Free Notice (Other) - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 1 of 21

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

No. 98-484C (Senior Judge Wiese)

DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF FILING OF ITS OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF'S DESIGNATIONS OF DEPOSITION AND TRIAL TESTIMONY AND ITS COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS OF DEPOSITION AND TRIAL TESTIMONY Defendant, the United States, respectfully submits this notice of the filing of its objections to the designations of deposition and trial testimony by plaintiff, Northern States Power Company ("NSP"). In addition, defendant respectfully provides the Court with the Government's counter-designations. Both the list of the Government's objections and the text of the counter-designations are attached. Although the Court has deferred ruling upon the Government's motion to strike NSP's designations, we are filing our objections and counterdesignations to ensure that they are properly before the Court, if the Court considers the testimony designated by NSP. Counsel for defendant will provide a courtesy copy of the attached to the Court and counsel for NSP on the first day of trial. Respectfully submitted, PETER D. KEISLER Assistant Attorney General DAVID M. COHEN Director

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 2 of 21

s/Harold D. Lester, Jr. HAROLD D. LESTER, JR. Assistant Director OF COUNSEL: JANE K. TAYLOR Office of General Counsel U.S. Department of Energy 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20585 ALAN J. LO RE Senior Trial Counsel ANDREW P. AVERBACH JOHN C. EKMAN STEPHEN P. FINN JOSHUA E. GARDNER MARIAN E. SULLIVAN Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 October 23, 2006 s/Heide L. Herrmann HEIDE L. HERRMANN Trial Attorney Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Department of Justice 1100 L Street, N.W. Attn: Classification Unit 8th Floor Washington, D.C. 20530 Tele: (202) 305-3315 Fax: (202) 307-2503

Attorneys for Defendant

2

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 3 of 21

ATTACHMENTS

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 4 of 21

DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO DESIGNATIONS BY NORTHERN STATES POWER CO, AND DEFENDANT'S COUNTER-DESIGNATIONS

GUIDE TO OBJECTIONS OBJECTION FOUNDATION MEANING QUESTION SEEKS TESTIMONY THAT IS OUTSIDE OF WITNESS'S PERSONAL EXPERIENCE OR OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT, OR THE WITNESS'S PERSONAL EXPERIENCE HAS NOT BEEN ESTABLISHED

LEGAL CONCLUSION

QUESTION CALLS FOR LEGAL CONCLUSION

SPECULATION

QUESTION SEEKS INFORMATION EITHER NOT BASED UPON THE WITNESS'S KNOWLEDGE OR EXPERIENCE OR CONCERNS A HYPOTHETICAL

BEST EVIDENCE

TESTIMONY CONTAINS EXCERPTS FROM A DOCUMENTS OR DISCUSSES A DOCUMENT, THE BEST EVIDENCE OF WHICH IS THE DOCUMENT ITSELF (WHICH MAY NOT BE IN EVIDENCE OR IDENTIFIED AS A TRIAL EXHIBIT)

VAGUE

MEANING OF TERMS WITHIN THE QUESTION ARE UNCLEAR

RELEVANCE

TESTIMONY IS NOT RELEVANT TO THE ISSUES TO BE DECIDED BY THE COURT

HEARSAY

TESTIMONY CONTAINS STATEMENTS MADE BY OTHERS

1

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 5 of 21

LAKE BARRETT Objections: Testimony Objections

April 22, 2002 49:2-60:22 June 24, 2005 (TVA) 1 59:4-11 74:2-15 76:12-19 85:3-94:8 117:3-123:2 137:11-139:20 153:3-156:19 197:4-198:10 217:1-220:2

Foundation, legal conclusion, speculation, vague (as to term "reasonable") Best evidence, speculation, vague Foundation, vague (as to term "appropriate") Foundation, vague Foundation, legal conclusion, vague, completeness (question begins at 116:21) Vague Foundation, best evidence, vague Foundation, best evidence, vague (as to "studies"), completeness (question begins at 196:22) Foundation, mischaracterizes prior testimony, vague

April 23, 2002 348:1-350:11 June 24, 2005 (TVA) 824:17-826:25

Foundation, best evidence, vague

April 26, 2002 739:1-742:13

Foundation, best evidence, completeness (question and answer begin at 738:19)

Plaintiffs have designated "trial" testimony for Mr. Barrett from the trial in Tennessee Valley Authority v. United States, No. 01-249C (June 24, 2005). Mr. Barrett did not testify at trial in TVA. The testimony designated are excerpts from Mr. Barrett's deposition testimony on April 22 and 23, 2002 and duplicate testimony that plaintiff has already designated. 2

1

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 6 of 21

795:5-798:9

Foundation, best evidence, speculation

May 10, 2002 1163:1-1166:7

Foundation, legal conclusion, best evidence, vague (as to "mission"), completeness (question and answer begin at 1162:12) Foundation, best evidence Foundation, best evidence Foundation, best evidence, speculation

1284:19-1286:7 1332:1-1335:18 1368:10-1371:21

Counter-Designations: April 22, 2002 38:14-15 43:13-49:1 65:10-69:19 80:10-81:1 83:7-84:5 116:14-117:18 120:22-121:21 149:5-150:20 180:16-181:17 194:19-197:7 201:15-203:3 242:16-249:19 April 23, 2002 399:22-401:3 412:22-413:16 427:14-435:2 442:19-445:5 461:14-465:9 April 26, 2002 699:6-16 742:14-743:1 3

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 7 of 21

May 8, 2002 939:13-940:8 953:21-955:14 965:2-966:15 May 10, 2002 1148:22-1151:4 1341:2-1342:14 1347:14-1348:14

4

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 8 of 21

ALAN BROWNSTEIN Objections: Testimony Objections

April 9, 2002 136:7-25

Foundation, best evidence, legal conclusion, completeness (answer continues to 137:6)

April 10, 2002 276:6-17 282:5-283:15 299:15-20

Foundation, vague (as to term "linkages") Foundation, best evidence Foundation, legal conclusion, vague (as to whether question was about ACR or APR ­ see 299:21-24) Foundation Foundation Foundation, legal conclusion

328:19-21 376:22-378:5 405:16-20

April 11, 2002 514:1-519:9

Foundation, best evidence, legal conclusion

June 14, 2002 282:1-25

Foundation, vague (as to "kind of inconsistency"), completeness (answer continues to 283:15)

5

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 9 of 21

Counter-designations: April 9, 2002 61:16-63:4 88:5-89:8 111:13-117:18 128:18-136:6 137:1-138:10 April 10, 2002 294:7-295:19 319:19-320:11 388:23-400:21 April 11, 2002 549:7-14 May 23, 2002 140:3-9 167:4-15

6

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 10 of 21

SUSAN KLEIN Objections: Testimony Objections

April 24, 2002 151:6-151:20

Foundation, best evidence, relevance, beyond the scope of RCFC 30(b)(6) deposition

Counter-designations: April 24, 2002 10:20-11:9 62:21-63:5 April 25, 2002 354:17-355:13 376:13-382:22 400:7-401:17

7

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 11 of 21

CHRISTOPHER KOUTS Objections: Testimony Objections

July 12, 2005 1569:4-1570:17 1571:1-1580:24

Relevance Best evidence, relevance, completeness (answer ends on 1581:6)

Counter-designations: July 12, 2005 1580:25-1581:6

8

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 12 of 21

MICHAEL LAWRENCE Objections: Testimony Objections

May 20, 2002 86:7-88:22 130:7-131:16 142:10-145:24

Foundation, best evidence, vague, relevance Legal conclusion, foundation Foundation, best evidence, vague

May 21, 2002 301:20-305:4

Foundation, legal conclusion

Counter-designations: May 20, 2002 111:10-113:20 122:8-123:25 124:8-126:23 165:13-167:6 169:11-174:24 184:3-185:24 201:11-204:4 May 21, 2002 255:3-258:10 259:14-260:22 266:22-267:25 294:6-295:5 308:1-309:20 311:10-315:18 316:20-317:25 325:1-332:19 333:12-337:23 341:19-345:19 9

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 13 of 21

RONALD MILNER Objections: Testimony Objections

May 1, 2002 31:1-22 73:10-22

Relevance Foundation, best evidence, vague (as to timeframe)

May 3, 2002 555:8-556:12

Best evidence

May 7, 2002 661:4-24 Counter-designations: May 1, 2002 27:23-28:6 41:3-17 67:5-69:12 132:2-133:4 May 2, 2002 391:13-392:17 May 3, 2002 443:16-444:8 552:12-555:6 August 11, 2004 4711:23-4716:2 4723:9-4732:25 10

Best evidence, relevance

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 14 of 21

4735:9-4742:11 4760:12-15

11

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 15 of 21

ROBERT MORGAN Objections: Testimony Objections

March 21, 2002 137:3-144:10

Legal conclusion, speculation

June 25, 2002 134:12-135:14

Legal conclusion

August 3, 2004 3674:16-3686:22

Best evidence

Counter-designations: August 2-3, 2004 (Trial in Yankee Atomic) 3626:5-3637:22 3642:19-3652:20 3656:16-3657:15 3664:22-3665:25 3667:17-3668:3 3675:3-23 3685:14-3686:11 3693:18-3696:8 July 14, 2005 (Trial in TVA) 2189:21-2190:16 2193:4-21 2194:11-2195:10 2198:9-2200:16 2206:1-2216:18 2218:17-2223:10 2230:24-2236:23

12

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 16 of 21

THOMAS POLLOG Objections: Testimony2 Objections

May 16, 2002 293:3-294:23

Legal conclusion

August 4, 2004 4012:19-4021:9

Legal conclusion

Counter-designations: April 11, 2002 31:1-34:5 41:5:-44:15 60:1-63:18 64:22-67:13 74:10-19 92:12-93:9 107:1-108:2 123:15-124:10 144:3-145:15 151:14-154:16 155:18-156:13 158:16-172:12 174:1-22 183:4-184:2 206:16-208:6

Plaintiff has designated portions of the TVA trial transcript which are duplicative of the designations of Mr. Pollog's deposition testimony. Compare Pollog Dep. Apr. 11, 2002, 96:197:17 and TVA Transcript, 916:2-918:8 and 1365:9-1367:10. 13

2

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 17 of 21

April 12, 2002 9:25-16:17 21:17-24:21 49:14-50:23 91:4-92:10 115:11-116:20 160:12-162:19 163:5-19 May 16, 2002 320:15-321:7 322:20-323:17

14

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 18 of 21

NANCY SLATER (THOMPSON) Objections: Testimony Objections

April 22, 1999 242:18-245:21

Foundation, completeness (answer ends at 246:4)

June 13, 2002 98:1-99:25 108:20-110:13

Foundation, legal conclusion, completeness (answer ends at 100:14) Foundation, legal conclusion, completeness (question begins at 108:7)

Counter-designations: April 21, 1999 32:23-33:6 82:10-15 82:19-83:10 106:16-108:10 164:23-165:13 176:11-25 April 22, 2002 245:17-246:4 251:23-253:10 253:22-254:11 257:23-259:24 June 13, 2002 149:10-153:14

15

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 19 of 21

VICTOR TREBULES Objections: Testimony Objections

April 17, 2002 52:11-53:21

Best evidence, completeness (answer concludes at 54:4)

April 18, 2002 19:7-20:16

Foundation, legal conclusion, relevance, completeness (question begins at 18:22)

Counter-designations: April 17, 2002 15:17-16:17 18:18-19:4 42:5-43:17 53:22-54:4 76:17-77:22 96:19-103:22 113:18-116:14 146:12-148:21 173:2-176:9 180:7-186:22 April 18, 2002 302:21-305:14 381:5-382:14 April 18. 2002 (Yankee Atomic deposition) 125:20-127:13

16

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 20 of 21

DAVID ZABRANSKY Objections: Testimony Objections

April 17, 2002 30:6-42:16 57:1-59:14 76:13-79:19 89:3-92:17 105:6-14

Legal conclusion Legal conclusion Legal conclusion Speculation, vague (as to term "reasonable") Foundation

April 18, 2002 323:2-326:17 343:2-366:22

Foundation, legal conclusion, best evidence, completeness (question begins at 322:16) Foundation, legal conclusion, speculation

June 6, 2002 246:1-247:25

Legal conclusion, speculation

Counter-designations: April 17, 2002 55:1-57:17 60:20-61:5 128:10-129:18 150:4-155:21 197:4-199:10 April 18, 2002 242:10-246:19 249:6-253:12 17

Case 1:98-cv-00484-JPW

Document 279

Filed 10/23/2006

Page 21 of 21

254:9-19 266:21-267:20 395:18-396:21 412:20-414:16 449:7-451:18 April 19, 2002 628:15-631:22 639:12-640:8 June 6, 2002 229:7-231:20 234:6-240:19 August 5, 2004 4154:6-4156:3 4161:19-4162:9 4222:15-4226:3

18