Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02275/USCOURTS-casd-3_09-cv-02275-8/pdf.json

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

---

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

-1-

WEST\259154482.2 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CITY OF SAN DIEGO,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONAL STEEL AND 

SHIPBUILDING COMPANY; et al.,

Defendants.

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

ORDER CONFIRMING GOOD 

FAITH SETTLEMENT BETWEEN 

BAE SYSTEMS SAN DIEGO SHIP 

REPAIR INC., SOUTHWEST 

MARINE, INC., AND THE SAN 

DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT 

AND BARRING AND DISMISSING 

CLAIMS AGAINST THE PORT 

DISTRICT

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS 

AND COUNTERCLAIMS

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

Marine, Inc. (collectively, "BAE Systems") and San Diego Unified Port District 

("Port District") for Order Confirming Settlement and Barring and Dismissing 

Claims came on regularly for hearing before this Court on October 5, 2015, 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 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 547 Filed 11/13/15 Page 1 of 6
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

-2-

WEST\259154482.2 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB)

(attached to the Declaration of Michael 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 and the Port District is in the 

public interest, is fair and reasonable, both procedurally and substantively, 

consistent with the purposes of the 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 of Civil Procedure sections 877 and 877.6 

and the rule of Tech-Bilt, Inc. v. Woodward-Clyde & Associates, 38 Cal.3d 488 

(1985), and that the Port District is 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 

appearing,

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 of the UCFA is 

adopted in this case for purposes of determining the legal effect of the Settlement 

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 of the UCFA, Section 877.6 of the California 

Code of Civil Procedure, and CERCLA section 113(f), any and all claims for 

contribution or equitable indemnity against the Port District arising out of the facts 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 547 Filed 11/13/15 Page 2 of 6
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

-3-

WEST\259154482.2 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB)

alleged in the Complaint, counterclaims, and cross-claims in this Action, regardless 

of when such claims are asserted or by whom, relating to Covered Matters under 

the Settlement Agreement are hereby BARRED. Such claims are barred regardless 

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

any other theory, as any such claims against the Port District arising out of the 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 Paragraph 9 of this Order and this Order becoming final and 

effective, all claims, cross-claims and counterclaims by and between BAE Systems 

and the Port District in the Action with respect to "Covered Matters" under the 

Settlement Agreement (which expressly does not include "Excluded Matters") are 

hereby dismissed with prejudice.

5. Subject to Paragraph 6(a), below, any and all claims by the Port 

District and BAE Systems, and each of them, against each other, whether in claims, 

cross-claims or counterclaims, relating to "Excluded Matters" shall be reserved and 

not deemed barred by entry of judgment or dismissal pursuant to the Settlement 

Agreement. 

6. Subject to this Order becoming final and effective:

(a) All claims made by the Port District against BAE Systems and by 

BAE Systems against the Port District, and by each of them against any other 

party, whether alleged in a counterclaim or cross-claim, relating to Polygon 

SW-29 and the Tidelands Property, including, without limitation, contractrelated claims, shall be dismissed WITHOUT prejudice, subject to the terms 

of the Tolling and Standstill Agreement previously entered into by and 

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

Company ("SDG&E"), the City, Star & Crescent Boat Company, and 

Campbell Industries; 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 547 Filed 11/13/15 Page 3 of 6
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

-4-

WEST\259154482.2 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB)

(b) All cross-claims by the Port District against Campbell Industries 

and against National Steel and Shipbuilding Company ("NASSCO") (to the 

extent any such claims remain against NASSCO) with respect to the 

following matters are hereby dismissed with prejudice: (1) any and all 

claims that were, that could have been, that could now be, or that could 

hereafter be asserted by the Port District against Campbell Industries or 

NASSCO as of the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement arising out of 

or in connection with alleged COC contamination of the sediments within the 

Remedial Footprint; (2) any and all costs incurred by the Port District that 

have arisen out of, or that arise out of, or in connection with, the 

investigation and remediation required to comply with all legally enforceable 

requirements imposed by the Agency in connection with the implementation 

of the CAO, including all reasonably necessary measures required to satisfy 

the requirements of the CAO or any amendments thereto; and (3) all claims 

asserted by the Port District against Campbell Industries in this Action and 

accruing prior to the execution of the Settlement Agreement for breach of 

contract or express contractual indemnity relating to the alleged COC 

contamination of the sediments within the Remedial Footprint, but not as to 

the remainder of the Shipyard Sediment Site or the Tidelands 

Property. Subject to paragraph 6(a), above, all other claims by the Port 

District against Campbell Industries in this Action are hereby dismissed 

without prejudice. Any and all claims the Port District has or may have in 

the future against Campbell Industries and/or NASSCO relating to any 

Excluded Matters are expressly reserved and not deemed barred by any 

dismissals in this Order. As to all dismissals in this paragraph 6(b), each 

party shall bear its own attorney's fees, costs and expenses; 

(c) Except with respect to (1) Polygon SW-29 and (2) the Tidelands 

Property, the Port District’s Twentieth Claim for Relief (Express Contractual 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 547 Filed 11/13/15 Page 4 of 6
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

-5-

WEST\259154482.2 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB)

Indemnity) and Twenty-First Claim for Relief (Breach of Contract) against 

SDG&E are dismissed WITH prejudice to the extent they relate to the marine 

sediment contamination existing at the Site; and 

(d) With respect to (1) Polygon SW-29 and (2) the Tidelands Property, 

the Port District's Twentieth Claim for Relief and Twenty-First Claim for 

Relief against SDG&E are dismissed WITHOUT prejudice subject to the 

terms of the Tolling Agreement. 

For purposes of this Order, the terms "Agency," "CAO," "COCs," "Excluded 

Matters," "Remedial Footprint," "Polygon SW-29," "Site," and "Tidelands 

Property" shall have the same meaning as in the Settlement Agreement.

7. Pursuant and subject to the Agreement for Dismissals and Tolling 

Agreement entered into by and between the Port District and the City of San Diego 

("City"), upon entry of an order in this Action dismissing (i) Plaintiff's First Cause 

of Action of the Complaint for "cost recovery" pursuant to Section 107(a)(4) of 

CERCLA, and (ii) Plaintiff's Seventh Cause of Action of the Complaint for "cost 

recovery" pursuant to Section 13304 of the California Water Code, against the Port 

District for "Covered Matters" (as said term is defined in the settlement agreement 

between the City and BAE Systems), and this Order becoming final and effective, 

then, and only then: 

(a) The Port District's First and Sixth Claims for Relief of its 

Counterclaim [Dkt. No. 11-1] and its First and Sixth Claims for Relief of its 

Third Amended and Supplemental Cross-Claims ("TACC") [Dkt. No. 308] 

against the City are dismissed WITH prejudice solely to the extent they relate 

to "Covered Matters" under the Settlement Agreement (which expressly does 

not include "Excluded Matters"); and 

(b) The Port District's Forty-First Claim for Relief and Forty-Second 

Claim for Relief of its TACC against the City for Express Contractual 

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 547 Filed 11/13/15 Page 5 of 6
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

-6-

WEST\259154482.2 09-CV-2275 WQH (JLB)

Indemnity and Implied Contractual Indemnity, respectively, are dismissed 

WITHOUT prejudice. 

8. Any other claims expressly reserved under the Settlement Agreement 

shall be reserved and not deemed barred by entry of judgment or dismissal pursuant 

to the Settlement Agreement. 

9. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over both the subject matter of the 

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

of the performance of the terms and provisions of the Settlement Agreement for the 

purpose of enabling BAE Systems and the Port District, and each of them, 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 of the Settlement Agreement or for any further relief as the interest of justice 

may require.

10. BAE Systems and the Port District shall each bear their own costs and 

expenses, including attorneys' fees in this Action, as between BAE Systems and the 

Port District, through the date of this 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: November 13, 2015

Case 3:09-cv-02275-WQH-JLB Document 547 Filed 11/13/15 Page 6 of 6