Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 146 /Thursday, July 30, 1998 / Notices 40737

Agency, 726 Minnesota Avenue, Kansas

City, Kansas; 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 Consent

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 refer to the referenced case and

enclose a check in the amount of $5.50

(25 cents per page reproduction costs),

payable to the Consent Decree Library.

Joel M. Gross,

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section.

[FR Doc. 98–20402 Filed 7–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

in an Oil Spill Case

In accordance with Departmental

policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby

given that a consent decree was lodged

in In re Complaint of United States, as

Owner of SS CAPE MOHICAN (O.N.

536672), for exoneration from or

limitation of liability, Civil Action No.

C97–1380 EDL (N.D. Cal.), on July 16,

1998 with the United States District

Court for the Northern District of

California.

On October 28, 1996, fuel oil in a

stabilization tank on the SS CAPE

MOHICAN flowed from the vessel into

a drydock operated by San Francisco

Drydock and overflowed from the

drydock into San Francisco Bay (the

‘‘Oil Spill’’). The United States has filed

claims against San Francisco Drydock.

San Francisco Drydock has filed claims

against the United States. The State of

California has filed claims against San

Francisco Drydock and the United

States.

The State of California and the United

States have entered into a joint consent

decree with San Francisco Drydock that

resolves the claims asserted by both

governments against San Francisco

Drydock. Under the Consent Decree,

San Francisco Drydock will pay the

state and federal governments

$7,756,646 to settle the state and federal

claims for response costs, assessment

costs, and natural resources damages. Of

that total, $3.625 million is for natural

resources damages under the trusteeship

of the federal and state governments.

The state and federal natural resources

trustees presently plan to use the $3.625

million to restore and enhance habitats,

birds, marine aquatic species, public

areas, and public services affected by

the spill. The natural resources trustees

will describe specific restoration

projects in one or more restoration plan

proposals. Public comment on the

specific projects will be sought before

the trustees prepare the final restoration

plan or plans.

Other federal components of the

settlement include the recovery of Coast

Guard and Navy response costs of

$1,239,198; Department of the Interior

(‘‘DOI’’) response costs of $138,832;

compensation for the oiling of historic

ships in the amount of $50,000; and

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration response costs of

$120,630.

The State of California is recovering

other amounts, including state response

costs of $1,757,984; state damage

assessment costs of $175,000; payments

to the state environmental enhancement

fund and the oil spill prevention and

administration fund totaling $175,000,

and a civil penalty of $50,000. In

addition, the state and the San

Francisco District Attorney’s Office will

jointly administer $400,000 to be

devoted to enhancing and protecting

natural resources in or around, or

affected by or having an effect on, San

Francisco Bay.

The Department of Justice will

receive, for a period of thirty (30) days

from the date of this publication,

comments relating to the joint natural

resources damages component of the

proposed consent decree, the $3.625

million. No comments are requested on

the recovery of response costs or other

matters. Comments should be addressed

to the Assistant Attorney General for the

Environment and Natural Resources

Division, Department of Justice,

Washington, D.C. 20530, and copied to

Robert R. Klotz, Environmental

Enforcement Section, U.S. Department

of Justice, 301 Howard Street, Suite 870,

San Francisco, CA 94105. Comments

should refer to In re Complaint of

United States, as Owner of SS CAPE

MOHICAN (O.N. 536672), for

exoneration from or limitation of

liability, Civil No. C97–1380 EDL, and

DOJ No. 90–5–1–1–4407.

The proposed CAPE MOHICAN

consent decree may be examined at the

office of the United States Attorney,

Northern District of California, 450

Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco,

California 94102; 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

consent 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. To

request a copy of the consent decree in

In re Complaint of United States, as

Owner of SS CAPE MOHICAN (O.N.

536672), for exoneration from or

limitation of liability, please refer to that

case title, Civil No. C97–1380 EDL, and

DOJ No. 90–5–1–1–4407, and enclose a

check for the amount of $9.50 (25 cents

per page reproduction cost) payable to

the Consent Decree Library.

Joel Gross,

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 98–20395 Filed 7–29–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division

United States v. General Electric

Company; Proposed Final Judgment

and Competitive Impact Statement

Notice is hereby given pursuant to the

Antitrust Procedures and Penalties Act,

15 U.S.C. 16(b) through (h), that a

proposed Final Judgment, Stipulation,

and Competitive Impact Statement have

been filed with the United States

District Court for the District of

Montana, Missoula Division, in United

States v. General Electric Company,

Civil Action No. 96–121–M–CCL.

Copies of the Complaint, proposed Final

Judgment, and Competitive Impact

Statement are available for inspection at

the Department of Justice in

Washington, DC, in Room 300, 325

Seventh Street, NW., and at the Office

of the Clerk of the United States District

Court for the District of Montana, 301

South Park, Room 542, Helena, MT

59626.

The Complaint in this case, filed in

August 1996, alleged that General

Electric had entered into agreements

that violated Sections 1 and 2 of the

Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1 and 2, with

hospitals in the United States. The

District Court dismissed the

government’s Section 2 claims, leaving

for adjudication whether GE’s

agreements, by restraining trade, had

violated Section 1. The challenged

agreements were part of license

agreements between GE and the

hospitals in which the hospitals agreed,

as a condition for obtaining a license for

GE’s advanced diagnostic materials for

the servicing of their GE imaging

equipment (such as MRIs, CT scanners,

x-ray machines, etc.), that they would

not compete with GE in servicing

medical equipment for others.

The proposed Final Judgment enjoins

GE from restraining, in connection with

such licenses, a licensee’s right to

service medical equipment for third

parties. Section IV(B) of the Final

Judgment prohibits GE from requiring