Laserfiche WebLink
0 <br /> 1 Finally, the Consent Decree does not impair the rights of the Equipment <br /> 2 Manufacturers. With respect to those future costs to be incurred, this settlement imposes on the <br /> 3 Settling Parties a requirement that the Settling Dry Cleaning Defendants perform necessary and <br /> 4 proper remediation of the dry cleaning solvent contamination at and emanating from the Site as <br /> 5 provided in the Remedial Action Plan, consistent with the NCP, which itself contains cost <br /> 6 effectiveness provisions, and all applicable requirements of state or local law which are not <br /> 7 inconsistent with the NCP or this Consent Decree. If and when plaintiff LPL were to recover a <br /> 8 declaratory judgment on the assigned claims as to the Equipment Manufacturers' equitable share of <br /> 9 the costs to be incurred in the future by the Settling Dry Cleaning Defendants pursuant to this <br /> 10 settlement,the Equipment Manufacturers would have an opportunity to challenge whether those <br /> 11 costs actually incurred were consistent with the standards set forth in the Consent Decree each <br /> 12 time plaintiff LPL periodically moved to reduce the declaratory judgment to a lump sum judgment. <br /> 13 In essence,the declaratory judgment that plaintiff LPL will seek from the Court in pursuing the <br /> 14 contribution claims assigned to it pertains only to the Equipment Manufacturers' fair share of those <br /> 15 future costs to be incurred pursuant to the Consent Decree,performing the Work, or undertaking <br /> 16 the activities authorized or required by the Consent Decree or any order issued or plan adopted <br /> 17 pursuant to it. Of course, as required by the Consent Decree, the Work must be consistent with <br /> 18 the NCP. <br /> 19 With respect to the settlement of plaintiff LPL's claims against the Settling Dry <br /> 20 Cleaning Defendants, the Settling Parties have agreed as to the value of those claims after full, <br /> 21 heated and lengthy adversarial debate. If the Equipment Manufacturers wish to challenge the <br /> 22 reasonableness of this settlement in light of the respective positions of and relative risks to the <br /> 23 Settling Parties,their opportunity to assert such a challenge will be at the time the Settling <br /> 24 Parties move the Court for entry of the Consent Decree. <br /> 25 <br /> 26 <br /> 27 <br /> 28 <br /> JOINT SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS&RESPONSES REGARDING FIRST FINAL CONSENT DECREE -17- <br /> 0009203.10 10/03/94 rJ 10:43 AM <br />