I would have thought that a confidentiality limitation derived by NTSB, in turn derived from Annex 13, exists independent of attorney mental impressions or tangible work (work-product), as well as independent of the att'y-client privilege. So in one sense, it seems plaintiffs' subject matter designation for what certainly appears to have been a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of a corporate representative - sometimes referred to as PMK, person-most-knowledgeable - seeks content essentially the same as a privilege log, doesn't it? What was withheld from production, its subject matter (and pro forma items like dates, to/from), and the basis for withholding it.
Another aspect though is did the Defendant, or did the Defendant not, turn over to Mr. Clifford and his co-counsel the exact same set of documents given to Congress? It can't be both Yes and No - and if No, see above.
Interesting, the depo would have been....yesterday.