Washington, D.C. Friday, August 15, 2008

20 Reported by: George W. Tudor, RPR 21 Job No. 188940B

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 2 of 45

00002 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Deposition of RITA JACKSON, held at the offices of: 10 11 12 13 14 15 Pursuant to notice, before George W. Tudor, RPR, a 16 Notary Public of the District of Columbia. 17 18 19 20 21 Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, D.C.20590-0001 August 15, 2008 1:10 p.m.

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 3 of 45

00003 1 ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF: 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Present: Mr. Samuel Patterson 20 21 Robert Chandler, Esquire Assistant United States Attorney U.S. Department of Justice 1100 L Street, NW Room 12002 Washington, DC 20036 Marc Lamer, Esquire Kostos and Lamer, P.C. 1608 Walnut Street Suite 1300 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 215.545.0570 [email protected]

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 4 of 45

00004 1

INDEX

2 EXAMINATION OF RITA JACKSON 3 BY: 4 MR. LAMER: 5 MR. CHANDLER: 6 EXHIBITS DESCRIPTION 7 No. 48 8 No. 49 9 No. 50 10 No. 51 11 No. 52 12 No. 53 13 No. 54 14 No. 55 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 (Copies of exhibits attached hereto.) Contract Two pages of handwritten notes One page of notes Two e-mail messages Letter dated 3/10/98 Letter dated 4/28/98 Letter dated 4/30/98 Amendment of Solicitation/ Modification of Contract 33 PAGE: 6 39 PAGE: 14 20 20 20 25 32 33

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 5 of 45

00005 1 Thereupon, 2 RITA JACKSON,

3 a Witness, called for oral examination by counsel for 4 the Plaintiff, having been duly sworn by the Notary 5 Public, was examined and testified as follows: 6 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF

7 BY MR. LAMER: 8 Q. Would you state your name for the record,

9 please? 10 11 A. Rita Jackson. Q. I'll give you my little preamble. We do

12 this little thing first. 13 Ms. Jackson, my name is Marc Lamer. I

14 represent Veridyne, Inc., who you probably know 15 better as Shepard-Patterson Associates, Inc., and 16 we're engaged in certain litigation involving the 17 federal government, and specifically the Department 18 of Transportation and the Maritime Administration. 19 I'm going to ask you a series of questions

20 about facts at issue in that litigation. If at any 21 time you don't hear a question I ask, please tell me

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 6 of 45

00006 1 and either I or the court reporter will repeat it. 2 If I ask you a question and you don't understand it, 3 please tell me and I will try to rephrase it. But 4 if I ask you a question and you answer it, I will 5 assume that you heard the question, you understood 6 the question and that's the answer that you intend. 7 MR. CHANDLER: And I'm going to object. I

8 don't know that that's necessarily a fair 9 assumption. 10 MR. LAMER: And beyond that, when you

11 answer a question, please do so verbally. The court 12 rotter's job is tough enough without having to 13 interpret gestures. And finally, when I'm talking, 14 if you would refrain, and when you're talking, I'll 15 refrain, and that will make his job an awful lot 16 easier than to try to figure out who to put where on 17 a sheet of paper. 18 19 A. Okay. Q. Could you give me your educational

20 background, please? 21 A. Educational background. I have a

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 7 of 45

00007 1 bachelor's degree in business administration and a 2 master's degree in public administration. 3 4 5 6 7 Q. And what is your bachelor's degree? A. George Mason University. Q. And yours master's? A. Central Michigan University. Q. And could you give me your employment

8 history? 9 A. My employment history. How far back

10 should I go? 11 Q. I don't know. When you got out of

12 college; how's that? 13 A. When I got out of college, I started

14 working for the Defense Fuel Supply Center, at which 15 time I applied for an internship with the Department 16 of the Navy and I was accepted for that position. 17 Worked with the Military Sealift Command as a 18 contracting officer. Got a promotion and came to 19 the Maritime Administration, and now I am in the 20 office of -- Maritime Work Force Development. 21 Q. When did you come to the Maritime

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 8 of 45

00008 1 Administration? 2 A. I came to the Maritime Administration in

3 July, 1994. 4 Q. Okay. And when you came to the Maritime

5 Administration, in what capacity? 6 7 8 9 A. Contract specialist. Q. Contract specialist? A. Yes. Q. Is there a difference between a contract

10 specialist and a contracting officer? 11 12 13 A. Yes. Q. What's the difference? A. A contracting officer has the authority to

14 obligate the federal government for contracts. 15 16 Q. And what about a contract specialist? A. A contract specialist normally does the --

17 does the day-to-day operations of the actual 18 contract. 19 Q. Could a contracting officer be a contract

20 specialist for a given contract? 21 MR. CHANDLER: Objection, vague.

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 9 of 45

00009 1 BY MR. LAMER: 2 Q. Could somebody who has a warrant as a

3 contracting officer, could they act as a contract 4 specialist for a specific contract? 5 6 A. I would say yes. Q. Okay. Now, during your time at MARAD as a

7 contract specialist, did you have occasion to become 8 familiar with a company, Shepard-Patterson 9 Associates? 10 11 A. Yes. Q. How did you become familiar with that

12 company? 13 A. They submitted a proposal for a -- I'm not

14 sure if it was RFP or request for some services that 15 the agency wanted. 16 17 18 19 20 Q. And did they receive a contract? A. Yes. Q. Was that what's known as an 8(a) contract? A. I believe it was, yes. Q. Do you remember when that was awarded,

21 roughly?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 10 of 45

00010 1 A. No. 2 Q. Okay. Would the number DTMA 91-95-C-00024

3 ring a bell? 4 5 A. Yes. Q. What was that contract for? What types of

6 services? 7 8 A. Logistic support services. Q. What does that mean? Tell me what

9 logistic support services means. 10 A. To the best of my recollection, it was

11 supplying supplies for the Maritime Administration 12 vessels. 13 14 15 16 17 Q. What kind of supplies? A. Parts. Q. Are you talking about spare parts? A. Yes. Q. Now we're talking about logistic support

18 contract. Did Shepard-Patterson have a separate 19 contract for spare parts? 20 21 A. I believe it was -- was it separate? Q. I'm asking you.

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 11 of 45

00011 1 A. They had a -- they had a spare parts

2 contract, yes. 3 Q. And in addition to spare parts, what kind

4 of logistic support services did they provide? 5 6 A. I guess I'm not sure. I don't remember. Q. Okay. When the original contract was

7 awarded, I guess in 1994 or '95, do you remember 8 whether that award was as a result of competition or 9 was it direct negotiation with Shepard-Patterson? 10 MR. CHANDLER: Objection, assuming facts

11 not in evidence. 12 13 14 MR. LAMER: Go ahead. MR. CHANDLER: You can answer. A. Can you repeat the question?

15 BY MR. LAMER: 16 Q. Yes. When Shepard-Patterson received the

17 contract that we're talking about, the logistic 18 support contract, I think we agreed that that was an 19 8(a) contract? 20 21 A. Yes. Q. Minority setaside?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 12 of 45

00012 1 2 A. Yes. Q. Do you remember whether there was a

3 competition amongst 8(a) contractors or whether 4 MARAD negotiated directly with Shepard-Patterson? 5 6 A. I don't remember. Q. Okay. Now, at some point -- and I'll

7 direct your attention to late 1987 and early 1998 -8 do you recall discussions at MARAD about extending 9 the Shepard-Patterson logistics support contract? 10 11 A. Yes. Q. Okay. And do you remember how those

12 discussions started? 13 14 A. No. Q. I'm going to show you a document that we

15 have previously marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 37. 16 Showing you what's been marked as

17 Plaintiff's Exhibit 37, do you recall ever having 18 seen this letter before? 19 20 A. Yes. Q. And directing your attention to the first

21 sentence, it refers to a meeting February 19th,

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 13 of 45

00013 1 1998, it appears. Do you recall that meeting? 2 3 A. No. Q. Do you have any recollection whatsoever of

4 attending a meeting with representatives of 5 Shepard-Patterson in 1998 to discuss the extension 6 of the logistic support contract? 7 8 A. No. Q. If you notice in the letter, the letter

9 talks about an extension of the contract, and in the 10 very second sentence, it says "Proposed estimate NTE 11 three million in the aggregate." Did you have any 12 idea at the time what that was referring to? 13 14 A. Can you ask the question again? Q. Yes. When the letter says "Proposed

15 estimates not to exceed $3 million in the 16 aggregate," what did you understand that to mean? 17 18 19 A. What do I understand that to mean? Q. What did you understand it to mean then? A. NTE means not to exceed, so they're saying

20 that their proposal will not exceed $3 million. 21 Q. Do you recall what the approximate dollar

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 14 of 45

00014 1 value of this contract was at the time? 2 3 A. Which contract? Q. The logistics support contract. If I say

4 the contract, that's the one I'm referring to. 5 6 7 A. No, I don't. MR. LAMER: Let's mark this as 48. (Deposition Exhibit No. 48 marked for

8 identification.) 9 BY MR. LAMER: 10 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

11 Plaintiff's 48 and directing your attention to 12 starting on the third page of the document, are you 13 familiar with this document? 14 MR. CHANDLER: Objection, vague.

15 BY MR. LAMER: 16 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

17 Plaintiff's 48, are you familiar with the document? 18 MR. CHANDLER: Are you asking her about

19 the third page or the entire document. 20 Q. First I'm asking are you familiar with the

21 document.

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 15 of 45

00015 1 2 3 4 A. Yes. Q. And what is the document? A. It is the contract -Q. Let me see that a minute, if you would.

5 Some extra pages might have gotten stapled in the 6 front. 7 They did. It's got two sets of -- SBA.

8 Let's make that 48. 9 (Document substitution for Exhibit 48.)

10 BY MR. LAMER: 11 Q. All right. With the corrected 48, is this

12 the Shepard-Patterson logistics support contract we 13 were discussing a few moments ago? 14 15 A. It appears to be, yes. Q. Directing your attention to the pages that

16 are numbered at the bottom B2, B3, B4, B5 and B6, 17 does this refresh your recollection as to the 18 approximate dollar value of the services that MARAD 19 was procuring from Shepard-Patterson? 20 21 A. Yes. Q. So in terms of cost, it appears to be

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 16 of 45

00016 1 anywhere from 2.7 million per year up as high as 4.4 2 million per year. 3 Oh, that's easy enough. Look at the first

4 page. It says the total is $21 million. Do you see 5 that? 6 7 A. Um-hmm. Q. Does that refresh your recollection as to

8 the approximate dollar value of the 9 Shepard-Patterson logistic support contract? 10 11 A. Yes. Q. Okay. And this extension that Mr. Jenna

12 was writing about, this was to be a five-year 13 extension; am I correct? And I'll direct your 14 attention to paragraph number three.? 15 16 MR. CHANDLER: Objection, vague. A. Yes.

17 BY MR. LAMER: 18 Q. Now, when you saw this letter, did you

19 have any understanding as to how, if the contract 20 was running 2.7 to $4.4 million worth of services a 21 year, Shepard-Patterson would be submitting to you a

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 17 of 45

00017 1 proposal for a five-year extension not to exceed $3 2 million? 3 4 A. Say the question again, sir? Q. Did you have any idea as to how

5 Shepard-Patterson would be able to provide you with 6 a proposal to extend this contract for five years at 7 a total dollars not to exceed three million? 8 9 A. Can you rephrase the question? Q. Sure. The letter says, "We're agreed that

10 the extension was to be for five years of a contract 11 that averaged about $4 million worth of work a 12 year," agreed? 13 14 A. Yes. Q. So when you got this letter and you saw in

15 paragraph two Mr. Jenna says that -- and this is 16 follow-up to the meeting -- "The proposed estimates 17 not to exceed $3 million in the aggregate." Do you 18 see that? 19 20 A. Yes. Q. Did you have any understanding at the time

21 as to how Shepard-Patterson would fashion a proposal

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 18 of 45

00018 1 for MARAD to continue this contract for five years 2 at an aggregate dollar value not to exceed $3 3 million? 4 5 A. No. Q. Did you have any idea where the $3 million

6 figure came from? 7 8 A. No. Q. Did you ever hear the figure $3 million

9 mentioned as being a ceiling for the value of an 10 extension? 11 A. Are you asking me is it unusual for

12 that -13 Q. No, I'm asking if, at the time, you ever

14 heard any discussion regarding this extension, that 15 $3 million was the maximum dollar value for which 16 the contract could be extended. 17 18 A. That's what the proposal says, yes. Q. No, the proposal simply says that the --

19 if I'm reading it, it says proposed estimates not to 20 exceed $3 million in the aggregate. 21 My question is, did you ever hear any

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 19 of 45

00019 1 discussion that an extension was not permitted to 2 exceed $3 million. 3 MR. CHANDLER: Objection, asked and

4 answered. 5 MR. LAMER: No, it hasn't been asked and

6 answered. 7 Q. Answer the question, please. Did you ever

8 hear any discussion at MARAD that there was a $3 9 million limit on extending an 8(a) contract? 10 11 12 13 A. Yes. Q. And where did you hear that from? Bad English. From whom did you hear that? A. It was my understanding the proposal that

14 was submitted was not to exceed $3 million. 15 Q. Why was it not to exceed $3 million, in

16 your understanding. You had a contract, $21 million 17 in the aggregate. Why could the proposal not exceed 18 $3 million? 19 20 A. That was a requirement from SBA. Q. And you knew that then, am I correct, in

21 1998?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 20 of 45

00020 1 2 3 A. In '98? Yes. MR. LAMER: Okay. Now, this will be 49. (Deposition Exhibit No. 49 marked for

4 identification.) 5 BY MR. LAMER: 6 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

7 Plaintiff's 49, did you recognize the handwriting on 8 this document? 9 10 11 12 A. No. Q. No? A. No. (Deposition Exhibit No. 50 marked for

13 identification.) 14 BY MR. LAMER: 15 Q. Pretty obvious what I want to ask. I'm

16 showing you Plaintiff's Exhibit 50. Do you 17 recognize the handwriting on this document? 18 19 A. No. (Deposition Exhibit No. 51 marked for

20 identification.) 21

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 21 of 45

00021 1 BY MR. LAMER: 2 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

3 Plaintiff's 51 -- by the way, I think you said you 4 were aware that $3 million was the SBA limit for 5 extending an 8(a) contract. Do you remember how you 6 became aware of that? 7 8 A. There was some discussion with SBA. Q. Okay. Was that discussion before or after

9 the date of Mr. Jenna's letter to you, February 25th 10 letter? 11 12 A. I don't recall. Q. Do you recall anybody at MARAD informing

13 Shepard-Patterson, "Yes, we can extend the contract, 14 but only to the extent of $3 million"? 15 16 A. I don't recall, no. Q. Do you recall how Shepard-Patterson knew

17 that the proposal could not exceed $3 million? 18 A. Well, they were an 8(a) program. I assume

19 they would know that. 20 Q. So that's simply an assumption on your

21 part? You don't...

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 22 of 45

00022 1 2 A. I don't what? Q. Your answer is that you assume they would

3 know it because they were in the 8(a) program? 4 5 A. Right, they were in the program. Q. Let me show you what's been marked as

6 plaintiff's 51, and I would ask -- do you recall 7 this document? 8 9 10 11 12 A. No. Q. Is this an e-mail that you sent? A. It appears to be, yes, at the bottom. Q. Do you remember why you sent it? A. Joyce sort of reviewed the documents in

13 the office. She was like the policy person at one 14 point. It appears that I was informing her of the 15 status of the extension. 16 17 18 19 20 21 Q. What were you requesting from her? A. Guidance. Q. Pardon? A. Guidance. Q. What kind of guidance? A. To accomplish the extension.

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 23 of 45

00023 1 Q. If you can explain to me, what was her

2 guidance back to you? 3 A. She's requesting that a justification be

4 prepared. 5 6 Q. What kind of a justification? A. I believe she's requesting a justification

7 to request the extension. 8 Q. What does she mean by "A justification

9 combining the normal documentation required by FAR 10 17.205 and a special documentation required by TAM 11 1217.204, which is applicable when you exceed the 12 five years set forth in the FAR"? Could you explain 13 to me what your understanding was of what she's 14 talking about? 15 A. She's saying go to these two documents and

16 determine what are the applicable documentation and 17 prepare it? The TAM is Transportation -18 19 20 Q. Acquisition Manual? A. Yes. Q. What did she mean in the last paragraph,

21 "I would recommend a request to SBA to convert this

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 24 of 45

00024 1 8(a) contract to the special DOT/SBA MOU authority. 2 Once granted, this would keep the SBA 3 signature/approval within this office in the 4 future"? 5 6 A. I'm not sure what she means by that. Q. Let me see if I understand, and you tell

7 me if I'm wrong. It sounds like what she's saying 8 is, process this under this DOT/SBA, MOU -- would 9 MOU be Memorandum Of Understanding? 10 11 A. Yes. Q. Process it under that, and then MARAD

12 would not need SBA to sign -- it would keep the 13 SBA's signature approval within this office in the 14 future, and then they would no longer need SBA's 15 signature. 16 17 A. I would have to see the MOU to see it. Q. So as of today, you have no recollection

18 of what that meant. You don't know what it says. 19 20 21 A. Right. Q. Okay. Let me show you -A. Do you have a copy of the MOU?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 25 of 45

00025 1 2 MR. LAMER: Mark this as 52. (Deposition Exhibit No. 52 marked for

3 identification.) 4 BY MR. LAMER: 5 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

6 Plaintiff's Exhibit 52, have you ever seen this 7 document before? 8 A. That's my signature on it, so I'm going to

9 say yes. 10 11 Q. And why did you generate this document? A. I'm requesting that Shepard-Patterson

12 submit a cost proposal. 13 Q. And you say in the first paragraph, "Based

14 on your presentation provided to this office on 15 February 19, 1998 and legal concurrence, we are 16 making plans to accomplish this effort." Would that 17 be the extension of the contract? 18 19 A. Yes. Q. Okay. Now, we looked before at the

20 February 25 letter from Mr. Jenna that said the 21 proposal was not to exceed $3 million, right? Do

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 26 of 45

00026 1 you recall that? 2 3 A. Yes. Q. Your next sentence says, "The scope of

4 work will remain the same as is established in the 5 current contract." What did you mean by that? 6 7 8 9 10 11 A. By the term "scope of work"? Q. Scope of work. A. Basically, the same type of services. Q. Type of services or amount of services? A. The same type of services. Q. And it says, "Also, as in the current

12 contract, actual taskings will be assigned using the 13 work order and technical directive structure." What 14 is that? What did that mean? 15 A. That it would be handled as the current

16 contract is being handled, which is specific work 17 orders for services. 18 Q. So -- and if I understand it, and you

19 correct me if I'm wrong, if I understand the 20 contract correctly, the contract doesn't give the 21 contractor any work, it's the work orders that gives

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 27 of 45

00027 1 the contractor work? 2 3 A. Yes, and technical directive, yes. Q. Right, a tender. So each time MARAD wants

4 the contractor to do work under the contract, there 5 has to be a technical directive and a work order. 6 7 A. Right, actual tasking. Q. Let me show you what's been previously

8 marked as plaintiff's 39. Let me ask you a couple 9 of questions. You don't have to read the whole 10 thing. We will be here for a week. 11 12 A. Okay, agreed. Q. Showing you what's been previously marked

13 as Plaintiff's 39, do you recall having seen this 14 before? 15 16 A. I would assume so, yes. Q. And is this the Shepard-Patterson

17 extension proposal in response to your letter of 18 March 10th? 19 20 A. Yes. Q. And Shepard-Patterson responded and said

21 they understand the scope of work will remain the

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 28 of 45

00028 1 same. Do you see that? 2 3 A. Where is that? Q. Fourth line. "We understand the scope of

4 work will remain the same as is established in the 5 current contract." 6 7 A. Yes. Q. And that's what you had said in your

8 letter to them, correct? 9 10 A. Correct. Q. Do you remember what you did with this

11 proposal when you received it? 12 A. Normally we would submit it to the

13 technical office for them to review it. 14 Q. And that would be MARAD 714, Richard

15 Williams' group? 16 17 18 A. Yes. Q. I'm trying to get into the -A. It's been a long time since I heard the

19 codes. 20 21 Q. They don't still use them? A. I haven't been in that office in over a

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 29 of 45

00029 1 decade. 2 3 Q. I'm sorry. Let me show you what's previously been

4 marked as Plaintiff's 41. 5 Showing you what's been marked as

6 Plaintiff's 41, do you recall ever seeing this 7 before? 8 9 A. Yes. Q. Was this your request to the MARAD

10 technical people to review the proposal -11 12 A. Yes. Q. -- that Shepard-Patterson sent you, the

13 proposal? 14 In number four, you wrote, "Any

15 discussions of your evaluation are sensitive 16 information. Such information shall not be 17 disclosed to any party outside the government or 18 within who is not directly participating in the 19 procurement process and do not have a need to know." 20 Why did you write that? 21 A. It's standard practice. It's proprietary

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 30 of 45

00030 1 information that shouldn't be discussed outside. 2 3 Q. Let me show you Plaintiff's 42. Showing you what's been marked as

4 Plaintiff's 42, do you recall having seen that 5 before? 6 7 A. I would assume so, yes. Q. Would that be the MARAD 614, the response

8 to your request that the proposal for the extension 9 be evaluated? 10 11 A. Yes. Q. Okay. The memo says, "A further review of

12 the contractor's labor pool in the final option 13 years gives the appearance that labor was being cut 14 by 80 percent. However, we believe that the 15 contractor showed these cuts in order to remain 16 within SBA's $3 million threshold." And it goes on. 17 "Therefore, MARAD 614 accepts Shepard-Patterson's 18 cost proposal for five more option years and 19 requests that your office take whatever action is 20 necessary to modify the current contract." 21 When you saw that, did you wonder how, if

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 31 of 45

00031 1 the proposal purports to cut the labor for the 2 services by 80 percent, how it could be acceptable, 3 how the proposal could be considered acceptable? 4 5 A. No, not really. Q. Did you ever discuss it with anybody at

6 MARAD 614? 7 8 9 A. Probably Patrick, if anyone else. Q. Do you recall those discussions? A. He really didn't get into a lot of

10 details, because Patrick and his supervisor were 11 having some concern, I guess. Patrick and Dick were 12 discussing it, so I really wasn't included in their 13 discussion. 14 Q. Well, what do you remember, if anything,

15 Patrick told you relative to this 80 percent labor 16 reduction? 17 A. I believe he's the one that probably

18 brought it to Dick's attention, and Dick said 19 proceed, so... 20 Q. So your understanding was that if MARAD

21 614 was okay with the 80 percent reduction, then

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 32 of 45

00032 1 MARAD 380, your group, was going to go ahead and 2 extend the contract? 3 A. Well, right. I mean, we have a dollar

4 figure that we can't exceed, so whenever you reach 5 it, you reach it. 6 7 (Brief recess.) (Deposition Exhibit No. 53 marked for

8 identification.) 9 BY MR. LAMER: 10 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

11 Plaintiff's 53, do you recall ever seeing this 12 document before? 13 14 15 A. No. Q. I thought it was your signature. A. No, that's my signature; I just don't

16 remember. 17 Q. Would this be your request to the Small

18 Business Administration to accept the three-year 19 extension of the -- five-year extension of the 20 Shepard-Patterson Logistics support contract? 21 A. Yes.

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 33 of 45

00033 1 Q. And the note at the top, does that relate

2 to what Joyce Harris had suggested in her e-mail 3 back on March 6th, processing it under the SBA and 4 DOT MOU? 5 6 7 8 A. Yes. Q. Do you remember what SBA's response was? A. No. (Deposition Exhibit No. 54 marked for

9 identification.) 10 BY MR. LAMER: 11 Q. Do you recall this letter from SBA

12 addressed to you? 13 14 A. No, I don't recall. Q. Does this letter indicate that SBA had

15 rejected the request to extend the Shepard-Patterson 16 logistics support contract? 17 18 A. Yes. Q. Do you remember what the issue was with

19 modification 17? 20 21 A. No. (Deposition Exhibit No. 55 marked for

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 34 of 45

00034 1 identification.) 2 BY MR. LAMER: 3 Q. Showing you what's been marked as

4 Plaintiff's Exhibit 55, which is a form, Amendment 5 of Solicitation/Modification of Contract, it has 6 0017 in the upper left-and corner and your signature 7 in the lower right. Do you recognize this document? 8 9 A. No. Q. Does this appear to be a modification

10 number 17 to contract DTMA 91-95-C-00024? 11 12 A. Yes. Q. Can you tell from this document, this

13 Plaintiff's 55, at all what SBA's objection might 14 have been? This basically says this must be 15 rescinded. 16 17 A. No, I don't. Q. Now, at some point, did you come to learn

18 that this Shepard-Patterson logistics support 19 contract had in fact been extended? 20 21 A. Yes. Q. And were you aware that SBA signed off on

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 35 of 45

00035 1 the extension? 2 3 A. Yes. Q. Do you know how that came to be? Well,

4 SBA wrote to you and said they were rejecting the 5 extension? 6 7 A. Right. Q. What I'm interested in is how it came to

8 be that the contract was then extended. 9 A. Representatives of MARAD actually went to

10 the SBA office and had a meeting with them, and when 11 they returned, the modification was signed. 12 Q. Who was that representative; do you

13 remember? 14 A. My supervisor, Wayne Cutrell, went. I

15 believe Dick Williams went, the technical person, 16 and the head of the division, Tim Roark. 17 Q. Okay. And when they came back, it was all

18 taken care of, the extension was signed? 19 20 A. Yes. Q. Do you remember the dollar value of the

21 extension?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 36 of 45

00036 1 2 A. No. Q. Let me show you what's been previously

3 marked as Plaintiff's 2. Does this appear to be the 4 modification that extended the Shepard-Patterson 5 logistics support contract? 6 7 8 9 A. Yes. Q. Do you know who drafted this document? A. I probably drafted the schedules. Q. Who would have drafted the third page?

10 That's it, you have got it right there. One, two, 11 three. Two of seven. I'm sorry, third page, two of 12 seven. 13 A. I didn't fill it out. It looks like a

14 different type. 15 Q. Oh, okay. So you're not sure who drafted

16 page two of seven, but you think you drafted the 17 pages that start three of seven, four of seven, five 18 of seven, six of seven and seven of seven? 19 20 A. Yes. Q. If you look at those five pages and you

21 look at total estimated costs, does it appear to be

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 37 of 45

00037 1 about $3 million? Again, starting at three of seven 2 at the bottom, if you look at total estimated costs, 3 the first, three of seven is 1.2, nine million, 4 808,000 -- that's about two million; 379,000 would 5 be about 2.4; 230 would be about 2.63, and 172, a 6 little under three million. 7 8 A. Yes. Q. So the dollar value with the extension

9 would have been under the $3 million limit that we 10 discussed earlier; am I correct? 11 12 A. It appears so, yes. Q. Let me ask you, and then we're sort of

13 here, this is, I think I, dated sometime in May. At 14 any time when you -- going back to the February 25 15 letter from Mr. Jenna up to the point when this 16 modification was signed, did you ever suggest to 17 anyone at Shepard-Patterson that they could expect 18 MARAD to order more than the dollar value of the 19 work that was in this modification? 20 21 A. No. Q. Do you know if anybody else at MARAD ever

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 38 of 45

00038 1 suggested to Shepard-Patterson that MARAD would 2 order more than the dollar value of the work that's 3 in this modification 23? 4 5 A. No. Q. Let me sort of close the loop, here. Did

6 you or anyone else at MARAD, to your knowledge, ever 7 suggest to Shepard-Patterson that they might expect 8 MARAD to order more than $3 million? 9 10 A. No. Q. Let me ask you one other question, and

11 this goes back to something, a note that I missed. 12 Regarding this $3 million ceiling, do you

13 recall anyone at MARAD saying to Shepard-Patterson, 14 "Yes, we are willing to consider the extension, but 15 you understand it has to be less than $3 million?" 16 A. That's what all the documentation

17 indicates, yes. It says not to exceed $3 million. 18 Q. But what I'm asking, the discussion

19 appeared to be earlier on whether MARAD would 20 consider a proposal to extend the contract. Am I 21 correct?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 39 of 45

00039 1 2 A. Yes. Q. And do you recall anyone at MARAD saying,

3 "Yes, we can consider the proposal to extend the 4 contract, but it cannot exceed $3 million"? 5 6 7 8 9 A. To Shepard-Patterson? Q. Correct. A. Not to my knowledge, no. MR. LAMER: Okay. that's all I have. . EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR THE DEFENDANT

10 BY MR. CHANDLER: 11 Q. I just have a couple of quick questions.

12 I remind you you are still under oath and your 13 answers still are subject to the penalties of 14 perjury, essentially. 15 16 17 When did you stop working with MARAD 380? A. July 6th, 1998. Q. July 6th, 1998. And did you have any

18 business related to this contract after that date? 19 20 A. No. Q. Did you have any business with

21 Shepard-Patterson after that date?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 40 of 45

00040 1 2 A. No. Q. And have you spoken to Mr. Patterson since

3 that date? 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. Since July? Q. Since July 6th, 1998. A. Yes. Q. On how many occasions? A. Less than a handful. Q. More than five? A. I don't think so. Q. Less than five? A. I don't think so, no. Q. It's got to be one or the other, right?

14 Or is it just five? 15 A. My office was down the hall from the

16 Office of Acquisitions, so there was occasions where 17 he would be coming through the building to see them 18 that I would see him, so we would speak, you know, 19 ask about his kids. 20 Q. Have you ever spoken to Mr. Patterson

21 outside the office?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 41 of 45

00041 1 2 3 4 5 6 A. Yes. Q. And on how many occasions? A. That I can recall, one. Q. Might there be more? A. I don't think so, no. Q. And what was your conversation about on

7 that occasion? 8 9 10 A. Colleges. Q. What about colleges? A. My daughter was starting college and I

11 asked him about Temple University in Philly. 12 Q. And why did you ask Mr. Patterson about

13 Temple? 14 A. Because he lived in the Philadelphia area

15 and I knew that he would give me an honest opinion 16 about the school. 17 18 Q. And what did he tell you? A. He told me it was a good school in a bad

19 neighborhood. 20 Q. Is that all you talked about during that

21 conversation?

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 42 of 45

00042 1 2 A. Yes. Asked about his family. Q. Did you talk at all about the contractor,

3 the subject of this litigation? 4 A. No. I didn't realize that was still an

5 issue. 6 Q. Did you talk about any business-related

7 matters? 8 9 10 11 12 13 A. No. Q. Has Mr. Patterson ever called you at home? A. No. Q. Have you ever called him at home? A. No. Q. Okay. So other than that one occasion on

14 which you spoke about colleges, you and 15 Mr. Patterson have not spoken since July 6th, 1980, 16 other than on occasion in the hallway of the 17 Maritime Administration? 18 19 20 21 A. Correct. MR. CHANDLER: I have nothing else. (Signature not waived.) (Deposition concluded at 2:15 p.m.)

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 43 of 45

00043 1 Ms. Rita Jackson c/o Robert Chandler, Esquire 2 Assistant United States Attorney U.S. Department of Justice 3 1100 L Street, NW, Room 12002 Washington, DC 20036 4 In Re: Veridyne Corp. vs. United States 5 We enclose for your review and signature a copy of 6 the above-referenced transcript. We ask that you read the transcript carefully. If it is necessary to make 7 any corrections, please do so on the enclosed errata sheet, indicating the page, line number, correction, 8 and reason for such correction. The errata sheet must be signed and dated. Also, you must sign the 9 certificate of deponent enclosed in the transcript.

10

If you do not complete the reading and signing within thirty days, you may have waived your right to

11 make corrections; therefore, your prompt attention to this matter would be appreciated. 12 Upon completion of your review, please return the 13 transcript with certificate of deponent and errata

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 44 of 45

sheet to Esquire Deposition Services, 1020 19th Street, 14 N.W., Suite 620, Washington, D.C. 20036. 15 Sincerely, 16 17 18 George W. Tudor 19 20 21

Case 1:06-cv-00150-CCM

Document 60-2

Filed 08/29/2008

Page 45 of 45

00044 1 2 CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC I, George W. Tudor, the officer before whom the

3 foregoing deposition was taken, do hereby certify that 4 the witness whose testimony appears in the foregoing 5 deposition was duly sworn by me; that the testimony of 6 said witness was taken stenographically by me and 7 thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under my 8 direction; that said deposition is a true record of the 9 testimony given by said witness; that I am neither 10 attorney nor counsel for, nor related to or employed by 11 any of the parties to the action in which this 12 deposition is taken, and further, that I am not a 13 relative or employee of any attorney or counsel 14 employed by the parties hereto or financially 15 interested in this action. 16 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my

17 hand and affixed my notarial seal. 18 _______________ 19 Date ________________________ George W. Tudor

My Commission expires Notary Public in and for 20 January 1, 2011 the District of Columbia 21