Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 199 / Wednesday, October 15, 1997 / Notices 53653

August 28, 1990. The FEIS described

four alternatives for the proposed

construction and operation of a

hydropower project using features of

Reclamation’s Uncompahgre Valley

Reclamation Project (UVRP).

Reclamation is considering executing a

lease of power privilege (a type of

contract) with a private company to use

facilities for this project. A Section 404

Permit under the Clean Water (Act) is

also required for the project.

The alternatives described in the FEIS

provided for additional water diversions

from the Gunnison River through the

existing Gunnison Tunnel to a penstock

and powerplant near Montrose,

Colorado. The significant issues

addressed in the FEIS included the

impacts of reduced flows in the

Gunnison River, increased flows in the

Uncompahgre River, economic impacts

in local counties, and impacts on

wetlands. Since publication of the FEIS,

additional information has become

available concerning proposed bank

stabilization plans along the

Uncompahgre River, endangered

species, resources along the Gunnison

River, and power sales.

Hydropower development in

association with the UVRP was

authorized by the Act of June 22, 1938

(Pub. L. 75–698, Stat. 941). Under the

Act, the hydropower facility would be

constructed and operated under a lease

of power privilege with Reclamation.

This lease would provide for cost

reimbursement fees, Reclamation’s role

as overseer, and the Sponsor’s

obligations, including environmental

commitments. Funding for the

hydropower studies is provided by the

project proponents. Reclamation serves

as the lead Federal agency responsible

for ensuring compliance with NEPA.

Potential Federal Action

Two major Federal actions are

pending on the project: execution of a

lease of power privilege by Reclamation

and issuance of a Section 404 Permit

under the Clean Water Act by the Corps

of Engineers.

Dated: October 7, 1997.

Charles Calhoun,

Regional Director, Upper Colorado Region.

[FR Doc. 97–27231 Filed 10–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–94–M

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Reclamation

Garrison Diversion Unit

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, in

conjunction with U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, and the North Dakota Game and

Fish Department.

ACTION: Notice of availability of Final

Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS).

SUMMARY: Pursuant to section 102(2)(C)

of the National Environmental Policy

Act of 1969, as amended, the Bureau of

Reclamation, acting as lead Federal

agency, in conjunction with the Fish

and Wildlife Service and North Dakota

Game and Fish Department, has

prepared a Final Environmental Impact

Statement (FEIS) on the Arrowwood

National Wildlife Refuge (NWR)

mitigation project. The FEIS evaluates

the impact to the environment of seven

alternatives, including no action, for

mitigating adverse impacts of

Jamestown Reservoir on Arrowwood

NWR. The project would improve refuge

water management capability through

construction of various bypass channels,

water control structures, and fish

barriers. In addition, the normal

operating level of Jamestown would be

lowered approximately 1.8 feet. This

mitigation is required by the Garrison

Diversion Unit Reformulation Act of

1986 (P.L. 99–294) and the National

Wildlife Refuge System Administration

Act (16 U.S.C. 668dd–668jj).

DATES: A 30-day public comment period

commences with the publication of this

notice.

ADDRESSES: Obtain information relative

to the study or a copy of the FEIS from:

Greg Hiemenz, Project Coordinator,

Bureau of Reclamation, Dakotas Area

Office, P.O. Box 1017, Bismarck ND

58502.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg

Hiemenz, Project Coordinator, at (701)

250–4242 extension 3611 or Dennis E.

Breitzman, Area Manager, at (701) 250–

4242.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Arrowwood NWR is located on the

James River in Stutsman and Foster

Counties, North Dakota. The refuge lies

within the flood pool of Jamestown

Reservoir, a component of the Garrison

Diversion Unit, and has, on numerous

occasions, been adversely affected by

reservoir operations.

Seven alternatives for mitigating

impacts to the refuge, including no

action, were evaluated in the FEIS. The

action alternatives comprise an

incremental series of physical features,

including bypass channels, water

control structures, waterfowl subimpoundments, and fish barriers, that

could be constructed at Arrowwood

NWR and Jamestown Reservoir to

improve refuge water management. In

addition, five of the six action

alternatives would lower the normal

operating level of Jamestown Reservoir

and include measures to enhance the

reservoir’s sport fishery. Three of the

alternatives would require off-site

mitigation, including acquisition of

private lands for development as

wildlife habitat, to fully mitigate

impacts to the refuge. The preferred

alternative is the Mud and Jim Lakes

Bypass—Lower Joint-use Pool

Alternative. This is the least costly

alternative that mitigates for all adverse

impacts without requiring any

acquisition of private land.

As part of the NEPA process, public

scoping meetings were held during

January 1994. The draft EIS was

completed and sent out for agency and

public review and comment in April

1996. Comments were received and

replies are incorporated into the FEIS.

Dated: October 7, 1997.

Neil Stessman,

Regional Director.

[FR Doc. 97–27230 Filed 10–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–94–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Under the Comprehnsive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

Notice is hereby given that on

September 29, 1997, a proposed De

Minimis Consent Decree (‘‘proposed

Decree’’) in United States and State of

Indiana v. A. H. Choitz, et al., Civil

Action No. 1:97–CV–362, was lodged

with the United States District Court for

the Northern District of Indiana (Fort

Wayne Division).

In this action the United States seeks

relief under Sections 106 and 107 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9606 &

9607, for cost recovery and abatement of

hazardous substances relating to the

Wayne Reclamation and Recycling Site

(Site), located near Columbia City,

Indiana.

The proposed Decree would resolve

the liability of over 800 de minimis

parties. These parties were customers of

a now-defunct company known as

Wayne Reclamation, which operated the

Site in the 1970’s and 1980’s and which

transported and disposed of a wide

variety of substances, including waste

oil. Each of the proposed de minimis

settlers allegedly arranged with Wayne

Reclamation for the disposal of minimal

amounts of hazardous substances which

ultimately were disposed of at the Site.

Under the proposed Decree, each of

these 800-plus de minimis settlers
53654 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 199 / Wednesday, October 15, 1997 / Notices

receives contribution protection for

response costs incurred and to be

incurred in cleaning up the Site, as well

as covenants not to sue from the United

States under Sections 106 and 107 of

CERCLA and Section 7003 of the

Resource Conservation and Recovery

Act (‘‘RCRA’’). The State of Indiana, coplaintfiff in this case, gives similar

covenants to the de minimis settlers.

Also joining the proposed Decree are

private parties (‘‘the Large Volume

PRPs’’) who are obligated under a prior

consent decree with the United States

and State of Indiana to design,

construct, and maintain the remedial

action that EPA selected for the Site.

Under the proposed Decree, the Large

Volume PRSs relinquish their

contribution claims against all the de

minimis settlers and against any other

person not already sued in contribution

for costs incurred in connection with

this Site.

In return for these covenants, the de

minimis settlers shall pay, in total,

approximately $5.4 million to the large

Volume PRPs. In addition, the United

States and State of Indiana shall receive

from the Large Volume PRPs

approximately $203,000, in

reimbursement of past costs and in

resolution of a natural resource damages

claim.

The Department of Justice will receive

for a period of thirty (30) days from the

date of this publication comments

relating to the proposing Decree.

Comments should be addressed to the

Assistant Attorney General of the

Environmental and Natural Resources

Division, Department of Justice, 950

Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.,

Washington, D.C. 20530, and should

refer to United States and State of

Indiana v. A.H. Choitz, et al., Civil

Action No. 1:97–CV–362, D.J. Ref. 90–

11–3–603A. Commenters may request

an opportunity for a public meeting in

the affected area, in accordance with

Section 7003(d) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.

§ 6973(d).

The proposed Decree may be

examined at the Office of the United

States Attorney, 3128 Federal Building,

1300 S. Harrison Street, Fort Wayne,

Indiana 46802, at the Office of Regional

Counsel, U.S. EPA Region 5, 200 West

Adams, Chicago, Illinois, and at the

Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street,

N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C.

20005, (202) 624–0892.

A copy of the proposed Decree may be

obtained in person or by mail from the

Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street,

N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C.

20005. In requesting a copy of the entire

Decree, including all signature pages

and attachments, please enclose a check

in the amount of $126.25 (25 cents per

page reproduction cost) payable to the

Consent Decree Library. In requesting a

copy of only the text of the proposed

Decree, a stipulation related to the

proposed Decree, and the signature page

of the United States, please enclose a

check in the amount of $9.50 (25 cents

per page reproduction cost) payable to

the Consent Decree Library.

Bruce S. Gelber,

Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement

Section, Environment and Natural Resources

Division.

[FR Doc. 97–27205 Filed 10–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act

Notice is hereby given that a second

proposed Consent Decree in United

States v. H. Brown Co., et al., Civil

Action No. 1:96 CV–949 (W.D. Mich.),

entered into by the United States and

seven (7) parties, was lodged on

September 30, 1997, with the United

States District Court for the Western

District of Michigan. The proposed

Second Consent Decree resolves certain

claims of the United States for past and

future costs under the Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation

and Liability Act, as amended

(‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. § 9601, et seq.,

with respect to the H. Brown Superfund

Site (‘‘Site’’) in Walker, Michigan.

Under the terms of the proposed

Consent Decree, the seven Settling

Defendants will pay a total of $100,000

to the United States.

The Department of Justice will receive

comments relating to the proposed

Second Consent Decree During my

tenure at the Board of Immigration

Appeals, the attorney-advisor drafted

legal opinions for the adjudicating body

which addressed issues of law and fact

appealed to the Board by the

Immigration Service and should refer to

United States v. H. Brown Co., et al., D.J.

Ref. No. 90–11–2–835A. The proposed

Second Consent Decree may be

examined at the Office of the United

States Attorney for the Western District

of Michigan, Grand Rapids, Michigan;

the Region V Office of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency, 77

West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago,

Illinois 60604; and at the Consent

Decree Library, 1120 G Street NW., 4th

Floor, Washington, DC 20005, telephone

no. (202) 624–0892. A copy of the

proposed Consent Decree may be

obtained in person or by mail from the

Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street

NW., 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20005.

In requesting a copy, please enclose a

check for reproduction costs (at 25 cents

per page) in the amount of $9.25 for the

Decree, payable to the Consent Decree

Library.

Bruce S. Gelber,

Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement

Section, Environment and Natural Resources

Division.

[FR Doc. 97–27211 Filed 10–14–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act

Notice is hereby given that a proposed

Consent Decree in United States v.

MacGillis & Gibbs Co., and Soo Line

Railroad Co., Civil Action No. 4:94–CV–

848 (D. Minn.) entered into by the

United States and the Soo Line Railroad

Co. (‘‘Soo Line’’), was lodged on

September 23, 1997, with the United

States District Court for the District of

Minnesota. The proposed Consent

Decree resolves certain claims of the

United States under Section 107 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability

Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9607, with

respect to the MacGillis & Gibbs Co./

Bell Lumber & Pole Co. Superfund Site

(‘‘Site’’) in New Brighton, Ramsey

County, Minnesota.

Under the terms of the proposed

Consent Decree, Soo Line agrees, inter

alia, to pay the United States $75,000 in

past response costs incurred in

connection with the MacGillis & Gibbs

portion of the Site, and $10,000 for

federal Natural Resource Damages. In

addition, Soo Line agrees to provide

access to U.S. EPA to its property at the

Site for purposes of implementing

response actions, and agrees to record

land use restrictions to ensure the

protectiveness of the remedial measures

at the Site.

The Department of Justice will receive

comments relating to the proposed

Consent Decree for 30 days following

publication of this Notice. Comments

should be addressed to the Assistant

Attorney General, Environment and

Natural Resources Division, United

States Department of Justice, P.O. Box

7611, Ben Franklin Station, Washington,

D.C. 20044–7611, and should refer to

United States v. MacGillis & Gibbs Co.

and Soo Line Railroad Co., D.J. Ref. No.

90–11–2–904. The proposed Consent