Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02275/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02275-10/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 893
Nature of Suit: Environmental Matters
Cause of Action: 42:9607 Real Property Tort to Land - Liability

---

5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

8 

9 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

17 

18 

19 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

27 

28 

FILED 

NOV 1B2015 

CLERK, U.S. ["ST~T=OUR SOUTHERN DIST~flt:T fll&/ll6Jo.lF. NIA 

BY Jlj/. {'KIA. EPUTY 

, {/ 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

CITY OF SAN DIEGO, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

NATIONAL STEEL AND 

SHIPBUILDING COMPANY; et aI., 

Defendants. 

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS 

AND COUNTERCLAIMS 

CASE NO. 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB) 

ORDER CONFIRMING 

SETTLEMENT BETWEEN BAE 

SYSTEMS SAN DIEGO SHIP 

REPAIR INC SOUTHWEST C ~~:N\NB(t~~1:~ttPANY AND 

THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT 

DISTRICT, AND BARRING AND 

DISMISSING CLAIMS 

The Joint Motion ofBAE Systems San Diego Ship Repair Inc., Southwest 

Marine, Inc. (collectively, "BAE Systems"), Star & Crescent Boat Company ("Star 

& Crescent"), and the San Diego Unified Port District ("Port District") for an 

Order Con~ttlement and Barring and ~ngClaims came 9Br8gHlafl, fat he~ before this Court OR NQI,'emeel' 30, 20 1~" the Honorable 

William Q. Hayes presiding. 

After considering the moving and opposition papers, declarations submitted 

by the parties, the Settlement Agreement submitted to the Court for approval 

09-CY-2275 WQH (JLB) 

1 

WEST\260002282.3 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 549 Filed 11/13/15 Page 1 of 4
5 

10 

15 

20 

25 

1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

7 

8 

9 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

17 

18 

19 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

27 

28 

(attached to the Declaration ofMichael S. Tracy) (the "Settlement Agreement") 

and the record as a whole, the COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT the Settlement 

Agreement entered into by and between BAE Systems, Star & Crescent, and the 

Port District is in the public interest, is fair and reasonable, both procedurally and 

substantively, consistent with the purposes ofthe Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. section 9601, 

et seq., and the Uniform Comparative Fault Act ("UCFA"), 12 U.L.A. 147, and 

was entered into in good faith under California Code ofCivil Procedure sections 

877 and 877.6 and the rule of Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates, 38 

Ca1.3d 488 (1985), and that Star & Crescent and the SDMCC Entities 1 are entitled 

to contribution and indemnity protection under federal and state law theories for 

the apportionment of liability among alleged joint tortfeasors. 

This matter having been briefed and submitted for decision, and good cause 

appeanng, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED, and the 

Settlement Agreement is APPROVED. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: 

1. The Settlement Agreement is hereby approved as a good faith 

settlement and shall be afforded all the rights and protections that accompany this 

determination. 

2. The Court further finds and determines that Section 6 ofthe UCF A is 

adopted in this case for purposes ofdetermining the legal effect ofthe Settlement 

1 "SDMCC Entities" shall mean and refer to San Diego Marine Construction 

ComI>any (aka San Diego Marine Construction Co.), Star 8i Crescent Investment 

Co., Star and Crescent Boat Comp_any, a division ofSan Diego Marine 

Construction Company, Star and Crescent Boat Company, Sfar and Crescent Investm~~t Company1'. ap.4 Star and Crescent F erry Comp~ny', except to ~he extent 

such entItIes, or any OIVlSlOn of them, were merged, acqUlrea, or otherwIse 

succeeded in interest by MCCSD, San Diego Marine Construction CO~l Campbell Industries, Marine Construction and Design Co., or their respective affiltates. 

09-CV-2275 WQH OLB) 

2 

WEST\260002282.3 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 549 Filed 11/13/15 Page 2 of 4
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 

Agreement, which means the proportionate share rule (and not the pro tanto rule of 

the Uniform Comparative Fault Among Tortfeasors Act ("UCATA")) shall apply 

to reduce BAE Systems' claims against non-settling parties. 

3. Pursuant to Section 6 ofthe UCFA, Section 877.6 ofthe California 

Code ofCivil Procedure, and CERCLA section 113(f), any and all claims, crossclaims or counterclaims for contribution or equitable indemnity against Star & 

Crescent and/or any or all ofthe SDMCC Entities arising out of the facts alleged in 

the claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims in this Action, regardless ofwhen such 

claims are asserted or by whom, relating to Covered Matters under the Settlement 

Agreement are hereby BARRED. Such claims are barred regardless ofwhether 

they are brought pursuant to any federal or state statute, common law, or any other 

theory, as any such claims against Star & Crescent and/or any and all ofthe 

SDMCC Entities arising out ofthe facts alleged in this Action are in the nature of 

contribution claims arising out of a common liability, whether framed in terms of 

federal or state statute or common law. 

4. Subject to Paragraphs 6 and 7 ofthis Order, and this Order becoming 

final and effective, all claims by BAE Systems and the Port District, respectively, 

against Star & Crescent and the SDMCC Entities with respect to "Covered 

Matters" under the Settlement Agreement (which expressly does not include 

"Excluded Matters") are hereby dismissed with prejudice. Star & Crescent and the 

SDMCC Entities have not alleged claims in this Action, and therefore, have no 

claims to dismiss. 

5. Upon this Order becoming final and effective, all claims by BAE 

Systems and the Port District, respectively, against Star & Crescent and the 

SDMCC Entities relating to "Excluded Matters" shall be reserved and not deemed 

barred by entry ofjudgment or dismissal pursuant to the Settlement Agreement. 

6. All claims relating to Polygon SW-29 and the Tidelands Property (as 

said terms are defined in the Tolling and Standstill Agreement previously entered 

09~CV~2275 WQH (JLB) 

3 

WESTI260002282.3 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 549 Filed 11/13/15 Page 3 of 4
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 

I. 

into by and between BAE Systems, the Port District, San Diego Gas & Electric 

Company, the City of San Diego, Star & Crescent and Campbell Industries (the 

"Tolling and Standstill Agreement")) including, without limitation, contract-related 

claims, made by BAE Systems and/or the Port District against Star & Crescent 

and/or against the SDMCC Entities, shall be dismissed WITHOUT prejudice, 

subject to the terms ofthe Tolling and Standstill Agreement. 

7. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over both the subject matter ofthe 

Settlement Agreement and the parties to the Settlement Agreement for the duration 

ofthe performance ofthe terms and provisions ofthe Settlement Agreement for the 

purpose of enabling BAE Systems, the Port District, and Star & Crescent, and each 

ofthem, to apply to the Court at any time for such further order, direction, and 

relief as may be necessary or appropriate to construe, implement, or enforce 

compliance with the terms ofthe Settlement Agreement or for any further relief as 

the interest ofjustice may require. 

8. BAE Systems, the Port District, and Star & Crescent, shall each bear 

their own costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees in this Action through the 

date ofthis Order but shall retain their respective right to seek costs and expenses, 

including attorneys' fees, from other parties to this Action to the extent such claims 

have not been dismissed or barred. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: I&,.d/~ Hon. William 

Judge, United 

09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB) 

4 

WEST\260002282.3 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 549 Filed 11/13/15 Page 4 of 4