California Department of Toxic Substances Control v. United States of America
Filing
9
STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 8/31/17 ORDERING that the matter is STAYED until 3/1/2018. On or before 11/1/2017, the parties shall file a proposed Consent Decree with the Court. In the event that a proposed Consent Decree cannot be filed with the Court by 11/1/17, the parties agree to file a joint status report notifying the Court of the status of the approvals.(Mena-Sanchez, L)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
SUSAN S. FIERING, State Bar No. 121621
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
ROSE B. FUA, State Bar No. 119757
HEATHER C. LESLIE, State Bar No. 305095
Deputy Attorneys General
1300 I Street, Suite 125
P.O. Box 944255
Sacramento, CA 94244-2550
Telephone: (916) 210-7832
Fax: (916) 327-2319
E-mail: Heather.Leslie@doj.ca.gov
Attorneys for California Department of Toxic
Substances Control
9
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11
12
13
14
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC
SUBSTANCES CONTROL,
2:16-cv-02897-JAM-AC
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO
Plaintiff, CONTINUE THE STAY
15
16
v.
17
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Judge: John A. Mendez
Action Filed: December 9, 2016
18
19
Defendant.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order To Continue the Stay (2:16-cv-02897-JAM-AC)
1
Plaintiff, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (“DTSC”) and Defendant, the
2
United States of America (“United States”) hereby submit this Stipulation and [Proposed] Order
3
to Continue the Stay and to postpone the deadline for dispositional papers. Dispositional papers
4
are currently due on or before September 1, 2017. DTSC and the United States stipulate to lodge
5
the proposed Consent Decree by November 1, 2017.
6
BACKGROUND
7
On or about December 9, 2016, DTSC initiated the above-captioned case, seeking cost
8
recovery and declaratory relief under sections 107(a) and 113(g) of the Comprehensive
9
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9607(a)
10
and 9613(g). The matter concerns the properties known as 711 and 750 Jackson Street, Benicia,
11
Solano County, California (identified by Assessor’s Parcel number 0080-14-0440) and 938, 940,
12
942, 945, 946, 952, and 954 Tyler Street; 963, 965, 967, 969, 971, 973, 977, 979, 981, 983, 985,
13
989, and 991 Lincoln Street; and 900 and 954 Jackson Street, Benicia, Solano County, California
14
(identified by Assessor’s Parcel numbers 0080-28-0010, 0080-28-0030, 0080-28-0040, 0080-28-
15
0050) and all locations where hazardous substances released at, in, or from those addresses may
16
come to be located in the future (the “Site”). On April 27, 2017 DTSC and the United States filed
17
a Joint Notice of Tentative Settlement and asked the Court for additional time to file dispositional
18
papers. On April 28, 2017 the Court filed a Minute Order that stayed the matter and instructed
19
the parties to file dispositional documents on or before September 1, 2017.
20
SETTLEMENT PROGRESS
21
DTSC and the United States have been negotiating in good faith to resolve this matter.
22
While staff attorneys have agreed upon the terms of the Consent Decree that will settle this matter,
23
authorized officials within these two government organizations still need to review and approve
24
the terms of the Consent Decree. In addition, the public, including the current and past owners of
25
the Site, will be provided the opportunity to comment on the proposed Consent Decree. DTSC
26
and the United States propose that the parties lodge a proposed Consent Decree approved by the
27
management of both governments on or before November 1.
28
1
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue the Stay (2:16-cv-02897-JAM-AC)
1
After the proposed Consent Decree is lodged, DTSC and the United States agree that a 60-
2
day comment period is appropriate. At the end of the comment period, DTSC will need to
3
respond to public comments. Since we do not know the nature or the number of the comments
4
that need to be answered, DTSC requests up to 30 days to respond to the comments. After those
5
30 days, or sooner, if possible, the parties will file with the Court motions for approval of the
6
proposed Consent Decree, unless public comments disclose facts or considerations that indicate
7
the proposed Consent Decree is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate, in which case DTSC may
8
withdraw or withhold its consent to entry of the Consent Decree.
9
STIPULATION
10
The parties hereby stipulate and agree that there is good cause for the Court to enter the
11
12
13
14
following order:
1.
The matter is stayed until March 1, 2018. On or before November 1, 2017, the parties
shall file a proposed Consent Decree with the Court.
2.
In the event that a proposed Consent Decree cannot be filed with the Court by
15
November 1, 2017, the parties agree to file a joint status report notifying the Court of the status of
16
the approvals.
17
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
18
Dated: August 31, 2017
XAVIER BECERRA
Attorney General of California
SUSAN S. FIERING
Supervising Deputy Attorney General
19
20
21
22
/s/ Heather Leslie
____________________________________
ROSE B. FUA
HEATHER C. LESLIE
Deputy Attorneys General
Attorneys for the California Department of
Toxic Substances Control
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue the Stay (2:16-cv-02897-JAM-AC)
1
Dated: August 31, 2017
JEFFREY H. WOOD
Acting Assistant Attorney General
2
3
4
/s/ Mark Rigau (as authorized on 8/31/17)
___________________________________
MARK A. RIGAU
Senior Trial Counsel
Environment and Natural Resources
Division
United States Department of Justice
Attorneys for the United States of America
5
6
7
8
9
PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
11
12
13
Dated: __8/31/2017_________________
/s/ John A. Mendez_________________
14
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
JUDGE JOHN A. MENDEZ
15
16
OK2015950029
33028804.doc
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Stipulation and [Proposed] Order to Continue the Stay (2:16-cv-02897-JAM-AC)
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?