You're viewing Docket Item 95.2 from the case CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. & SUBSIDIARIES v. USA. View the full docket and case details.

Download this document:




Case 1:06-cv-00305-MBH Document 95-3 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 1 of 3

REPLY EXHIBIT 2

Case 1:06-cv-00305-MBH Document 95-3 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 2 of 3

MAYER
BROWN
ROW E
& MAW

August 7, 2007

VIA UPS

David N. Geier
Joseph A. Sergi
U.S. Deparment of Justice
Tax Division, Room 7919
555 Four Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001

Re: Consolidated Edison Companv of New York,

Inc. & Subsidiaries v. The United States,
Docket No. 06-305 T

Dear David and Joe:

With this letter and pleading, we are producing additional documents in response to

Defendant's First Request for Production of Documents, as expanded by the Cour. The
documents in this Twenty-Sixth Supplemental Response are bates-labeled as PF327251-
PF327397. We are also re-producing PF326744-99, the Consolidated Edison 1997 Anual
Report, in color.

On July 19, Defendant requested that Plaintiff carefully review the privilege log it had

provided in connection with its Tenth Supplemental Response, as well as any subsequent
privilege logs. Defendant fuer requested that Plaintiff combine all of its privilege claims into
a single document. Plaintiff did as Defendant requested, and produced as Supp 25 its combined
privilege log, as well as any documents that Plaintif determined were not protected by privilege.

On August 1, Defendant requested that Plaintiff review its claims of privilege regarding

the NUON transaction, paricularly in light of the NUON-related documents that had been
produced to Defendant by third parties. Plaintiff has done as Defendant requested, and produces
with this letter and pleading its final combined privilege log, as well as any NUON or other
leasing transaction-related documents that Plaintiff determined were not protected by privilege.
All of these documents have been previously produced to Defendant; Plaintiff has now made all
of the claims uniform across the multiple non-identical copies of a paricular document. This
Twenty-Sixth Supplemental Response is, from Plaintiffs perspective, its final response and final
privilege log.

Pusuant to Cour of Federal Claims Rule 26(a), Plaintiff hereby notifes the Defendant
that it may rely upon any document produced in this Twenty-Sixth Supplement in support of its
claims and/or defenses in the tral of this matter.

Benin Brussels Chanotle Chicago Cologne Frankfurt Houston London Los Angeles New York Palo Alto Pans Washingtn, D,C,

Independent Mexico Cit Corrspondnt: Jauregui, Navarrte y Nader S,C.

Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP operates in combination with our assiated English limited liabilty partnership in the offces liste above.

Mayer, Brown, Rowe & Maw LLP

Case 1:06-cv-00305-MBH Document 95-3 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 3 of 3

August 7, 2007
Page 2

Please contact me at (212) 506-2642 if you have any questions regarding this production.

S incerel y,

D~ F Alfe

David F. Abbott

Enclosures as stated

cc: Andrew Scher