Free Response - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00168-FMA AKIN STRAUSS GUMP HAUER

Document 222-5

Filed 10/01/2004

Page 1 of 3

&

FELDLL~'

July 10, 2002 VIA FACSIMILEAND1~t CLASS MAIL Mr. DonaldE. K_inner Assistant Director i CommercialLitigation Branch ',Civil Division ' U.S. Depamnent Justice of ~ Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor 1100 L Street, NW i Washingto~ D.C. 20530 '~ Re: North &atAlaska f:~ousing Corp. v. United States, No. 98-168C (Fed. C 1 .) Dear Don: Severn deficiencies in the Goverranent'sResponseto North Star's June 7, 2002 Supplemental Interrogatories and Requests for Documents (which inctuded a CompactDisc which contained 4,938 imagesin .tif format) warrant your immediateattention. Thesedeficiencies are preventing our ability to prepare for the depositions scheduledto begin the weekafter next in Alaska. ' . : : . First, it is difficult to acceptthat responsivedocuments the issue of stockpiling do not exist. on Requestsfor ProductionNos. 10 and i 1, as modified, seek any and all documents received by and/or relied uponby HaroldHopson the preparation of the stockpiling portion (that issuance of in units for changeof occupancy maintenance no longer limited to t~vo per day or ten per week is and that a ten workingday notice is no longer required for issue of units for changeof occupancy maintenance)of the January 28, 2002 letter, and any and all documentsreflecting communications ~ m-nong Govermnent personnel with respect to that portion of~he letter. Weread the Government's response as stating that there are no documents communications or dealing with these statements . contained in the January 28th letter. Please produceany such existing documents immediately. ~. Second,your document production is conspicuouslylacking in written and electronic :correspondence. For example, Request for Production No. 7 seeks any and all documents reflecting the Government's schedule of change of occupancymaintenance, including whenunits .are vacated by occupantsand whenNorth Star is notified of the unit turnover date. Yourresponse consisted of a computerdisc containing 2,059 pages of change of occupancyforms, 1,878 pages ;of workcompletion forms, 555 pages of maintenanceissue forms, 76 pages of deficiency return !notification forms, and one, single pageof correspondence. is difficult to believe that there is It '.only one page of electronic or other correspondencepertaining to the Government's scheduling of

Case 1:98-cv-00168-FMA AKIN GUMP ,STRAUSS HAUER Mr. Donald E. Kinner Page 2 July 10, 2002

Document 222-5

Filed 10/01/2004

Page 2 of 3

& FELD~.I.r

change of occupancymaintenance. Moreover, in response to Requests for Production Nos. 1, 2, 4, and 5, which seek documentspertaining to the August23, 2001 and October30, 2001 Contracting Officer Decisions, you refer to the documentsappendedto your discovery responses at Tabs 1 and 2. Tab1 contains a cover sheet listing "supporting docs" for Unit 1155, including "e-mails 7/12/01 thru 8/17/01. Thesee-mails are not included in Tab1~ nor are they properly identified by sender, recipient(s), date, topic, and personsbeing copied on or receiving forwarded copies of such e-mails. Tab2 contains a cover sheet listing "supporting d0cs" for Unit 750, including "e--mails 9/26/01 - 10/22/01. Thesee-mails arc not included in Tab2, nor are they properly identified by sender, recipient(s), date, topic, and personsbcflug copiedon or receiving forwardedcopies of such e-mails. Please producethese e-mails, as well as all other rcsponsive correspondence immediately. Third, your methodof identifying docuraents you claim are protected by attorney-client privilege is insufficient. Yourresponseto Interrogatory No.4 identifies as privileged six groupingsof communicationsincluding Scott Marchandand Dermis Klein and/or Rod Everett. These ', communications appear to be identified in items 5 and 6 of the privilege log you producedon July 5, 2002. Neither your resl~onse to Interrogatory No. 4 nor your privilege log is complete. Please , identify each separate electronic corrmaunication whichyouclaim a pri,,~lege exists, including for ' the date, subject, sender, recipient(s), and any persons copied on such e-mails or to whom such ' mails wereforwarded.Similarly, your response to Interrogatory No. 12 identifies as privileged a~ unspecified numberof e-mails in Septemberand October, 2002involving RodEverett, Den_n_is Klein, Scott Marchand, andAbigail Durming-Newbury. These communicationsappear to be identified in items 2, 3, and 4 of the July 5th privilege log. Again,neither your responseto Interrogatory No. 12 nor your privilege log is complete. Please identify each separate electronic communication whichyou claim a privilege exists, including the date, subject, sender, for recipient(s), and any persons copied on such e-mails or to whom such e-mails were forwarded. Please do the samefor item I identified on the privilege log. Additionally, werequest that each of the documents witl±eld by the Govern.ment privilege be submitted tu the Court for immediatc for review. ..Fourth, you have impermissiblyrestricted your discovery responsesin a mariner inconsistent with , the request as drafted. Interrogatory No. 7 requires youto identify any and all manuals, .procedures: or other instructive materials for ContractingOfficers with respect to evaluating :evidence on both sides of a dispute and issuing independentand/or unbiased decisions. Youlimit your response to Real Estate Leasing ContractingOfficers, and claim that no such materials exist. ',Accordingly, please supplementyour response to Interrogatory No. 7 to encompass manuals, all iprocedures, or other instructive materials whichpertain in any wayto ContractingOfficers. Similarly, Requestfor Production No. 6 seeks any and all training documents provided to Contracting Officers. Yourresponse includes only a handwritten paper listing a May22, 2000

Case 1:98-cv-00168-FMA AKIN GUMP STRAUSS HAUI£1~. Mr. Donald Kinn~ E. Page 3 July 10, 2002

Document 222-5

Filed 10/01/2004

Page 3 of 3

& FELDL~.~,

e-mail from S. Marchand D. Klein, A. Dunning,and R. Everett and hsting a July 24, 2001 to memo Chief, RE Division COE to from Col. Meeks; and a copy of the July 24, 2001 memo from Col. Meeks.Again~ this request is not limitcd to Real Estate ContractingOfficers, and thus please supplementyour response accordingly. In light of fast-approachingdiscovery deadlines, weask that you give this letter your immediate attention as these documents required for the depositions. are

PaulW.K'~I" lion

cc:

Hon. JudgeAllega (via facsimile: (202) 219-1386)