Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00595/USCOURTS-caed-2_14-cv-00595-20/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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

KAMALA D. HARRIS, State Bar No. 146672

Attorney General of California

SARAH E. MORRISON, State Bar No. 143459

Supervising Deputy Attorney General

DENNIS L. BECK, JR. State Bar No. 179492

OLIVIA W. KARLIN, State Bar No. 150432

Deputy Attorney General

300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702

Los Angeles, CA 90013

Telephone: (213) 897-0473

Fax: (213) 897-2802

E-mail: Olivia.Karlin@doj.ca.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

California Department of Toxic Substances Control 

and the Toxic Substances Control Account

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SACRAMENTO DIVISION

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC 

SUBSTANCES CONTROL and the TOXIC 

SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACCOUNT,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JIM DOBBAS, INC., a California 

corporation; CONTINENTAL RAIL, INC., 

a Delaware corporation; DAVID VAN 

OVER, individually; PACIFIC WOOD 

PRESERVING, a dissolved California 

corporation; WEST COAST WOOD 

PRESERVING, LLC., a Nevada limited 

liability company; and COLLINS & 

AIKMAN PRODUCTS, LLC, a Delaware 

limited liability company,

Defendants.

2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB

CONSENT DECREE BETWEEN 

PLAINTIFFS AND DEFENDANT JIM 

DOBBAS, INC.

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS AND 

CROSS CLAIMS

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 1 of 14
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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiffs, the State of California Department of Toxic Substances Control and the 

Toxic Substances Control Account (collectively “DTSC”), filed a Complaint in the abovecaptioned matter on March 3, 2014, pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), 42 U.S.C. § 9601 et seq., against several 

defendants, including Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc. (“Dobbas”), and then subsequently filed a First 

Amended Complaint on December 11, 2014 (“First Amended Complaint”), pursuant to 

CERCLA, amending to add an additional defendant. In this action, DTSC seeks the recovery of 

response costs incurred or to be incurred by DTSC in responding to releases and/or threatened 

releases at the property located at 147 A Street, Elmira, Solano County, CA, identified by Solano 

County Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 142-010-130, 142-010-140 and 142-042-010 (“the Site”), 

pursuant to CERCLA section 107(a), 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a). DTSC also seeks declaratory relief 

under 28 U.S.C. § 2201 and CERCLA section 113(g)(2), 42 U.S.C. § 9613(g)(2), alleging that 

defendants are jointly and severally liable for future response costs to be incurred by DTSC with 

respect to the Site. DTSC also seeks injunctive relief, treble damages, and civil penalties against 

certain defendants, including Dobbas, pursuant to a supplemental state law claim under the 

Hazardous Substances Account Act, California Health and Safety Code section 25300 et seq. 

(“HSAA”), for those defendants’ failure to comply with an Imminent and Substantial 

Endangerment Determination Order and Remedial Action Order that DTSC issued to those 

defendants concerning the releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances at the Site.

1

2. In the First Amended Complaint, DTSC alleges, in relevant part that:

a. From approximately 1972 to 1982, certain defendants conducted wood 

preserving operations at the Site. Wood preserving operations involved the use of hazardous 

substances, including arsenic, chromium, and copper.

 

1 DTSC also sued David Van Over (“Van Over”) for his use of the Site as a residence, in 

violation of the Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Order and the 1995 Land Use Covenant 

that restricted the permissible uses of the Site based on environmental conditions there. 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 2 of 14
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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

b. As a result of the wood preserving operations at the Site, hazardous substances 

have been, and continue to be released and/or threatened to be released into the environment at 

and from the Site.

c. Pacific Wood Preserving (“PWP”) conducted wood preserving operations at the 

Site from approximately 1972 to approximately September 12, 1979, and owned the Site from 

1977 to approximately September 12, 1979. On September 12, 1979, PWP sold the Site to The 

Wickes Corporation. WCWP is a successor to PWP. From 1979 to approximately 1982, nonparty to this agreement Collins & Aikman Products, LLC (formerly known as Collins & Aikman 

Products Co., and the successor by merger to the Wickes Corporation (“C&A Products”), 

conducted wood preserving operations at the Site. Wood preserving operations at the Site ceased 

in approximately 1982. 

d. From the 1980’s through 2005, The Wickes Corporation and its successor, 

C&A Products, took various response actions under the oversight of DTSC to address 

environmental contamination at, around, and/or beneath the Site. Those actions included, among 

other things, soil excavation, installing an asphalt cap over contaminated soils, constructing a 

building and a drainage system over another contaminated area of the Site, installing and 

operating a groundwater extraction and treatment system, and groundwater monitoring. 

e. On or about March 20, 1997, C&A Products sold the Site to Dobbas and 

Continental Rail, Inc. (“CRI”).

f. On or about May 17, 2005, C&A Products filed a Chapter 11 petition in the 

United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Case No. 05-55932. In 

November 2005, while in Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings, C&A Products informed DTSC 

that it was unwilling to continue to perform response actions at the Site. 

g. In 2006, DTSC requested that Dobbas and CRI, the then-owners and operators 

of the Site, carry out response actions to address contamination at the Site. Dobbas and CRI 

refused. As a result, DTSC issued an Imminent and Substantial Endangerment Determination on 

November 9, 2006, and initiated state-funded contracts to evaluate response actions. 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 3 of 14
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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

 h. DTSC initially tried in 2007 and 2008 to resume operating the Wickes/C&A 

Products remedy that DTSC had approved in 1996. But the groundwater treatment system had 

already reached a point at which it was evident that it would not clean up the groundwater to 

remediation goals. Ultimately, the idled groundwater treatment system would require too many 

repairs to make it cost-effective to restart. But until DTSC discovered the system could not be

fixed, DTSC viewed re-starting it as an interim measure to contain the “plume” (i.e. underground

area) of groundwater contamination until alternative cleanup approaches could be evaluated, 

which it eventually did.

i. In July 2010, DTSC finalized a Removal Action Workplan for the Site that 

called for contaminated soil excavation, off-site disposal, backfilling, confirmation sampling, 

demolition of the groundwater extraction and treatment system, and long-term groundwater 

monitoring. The Removal Action Workplan reported that contaminated groundwater had 

migrated from beneath the Site to the residential area, which created the potential for irrigation 

wells located there to extract and distribute contaminated groundwater. 

j. On or about February 11, 2011, Dobbas and CRI sold the Site to defendant Van 

Over. 

k. On March 16, 2011, DTSC issued an Imminent and Substantial Endangerment 

Determination Order and Remedial Action Order (“I/SE Order”) ordering Dobbas, CRI, and Van 

Over to conduct the actions described in the Removal Action Workplan and to take additional 

response actions at the Site. Dobbas, CRI, and Van Over failed to complete the actions described 

in the Removal Action Workplan, or to take other response actions described in the I/SE Order.

3. From 2005 to the present, DTSC contends it took response actions at the Site to 

address the abandonment of environmental work at the Site, which created an imminent risk that 

contaminated groundwater would spread to nearby wells and further contaminate the drinking 

water aquifer, and that the asphalt cap would fail and allow direct human contact with 

contaminated soil or contribute more to surface water or groundwater contamination. DTSC

believes that its response actions were necessary to remove and remedy the hazardous substances 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 4 of 14
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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

released and/or threatened to be released at and from the Site. The response actions included, but 

were not limited to, the following activities: efforts to repair and restart the groundwater 

extraction and treatment system, completion of a removal investigation for site soils, preparation 

of the Removal Action Workplan, implementation of the Removal Action Workplan, and 

groundwater monitoring.

4. As of December 31, 2014, DTSC claims its unreimbursed response costs related to 

the Site exceed $2.4 million, exclusive of interest. DTSC believes that it will continue to incur 

response costs related to the Site, including DTSC’s enforcement costs to litigate the First 

Amended Complaint.

5. DTSC contends that Dobbas is a responsible party pursuant to section 107(a) of 

CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a), and is jointly and severally liable under CERCLA for response 

costs incurred and to be incurred by DTSC at the Site.

6. Dobbas filed an answer to the Complaint on June 10, 2014, and an answer to the First 

Amended Complaint on December 24, 2015. 

7. DTSC and Dobbas (“the Parties”) agree, and this Court, by entering this Consent 

Decree, finds, that this Consent Decree has been negotiated by the Parties in good faith, the 

settlement of this matter will avoid prolonged and complicated litigation, benefits the 

environment and community and that this Consent Decree is fair, reasonable, in the public 

interest and is consistent with the purpose of CERCLA. 

THEREFORE, the Court, with the consent of the Parties to this Consent Decree, hereby 

ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES, as follows: 

I. JURISDICTION

8. The Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the matters alleged in this action 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and CERCLA section 113(b), 42 U.S.C. § 9613(b), and the Court 

has personal jurisdiction over each of the Parties. 

9. Venue is appropriate in this district pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and 

CERCLA section 113(b), 42 U.S.C. § 9613(b), because the claims asserted in the First 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 5 of 14
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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

Amended Complaint and the releases and/or threatened releases of hazardous substances 

occurred in this judicial district.

10. Dobbas waives all objections and defenses that it may have to the jurisdiction of 

the Court or to venue in this district in the above-captioned action. Dobbas agrees not to 

challenge this Court’s jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree.

11. The Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter for the purpose of interpreting 

and enforcing the terms of this Consent Decree if necessary. 

II. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTED CLAIMS

12. This Consent Decree resolves the claims against Dobbas in the First Amended 

Complaint. DTSC agrees to settlement of Dobbas’ liability in this action in exchange for 

consideration from Dobbas, including payment by Dobbas to reimburse a portion of DTSC’s 

response costs incurred and to be incurred by DTSC at or in connection with releases and/or 

threatened releases of hazardous substances at, beneath, and/or from the Site. 

13. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Consent Decree, this Consent 

Decree shall not prejudice, waive, or impair any right, remedy or defense that Dobbas may have 

in any other or further legal proceeding. Further, Dobbas does not admit any allegations, 

findings, determinations or conclusions contained in the First Amended Complaint or this 

Consent Decree. Dobbas’ entry into this Consent Decree and compliance with its terms shall 

not be construed as an admission of liability or any issue of law or fact with respect to the Site. 

14. The Parties consent to, and shall not challenge entry of, this Consent Decree or 

this Court’s jurisdiction to enter and enforce this Consent Decree.

15. Upon approval and entry of this Consent Decree by the Court, this Consent 

Decree shall constitute a final judgment between the Parties.

III. DEFINITIONS

16. Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, terms used in this Consent Decree 

that are defined in CERCLA or in the regulations promulgated under CERCLA shall have the 

meaning assigned to them therein. Whenever terms listed below are used in this Consent 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 6 of 14
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

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

Decree, the definitions below shall apply.

17. “DTSC” shall mean, collectively, the State of California Department of Toxic 

Substances Control (“the Department”) and the Toxic Substances Control Account, and their 

predecessors and successors. The Department is a public agency of the State of California 

organized and existing under and pursuant to California Health and Safety Code § 58000, et seq. 

Under California law, the Department is the state agency responsible for determining whether 

there has been a release and/or threatened release of hazardous substances into the environment, 

and for determining the actions to be taken in response thereto. The Toxic Substances Control 

Account is an account within the State of California General Fund. Under California Health and 

Safety Code section 25361(a), the account shall be a party in any action for recovery of response 

costs or expenditures incurred from the account under Chapter 6.8 of Division 20 of the 

California Health and Safety Code.

18. “Effective Date” shall mean the date of entry of this Consent Decree by this 

Court. 

19. “Parties” shall mean DTSC and Dobbas, collectively.

20. “Response Costs” shall mean all costs of “removal,” “remedial action,” or 

“response” as those terms are defined by CERCLA section 101, 42 U.S.C.§ 9601, subsections 

23-25, related to the release and/or threatened release of hazardous substances at or from the 

Site, including the soils and groundwater. 

21. “Site” shall mean the property at 147 A Street, Elmira, Solano County, CA, 

identified by Solano County Assessor’s Parcel Number(s) 142-010-130, 142-010-140 and 142-

042-010. For purposes of this Consent Decree, the Site includes the vertical and areal extent of 

the hazardous substance contamination that is or has been present at, beneath, and from the Site, 

including those areas outside the described parcels where hazardous substances released and/or 

disposed of at the parcels have come to be located.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 7 of 14
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

7

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

IV. DOBBAS’ SETTLEMENT OBLIGATIONS

22. Payment. Dobbas shall pay to DTSC the sum of two hundred sixty five 

thousand dollars ($265,000) on or before the tenth business day after the Parties execute this 

Consent Decree. 

23. The payment required in paragraph 22 shall be made by certified check, cashier’s 

check, or money order made payable to “Cashier, California Department of Toxic Substances 

Control,” and each shall bear on its face both the docket number of this action, and the phrase 

“Site Code 100164.” The payment shall be sent to:

Cashier

Department of Toxic Substances Control

Accounting Office, MS-21A

1001 I Street

P.O. Box 806

Sacramento, CA 95812-0806

A copy of the check shall be mailed to:

Office of Legal Counsel

California Department of Toxic Substances Control

1001 I Street, 23rd Floor

P.O. Box 806

Sacramento, CA 95812-0806

Or e-mailed to Marilee.Hanson@dtsc.ca.gov in .pdf or .jpg format.

V. ACCESS TO INFORMATION

24. Within thirty (30) calendar days of the Effective Date, Dobbas shall provide to 

DTSC copies of any and all records, documents, and information within its possession or 

control, or that of its agents, relating to: (a) the ownership, operation or control of the Site; (b) 

the purchase, storage, use, handling, generation, treatment, transportation, or disposal of 

hazardous substances in connection with the Site; (c) releases and/or threatened releases of 

hazardous substances at or from the Site, including the Site’s soil and groundwater; and (d) 

response actions conducted by any person at the Site.

25. If, after the Effective Date, Dobbas discovers or obtains any records, documents 

or information described in paragraph 24 not previously provided to DTSC, Dobbas agrees to 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 8 of 14
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

8

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

provide DTSC with copies of the additional records, documents, or information within thirty 

(30) calendar days of the date Dobbas discovers or obtains the records, documents, or 

information.

26. Dobbas may assert confidentiality claims covering part or all of the documents or 

information submitted to DTSC under this Consent Decree to the extent permitted by, and in 

accordance with, California Health and Safety Code § 25358.2. Documents or information 

determined to be confidential by DTSC will be afforded the protection specified in California 

Health and Safety Code § 25358.2. Dobbas may also assert that certain documents, records and 

other information are privileged under the attorney-client privilege or any other privilege 

recognized by federal law. If Dobbas asserts such a privilege in lieu of providing documents, 

Dobbas shall provide DTSC with a description of the documents withheld and the basis for 

asserting the privilege. 

VI. COVENANT NOT TO SUE BY DTSC

27. Except as expressly provided in Section VII (Reservation of Rights) of this 

Consent Decree, DTSC covenants not to sue or take administrative action against Dobbas 

pursuant to any theory whether under any federal or state statute, regulation or common law 

including, but not limited to CERCLA, the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (“RCRA”),the 

California Hazardous Substances Account Act (“HSAA”), California Health and Safety Code § 

25300, et seq., to: (a) recover DTSC’s past or future Response Costs related to the Site; or (b) 

require Dobbas to conduct response actions, including removal or remedial actions, in response 

to the release or threatened release of hazardous substances at the Site, including the soils and 

groundwater. This Covenant Not to Sue is conditioned upon the complete and satisfactory 

performance by Dobbas of all of its obligations under this Consent Decree. This Covenant Not 

to Sue shall be revoked and deemed not effective if Dobbas fails to make the payment required 

by paragraph 22 of this Consent Decree, or if Dobbas voluntarily acquires title to the Site after 

the Effective Date. Dobbas shall make all reasonable, good faith efforts to oppose any attempt 

by a third party to vest Dobbas with title to the Site. Dobbas shall notify DTSC within five (5) 

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 9 of 14
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

9

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

days of becoming aware of any such attempt to vest Dobbas with title to the Site.

VII. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

28. Claims Regarding Other Matters. DTSC reserves, and this Consent Decree is 

without prejudice to, all rights against Dobbas with respect to all matters not expressly included 

within DTSC’s Covenant Not to Sue (Section VI).

29. Reservation of Claims. DTSC reserves, and this Consent Decree is without 

prejudice to, all rights against Dobbas with respect to:

a. Claims based on a failure of Dobbas to meet a requirement of this 

Consent Decree;

b. Liability arising from past, present, or future disposal, release and/or 

threat of release of a hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant outside of 

the Site; and

c. Criminal liability. 

30. Claims against Other Persons. DTSC reserves, and this Consent Decree is 

without prejudice to, all rights, claims, and causes of action DTSC may have against any person 

other than Dobbas. Nothing in this Consent Decree is intended to be, nor shall be construed as, 

a release, covenant not to sue, or compromise of any claim or cause of action which DTSC may 

have against any person or other entity not a signatory to this Consent Decree. 

31. Government Authority. Except as expressly provided in this Consent Decree, 

nothing in this Consent Decree is intended, or shall be construed, to preclude DTSC from 

exercising its authority under any law, statute, or regulation with respect to the Site. 

Furthermore, except as expressly provided in this Consent Decree, nothing in this Consent 

Decree is intended, nor shall be construed, to preclude any state agency, department, board, or 

entity, or any federal or local agency, department, board, or entity, from exercising its authority 

under any law, statute, or regulation.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 10 of 14
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

10

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

VIII. COVENANT NOT TO SUE BY DOBBAS

32. Without compromising or waiving its rights to seek judicial enforcement of the 

terms of this Consent Decree, Dobbas covenants not to sue and agrees not to assert any claims 

or causes of action against DTSC or its contractors or employees that arise out of the transaction 

or occurrence that is the subject matter of the First Amended Complaint or Dobbas’ 

Counterclaim filed on June 10, 2014, or for any injuries, losses, costs, or damages caused or 

incurred as a result of the performances or requirements of this Consent Decree or DTSC’s 

response actions at the Site.

IX. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION

33. With regard to claims for contribution against Dobbas, Dobbas is entitled to 

contribution protection pursuant to section 113(f)(2) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. section 9613(f)(2), 

and applicable federal and state statutory and common law for the “Matters Addressed” in this 

Consent Decree, to the extent provided by law, except for actions and claims identified in 

DTSC’s Reservation of Rights (Section VII). 

34. The “Matters Addressed” in this Consent Decree include: (1) any and all civil 

and/or administrative liabilities for reimbursement of any past, present, or future Response 

Costs; and/or (2) any and all civil and/or administrative liabilities and/or Response Costs as a 

result of or pursuant to any claims for or relating to declaratory relief, civil penalties, 

administrative penalties and/or injunctive relief, under CERCLA, the HSAA, the California 

Hazardous Waste Control Law and/or common law or statutory claims, including but not 

limited to nuisance, with regard to releases or threatened releases of solid wastes and/or 

hazardous substances and/or wastes, as those terms are defined pursuant to CERCLA, the 

HSAA, the California Hazardous Waste Control Law, and/or federal or State statutes and 

regulations, in, at or from the Site.

35. The contribution protection provided in this Section is conditioned upon Dobbas’ 

full performance of its obligations under this Consent Decree.

/ / /

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 11 of 14
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

11

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

36. Nothing in this Consent Decree limits or impairs the right of DTSC to pursue any 

other person for unrecovered Response Costs incurred by DTSC. 

X. NOTIFICATION

37. Notification to or communication among the Parties as required by or provided 

for in this Consent Decree shall be addressed as follows:

For DTSC:

Charlie Ridenour, Branch Chief

Brownfields and Environmental Restoration Program

California Department of Toxic Substances Control

8800 Cal Center Drive

Sacramento, CA 95826

Marilee Hanson, Senior Staff Counsel

Office of Chief Counsel

California Department of Toxic Substances Control

1001 I Street

P.O. Box 806

Sacramento, CA 95812-0806

For Dobbas:

Donald J. Dobbas

Jim Dobbas, Inc.

P.O. Box 177

Newcastle, CA 95658

Nicole Gleason

King Williams & Gleason LLP

520 Capitol Mall Ste 750

Sacramento, CA 95814 

XI. GENERAL PROVISIONS

38. Parties Bound. This Consent Decree shall apply to, be binding upon, and inure 

to the benefit of the Parties and their representatives, successors, directors, officers, 

shareholders, and assigns. 

39. No Waiver of Enforcement. The failure of DTSC to enforce any provision of 

this Consent Decree shall in no way be deemed a waiver of such provision or in any way affect 

the validity of this Consent Decree. The failure of DTSC to enforce any such provision shall 

not preclude it from later enforcing the same or any other provision of this Consent Decree.

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 12 of 14
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

12

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

40. Costs. Except as provided in this Consent Decree, the Parties will not seek to 

recover attorneys’ fees and/or litigation costs against each other.

41. Modification. This Consent Decree may be modified upon written approval of 

the Parties and with the consent of the Court.

42. Integration. This Consent Decree constitutes the final, complete, and entire 

agreement between the Parties with respect to the settlement embodied in this Consent Decree. 

43. Lodging and Public Comment. This Consent Decree shall be lodged with the 

Court for a period of not less than thirty (30) days for public notice and comment. DTSC shall 

file with the Court any written comments received and DTSC’s responses thereto. DTSC 

reserves the right to withdraw or withhold its consent to entry of the Consent Decree if 

comments regarding the Consent Decree disclose facts or considerations that indicate that this 

Consent Decree is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate and agrees to return to Dobbas all 

funds paid by Dobbas to it. Dobbas consents to the entry of this Consent Decree without further 

notice. 

44. If the Court should decline to approve this Consent Decree in the form presented, 

this agreement is voidable at the discretion of either of the Parties, all funds paid to DTSC shall 

be returned to Dobbas and the terms of the agreement may not be used as evidence in any 

litigation between the Parties.

45. Counterparts. This Consent Decree may be executed in two or more 

counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall 

constitute one and the same instrument.

46. Signatories. Each signatory to this Consent Decree certifies that he or she is 

fully authorized by the party he or she represents to enter into the terms and conditions of this 

Consent Decree, to execute it on behalf of the party represented, and to legally bind that party to 

all the terms and conditions of this Consent Decree.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 13 of 14
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

13

[Proposed] Consent Decree Between Plaintiffs and Defendant Jim Dobbas, Inc.

(2:14-cv-00595-WBS-EFB)

XII. APPROVALS OF PARTIES.

DTSC consents to this Consent Decree by its duly authorized representative as follows: 

FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL and TOXIC 

SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACCOUNT

/s/ Date 6/30/2015

Charlie Ridenour

Branch Chief, Brownfields and Environmental Restoration Program

Dobbas consents to this Consent Decree by its duly authorized representative as follows: 

FOR JIM DOBBAS, INC.: 

/s/ Date 6/30/2015

Donald J. Dobbas,

President

IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED.

Dated: November 17, 2015

Case 2:14-cv-00595-WBS-JDP Document 150 Filed 11/18/15 Page 14 of 14