Laserfiche WebLink
I Any assertion by the Equipment Manufacturers that governmental agencies who may become <br /> 2 active at the Site should be specifically identified or that the Consent Decree should limit their <br /> 3 authority to act at the Site would be an overbroad preemption of legitimate state authority. To the <br /> 4 extent that claims are asserted against the Equipment Manufacturers for a share of these costs in <br /> 5 subsequent litigation, the identity and nature of the governmental agencies active at the Site and <br /> 6 the nature of their involvement will be readily obtainable in the normal course of discovery. <br /> 7 Accordingly,the broad language of the Consent Decree referencing federal, state and local <br /> 8 agencies should be adopted as proposed. <br /> 9 Comment#13: <br /> 10 Section Addressed: Section VI, Commitments of the Settling Parties <br /> 11 Page 8, Line 7 to Page 9, Line 7 <br /> 12 Summary of Comment Received: <br /> 13 The Commenters,the Equipment Manufacturers, note that invoices for all costs <br /> 14 (including past and future oversight costs) should be forwarded to all parties including the <br /> 15 Equipment Manufacturers. The Commenters suggest that failure to forward invoices to the <br /> 16 Equipment Manufacturers should result in a bar precluding plaintiff LPL from seeking <br /> 17 reimbursement for those costs. <br /> 18 Settling Parties' Response: <br /> 19 The Settling Parties respond that plaintiff LPL is not seeking reimbursement for <br /> 20 costs incurred. If and when plaintiff LPL asserts the Settling Dry Cleaning Defendants' <br /> 21 contribution claims which it received in assignment, it will seek contribution from the Equipment <br /> 22 Manufacturers of their equitable share of the total joint and several liability imposed on the <br /> 23 Settling Dry Cleaning Defendants. <br /> 24 The Settling Parties further respond that the Consent Decree provides for invoices <br /> 25 to be forwarded to the Settling Parties in the present action who are responsible for the payment of <br /> 26 those costs. The Settling Parties further respond that the Equipment Manufacturers have not yet <br /> 27 agreed or been ordered to pay all or any portion of these costs, nor has their liability for those costs <br /> 28 been adjudicated. Accordingly, the Settling Parties state that this Consent Decree is not the <br /> JOINT SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS&RESPONSES REGARDING FIRST FINAL CONSENT DECREE -20- <br /> 0009203.10 10/03/94 @ 10:43 AM <br />