SUSAN G. BRADEN, Judge.
On January 19, 2017, Plaintiff submitted a Motion To Compel Witnesses To Testify At Depositions Via Remote Means ("Pl. Mot."), attaching several exhibits in support ("Pl. Mot. Exs. 1-8). Plaintiff seeks to depose four witnesses located out of the Washington, D.C. metro area via video-teleconferencing ("VTC"), in order to save the parties the cost and travel time incurred in connection with travel to Ft. Worth, Texas, and Savannah, Georgia. Pl. Mot. at 1.
On February 6, 2017, the Government filed a Response ("Gov. Opp.") and the February 6, 2017 Declaration of Jane Holt-Duecaster ("2/6/2017 Decl."), stating that the Government did not agree to conduct depositions of the witnesses via VTC, because the Plaintiff's notice of deposition requires the Government to make the necessary arrangements for VTC. Gov. Opp. at 2. The Government adds that, although the Army Corps of Engineers' Fort Worth Office maintains a VTC facility, its use is restricted to official Department of Defense ("DoD") activities. 2/6/2017 Decl. at ¶ 2. Moreover, the cost of using VTC technology could be as much as $600 a day. 2/6/2017 Decl. at ¶ 2. Finally, the Government prefers to conduct live depositions and Government's counsel would travel to the witnesses' locations, even if the depositions were conducted via VTC. Gov't Opp. at 3.
Under Rule of the United States Court of Federal Claims ("RCFC") 30(b)(4),
As a general rule, the court and the parties should make good-faith efforts to control the costs of litigation. The Government expresses a preference for live depositions, but Plaintiff argues that litigation costs could be lowered for both parties, if the depositions were taken by VTC. The Government's preference should not require Plaintiff to spend significantly more in litigation costs than necessary.
Plaintiff's motion is granted for good cause shown. The parties shall arrange for depositions to be taken via VTC at a convenient time.