Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01520/USCOURTS-caed-2_01-cv-01520-44/pdf.json

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

---

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

Stipulation/Proposed Order re: SA/MPCD 1 No. 2:01-cv-1520-MCE

John C. Cruden

Assistant Attorney General

United States Department of Justice

Environment & Natural Resources Division

Karl J. Fingerhood, Senior Counsel

Andrew J. Doyle, Attorney

P.O. Box 7611

Washington, DC 20044-7611

Telephone: (202) 514-7519 & (202) 514-4427

Facsimile: (202) 514-0097

karl.fingerhood@usdoj.gov

andrew.doyle@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for United States of America

Thomas M. Bruen (SBN: 63324)

Law Offices of Thomas M. Bruen

A Professional Corporation

1990 N. California Boulevard, Suite 620

Walnut Creek, CA 94596

Telephone: (925) 295-3137

Facsimile: (925) 295-3132

tbruen@tbslaw.com

Attorney for El Dorado County, California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

EL DORADO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, 

et al.,

Defendants.

AND RELATED ACTIONS.

No. 2:01-cv-1520-MCE

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER 

TO APPROVE AND ENTER 

“SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND 

MODIFICATION OF PARTIAL CONSENT 

DECREE”

Plaintiff United States of America and Defendant El Dorado County, California 

(“County”) hereby stipulate and jointly move the Court to approve and enter the 

Case 2:01-cv-01520-MCE-DAD Document 458 Filed 09/27/16 Page 1 of 5
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

Stipulation/Proposed Order re: SA/MPCD 2 No. 2:01-cv-1520-MCE

“Settlement Agreement and Modification of Partial Consent Decree” (“SA/MPCD”) that is 

attached hereto. In support of this joint motion, the parties state as follows: 

1. On August 20, 2010 (ECF No. 389), the Court entered a Partial Consent 

Decree (“PCD”) between the United States and the County.

2. The PCD resolved claims asserted by the parties under the 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 

42 U.S.C. §§ 9601-75, related to a former landfill site south of Lake Tahoe. Generally 

speaking, the PSD required the County to perform cleanup work at the site’s first 

operable unit (“OU-1”), and the PSD also addressed the obligations of both parties to 

pay past and future response costs.

3. On April 27, 2011 (ECF No. 395), the County filed a Motion for 

Construction, Enforcement, and Modification of the PCD (“County’s Motion”), arguing 

that the OU-1 remedial design was defective, and that it was improper for the County to 

bear the costs of the allegedly defective design. 

4. On May 26, 2011 (ECF No. 403), the United States filed an opposition to 

the County’s Motion, arguing that the County’s Motion relied on events that the parties 

anticipated when they entered into the PCD and thus no modification was warranted. 

5. On July 8, 2011 (ECF No. 416), the Court entered an Order granting the 

County’s Motion to Modify the Partial Consent Decree. The Order, inter alia, 

“suspended” “[t]he County’s obligation to continue construction of the Design” and ruled 

that “[t]he government’s liability for additional costs . . . will be determined by separate 

evidentiary hearing.” 

6. The United States appealed the Court’s July 8, 2011 Order, but on January 

11, 2013 (ECF No. 431), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 

Case 2:01-cv-01520-MCE-DAD Document 458 Filed 09/27/16 Page 2 of 5
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

Stipulation/Proposed Order re: SA/MPCD 3 No. 2:01-cv-1520-MCE

dismissed the appeal as premature.

7. Limited discovery and the entry of a stipulation ensued (ECF No. 442).

8. On October 29, 2014 (ECF No. 445), the Court established a briefing 

schedule in an effort to complete its resolution of the County’s Motion to Modify the 

Partial Consent Decree.

9. On December 3, 2014, the parties appeared before a mediator in an effort 

to resolve the County’s Motion (and certain other issues in dispute) without continued 

litigation.

10. On January 29, 2015 (ECF No. 453), the Court approved the parties’ 

stipulation to stay further proceedings pending the completion of the parties’ settlement 

negotiations.

12. On March 8, 2016, the County executed the attached SA/MPCD.

12. On August 10, 2016, the United States executed the attached SA/MPCD.

13. The SA/MPCD, inter alia, provides that the United States, on behalf of the 

Forest Service, “shall pay to the County $4,100,000 to resolve any and all claims alleged 

by the County in conjunction with the County’s Motion as well as any and all claims that 

the County had, has, or may have arising out of the transaction or occurrence that is the 

subject matter of the County’s Motion.” ¶ 1. In addition, “the County shall pay to the 

Forest Service $500,000 to resolve any and all claims the United States, on behalf of the 

Forest Service, has, had, or may have to recover any or all Interim Response Costs and 

Future Response Costs associated with OU-1,” as those terms are defined in the PCD. 

¶ 5. The SA/MPCD further states that “the County shall establish and fund [a] . . . trust 

in the amount of $2,700,000 to be used [by the Forest Service] for OU-1 Operation and 

Maintenance,” or “O&M,” ¶ 8, and that “the County shall be relieved of any and all Work 

Case 2:01-cv-01520-MCE-DAD Document 458 Filed 09/27/16 Page 3 of 5
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

Stipulation/Proposed Order re: SA/MPCD 4 No. 2:01-cv-1520-MCE

or payment obligations under the Partial Consent Decree associated with OU-1, 

including but not limited to . . . conducting additional Work associated with OU-1 . . . and 

conducting OU-1 O&M.” ¶ 10.

14. Pursuant to Section XXXI of the Partial Consent Decree (ECF No. 389 at 

pp. 129-30 of 137), any “material modification to [the] Partial Consent Decree . . . shall 

be in writing, signed by the United States and [the County], and shall be effective upon 

approval by the Court.” (Emphasis added.)

15. The parties request the Court to approve and enter the SA/MPCD because 

it reflects their agreement reached after extensive and mediated negotiations. 

16. Moreover, approval and entry of the SA/MPCD would fully resolve the 

County’s Motion without any need for the Court to conduct further proceedings.

DATED: August 10, 2016

Respectfully submitted and stipulated:

FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

JOHN C. CRUDEN

Assistant Attorney General

Environment & Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

/s/ Andrew J. Doyle___________

ANDREW J. DOYLE

Trial Attorney

Environmental Defense Section

Environment & Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

KARL J. FINGERHOOD

Senior Counsel

Environmental Enforcement Section

Environment & Natural Resources Division

U.S. Department of Justice

Case 2:01-cv-01520-MCE-DAD Document 458 Filed 09/27/16 Page 4 of 5
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

Stipulation/Proposed Order re: SA/MPCD 5 No. 2:01-cv-1520-MCE

FOR EL DORADO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA:

LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS M. BRUEN

A Professional Corporation

/s/ Thomas M. Bruen (with permission by AJD)

THOMAS M. BRUEN (SBN: 63324)

1990 N. California Boulevard, Suite 620

Walnut Creek, CA 94596

Telephone: (925) 295-3137

Facsimile: (925) 295-3132

tbruen@tbslaw.com

ORDER

Upon consideration of the parties’ stipulation filed on August 10, 2016 (ECF No. 

457), pursuant to Section XXXI of the Partial Consent Decree previously entered by the 

Court (ECF No. 389), and good cause appearing therefor, the Court APPROVES and 

ENTERS the “Settlement Agreement and Modification of Partial Consent Decree” (or 

“SA/MPCD”) that is attached to the parties’ stipulation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 23, 2016

Case 2:01-cv-01520-MCE-DAD Document 458 Filed 09/27/16 Page 5 of 5