IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, et al,, Plaintiffs, v. Case No. 1:96CV01285 (Judge Lamberth) GALE A. NORTON, Sec_-etary of the Interior. et al., Defendants. INTERIOR DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR LEAVE TO SUPPLEMENT THEIR MOTION AND SUPPLEMENT TO MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER AS TO DISCOVERY BY THE SPECIAL MASTER-MONITOR AND AS TO THE RULE ANNOUNCED BY THE SPECIAL MASTER-MONITOR CONCERNING DEPOSITION QUESTIONING The Secretary of the Interior and the Assistant Secretary-Indian Afl:airs (the "Interior Defendants") hereby move for leave to file thc _bllowing Supplement to their January 23, 2003 Motion For A Protective Order that (l) discovery by the Special Master-Monitor to the Interior Defendants ant be had; and (2) the Special Master-Monitor not attempt to make dispositive substantive rulings at depositions and compel vdtnesses, under threat of potential disciplinary action against their counsel, to answer questions over the objections and instnlction of thelr counsel. The reason Interior Defendants are requesting this Supplement is that, on January 24, 2003, the Special Master-Monitor served additional discovery requests on Interior Defendants ("Janua D, 24. 2003 Requests") (Exhibit 1) These additional requests provide further support for the merits ora protective order and fall within the relief requested by our January 23, 2003 motion. The Special Master-Monitor was previously served a copy of Interlor Defendants' Motion on Janumw 23, 2003. Interior Defendants have notified the Special Master-Monitor that his requests are enconrpasscd by the relief sou_ht in our pending motion and therefore, it would not be appropriate for us to respond to his discovery requests pending the Court's ruling on our motionJ Exhibit 2. For the reasons previously set forth in Interior Defendants' January 23, 2003 Motion For A Protective Order and accompan?dng Memorandum of Points and Authorities (which arc incorporated by reference in their entirety), as well as the additional reasons cited herein, Interior Defendants request that the Court enter the proposed protective order attached to its January 23, 2003 Motion and grant such other and further relief to which the Interior Defendants may be entitled. BACKGROUND The Special Master-Monitor's January 24, 2003 Requests demonstrate that he continues to actively participate in discovery for Trial Phase 1.5. The January 24, 2003 Requests seek seven different categories of documents and one of those categories contains eight diflkrent subparts. Exhibit 1. The subject malter of the requests ranges from Judgment Accountings to the Interior Defendtmts' Historical Accounting Plan filed with the Court on January 6, 2003 ("Historical Accounting Plan"). In certain instances, the nature of the Special Master-Monitor's requests go beyond asking merely for categories of documents and instead, purport to require Interior Defendants to justif3, their decisions regarding various aspects of their Historical On Januarv 3 l 2003 GoYemment counsel conferred by telephone with Plaintiffs' counsel Keith Halpcr, who indicated that Plaintiftk opposed this Supplement to Interior Defendants' Motion. 2 Accounting Phm. For example, he requests "any and all documents.., regarding.., the finaI decision" with respect to various aspects of thc Historical Accounting Plan. Exhibit 1 at 3-4. In addition, the seven catcgorles and subparts are broadly worded, requiring "any and all" documents, ld_ at 2-4. Despite the broad nature of the requests, the Special Master-Monitor requests that interior Defendants produce documents to him by February 7, 2003, only 10 business days lbllowing his requests. Id_ at 4. SUPPLEMENTAL ARGUMENT 1. A Protective Order is Warranted with Respect to the Special Master-Monitnrk January 24, 2003 Discovery Requests A. The Special Master-Monitor's January 24, 2003 Requests Further Demonstrate That He Has Become A Dc Facto Litigant In The Case The January 24, 2003 Requests serve as filrther evidence that, rather than focusing on the oversight and monitoring roles set forth in the Appointment Order, the Special Masterdvlonitor has undertaken his own affirmative discovery campaign against Interior Defendants and has transfomled his position ii'om a judicial o£ficcr to a litigant. His January 24, 2003 Requests fucus on the adequacy of the judgment accountings and the Historical Accounting Plan. Exhibit I at 2-4. These subject matters are outside the scope of both his monitoring authority and his authority to supervise discovery for Phase 1.5. B. The Special Master-Monitor's January 24, 2003 Request Further Demonstrates That His Active Participation In Discovcrv Conflicts With }{is Oversight Responsibility The Special Master Monitor's Jamlary 24, 2003 Requests do not appear to seek documents concerning the status of trust reGnn, but instead seeks docmnents concerning thc 3 adequacy of the jud_m-nent accountings and the Historical Accounting Plan ordered by the Court. The adequacy of the Historical Accounting Plan or any accountings is not a matter that has been referred to the Special Master-Monitor and an investigation to that end is therefore beyond the scope of his authority. The Historical Accounting Plan and accountings arc matters to be addressed by the Court, about which the Court has authorized Plaintiffs to seek discovery. Cobell v. Norton, 226 F. Supp.2d 1,163 (D.D.C. 2002). In seeking such discovery ill advance of, and in addition to, Plaintiffs, the Special Master-Monitor is putting himself in a position where he would be required to oversee discovery disputes between the parties, while seeking his own parallel discoYery concerning what is at issue in the litigation. An inherent contlict exists. To avoid such conflicts, the Court should allow discovery between thc parties to proceed without simultaneous discovery from the Special Master-Monitor. C. The Special Master-Monitor's January 24, 2003 Requests Unnecessarily Seek Discovery Alreadv Propounded By Plaintiffs For Trial Phase 1.5 On December 16, 2002, Plaintiffs served their Eighth Request for Production of Documents ("Plaintiffs' RFP8"). Exhibit 3. The Special Master Monitor's discovery requests are, in substantial respects, already covered by Plaintiffs' discovery requests, making the Special Master-Monitor's requests unnecessary, in addition 'to their impropriety as noted above. Both the Special Master-Monitor's requests and Plaintiffs' requests are broadly worded in that they ask for all documents pertaining to a particular subject matter. The subject matters in their respective requests overlap as follows: (1) the documents requested in the Special Master-Monitor's Requests Nos. 1 through 4 are already the sabjecl of Plaintil'l_' RFP8 Categories 155-t65; (2) the doculncnts requested in thc Special Master Monitor's Request No. 6 are already thc subject of 4 Plaintiffs' RFP8 category 173; and (3) the documents requested by the Special Master Monitor's Request No. 7 are already the subject of Plaintiffs' RFP8 categol2/19. The extent to which the Special Master-Monitor's discovery requests duplicate Plaintiffs' RFP8 demonstrates the unduly burdensome nature of havi_ng the Special Master-Monitor also pmpomtd discovery. See Extfibit i at 4. A less burdensome and practical alternative would be for Interior Defendants to provide the Special Master-Monitor with copies of documents as they are produced to Plaintiffs in response to RFP8 and not pursuant to separate requests by the Spccial Master-Monitor. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, the Court should g_ant Interior Defendants' Motion For Leave. In addition, the Court should grant the hlterior Defendants' Motion for a Protective Order that discovery by the Special Master-Monitor not bc had, and that substantive discovery disputes arising during depositions, including those relating to an instruction that a witness not answer a question, be submitted to the Court for resolution. 5 Dated: January 31, 2003 Respectfully submitted, ROBERT D. McCALLUM Assistant Attomcy General STUART E. SCH[FFER Deputy Assistant Attorney General J. CHRISTOPHER KOHN Director SANDRA P. SPOONER Deputy Director JOHN T. STEMPLEWICZ Senior Trial Attorney Trial Attorney DC Bar No. 470450 Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division P.O. Box 875 Ben Franklin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0875 (202) 514-7194 6 Friday, Januar/24, 2003 1 09 PM pO2 Joseph S. Kieffer, II1. Special Master - Monitor 420 ?+b Street, N.W. #705 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 248-95d3 Interior O.O_ce: (202) 208-4078 Facxtn_ile: (202) 478-1958 Cellular: (202) 321-6022 January 24, 2003 S_ndra P. Spooner Deputy _rector ComasercIal Litigation Bmtmh U. S. D_p_mcnt of Justice P.O. Box 875 Ben Franldin Station Washington, D.C. 20044-0875 Re: Cobcll et al. v. Norton et aL Ci_41 Action No. 1:96 CV 01285 Dear Ms. Spooner: _Re: Trust Reform Status - Document Productio_ 1 As I have previously indicated, I will be increasing my review of the Interior D_end_mt's trust reform efforts to comply with the Court's September 17, 2003, Memorandtrrn and Order whfch states in part: "The Special Master-Monitor shall monitor the status of trust reform and the Interior defendants' effort3 as they relate to the duti_ declared by the Court and prescribed in the 1994 Act." M at 3. Pursuant to that Order, l will begin my review with a determination of the status ofth_ historical accounting as most recently described by defendants in the Eleventh Quarterly Status Report, flied with the Court on No_'ember 1, 2002,} the July 2, 2002 "Repor_ to Con_es$ on the HLstoricaI Accounting of Individual Indian Money Accounts," and, the "l-fistorical Accoxmting plan for Individual Indian Money Accounts" (''Historical Accounting plan"), filed with thc Cour_ on January 6, 2003. My review will encompass developments in the progress of the h/storlcal aceou_ing project by the Office of Hi.erotical Trust AccountLng ("OHTA'). In pan, this review w_Ii And flte Twel ah Quarterly Status izepoct due to be filed on Fei-*u a_3' 3, 2003. 1 EXItIBIT I Defendants' 0]-31 03 t_Iot[on f_r Leave 1o Supplen]_mt Friday, ,.ar_u_ry 24, 2003 10g PM _03 el)able me to update the status of that project since r last reported to the Court abou_ it in the Fi(th Report of the Court Monitor, fried on Febru_7 1, 2002. In regaxd to '_his review, I have previously sought the production of documents from the Interior defendants about what is cormnanly referred to by defendants as _e historical accounting of the Judgment and Per Capita IIM Accounts. AS of this date, you ha'_ not fully responded to my requests and remain in defauIt of those requests by failing to produce the doctmae?.ts or certify that file defendants have no further docurncpts responsive to those requests, as I have directed you do. 2 This document request does not abrogate your responsibility to fulfill defendants' obligations to comply with the September 17, 2002 Memorandum and Order of the Court by producing all relevant document5 subject to my letter requests of December 22, 2002, January 2, 2003, January 8, 2003, January 15, 2003 and J'antmry 16, 2003. I identify, the fo_owmg documents to be produced to me by close of business February 7, 2003. Please certify in your response that you have either produced all responsive documents, refuse to produce documents and the reasulls why, and that you have caused reasonable isutuh'y to be made pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civll Procedure and no other documents could be _und than these produced. A15o, *:hould you assert a claha of attorney-el/eat privilege, deh'beratlve process privilege, or work product doctrine over any of thc subject documents, please have the Department of Intexior officials, responsible for r_qew of the documents for assertion of these cia/ms, proMde certifications in writing supporting these :la/ms where required by statute or ease law. I. Any and all documents aM correspondence between OHTA rmmagers and stsff and the firms of Chavarria, Dutme & Lamey LLC and Grant Thorton LLP regarding the accountings performed and being per fmxned to date on the Judgment and Per Capita IIM Accounts as described in the January. 6, 2003. Historical Accounting Plan at pages IH-2 - II[-4. These documents should include hut not be limited to a_d trmnsmittal letters o[reports and draft reports, _ncluding copies of these reports, as well as those transmittal letters for CD&L's initial October 31,2001 reconciliation mi>on and June 7, 2002 update report, ch'ant Thomton's June 14, 2002 updated qual/ry control review report ("QCR-") and Grant Thomton's April 8, 2002 final report, produced by you and mentioned in Mr. Edwards' lnemorandum to Mr. Thomas Sinnaker, dated July 16, 2002, al.so produced by you. 2. Any and ail documents and correspondence between DOI and OHTA ofilciais 2 Your inet I_.xt er r e_pcmse on Innusry 17. 2003. to my Iener requests, while clalmi_g Attachments IV and V, documents subject to my r _luests, were protected by the attorney-client a,d deliberative process privileges and the work pro4ue: ricer rine, did not address my further requests for re_ponsi_e do¢llments nor did 5t cerI[_ there were no such documents within the Dep,xr tment ofth* Interior cc ehewhece. 7 _rida¥, J_nu3_ 24, 2003 1 09 PM p04 the firms of Ch_varrla, Dunne & Larnmj LLC and Grant Thertor, LLP regarding the retention of thek services and the terms of engagement for the reconcilmtion effort inclt_ng formal contracts or letter ag_eera(:nt s regarding the Judgment and Per Capka IIM Accounts and the qualky contxol review of that reconciliation, including any changgs to those contracts and/or agreements including the scope of work to be performed by these fu'nm. 3. A_y m..j ali documents m_d co_espondenno between DOI and OHTA o _cmJs ·_md the firms ofChavarria, Dunne & Lamey LLC and Grant Thorton LLP regarding he status of the reconciliation of the J,Jdgment and Per Capita IIM . ACCOUntS and/or any documento and correspondence regarding issues concerning the completeness of the Judgment and Per Capita IIM Accounts and the accuracy of the information cunt aLned itt those accounts on which the reconcillatinn was or v,511 be based. 4. Az5' and ail docun'_nts and correspondence b_twcen OHTA managers and staff and an)' other Buteaa or division of the Department of the lgerinr regarding issues concerning the completeneSS of the fudgnmnt m_d Per Capita I1M Accounts ar_l the accuracy of the foformation comtaLned Ln tho ce accounts on which the reconciliation ',vas or will be based. 5. Any and all documents and correspondenc_ between OHTA nmnagers and staff and any DOI off'orals, contractors, or consult_ts regarding "final decisio_ made by DOI officials co ncemlng the limitations placed on the hist orical accounting including: a) tho final decision to rccuncile only land-ha_ed IIM accounts greater than $5,000 as noted at page I-1 of the Historical Accounting Plan. b) the final decision to limit the historical accounting to trarmaction- by-transa_.~don accounting of oaly Judgmen_ and Per Capita HM Account_ a* r_ted at page l-I of the Historical Accounting Plan. c) the final decision to limit the historical accounting to dates before 1938 as noted at page II-2 of the H%_torical Accounting Plan d) the final deoMon to conduct a statistical sampling of some IIM accounts _; noted at page II-3 of the Historical Accounting Plan. e) the final dccislon not to conduct an historical accounting for closed accounts of deceased predeces._rs ofnorrent IIM account holders a_ noted a page 1I-3 of the Historical Accounting Plan. f') ihe final decision to accept as 'presur_ptivaly valid' the probates of deceased JIM account holders' land ownership as noted as 3 Friday, J3t, uary 24, 2003 _ 09 DM p,05 page Il-4 of the Historical Accounting Plan. g) the final decision to not account for funds generated fi'om trust hands that were paid dkectly to the Indian owner oft.he land v. ithout the funds com/alg into Interior's possession as noted at page II-4 of the Hi$torical Accounting Plan. il) the final decision rcgardlng the atat cment that _Intefior h_z, concluded that relying solely on the transaction-by-transaction accounting approach is not warranted, and is confident that samplmg is an effective technique to ,,'erify the accuracy and completeness of the land-based IIM account transaclion }'dstorles' mo. de at page III-7 of the Historical Accounting Plan. For purposes of ll"Js request, "final decision" means only that, net the iht elan advice or recormnendadons made to the decision-mkcr, but tI_ _'aal decision taken by that decision-maker following any dehberative process on which that decision x_ based. 6. A copy o f the "Accotmting St andard$ Manual that OHIA issued on July 2, 2002 and noted in the Eleventh Qtmrterly Slams Report al page 59. 7. Any and aU final submissions on file at the Department of the Interior for the Eleventh Quarterly Report's .r_.'tinns IV. A through F and V. A through E. For this request, the defin/tion of"final subnfissions' is those final drains of the subject sections submitted under the responsible official's signature whose signature is designated as "on file" at the conclusion of each of the sections in the Eleventh Quarterly Status Report. To the extent any request is vague or ambiguous hi your estinmtion, please contact me for further explsnation rather th-m waiting until your Februao' 7, 2003 response to false that issue. Any request for an extension of _Lme should be accompa_Ced by [the declaration o f the responsible Interior effidal regarding why that request is required. Sincerely vouts_ I ! ! k/ J l'r" c,: ' ' j'c, I _ w-.;.t,, ' _:.' _ Josk"p]_ S. Kieffer, II : %1 Spec iai Matter- Monitm 1 ce: Dennis Oingold, E_q. Keith _4arper. E_q. Elliot Levitas, Esq. 4 ,.,_ United States Departracnt of Justice Civil Division Commercial Litigation Branch SaadraP Spooner P,O. Boxg75, BenFratdclmStation Tel: (202)51447194 Deputy Director W0ahmgton, DC .10044-0875 Fax: (,?-Q2) 307-0494 _mail:s a_dra.s poo nen_usdoj gov January 31, 2003 BY FACSIiMILE Joseph S. Kieffer, I21 Special Maste_-Monitor 420 7 th Street, N.W. #705 Washington, D.C. 20004 Re: Cobell v. Norton Dear Mr. Kieffbr: This replies to your letter of January 24, 2003, requesting documents. On January 23, 2003, Interior Defendants filed and served a Motion for a Protective Order against, among other things, all pending and _ture diacovery by the Special Mastcr-Monil. or. That motion encompasses your January 24, 2003 request. Therefore, it would be inappropriate for us to respond to your request while this matter is pending before the Court. Sandra P. Spooner cc: DeJzn/s Gingold, Esq. Keith Hml>er, Esq. EXttIBIT 2 Defendants' 01-31-03 Motion flor Leave to Supplement IN TIlE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTPACT OF COLUMBIA ELOUISE PEPION COBELL, et al., Plaintiffs, Civil Action v. No. 1:96 CV 01285 RCL GALE NORTON, et al., Defendants. PLAINTIFFS' EIGHTH REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, plaintiffs requests that defendants identify and produce for inspection and copying at thc offices of the Native American Rights Fund, 1712 N Street, N W, Washington, D.C. 20036, at Ihe hour of I 0:00 am. on January 15, 2003, the items regardless of medium - specified in the attachment to this Request which are in their possession, under their control, or under the control otc.ny of their attorneys, agents er representatives, whether or not are controlled, housed, stored or held in official systems. This Request specifically requires YOU to produce ALL DOCUMENTS maintained or presently located on your employees' and agents' person, at their residences, on their private e-mail accounts or anywhere else in their possessioup custody, or contrnl. EXHIBIT 3 Defendants' 01-31-03 Motion fbr Leave 1o Supplement Pursuant to Rule 26(e)(2), you are under a continuing duty to supplemental your response to this discovery and your production of documents as relevant documents become available, ,_ee Klonoski v. Mahlab, 156 F.3d 255,268 (lst Cir. 1998) (Rule 260) imposes a broad requirement on parties to update their earlier discovery, responses); see also dssociallon of'American Yhyslcian.s' and Surgeons, Ina v. Clinton, 837 F, Supp. 454 (D.D.C. 1993) (duty to supplement response prompfiy; responding party cannot dribble out documents). December 16, 2002 Rcspecffully submitted, Of Counsel ........__ JOHN ECCOHAWK DEN.W'ilS M. OIN_D Native American Rights Fund D.C. Bar No. 417748 1506 Broadway Boulder, Colorado 80302 MARK KESTER BROWN (303) 447-8760 D.C. Bar No. 470952 1275 Pennsyivmlia Ave., N.W. Ninth Floor Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 661-6382 D.C. Bar No. 451956 Native American Rights Fund 1712 N Street. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-2976 (202) 785-4166 DEFINITIONS A. All Documents. As used herein the terms "ALL DOCUMENTS," "DOCUMENTS" and "DOCUMEN'i" include a writing and recording (regardless of medium) as defined in Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 1001 (which is defined as consisting of"letters, words, or numbers, or their equivalent, set down by handwriting, b'pewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, magnegc impulse, mechanical or electronic recording, or other form of data compilation"). Specific examples of thc documents bclng sought (and which are encompassed by such defined terms in the tmlikely event they are not encompassed by the dcfinitkm set forth in Rule I001) include: Any printed, type_xitten, or handwritten or graphic matter, regardless of medium on ',_hich it is produced, repmduccd or stored, including without limitation, correspondence, letters, memoranda, e-mail, reports, charts, diagrams, blueprints, site plans, business records, personal rocor,&% m_ps, pamphlets, handwritte2 rtotes, minutes of meetings, notes of meetings or conversations, catalogues, advertising pamphlets, ,,witten agreements, contracts, photographs, sound recordings, papers, books, FILES, computer print-outs, diaries and diary entries, calendars, tables, compilations, graphs, recommendations, studies, worksheets, logs, workpapers, summaries, inlhrmation stored by a computer or on a computer disk, diskette tape card or other form of computer memory storage, as well as any electronic re¢ordlng, tape recording, photograph, video, film, microfilm, microfiche, or similar recording of words, images, sounds, pictures, or information of any kind, and all telegrams, transmission by any of the following: telefax, e-maiL facsimile, telex or cable. 1 This Request specifically requires YOU to produce ALL DOCUMENTS maintained or presently located on your employees' and agents' person, at their residences, on their private e-mail accounts or anywhere else in their possession, custody, or control. When requested to produce a DOCUMENT you are required to produce all VERSIONS thereof. B. Version. "VERSION" or "VERSIONS" means any of the following: l ) Any prior or subsequent version or draft of a DOCUMENT, including without limitation all amendments, alterations, drafts, runs and modifications. 2) Any duplicate (as that term is defined in Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 1001(4). which defines a duplicate as "a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements m_d nfiniatures, or by mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original.") of a DOCUMENT falling within one or more categories of this Request for Production of Documents, which duplicate is, or at any time hah been, different from the DOCUMENT of which it is a duplicate including without limitation duplicates that bear added notations, marginalia, and/or have had other DOCUMENTS affixed or attached thereto such as stapled or paper-clipped notes and "Post-It" type self-stick removable notes. All DOCUiVfENTS commonly known as "duplicate originals," i e., counterparts signed by different signatories, are expressly included in this definition of VERSION. C. Delegates, Entities and TheirAffents. Whenever reference is made or information is sought with respect to an entity such as a TRIBE, corporation, partnership er governmental agency or orgtmization that can act only through individual agents, reference to the acts of such entity are intended to include all acts taken by its agents, directors, officers, employees, members and shareholders who have or claim to have authority to act on behalf'of such entity. D. Person. As used herein, the term '*PERSON" includes both singular and plural, and refkrs to any natural person, TRIBE, finn, association, partnership, joint venture_ corporation, govermnental agency or organization, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, or any other group or combination acting as a unit or affiliated entity. Whenever reference is made herein to any act by a PERSON, such reference is intended to, and docs, include reference to any act or conduct performed by such PERSON'S agents, employees, and/or REPRESENTATIVES unless a contrary intention is expressed. E. Representative. "REPRESENTATIVE" or "REPRESENTATIVES" refers to and includes any PERSON (as defined herein) who acts, has at any time acted, has at any time by' ant,' PERSON been requested or solicited to act. or has purporled to act at the request el, or/hr the benefit of, or on behalf of any PERSON, including without limitation all agents acting on behalf of their principals. F. Related Par_'. As used herein, the teml "ILELA 1 ED PARTY" means a PERSON or entity related to another by reason of any of the following: 3 1) Individuals being members of the same family. The family of an individual shall include his brothers and sisters (whether by whole or half blood), present spouse, prior spouses, ancestors, and lineal descendants, 2) A PERSON or entity and a partnership if the PERSON or entity is a general pariner of the partnership or owns 50% or more of the capital interest, or the profits interest in such partnership. 3) APERSON or enfity and acorporation ifthe PERSON: (i) owns or holds 50% or more of the value of the outstanding stock of the corporation, or (ii) controls, either directly or indirectly through a RELATED PARTY, 50% or more offlae voting power of the corporation. 4) Two corporations that are members of the same "controlled group" as that term is defined in Section 267 of the Internal Revenue Code, including without limitation. parent-subsidiary corporations and brother-sister corporations. 5) Any trust, together with the trustees, fiduciaries and beneficiaries of such trust, with respect to which a RELATED PARTY is a trustor, fiduciao' or beneficiary. 6) An entity with respect to which a RELATED PARTY owms or holds 50?/0 or more of the equity or voting interest in such entity. G, Conjunctions. As used herein, the conjunctions '_and" and "or" shall be construed both conjunctively and disjunctively, and each shall include the other whenever such dual construction serves to brlng within the scope of any request or catcgotT any DOCUMENT that would otherwise not bc brought within its scope. 4 H. Number and Gender. As used herein, the singular form shall include the plural (and vice versa) and file masculine shall include the feminine and/or neuter (and conversely) whenever such construction serves tt_ bring within the scope of any request or category any DOC[JMENT that would otherwise not he brought witlfin its scope. 1. Communication. AS used herein, the term "COMML]qlCATiON" or "COMMIJNICATIONS" means the transmittal of information, I whether oral or written, between PERSONS or entities, in any form - whether face-to-face, by telephone, by mail, by messenger or transmitted electronically, by telecopier, wire, modem or otherwise. DOCUMENTS that typically reflect COMMUNICATIONS include handwritten notes, telephone memoranda slips, daily appointment books and diaries, bills, checks, correspondence and memoranda (contained in Cla'on FILES ,and other,vise), and includes all drafts of suck DOCUMENTS, J. Negotiation. As used heroin, tile term "NEGOTIATION" or *'NEGOTIATIONS' means and includes any conversations and/or COMMUNICATIONS, whether written or oral, that occurred in reaching, or in attempting to reach, an agreement on a subject or issue. K. File(s). As used herein, any request for "FILE(S)" requires you to produce ail relevant filing tblders, buckets, containers, etc, and all DOCUMENTS contained therein in the order ia which such DOCUMENTS are ordinarily maintained. Igibberish I 5 L Reference to Interrogatories and/or Requests for Admissions. Whenever re£erence is made to an interrogatory, or Request for Admission, it shall refer to one contained in the Interrogatories or Requests for Admissions served concurrently herewith untess a contrary intention is expressed. SPECIAL DEFINITIONS A. YOU or YOUR slmll metal defendants, and each uf them, alld their REPRESEN ¥ATIVES. B. Interior's Quarterly/Status Reports 1. Interior's Status Report to the Court Number Eleven shall be defined as "I l:h QR" cr "QRI 1" or "Eleventh Status Report," 2. Any prior Slatus Report to the Court that is a par_ of the Court-ordered quarterly reporting rcqnirement shall be referred to in similar fashion by its ordinal number. E.g, "10_h QR," "QRI 0," "Tenth Status Report,". "7 th QR" or "QR7," or "Seventh Status Report," et cetera. C. DATACOM - DataCom Inc. D. DATA CLEANUP - Fhe term "data cleanup" shall mcan thc rcndering of data to be accurate: to she extent it would result in a greater number of documents being produced or identified, the term shall also encompass any definitions er uses of the term in any of the following contexts: (1) in any of the Quarterly or Status Reports filed by defendants or 6 the HLIP 2000; (2) in the testimony of Ross Ridgeway in the Second Contempt Trial; and (3) in the testimony of Thomas M. Thompson in the Second Contempt Trial. E. THIRD PARTY DOCUMENT COLLECTION PROJECT - The Collection of Information from Outside Sources Project referenced in the Eighth Quarterly Report, including from TRIBES. F. CDE - Chavarria, Dumte & Lamey. G. D&T Deloitte & Touche LLP H. E&Y Emst& Young LLP I. TRIBES - All federally-recognized tribes, including, but not limited to, tribes that are parties to compacting and contracting agreements. J. EBBERT AFFIDAVIT- Affidavit of Richard P. Ebbert filed with this Court on or about January 5,200I. K. IIM TRUST - the Individual Indian Monies Trust. L. rIM TRUST BENEFICIARY - An individual indian on whose behalf, as trust beneficialy, an IIM TRUST account is, or at any time has been, shouId be, or should have been, maintained by tile United States or its agents; the term "IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY" shall include all heirs and suecessors-in-inlcrest, including executors and personal representatives with respect to an IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY'S estate. 7 DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED CATEGORY NO. 1: A copy, front and back, of all checks or other negotiable instnnnents that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the decade of the 1990's. _CATEGORY NO. 2: A copy, front and back, of ali checks or other negotiable instrtunents that thc United States governnl_nt or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual tIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable mstrmnents ',;'ere issued in the decade of the I980's. CATEGORY NO. 3: A copy, front and back, of ail checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual iIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable mstmments were issued in the decade of the 1970's. CATEGORY NO. 4: A copy, front and back, of ail checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual I1M trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the decade of the 1960's. CATEGORY NO. 5: A copy, £ront and back, of ali checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the decade of the 1950's. CATEGORY NO. 6: A copy, front and back, oPall checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the decade of thc 1940's. CATEGORY NO. 7: A copy, from and back, of all checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust bencficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable mstmmems were issued in the decade of the I930%. CATEGORY NO. 8: A copy. front and back, el'all checks or other negotiabIc instruments that the United States govermnent or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property', which checks or other negotiable mstrumetus werc issued in the decade of the 1920's. 8 CATEGORY NO. 9: A copy. front and back, of ail checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements m individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the decade of the 1910%. CATEGORY NO. 10: Acopy, f?ont andback, ofallchecksorothernegotiableinstruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable irtstmments wcrc issued in the decade of thc 1900's. CATEGORY NO. 11: A copy. front and back, of all checks or other negotiable instruments that the United States government or any of its agents paid that constitute disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the decade of the 1890's. CATEGORY NO. 12: A copy. front and back, of all checks or other negotiable instruments that the Utfited States govenmaent or any of its agents paid that constltate disbursements to individual IIM trust beneficiaries with respect to their trust property, which checks or other negotiable instruments were issued in the period 1887 to I889. CATEGORYNO. 13: ALL VERglONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem orrefleet a matter material to the management of the IlM Trust. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively m only one iIM TRUST BENEFICIARY or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 14: ALL VERSlONg OF DOCUMENTS lhat discuss, concernorreilecta matter material to the preser_ ation olall or any of the assets in the IIM Trust. With respect to this Categol,'y only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 15: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect a matter material to the repmling on thc status or value of ali or any of the assets in the IIM Trust, With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 16: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect a matter material to the accounting for the rents, profits ,'md proceeds ofa[I or any of the assets in the IIM Trust. With respect to this Categor_ only, defendants are not required m produce DOCUMENTS diat pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 17: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that constitute a DOCUMENT that the Special Master ruled, in his May 19, { 999 Opinion and Order at page 8, that defhndanis 9 have a fiduciary obligation to disclose to plaintiffs in accordance with their management and administration ,of thc llM Trust. CATEGORY NO. 18: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflcct or coastitute one or more of the correspondence referenced at page 2 of the April 19, 2002 letter from Anthony Gamboa to Bert Edwards that is attached as an exhibit to Plainti_' Consolidated _otion for Leave to Amend and Motion to Amend Plainti_" February 15, 2002 Summary Judgment Contempt Motion and a Contempt Finding Purxuant to Fe_t R. Ci¥. P. 56(g) in Accordance with )vYwly Discovered Evidence. The April 19, 2002 Letter of GAO General Counsel Anthony Gamboa to OHTA Dtrector Bert Edwards (filed .)uae 4, 2002), which documents are described as follows: "Under separate cover, we will provide you with copies of the written correspondence exchanged belwean GAO and Justice, Interior, and Treasury, to which we refer in Enclosure I1." CATEGORY NO. 19; ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION Interior's Status Report to the Court Number Elew'n, including all drafts thereof and suggested charges thereto. CATEGORY NO. 20: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMk_NTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the "agreement on a proposed reorganization plan with the Tribal Task Force." Nee ll'h QR at 3. CATEGORY NO. 21: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of _'The proposal by the tribes contain[lng] language that was unacceptable to DOl." See 11 '_ QR at 3. CATEGORY NO, 22: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that disanss, concern, reflect or support YOUR al/¢gation that "Significant progress to address trust management deficiencies was accomplished during this reporting period." See 11 _h QR at 4. CATEGORY NO. 23: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the lndian '['rust Bushless Plan. See I I *_ QR at 4. CATEGORY NO, 24: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "[Ms. Em'in's] management skills are already making a difference in holding managers accountable for getting work done, and she is working to reorganize the Office of Special Trustee co make it more cffectlv¢." ,qe¢ I [_h QR. at 5. CATEGORY NO. 25: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCllMENTS that discuss, concem, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the "As-Is" trust business model. See I I _ QR at 6. 10 CATEGORY NO. 26: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the "To-Be' trust business model 5'ce 11 t" QR at 6. CATEGORY NO. 27; ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Results from a broad systems certification process conducted in January - February 2002 indicated that approximately ninety-f_ur percent (94%) of the DOI's IT systems did not house IITD.' See I 1 'h QR at 8. CATEGORY NO. 28: ALL VERSIONS OF DOC UMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "The relative security and integrity of DOFs computer systems is gradually improving." See I 1 :h QR at 8. CATEGORY NO. 29: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constinlte a VERSION or' the August 26, 2002 Deputy Secretary memorandum _'lnformation Technology Invevtment Management." (See l l _ QR at 9). CATEGORY NO. 31}: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of IT security program-level assessment guide. See 11 th QR at 9. CATEGORY NO. 31: ALLVERSlONSOFDOCUMFNTSthatdiscuss, concem, reflector constitute a VERSION of the draft Strategic Plan to Reach A-130. Appendix II compliance. See l¥aQRat 9. CATEGORY NO. 32: ALL VERSlONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concem, retIector constitute a VERSION of the guidelines for preparing asset valuations, risk assessments, system security plans, contingency plans, and technical memoranda issued by DOFs CiO Security Officer as referenced at page 9 of the 11 _a QR. CATEGORY NO. 33: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between SAIC. on the one hand, and defendants or their REPRESENTATIVES or ,*.ny third part3', on the other hand. with respect to the contract referenced at page 9 of the I I 'h QR. CATEGORY NO. 34: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect one or more of the two security incidents/breaches ret_rcnccd at page 9 of the I 1 'h QR. CATEGORY NO. 35: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discass, concern or reflect one or more security incident at the Dcpartment of Interior, including, but not limited to those reported through DOl's incident handling process. See I I _l_ QR at 9. 11 CATEGORY NO. 36: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute _ VERSION of the July 16, 2002 guidelines eh'titled "Hardening of Information Technology Sy.vtemx. "See I I m QR at 10. CATEGORY NO. 37; ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the Technical Reikrenca Model. See 1 l 'h QR at 10. CATEGORY NO. 38: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect Interior's IT SecuriTy and Capital Asset Planning activities. See 11 _s QR at I 0. CATEGORY NO. 39: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a V ERS[ON of [merior's August 2002 IT Security A,.vareness Brochure. See 1 / 'h QR at 10-11, CATEGORY NO. 40: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION oflnventories and priority lists for DOI IT systems. See 1 pa QR at 11. CATEGORY NO. 41: ALL _,q2RSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the Interior Asset Valuation Guide. See 1 l_h QR at I 1. CATEGORY NO. 42: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the draft IT asset valuation process. S_e 11 _h QR. at I 1. CATEGORY NO, 43: ALL VBRSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the July 15, 2002 report entitled "Optimizing the Indian Affairs Information Technology Infrastructure." See I 1 _" QR at 11. CATEGORY NO. 44: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern ar reflect Interior's August 2002 "corrective action approach.' See 1 l'h QR at 11. CATEGORY NO. 4S: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concemorrefi_ct SAIC's work in c_nrtection with the NIS1 800-26 Review and Mitigattom See [/_h QR at 12. CATEGORY NO. 46: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between SaNer International, on the one hand, and de/_ndants or their REPP,_SENTATIVES or ,-my third party, on the other hand, regarding or as a result of: the September I 1,2002 contract award. See l 1 th Qg at 12. CATEGORY NO. 47: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS flint discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the Seplamber 23, 2002 document generated by dc fondant McCalcb outlining the security requirements for reconnecting to the Internet. See 11 _h QR at 12. I2 CATEGORY NO. 48: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between BearingPoint Inc., on the one hand, and detbndants or their REPRESENTATIVES or any third party, on the other hand, regarding the systems boundary assessment. See 1 t th QR at 12. CATEGORY NO. 49: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUIVlENTS that discuss, concern or reflect Interior's Departmental Enterprise Architecture. See 1 l'h QR at 15. CATEGORY NO. 50: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCIJMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the Trust Architecture Work Plan completed August 6, 2002. ,¥ee I l _ QRat 15. CATEGORY NO. 51: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the August 20, 2002 drali architecture plans presented to the Associate Deputy Secretary. ,gee 1 l'h QR at 15. CATEGORY NO. $2: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute the "general evaluation of [IT] systems." ,gee [ l_h QR at 17. CATEGORY NO. $3: ALL VERSIONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, coneem, reftector constitute a "request lbr assistance in locating these missing records has been sent to the Office of Historical Trust Accounting." See 11 _ QR at 19. CATEGORY NO. 54: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute one or more of the "general inventories of cadastral survey needs on Indian lands." See 1Pr QR at 19. CATEGORY NO. 55._: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the training course "Land Tenure in Indian Country." See 1 I'h QR at 19, including without [imitation all course materials and syllabi. CATEGORY NO. 56: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that disanss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of thc BIA/"BLM general inventory of 2001. See 1 l 'h QR at 20. CATEGOR.Y NO. 57: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, cormem, reflect or constitute the "OHTA Cadastral Survey Pilot on acreage errors and location errors." See 11 ,h QR at 20. CATEGORV NO. 58: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCU3vIENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute "plans for replacing BLM's depleted work force of land surveyors." See 11 'h QR at 21. I3 CATEGORY NO, 59: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the Department of the Interior Indian Trust Lands Boundary Standards. ,_;ee 11 _1_ QR at 21. CATEGORY NO. 60: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the delay in conducting a nationwide BLM/BIA inventory of survey needs. See l i '" QR at 22. CATEGORY NO. 61: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "MRM's Indian mineral revenue backlogs arising from the system shutdown have now been eliminated and MRM is processing current revenues on a routine cycle." See I I 'h QR at 23. CATEGORY NO. 62: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "continued recovery efforts associated with the system shutdown of December 2001." See 11 `*' QR at 23. CATEGORY NO. 63: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "comprehensive process that provides managers with a framework for making staffing decisions." See 11 '_ QR at 25. CATEGORY NO. 64: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "assess[meat oI] trust management operations as managed in the Bureau of Indian Affairs." See ll_' QR at 25. CATEGORY NO. 65: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute an individual developmcnt plan. See 11 _h QR at 26. CATEGORY NO. 661 ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflector support YOUR allegation that: "Each of the managers responsible for trust projects or related trust activity within DOI was asked to submit his or her report of activity during the past three months" (See 1 I '_' QR at 29), including without limitation all VERSIONS of such reports of activities. CATEGORY NO. 67: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute infbrmalion "provided to Congress at a hearing in June 2002." See 1 P" QR at 30. CATEGORY NO. 68: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "unclahned property act" proposal (,See 11 _h QR at 32.), including without limitation all VERSIONS of such proposal. 14 CATEGORY NO. 69: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "self-managed trust" proposal (,gee 11 'h QR at 32.), including without limitation all VERSIONS of such proposal CATEGORY NO. 70: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "partitioning" proposal (See l / _r' QR at 32.), inclu4ing without limitation att VERSIONS of such proposal. CATEGORY NO. 71; ALU VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Plans are being formalized to hold a session for the self- governance tribes (compacting/contracting tribes) to gather best practices as well as document an5, variances." (See 11 u, QR at 3 %36.), including without limitation all VERSIONS of any such plans, CATEGORY NO. 7Z: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS th_tt discuss, concern, re fleet or support YOUR allegation that "Each member of thc team was responsible for getting input from their respective agency managers and staff." (See 11 'h QR m 37.), including without limitation all VERSIONS of any such input and all COMMUNICATIONS with msl_ect thereto. CATEGORY NO. 73: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "development of stm_dardized trust business processes." (See 11 _' QR at 38.), including without limitation all VERSIONS of any such trust business processes. CATEGORY NO. 74: ALL ¥ERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto. See 11 '_ QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required m produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 75: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the period January I, 2000 to the present. ,See I 1 th QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not reqnlled to produce DOCLrMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IlM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 76: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discttss, concern or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the period January 1, 1998 tbxough December 3 I, 1999, See 1 l'h QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defbndants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one [IM TRUSI BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, _r allotment. CATEGORY NO. 77: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect thc current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the 15 period January 1, 1996 through December 31, 1997. See 1 l_h QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one iIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 78: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concemorrefleetthe current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the period January 1, 1994 through December 31, 1995, See 11 m QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one UM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotmem. CATEGORY NO. 79: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the current probate staffing, caselcsad and/o_ any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the period January l, 1992 through December 3 t, 1993. See 11 _ QR at 39, With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS thai pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY _O. 80: ALL VERSIONS OP DOCUMENTS that discuss, concernorreflectthe c_rent probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the period Janua D' i. 1990 through December 31, 1991. See 1 I th QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM 'I_UST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 81: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, eoncem or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the decade of the 1980%, See 11 _ QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir. or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 82: ALLVERSlONSOPDOCUMENTSthatdlscuss, coneernorreflectthe current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the decade of the I97ffs. See I 1 _ QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, hcir_ or allotment. CATI_GORY NO. 83: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the decade of the 1960's. See 1 I_h QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that ixmain cxclu,_ively to only one [IM TRUST BFNEF[CIARY, decedant, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 84: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, ¢or_cem or reflect the current prubate staffing, caseload mid/or any bactdog with respect thereto at rely point during the 16 decade of the I950's. See 11 _a QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one ItM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment, CATEGORY NO. 85: ALL VERSlONS OE DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload aod/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the decade of the 1940's. See 11 _ QR at 39. With respect to this Calegory only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment, CATEGORY NO. g6: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS th_ discuss, concern or refiect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the decade of the 1930's. See l t a, QR at 39. Wtth respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent:heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 87: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that disctzss, concern or reflect the current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during _he decade of the 1920%. ,gee I 1 _ QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertakx exclusively to only one BM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 88: ALL VERSiONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concemorrefiectthe current probate staffing, caseload and/or any backlog with respect thereto at any point during the decade of the 191 frs. See 11' QR at 39. With respect to this Category only, de[andams are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain excIusively to only one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir. or a0otment. CATEGORY NO. 89: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, eoncem or reflect proceeds of IIM TRUST properl', that have been held undistributed at any time during the existence of the IlM TRUST - pending final adjudication of probate proceeding, including withom limitation the ultimate distribution of such proceeds. With respect to this Category only, de_bndants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only[ one IIM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, er allotment. CATEGORY NO. 90: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the revision of the "draft probate handbook" (See 11 II QR at 39), including without limitation ali approved or proposed "replacement pages" CATEt;OR¥ NO. 91: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reilect the ' trust business process 'To-Be' modeling workshop...held September 3-6, 2002, in Albuquerque, NlM' (sec I F h QR at 40), including without limitation all course materials and syllabi, and ALL Z7 VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS, electronic and otherwise, that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute the "record of the workshop proceedings" created by a contractor who "facilitated the workshop using mobile workstations and collaboration software to foster an open dialog and record the workshop proceedings," and all VERSIONS of the "lin]ore than one thoasand comments [that] were entered into the collaboration software," ld CATEGORY NO. 92: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the "'straw man' of the 'To-Be' trust business model." ,gee 1 l'h QR at 410. CATEGORY NO. 93: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENrTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute the _'CLS Beta test conducted at the end of May," as weli as any subsequent CLS alpha or beta tests. See ll'hQRat41. CATEGORY NO. 94: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the "operating flaws that were disclosed by the CLS Beta test conducted at the end of May ' See 1 I a, QRat4h CATEGORY NO. 95: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem, reflect or constitute the ;'August 1, 2002, test results." See I l_h QR at 4 I. CATEGORY NO. 96: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, refiect or support YOUR allegation that Number of Cases Processed and Decided -July through September 2002. During this reporting period, BIA and OHA deciding officials received 728 cases and issued decisions in 94l cases." See l I tt QR at 41. CATEGORY NO. 97: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of casas processed and decided for the period covered by thc Tenth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 98: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the umber of cases processed and decided for the period covered by the Ninth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 99: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect thc number of cases processed and decided for the period covered by the Eighth Status R6port. CATEGORY NO. 1001 ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases processed and decided for thc period covered by the Seventh Status Report. (2ATEGORY NO. 101: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases processed aid decided for the period covered bi, the Sixth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 1 I)2: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect thc number of cases processed and decided for thc period covered by the Fitih Status Report. 18 CATEGORY NO. 103: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases processed and decided tbr the period covered by the Fourth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 104: ALLVERSlONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, eoneem or reflect the ntmther of cases processed and decided fbr the period covered by the Third Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 105: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases processed and decided for the period covered by the Second Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 106: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases processed and decided for the period covered by the First Status Report, CATEGORY NO. 107: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concerto reflect or support YOUR a]Iegation that "The Office of Trust Funds Management (OTFM) distributed and closed 992 estate accounts representing 961 estates." See I 1 _ QR at 41. CATEGORY NO. 108: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect file number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Tenth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 109: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Ninth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 110: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Eighth Status Report, CATEGORY NO. I11: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Seventh Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 112: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Sixth Status Report. CATEGORY NO, 113: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed fbr the period covered by the Fiith Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 114: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Fourth Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 115: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of cases distributed _md closed for the period covered by the Third Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 116: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem or reflect the number of cases distributed and closed for the period covered by the Second Status Report. 19 CATEGORY NO. 117: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the number of'cases distributed and closed lbr the period covered by the First Status Report. CATEGORY NO. 118: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCLIMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "These [probate] numbers are the best intbrmation available and are subject to verification." See I 1 'h QR at 42. CATEGORY NO. 119: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, coanem, reflcct or support YOUR allegation that "An accurate statement of the probate workload cannot be made until a reconciliation is made with the CLS database noted above. There could be significant changes in the figures based on the on-site hand count verification entered into the CLS database." See t t_h QR at 42. CATEGORY NO. 120: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the "list of Criticat Data Etemenm (CDEs)." See l 1 ,h QR at 47. CATEGORY NO. 121: ALL VERS1ONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the definition of Critical Data Elements and how such definition was arrived at. CATEGORY NO. ,t22: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem or reflect what elements were included in or excluded from the list o f Crflical Data Elements. CATEGORY NO. 123: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMIJNICA21ON between DATACOM, on the one hand, and defendants or their REPRESENTATIVES or any third party, on the other hand, with respect to the DATA CLEANUP project, including without limitation all contract documents. CATEGORY NO. 124: ALI. VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between DATACOM, on the one hand, and defendmts or their REPRESENTATIVES. on the other hand. with respect to the DATA CLEANUP project. CATEGORY NO. 125: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem or reflect defendants' failure or delay in achieving DATA CLEANUP. With respect to this Carl:gory only, defendants are not required to produce DOCUMENTS that pertain exclusively to only one IiM TRUST BENEFICIARY, decedent, heir, or allotment. CATEGORY NO. 126: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or consfil[lte a quantification of the alllount of'data cleaned up or not cleaned up. CATEGORY NO. 127: ALLVERSlONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscussorconstitutea metric or metrics in the context o[DATA CLEANUP. 20 CATEGORY NO. 128: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concemorrefI¢ct defendants' Failure or delay in achieving data conversion. CATEGORY NO. 129: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem or reflect defendants' data warehousing efforts, See I 1 'h QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 130: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were in... Title Examination (Chain Sheet Preparation)." See I i 'h QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 131: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that dlscuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "cm_tractor's data cleanup e flirts and accomp[isfiments were m.., Chain Sheet Review." See 11 ® QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 132: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss_ concem, reflector support YOIJR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup effi)rts and accomplishmenvs were m.., Reviewing and Acquiring Legal Land Documents." See I i t" QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 133: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were m... Preparing Documents [br Encoding in thc LRIS." See 11 TM QR at 48, CATEGORY NO. 13& ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the *'contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were in... Multiple Owner Identification (MOID) Tasks." See 11 _h QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 135: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were tn. . Document (land tJtle/cncumbrance to land title) Pmcassing Tasks." See 11 _' QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 136: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were m... Non-Enrolled Identification Number Tasks." S'ee 11 th QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 137: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were m... Current Document Type Modifier Tasks." ,gee 11_ QR at 48. CATEGORYNO. 138: ALL VERSlONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concem, reflcctor support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were m... Document Chaining Tasks at the Flathead Agency." See 11 _h QR at 48. 21 CATEGORY NO. 139: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were in.,. Realty/Title Land Tract Match Tasks." See 11 m QR at 48. CATEGORY NO. 140; ALL VEP,.S1ONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were in... Track M990 Title Ownership Chaining Task at the Fort Peck Agency." See 11 '_ QR at 48. C'ATEGORY NO. 141: ALLVERSIONSOFDOCUMENTStbatdiscuss, coneern, refl¢ctor support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were in,,, REM/Land Oxvrtership ID/TFAS Account Comparison Match Task." See 11 m QR at 49. CATEGORy NO. 142: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCIJMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments were in... Document Recording and Microfilm Task at the Eastern Region." See 11 '_ QR at 49. CATEGORY NO. 143: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem, reflect or support 5:'OUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup cfi'arts and accomplishments were m,.. Dratting ,'md Encoding Administrative Probate Modification Tasks." See 1 l_h QR at 49. CATEGORY NO. 144: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that the "contractor's data cleanup efforts and accomplishments wer_ .... ,, fh in... LR.[S Death Notlficatlon Encoding Task at tile Southwest Region. See 11 QR at 49, CATEGORY NO. 145: ALL VERSIONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscugs, conccrn, reflector constitute a DOCUMENT that defendants have gathered from a third party as part of the THIRD PARTY DOC[ JMENT COLLECTION PROJECT, including from TRIBES. See Eighth Quarterly Report at 31. CATEGORY NO. 146: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between any third party, that is a subject or a potential subject of the THIRD PARTY DOCUMENT COLLECTION PROJECT, including from TRIBES, on the one hand, and defendants or their REPRESENTATIVES. on thc other hand. CATEGORY NO. 147..' ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the THIRD PARTY DOCUMENT COLLECTION PROJECT, or any aspect thereol_ ?ATEGORY NO. 148: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between an 3, trade group, on the one [md, and de feadams or their REPILESENTAT1VES, on the other hand with respect to thc THIRD PARTY DOCUMEN i COLLECTION PROIECT. 22 CATEGORY NO. 149: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION between any third party that is a subject or a potential subject of the THIRD PARTY DOCUMENT COLLECTION PROJECT, on the one hand, and defendants or their REPRESENTATIVES, on the other hand, with respect to the subject of the destruction or preservation of third party documents and in particular that third pa._ies refrain from destroying their records. CATEGORY NO. 150: ALL VERSIONS OF DocuMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect an), decision as to what categories of third parties defendants would or would not contact as part of the THIRD PARTY DOCUMENT COLLECTION PROJECT, including without limitation DOCUMENTS relating to the December 8, 2001 OHTA determination. ,gee Eighth Quarterly Report at 34. CATEGORY NO, 151: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "On July 9, 2002, OHTA's Executive Director and Deputy Director provided a briefing for Staff of the Senate Interior Appropriations Subcommittee." See lP_QRat 50. CATEGORY NO. 152[ ALL VERSIONS OF DOC[JMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "On August 1, 2002, another briefing was provided to a Staff member oftke House Appropriations Committee by OHTA's Executive Director and Deputy Director." See 11 *_ QR at 50. CATEGORY NO. 153: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "OHTA provided additional briefings to personnel of the Office of Management and Budget ,and to senior DUI personncI regarding various aspects of file Report." See 1 ph QR at 5{3. CATEGORY NO. 154: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of thc Report to Congreas on the Historical Accounting of lndividtsal Indian Money Accounts. See I P_ QR at 50. I_ATEGORY NO. 155: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the purported efforts of Chavarria, Dunnc & Lamcy ("CDL") "to reconcile a number of judgment and pcr capita IIM accounts." ,gee I I j_ QR at 51. CATEGORYNO. 156: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem, reflcct or constitute * VERSION of the October 31,2001 CDL ReporL ,5¥e 11 _ QR at 52, 53. 23 CATEGORY NO. 157: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the June 7, 2002 CDL Report Update. See 1 ph QR at 52, 53. CATEGORY NO. 158: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the July 31, 2002 CDL Report Update. See 11 th QR at 52, 53. CATEGORY NO. 159: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the August 30, 2002 CDL Report I Ypdate. ,gee 11 *_ QR at 52, 53. CATEGORY NO. 160: ALL VERSIONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concem, reflector constitute a VERSION of the August 31, 2002 CDL Report Update, See I 1 _h QR at 52, 53. CATEGORY NO. 16h ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the October 2, 2002 CDL Report Update See 1 ]th QR at 52, 53. CATEGORY NO. 162: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION ofaay and all subsequent CDL Reports. See 1 ph QR at 52. CATEGORY NO. 163: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMLrNICATION between Grant Thornton or any of its REPRESENTATIVES, on the one hand, and defendants er their REPRESENTATIVES, on the other hand, with respcct to DHTA or any of its endeavors. See 1 E h QR at 53. CATEGORY NO. 164: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, ¢oncem, reflector constitute any "reconciliation procedures" created for any trust accounts. See I Ith QR at 54. CATEGORY NO. 165: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCU_'MENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the work allegedly completed by CDL on August 31, 2002. See 1 E h QR at 54. CATEGORY NO. 166: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMEN'TS that discuss, concern, re{leer or constitute the work of Deloitte & Touche LLP ("D&I") in "conducting a historical accounting f_r the 37 IIM land-based accounts in the Easter Region." See I ph QR at 54. CATEGORY NO. 167: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a D&T's "additional analysis ol'the IRMS and TEAS data to determine the source of funds for all Eastern Region IIM land-based [IM accounts." See 11 th QR at 55. CATEGORY NO. 168: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCLrMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect to "accounting or tile new TFAS accounts [] in the Southwest Region" allegedly performed {_r to be pertbmled by Ernst & Young LLP ("E&Y"). See l ] th QR at 55. 24 CATEGORY NO. 169: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOU R _[egaf_on thzt "This plan was re'dewed and approved by Gram Thornton." See ll_QR at 55. CATEGORY NO. 170_ ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "The first facet of this project has been completed and interim reports of flndthgs have been pro,,,ided to each Land Title Records Office end an overall report finalized for OHTA." See I 1 _h QR at 56. CATEGORY NO. 171: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the second [hceI of the Land Title Project: "completeness of the ownership data (i.e., whether ail iMividual owners are recorded in LRIS) ' See I 1 m QR at 56. CATEGORY NO. 172: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "In June 2002, Gustavson Associates (Oustavson) completed a pilot study to search and identify oil and gas records on allotted lands and submitted a report with its findings,.,. Gustavson briefed DO[ and Justice staffon its findings on July 23, 2002?' (See 11 m QR at 58 ), including without limitation ail VERSIONS of such pilot study. CATEGORY NO. 173: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that dlscuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION oftbe Accounting Standards ?damml gee i I th QR at 59. CATEGORY NO. 174: ALL VERSlONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concem, reflector support YOUR allegation that "OST has received positive feedback as a result of these efforts." See 1 P" QR al 62. CATEGORY NO. 175: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "OCC is scheduled to begin working vdth OST during the next reporting period to help establish a grading system to evaluate the error rate, compliance with established trust stand,ds, and corrective measures at each location providing trust services." See 11 'h QR at 62. CATEGORY NO. 176: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem_ reflect or support YOUR allegation that "OCC is scheduled to begin working with OST during the next reporting period to help establish a grading system to evaluate the error rate, compliance with established trust standards, and corrective measures at each location providing trust services." See l 1 m QR at 62. CATEGORY NO. 177: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCI JMENTS that discuss, concem, reflect or support YOUR allegation that '_The Department is making great strides in improving thlbrmation security." See 11' QR at 63, 25 CATEGORY NO. 178: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Numerous deficiencies existed in the data because ofinconslstent application of any 'standard' method of data input, account/data review, or statldardized use of system codes." See 11 *h QR at 64. CATEGORY NO. 179: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "The Solicitor has recommended restricting the accounting lacking mandatory documents, because the address must be verified to ensure the proper beneficiary is receiving trust assets." See 11 _h QR at 65. CATEGORY NO. 180: ALI. VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "OST is exploring ways in which ir can store additional informatioxl in TEAS to provide perlbrmance statements to account holders which will identify the source of income and a listing of all assets owned." See I I _ QR at 65. CATEGORY NO. 181: ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, eoncem or reflect the ownership research conducted by CDL during the week of July 8, 2002. See l 1 '_ QR at 66. CATEGORY NO. 182_.' ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect the ownership research conducted by BIA during the week of July 22, 2002. See 11 _h QR at 66. CATEGORY NO. 183.'. ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the Drqft Recommended Prospective Action for the SDA Document Preparation and Encoding (Draft). See 11 t_ QR at 67. CATEGORY NO, 184: ALl. VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect "monthly status meeting with the BIA, Office of Trust Risk Management and the contractor as part of coordinating efforts to resolve SDA issues." See 11 th Q R at 67. CATEGORY NO. lOS: ALLVERSIONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concern, retlector support YOUR allegation concerning the $780,000 reduction in reported lhnd balance discrepancies. See 1 I th QR at 68. CATEGORY NO. 186: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concernl reflect or support YOUR allegation that "The Acting Director initiated an assessment of the ongoing activities of OTR an downward adjustment draft OTR work plan was developed." ,gee 11 th QR at 70. CATEGORY NO. 187: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute proposed records rctcntion schedules. See 11 th QR at 70. 26 CATEGORY NO. 188[ ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect tile course "Trust Foundations: An Introduction to Trust Relbrm and Change,"(See 11 '_ QR at 74.), including without limitation all course materials and syllabi. CATEGORY NO. t89t ALL VERSlONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concemorreflect audits of any individual Indian trust assets since 1995, including but not limited to audits performed pursuant to a compacting or contracting function. See 11 _' QR at 7g. CATEGORYNO. 190; ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discusa, concem, reflector constitute a VERSION of "reporis" completed by OTRM staff. See t I '_ QR at 79. CATEGORYNO. 191: ALL VERSIONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concem, reflector support YOUR allegation that"In his report iht July-September the Regional Appraiser report that, 'after 7 years [the backlog] is under control.'" &e 1 E h QR at 83. CATEGORY NO. 192: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that '"the team cleaned up about 250 backlogged appraisal requests that had been identified by the Agency to be high in priority.' Appraisal reports were completed for 152; the remaining 9g request_ were canceled." See 1 [ _ QR at g3. CATEGORY NO. 193: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "De¥clop draft Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for the distribution of estates affected by thc Youpee decision." ,gee I [*h QR at 86. CATEGORY NO. 194; ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concem_ retiect or support YOUR allegation that "Collaborate with the Rosebud Sioux Tribe to develop a cooperative agreement to define the Tribe's mit in the consolidation prQect.' ,Yea i 1 '_ QR at 86. CATEGORY NO. 195: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Collaborated with the Tribal Land Enterprise Board of Directors to identify 42 targeted tracts and continue the review of an additional 58 tracts. The goal is to purchase the individual interests and obtain 100% tribal interest. These tracts may provide future economic development opportunities for the Tribe." See l 1 '_ QR at 86. CATEGORY NO. 196: ALL VERSIONSOFDOCUMENTSthatdiscuss, concem, mfl¢ctor support YOUR allegation that "Implement a database to track 4,0004, applications of individual who wish to seIl their interests." ,gee 11 'h QR at 87. CATEGORY NO. 197: ALL ¥ERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or supporl YOUR allegation that "Develop SOP for the ILCP draft manual and rccotlcile agency records for the tracts targeted for purchase." See 11 _h QR at 87. 27 CATEGORY NO. 198: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Develop SOP for the landovmer interest inventory. The inventory will become part of the tracking database for this project." See 11 'h QR at 87. CATEGORY NO. 199: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Reconcile land interest inventory between agency records and the certified Title Status Reports (TSRs).' See I 1' QR at 87. CATEGORY NO, 200: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that"Complete reconciliation of 15 targeted tracts.' See l 1 _h QR at 87. CATEGORY NO, 201: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Identif3_ 250 additional owners/estates in the 15 targeted tracts as a result of Youpee re-distribution.' See l [ _h QR at 87. CATEGORY NO. 202: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Reconcile additional tracts to determine if the identified owners have other interests in order to make offers to purchase their other interests in lands located or_ the Rosebud Reservation." See 11 '_ QR at 87. CATEGORY NO, 203: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or support YOUR allegation that "Coordinate with the Office of Trust Funds Management (OTFM) to create a process to timely disburse the sale proceeds." See 11 _ QR at 87. CATEGORY NO. 204: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS t,hat discuss, ¢c,necrn, reflect or support YOUR allegation flint "Request and receive a Reservation-wide Mineral Appraisal from the Bureau of Land Management." See 1 l_h QR at 87. CATEGORY NO. 205: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a VERSION of the study completed by Booz Allen I Iamilton in April 2002. See I 1 '_ QR at gT. S CATEGORY NO. 206: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS tha d scu. s, concem_ reflecl or constitute one or more of the proposed revisions of 25 C.F.R. 2 -Appeals from Administrative Actions. See 11 _' QR at 9l. CATEGORY NO. 207: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUIvlENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute the Financial Conflicts of Interest proposal. See I 1 'h QR at 93-94. CATEGORY NO. 208: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect O ," ri the Affidavit of Richard P. Ebbert filed with this Cot_ on or about January' 5, _001 (the Ebhe Affidavit"). 28 CATEGORY NO. 209: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect why the $10,075 refund referenced in the Ebbert Affidavit, which refund was authorized in September 2001, has not been paid. CATEGORY NO. 210: ALL VERS1ONS OF DOCIJMF,NTS that discuss, concern or reflect geotherrrral lease number 52964 that is the subject of the Ebbert Affidavit. CATEGORY NO. 211: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMMUNICATION from, or a document generated by, BLM or MMS personnel with respect to any matter ret_renced in the Ebbert Affidavit, including without limitation COMMUNICATIONS from, or documents generated by Mary Mitchell, Mary Smith, Barbara Lanthert, Cor[m_e B_.Ilingsley (including witness statements from any such individuals). CATEGORY NO. 212: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect whether refunds a_e being processed, and if so the timeliness of such refunds, in thc Den'_er, Colorado office of the Minerals Management Service. CATEGORY NO. 213; ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or Teflect whether or not payments by check call he made manually from the Denver, Colorado office of file Minerals Management Service. CATEGORY NO. 214: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute s COMMUNICATION between any member or members of Congress or their REPRESENTA FIVES, on the one hand, and defendants or their REPRESENTATIVES, on the other bmod, with respect rn one or more of the subject matters re_erenced in mxy of the Calcgories of this Request for Production of Documents. CATEGORY NO. 215: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern, reflect or constitute a COMM[J_'NICATION between YOU or any of your REPRESENTATIVES, on the one hand, and any of the individuals who are the subject of any motion for order to show cause presently before the Special Master or who have made a_n appearance with respect to such proceeding or their REPRESENTATIVES or counsel, on the other hand, that discusses, concerns or relates to that proceeding or any aspect thereof CATEGORY NO. 216: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS that discuss, concern or reflect compensation paid to personal counsel Ihr individuals who are, or have been, the subject of any mol[on for order to shew cuuse in this litigation. CATEGORY NO. 217: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which is called for in lnterrogato W No. 48 of PlaintS)'3' Fourth Set of Interrogatories 29 CATEGORY NO. 218: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which is called for in Interrogatory No. 49 of ?laint(/Ji_' Fourth Set qflnterrogatories. CATEGORY NO. 219: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which is called for in Interrogatory No. 28 of Plaintiffs' Fourth Set of Interrogatories. CATEGORY NO. 2201 ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which is called for in Interrogatory No, 29 of Plaintifl_' Fourth Set of lnterrogatortes. CATEGORY NO, 221.- ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which is called for in laterrogatory No. 30 of Pinimlft_' Fourth Set of interrogatories. CATEGORY NO. 222: ALL VEP,SiONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of ',vhich is called for in Interrogatory No. 3 [ of Plaintiffs' Fourth Set of Interrogatorms. CATEGORY NO. 223: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which is called for in Interrogatory No. 32 of Plaintiffs' Fourth Set of Interrogatories. CATEGORY NO. 224: ALL VERSIONS OF DOCUMENTS the IDENTITY of which called Ibr in Interrogatory No, 33 of Plaintiffs' Fourth Set of lnterrogatomes. 30 December 16, 2002 Respectfully submitted, Of JOHN ECCOHAWK Native American Rights Fund D.C. Bar No. 417748 1506 Broadway Boulder, Colorado 80302 MARK KESTER BROWN (303) 44%8760 D.C. Bar No. 470952 1275 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Ninth Floor Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 661-6382 D.C. Bar No. 451956 Native American Rights Fund 1712 N Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-2976 (202) 785-4166 31 CERTiFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Plaintlffs' Eighth Requestfor Production of Documents was served upon the following by hand, on this day, December I6, 2002. Mark Nagle United States Attorney's Office 555 Fourth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Christopher J. Kohn U.S. Department of Justice Civil Division Room 10036 1 I00 L. Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 KEITHH_'____ 32 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE [ declare under penalty of perjury that, on January 3 l, 2003 I served the foregoing interior Defimdants' Motion for Leave to Supplement Their.i4otion and Supplement to Motion for a Protective Order as to Discovery by the Special Master Monitor and as m the Rule Announced by the 3[vecial Master-Monitor Concerning Deposition Questioning by facsimile in _ccordance with their written request of October 31, 2001. Keith Harper, Esq. Dermis M Gingold, Esq. Native American Rights Fund Mark Kester Brown, Esq. 1712 N Street, N.W. 1275 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036-2976 Ninth Floor (202) 822-0068 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 318-2372 By U.S. Mail upon: Elliott Levitas, Esq. 1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800 Atlanta, GA 30309-4530 By facsimile and U.S. Mall upon: Alan L. Balaran, Esq. Special Mastcr 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 12th Floor Washington, D.C. 20006 (202) 986-8477 By Hand upon: Joseph S. Kieffer, I11 Special Master Monitor 420 7 th Street, N.W. Apartment 705 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 478-1958 Sean P. Setmaergel