OFFICE OF COUNTY COUNSEL COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 6 …€¦ · CV-254-348; Wm. Bolthouse Farms, Inc. v. City of Lancaster, Diamond Farming Co. v. City of Lancaster, Diamond Farming

BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLPERIC L. GARNER, Bar No. 130665JEFFREY V. DUNN, Bar No. 131926STEFANIE D. HEDLUND, Bar No. 239787

5 PARK PLAZA, SUITE 1500IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92614TELEPHONE: (949) 263-2600TELECOPIER: (949) 260-0972

OFFICE OF COUNTY COUNSELCOUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

RAYMOND G. FORTNER, JR., Bar No. 42230COUNTY COUNSELMICHAEL MOORE, Bar No. 175599DEPUTY COUNTY COUNSEL

500 WEST TEMPLE STREETLOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012TELEPHONE: (213) 974-1951TELECOPIER: (213) 458-4020Attorneys for Defendant, LOS ANGELESCOUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO.40

ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATERCASES

Included Actions:Los Angeles County Waterworks District No.40 v. Diamond Farming Co., Superior Court ofCalifornia, County of Los Angeles, Case No.BC 325201;

Los Angeles County Waterworks District No.40 v. Diamond Farming Co., Superior Court ofCalifornia, County of Kern, Case No. S-1500-CV-254-348;

Wm. Bolthouse Farms, Inc. v. City ofLancaster, Diamond Farming Co. v. City ofLancaster, Diamond Farming Co. v. PalmdaleWater Dist., Superior Court of California,County of Riverside, Case Nos. RIC 353 840,RIC 344 436, RIC 344 668

EXEMPT FROM FILING FEESUNDER GOVERNMENT CODESECTION 6103

RELATED CASE TO JUDICIALCOUNCIL COORDINATIONPROCEEDING NO. 4408

LOS ANGELES COUNTYWATERWORKS DISTRICT NO.40RESPONSES TO ANAVERDE LLC’SREQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OFDOCUMENTS

(SET TWO)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40’S RESPONSES TO ANNAVERDE, LLC’S REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO

1 PROPOUNDING PARTY: ANAVERDE, LLC

2 RESPONDING PARTY: LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO.40

3 SET NUMBER: Two

4

5 Defendant Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 40 (“District”) hereby responds

6 to the Request for Production of Documents, Set Two, propounded by Anaverde, LLC

7 (“Anaverde”) as follows:

8

9 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

10 The District is in the process of conducting its investigation and discovery in this action.

11 Consequently, the District responds to these Demands to the best of its knowledge, but in doing-JO—

12 so, reserves the right to amend its Response at a future date. The District further reserves the

13 right to offer, at time of trial, facts, testimony or other evidence discovered subsequent to and not

14 included in this response, and assumes no obligation to voluntarily supplement or amend thisLi

15 Response to reflect such facts, testimony or other evidence. Documents that have not already

16 been produced in this litigation (including those made available through the LSCE database and

17 ftp site) will be available for inspection and copying on September 15, 2009, 2008, beginning at

18 9:00 a.m., at the District’s headquarters, 1000 South Freemont St., Buildin A-9 East, 4th Floor,

19 Alhambra, CA.

20 GENERAL OBJECTIONS

21 By responding to Anaverde’s Demand for Inspection and Production of Documents, Set

22 One, the District does not concede the relevancy or materiality of any request, or of the subject to

23 which such request refers. Each response is made subject to all objections as to competence,

24 relevance, materiality, propriety, and admissibility, as well as any or all other objections and

25 grounds which would require exclusion of evidence. The District reserves the right to make any

26 and all such objections at trial and at any other proceeding relating to this action. The District

27 objects to each of Anaverde’s demands to the extent any is directed to any information or

28 document that is subject to the attorney-client, attorney work product, deliberative process2

LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40S RESPONSES TO ANNAVERDE, LLC’S REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO

1 privilege or is confidential and not subject to discovery on any other grounds. The District will

2 not supply or render any information or documents protected from discovery under these or any

3 other applicable privileges. To the extent any Request relates to expert witness investigation, the

4 District will provide documents at such time as required by applicable Court Order and by the

5 Code of Civil Procedure. If privileged information or documents are produced, such production

6 is inadvertent, and the District demands the immediate return of any document containing such

7 information. The District further objects to the requests for production to the extent they seek

8 information or materials not presently in the District’s possession. The District further objects to

9 these discovery requests on the grounds that they are untimely under Code of Civil Procedure

10 section 2024.020. The District’s investigation and discovery in this case are ongoing. The

11 following responses are given without prejudice to the Districts’ right to produce or rely on anyJL(O

12 evidence subsequently discovered. The specific responses and objections given below areøuj5z

13 submitted without prejudice to, and without waiving, any of these general objections even thoughLJChj

OI-<‘- 14 the general objections are not expressly set forth in each response.

°- 15 OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES

16 The District incorporates fully the foregoing Preliminary Statement and General

17 Objections into each of the following specific objections and responses, and no specific objection

18 or response shall be construed to waive any of the General Objections.

19

20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.32 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED AS NO. 1):

21 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the surface water hydrology-

22 quantification as described in Figure 4.1-1 of the Problem Statement Report dated June 26, 2008.

23

24

25 1 The propounding party previously served a total of 31 Requests for Production as part of Set One of itsRequests for Production. Rather than numbering its second set of Requests for Production consecutively as required

26 under Code of Civil Procedure 2031.030(a), the propounding party began its second set of Requests for Productionagain at Request for Production No. 1. For purposes of clarity, the District has identified the Requests for Production

27 (Set Two), and its corresponding responses, by the sequential number of the Request (resuming where Set Oneconcluded) and placed the erroneous original numbers the propounding party assigned to this second set of Request

28 for Production in parenthesis.3


1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.32 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED

2 ASNO.1):

3 The District incorporates herein its Preliminary Statement and General Objections as

4 though expressly set forth herein. The District objects to this request to the extent that by seeking

5 all DOCUMENTS that “refer or RELATE TO” the subject of this request it seeks production of

6 materials protected by the attorney-client, work-product, or deliberative-process privileges.

7 Without waiving, and subject to, those objections, the District will produce all responsive, non-

8 privileged, documents in its possession, custody, and control.

9


11 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the back up data and/or analysisjO—

12 used to support Figure 4.1-1 of the Problem Statement Report dated June 26, 2008.(flW


14 ASNO.2):







21


23 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the City Ranch Creek NR data

24 point as referenced in the Problem Statement Report dated June 26, 2008.


26 AS NO. 3):


28 though expressly set forth herein. The District objects to this request to the extent that by seeking4



2 materials protected by the attorney-client, work-product, or deliberative-process privileges. The

3 District further objects to this Request to the extent that it calls for materials protected by the

4 privacy rights of third parties. Without waiving, and subject to, those objections, the District will

5 produce all responsive, non-privileged, documents in its possession, custody, and control.

6


8 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO precipitation records in the

9 Antelope Valley Watershed.


11 ASNO.4):




biD..> . . .15 matenals protected by the attorney-client, work-product, or deliberative-process privileges.



18

19 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.36 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED AS NO.5):

20 To the extent not included in Request For Production NumberS, any and all

21 DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO precipitation records at every gauging station in the

22 Antelope Valley Watershed.


24 AS NO.5):




28 materials protected by the attorney-client, work-product, or deliberative-process privileges. The5


1 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it is vague and ambiguous as to the what

2 the propounding party means by “To the extent not included in Request for Production Number

3 5” when the propounding party denoted this Request as Request for Production Number 5.

4 Without waiving, and subject to, those objections, the District will produce all responsive, non


6


8 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO precipitation records for adjacent

9 watersheds to the Antelope Valley Watershed.


11 AS NO.6):

12 The District incorporates herein its Preliminary Statement and General Objections asWUZ . . .


14 all DOCUMEIJTS that “refer or RELATE TO” the subject of this request it seeks production of


16 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it seeks information not relevant to the

17 subject matter of this lawsuit, and therefore exceeds the scope of permissible discovery pursuant

18 to Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.

19


21 To the extent not included in Request For Production Number 7, any and all

22 DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO precipitation records at every gauging station in

23 adjacent watersheds to the Antelope Valley Watershed.


25 AS NO.7):



28 all DOCUMENTS that “refer or RELATE TO” the subject of this request it seeks production of6

LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40’S RESPONSES TO ANNAVERDE, LLCS REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO


2 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it is vague and ambiguous as to the what

3 the propounding party means by “To the extent not included in Request for Production Number 7

4 when the propounding party denoted this Request as Request for Production Number 7. The

5 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it seeks information not relevant to the

6 subject matter of this lawsuit, and therefore exceeds the scope of permissible discovery pursuant

7 to Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.

8


10 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the hydrology of the San Andreas

811 Fault Zone within the Antelope Valley Watershed.

- 12 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.39 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED

13 ASNO.8):





18 District further objects to this Request on the ground that the phrase “San Andreas Fault Zone” is

19 vague and ambiguous such that the District cannot know what documents the propounding party

20 seeks by this Request.

21


23 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO water evaporation data andlor

24 analysis in the Antelope Valley Watershed.


26 AS NO.9):








5


7 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO man made water conveyances

8 created at the direction of the City of Palmdale within the Antelope Valley Watershed.


10 AS NO.10):





15 District further objects to this Request on the ground that the phrase “man made water

16 conveyances” is vague and ambiguous such that the District cannot know what documents the

17 propounding party seeks by this Request. The District further objects to this Request on the

18 ground that it seeks information from the District relating not to the District, but instead to an

19 unrelated third party.

20


22 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO man made water conveyances

23 created at the direction of the State of California (CalTrans) within the Antelope Valley

24 Watershed and specifically excluding the State Water Project conveyance.


26 AS NO.11):



LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40’S RESPONSES TO M’NAVERDE, LLC’S REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO



3 District further objects to this Request on the ground that the phrase “man made water

4 conveyances” is vague and ambiguous such that the District cannot know what documents the

5 propounding party seeks by this Request. The District further objects to this Request on the

6 ground that it seeks information from the District relating not to the District, but instead to an

7 unrelated third party.

8


10 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO man made water conveyances that

8convey water under, around or over the State Water Project within the Antelope Valley

-Jo

12 Watershed.

‘13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.43 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED

14 ASNO.12):





19 District further objects to this Request on the ground that the phrases “man made water

20 conveyances” and “convey water over, around or under the State Water Project” are vague and

21 ambiguous such that the District cannot know what documents the propounding party seeks by

22 this Request.

23


25 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO flood waters and/or flood events in

26 the Antelope Valley Watershed.

27

289

LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40S RESPONSES TO ANNAVERDE, LLCS REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO


2 AS NO.13):





7 District further objects to this request as irrelevant to the subject matter of this lawsuit, and

8 therefore exceeding the permissible scope of discovery under Code of Civil Procedure section

9 2017.010.

10

o 11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.45 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED AS NO.14):-Jo—

12 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO flood waters andlor flood events inWZ

- 13 the Anaverde Creek Sub-basin.


15 ASNO.14):





20 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it is vague and ambiguous as to the

21 meaning of the undefined term “Anaverde Creek Sub-basin” such that the District cannot know

22 what documents the propounding party seeks production of through this Request.

23


25 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the pH levels measured at each

26 GROUNDWATER WELL over the last fifty years (along with the sampling date) in the Antelope

27 Valley Watershed.

2810



2 AS NO.15):





7 District further objects to this request as overbroad as to time, and therefore unduly burdensome

8 and oppressive. Without waiving, and subject to, those objections, the District will produce all

9 responsive, non-privileged, documents in its possession, custody, and control.

10


12 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the water chemistry of surfaceU)bJ5

u Z

13 waters in the Antelope Valley Watershed.


15 ASNO.16):


17 though expressly set forth herein. The District objects to this request to the extent thai by seeking



20 District further objects to this request on the ground that surface water is not relevant to the

21 subject matter of this lawsuit, and therefore this Request exceeds the permissible scope of

22 discovery under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.

23


25 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO individual mineral constituents

26 contained in surface waters within the Antelope Valley Watershed for the following: Sodium(Na),

27 calcium (Ca), potassium (k), iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg, manganese (Mn), arsenic (As), selenium

2811


1 (Se), boron (B), chloride (CL), sulfate (S04), bicoarbonate (HCO3), carbonate (CACO3), nitrate

2 (N03), silica (Si02), nitrogen(N), and TICN (Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen).

3


5 AS NO.17):






8! subject matter of this lawsuit, and therefore this Request exceeds the permissible scope ofJIO

12 discovery under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.(flLJD

E


15 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO surface water ionic chemistry in

16 the Antelope Valley Watershed over the last fifty years.


18 AS NO.18):





23 District further objects to the term “ionic chemistry” as vague and ambiguous such that the

24 District cannot know exactly what documents the propounding party seeks through this Request.

25 The District further objects to this request on the ground that surface water is not relevant to the

26 subject matter of this lawsuit, and therefore this Request exceeds the permissible scope of

27 discovery under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.

2812



2 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO total dissolved solids (“TDS”) in

3 surface waters in the Antelope Valley Watershed over the past 50 years.


5 AS NO. 19):



8 all DOCUMENTS that “refer or RELATE TO” the subject of this request it seeks prOduction of



11 subject matter of this lawsuit, and therefore this Request exceeds the permissible scope of-Jo—-Ju

12 discovery under Code of Civil Procedure section 2017.010.(nw:

13


15 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO electricity consumption for each

16 GROUNDWATER WELL in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the past 50 years.


18 ASNO.20):





23 District further objects to this Request as overly broad as to time, rendering it unduly burdensome

24 and oppressive. Without waiving, and subject to, those objections, the District will produce all

25 responsive, non-privileged, documents in its possession, custody, and control which it can

26 reasonably access and produce.

27

2813

LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40’S RESPONSES TO ANNAVERDE, LLCS REQUEST FOR•PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO


2 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO electrical meters for each

3 GROUNDWATER WELL in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the past 50 years.


5 AS NO.21):






. 11 and oppressive. The District further objects to this Request in that it is vague and ambiguous asJO—

12 to how, if at all, the documents requested differ from those sought in Request No. 51(20) above,

13 such that the District cannot know what additional documents the propounding party seeks

14 through this Request.

15


17 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO electricity consumption and the

18 identity of the consuming GROUNDWATER WELL in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the

19 past 50 years.


21 AS NO. 22):






27 and oppressive. The District further objects to this Request in that it is vague and ambiguous as

28 to how, if at all, the documents requested differ from those sought in Request No. 51(20) above,14


1 such that the District cannot know what additional documents the propounding party seeks

2 through this Request.

3

4 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.54 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED AS NO. 231:

5 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO aquifer testing in the Anaverde

6 Creek Basin.


8 AS NO. 23):



11 all DOCUMENTS that “refer or RELATE TO” the subject of this request it seeks production of-Jo—_iLfl(0

12 materials protected by the attorney-client, work-product, or deliberative-process privileges. The(flWD

13 District further objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous as to time. The District further

14 objects to this Request in that it is vague and ambiguous as to the meaning of the undefined termsCfl<Z

15 “aquifer testing” and “Anaverde Creek Basin” such that the District cannot know what documents

16 the propounding party seeks through this Request.

17


19 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO GROUNDWATER WELL pump

20 testing (such as discharge) for each GROUNDWATER WELL in the Antelope Valley Watershed

21 for the past 50 years.


23 AS NO. 24):





28 District further objects to this Request as overly broad as to time, rendering it unduly burdensome15



2 to the meaning of the term “pump testing” such that the District cannot know what documents the

3 propounding party seeks through this Request.

4

5 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.56 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED AS NO. 25’):

6 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO GROUNDWATER WELL step-

7 discharge testing for each GROUNDWATER WELL in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the

8 past 50 years.


10 ASNO.25):

11 The District incorporates herein its Preliminary Statement and General Objections asJO—

12 though expressly set forth herein. The District objects to this request to the extent that by seeking(l)bJ





17 to the meaning of the term “step-discharge testing” such that the District cannot know what

18 documents the propounding party seeks through this Request.

19


21 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO GROUNDWATER WELL step-

22 draw down testing for each GROUNDWATER WELL in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the

23 past 50 years.


25 AS NO. 26):




LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO. 40S RESPONSES TO ANI’4AVERDE, LLC’S REQUEST FORPRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, SET TWO




4 to the meaning of the term “step-draw down testing” such that the District cannot know what

5 documents the propounding party seeks through this Request.

6

7 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO.58 (ERRONEOUSLY DENOTED AS NO. 27’):

8 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO raw water quality prior to treatment

9 for purposes of providing drinking water in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the past 50 years.


11 ASNO.27):

12 The District incorporates herein its Preliminary Statement and General Objections as(fltJbJ::(nz . . .

13 though expressly set forth herein. The Distnct objects to this request to the extent that by seeking





18 to the meaning of the phrase “raw water quality prior to treatment” such that the District cannot

19 know what documents the propounding party seeks through this Request.

20


22 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO raw water quality after treatment

23 for purposes of providing drinking water in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the past 50 years.


25 AS NO. 28):








4 to the meaning of the phrase “raw water quality after treatment” such that the District cannot

5 know what documents the propounding party seeks through this Request.

6


8 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO publicly issued water quality

9 reports on drinking water quality in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the past 50 years


11 ASNO.29):

12 The District incorporates herein its Preliminary Statement and General Objections asbJQ)Z . .




16 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it is overly broad as to time, and

17 therefore unduly burdensome and oppressive. Without waiving, and subject to, those objections,

18 the District will produce all responsive, non-privileged, documents in its possession, custody, and

19 control which can reasonably be gathered and produced.

20


22 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO the data which was used in

23 compiling drinking water quality reports in the Antelope Valley Watershed for the past 50 years.


25 AS NO. 30):






2 District further objects to this Request on the ground that it is overly broad as to time and scope,

3 and therefore unduly burdensome and oppressive.

4


6 Any and all DOCUMENTS that refer or RELATE TO any drilling of any type of

7 GROUNDWATER WELL in the Anaverde Creek Basin.


9 AS NO. 31):


11 though expressly set forth herein. The District objects to this request to the extent that by seeking-Jo—



14 District further objects to this Request as vague and ambiguous as to time. The District further

15 objects to this request as overbroad in its scope, and therefore unduly burdensome and oppressive.

16 The District further objects to this Request in that it is vague and ambiguous as to the meaning of

17 the undefined term “Anaverde Creek Basin” such that the District cannot know what documents

18 the propounding party seeks through this Request.

19

20

Dated: September 9, 2008

24 E GARNERJ FREY V DU1N

25 STEFANIE D. HEDLUNDAttorneys for Defendant,

26 LOS ANGELES COUNTY

27WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO.40

2819


1 PROOF OF SERVICE

2 I, Roberta Hoffuer, declare:

3 I am a resident of the State of California and over the age of eighteen years, andnot a party to the within action; my business address is Best Best & Krieger LLP, 5 Park Plaza,

4 Suite 1500, Irvine, California 92614. On September 9, 2008, I served the within document(s):

5 LOS ANGELES COUNTY WATERWORKS DISTRICT NO.40 RESPONSES TOANAVERDE, LLC’S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS, (SET TWO)

6

7 by posting the document(s) listed above to the Santa Clara County Superior Court

8website in regard to the Antelope Valley Groundwater matter.

9 Q by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereonfully prepaid, in the United States mail at Irvine, California addressed as set forth

10 below.

ii Q by causing personal delivery by ASAP Corporate Services of the document(s)listed above to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below.

12

13 Q by personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at theaddress(es) set forth below.

Oj-3

14 [] I caused such envelope to be delivered via overnight delivery addressed as

15 indicated on the attached service list. Such envelope was deposited for deliveryby Federal Express following the firm’s ordinary business practices.

16

17I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing

18 correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. PostalService on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I

19 am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellationdate or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.

20I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

21 above is true and correct.

22 Executed on September 9, 2008, at Irvine, California.

23

___

24 -<\,ZsiV ‘——--

Robj Hofflier25

26

27

2820
