26412 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 1995 / Notices

CNO Executive Panel; Closed Meeting

Pursuant to the provisions of the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (5

U.S.C. App. 2), notice is hereby given

that the Chief of Naval Operations

(CNO) Executive Panel will meet June

20-21, 1995, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.,

on each day. The meeting will be held

at the Applied Physics Laboratory, JHU,

Johns Hopkins Road, Laurel MD. This

session will be closed to the public.

The purpose of this meeting is to

conduct discussions on strategies for an

uncertain future to include information

warfare, reserve structure and

mobilization, and the changing strategic

environment. Additionally, the panel

members will discuss and synthesize

recommendations and conclusions

which will appear in the Task Force

final report. These matters constitute

classified information that is

specifically authorized by Executive

order to be kept secret in the interest of

national defense and are, in fact,

properly classified pursuant to such

Executive order. Accordingly, the

Secretary of the Navy has determined in

writing that the public interest requires

that all sessions of the meeting be closed

to the public because they will be

concerned with matters listed in section

552b(c)(1) of title 5, United States Code.

For further information concerning

this meeting, contact: Timothy J. Galpin,

Assistant for CNO Executive Panel

Management, 4401 Ford Avenue, Suite

601, Alexandria, VA 22302-0268,

Phone: (703) 756-1205.

Dated: May 4, 1995

L. R. McNees,

LCDR, JAGC, USN, Federal Register Liaison

Officer.

[FR Doc. 95-12089 Filed 5-16-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-F

DELAWARE RIVER BASIN

COMMISSION

Notice of Commission Meeting and

Public Hearing

Notice is hereby given that the

Delaware River Basin Commission will

hold a public hearing on Wednesday,

May 24, 1995. The hearing will be part

of the Commission’s regular business

meeting which is open to the public and

scheduled to begin at 11:00 a.m. in

Conference Room Two, 30th Floor, 290

Broadway, New York, New York.

An informal conference among the

Commissioners and staff will be open

for public observation at 10:00 a.m. at

the same location and will include

reports on the Upper Delaware ice

diversion project; New York State’s FY

1996 budgetary contribution to the

Commission; review policy for depletive

water uses exceeding 100,000 gpd and

possible local sponsorship of a Lehigh

River Basin automated flood warning

system.

The subjects of the hearing will be as

follows:

Applications for Approval of the

Following Projects Pursuant to Article

10.3, Article 11 and/or Section 3.8 of

the Compact

1. West Deptford Township D–79–82 CP

RENEWAL–2

An application for the renewal of a

ground water withdrawal project to

supply up to 108.5 million gallons (mg)/

30 days of water to the applicant’s

distribution system from Well Nos. 3

through 8. Commission approval on

December 23, 1986 was limited to five

years. The applicant requests that the

total withdrawal from all wells be

increased from 105 mg/30 days to 108.5

mg/30 days. The project is located in

West Deptford Township, Gloucester

County, New Jersey.

2. Rollins Environmental Services Inc.

D–93–63

An application for approval of an

industrial wastewater treatment plant

(IWTP) modification project. The

applicant proposes to replace its

existing outfall flume with a submerged

outfall diffuser for its current discharge

to Raccoon Creek in Water Quality Zone

4. The project IWTP will continue to

serve the applicant’s commercial

hazardous waste treatment facility

situated just south of U.S. Route 322

and north of Raccoon Creek in Logan

Township, Gloucester County, New

Jersey.

3. Seabrook Water Corporation D–94–48

CP

An application for approval of an

existing ground water withdrawal

project to supply up to 20 mg/30 days

of water to the applicant’s distribution

system from existing Well Nos. 12 and

13, and to limit the withdrawal from all

wells to 20 mg/30 days. The project is

located in Upper Deerfield Township,

Cumberland County, New Jersey.

4. Pocono Farms Water Company D–94–

65 CP

An application for approval of a

ground water withdrawal project to

supply up to 15.75 mg/30 days of water

to the applicant’s distribution system

from Well Nos. 4, 5 and 7, and to

increase the existing withdrawal limit of

4.84 mg/30 days from all wells to 15.75

mg/30 days. The project is located in

Coolbaugh Township, Monroe County,

Pennsylvania.

5. Thornbury Township, Delaware

County D–94–76 CP

A project to expand an existing 0.06

million gallons per day (mgd) sewage

treatment plant (STP) to 0.12 mgd to

serve growth in the planned residential

development of Thornbury Hunt in

Thorny Township, Delaware County,

Pennsylvania. The STP will continue to

provide secondary biological treatment

and discharge to Chester Creek near the

Penn Central Railroad in Thornbury

Township.

6. Jericho National Golf Club, Inc. D–95–

2

An application for approval of a

ground water withdrawal project to

supply up to 9 mg/30 days of water to

the applicant’s golf course irrigation

system from existing Well Nos. B–100

and B-C, and to limit the withdrawal

from all wells to 9 mg/30 days. The

project is located in Upper Makefield

Township, Bucks County, Pennsylvania.

7. Town of Thompson, Emerald Green

STP D–95–16 CP

A STP upgrade project that will

replace a 0.41 mgd capacity secondary

level plant with a 0.41 mgd capacity

tertiary plant. The upgraded STP will

continue to serve development in the

Emerald Green/Lake Louise Marie

Sewer District in the Town of

Thompson, Sullivan County, New York.

The STP will be situated on the site of

the existing STP located just south of

Route 17 and north of Lake Louise

Marie in the Town of Thompson, and

will continue to discharge to McKee

Brook, a tributary of the Neversink

River, via the existing outfall.

8. Outletter Associates D–95–17

A project to expand the existing 0.017

mgd tertiary STP to 0.024 mgd by

replacing the existing extended aeration

biological treatment process with a

sequencing batch reactor process, along

with other modifications. The STP will

continue to serve the Crossings Outlet

Square shopping center located in

Pocono Township, Monroe County,

Pennsylvania. Treated effluent, after

ultraviolet disinfection, will continue to

discharge to Pocono Creek in Pocono

Township.

Documents relating to these items

may be examined at the Commission’s

offices. Preliminary dockets are

available in single copies upon request.

Please contact George C. Elias

concerning docket-related questions.

Persons wishing to testify at this hearing
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 95 / Wednesday, May 17, 1995 / Notices 26413

are requested to register with the

Secretary prior to the hearing.

Dated: May 9, 1995.

Susan M. Weisman,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–12070 Filed 5–16–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6360–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Special Education and

Rehabilitative Services; Office of

Administrative Law Judges; Intent To

Compromise Claims, South Carolina

Commission for the Blind

AGENCY: Department of Education.

ACTION: Notice of intent to compromise

claims.

SUMMARY: The Department intends to

compromise claims against the South

Carolina Commission for the Blind

(Commission) now pending before the

Office of Administrative Law Judges

(OALJ), Docket Nos. 93–131–R and 93–

141–R (20 U.S.C. 1234a(j)).

DATES: Interested persons may comment

on the proposed action by submitting

written data, views, or arguments on or

before July 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: All comments concerning

this notice should be addressed to

Jeffrey B. Rosen, Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. Department of Education,

600 Independence Avenue SW., Room

5411, FB–10B, Washington, D.C. 20202–

2242.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jeffrey B. Rosen. Telephone: (202) 401–

6009. Individuals who use a

telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD) may call the Federal Information

Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339

between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern time,

Monday through Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant

to the Single Audit Act of 1984 (P.L. 98–

502) and the provisions of Office of

Management and Budget (OMB)

Circular A–128, the Office of the State

Auditor, State of South Carolina,

conducted an audit of the Commission

for the period July 1, 1987 through June

30, 1989. A final audit report was issued

on February 11, 1993 (ACN: 04–23147

SC) (hereinafter ‘‘SC I’’).

Based upon this audit report, the

Regional Commissioner, Region IV,

Rehabilitation Services Commission,

U.S. Department of Education (ED),

issued a Preliminary Department

Decision (PDD) on September 28, 1993

in which he requested that the

Commission repay $294,232 of funds

misspent under Title I of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended

(the Act), 29 U.S.C. 701 et seq. There

were seven different monetary findings

as follows:

a. Finding 1(b)—$8,528.23—

Unallowable vehicle purchase.

b. Finding 2—$1,217.00—Purchases not

properly allocated to particular cost

objectives.

c. Finding 4—$51,294.74—Time

distribution records not maintained

for employees.

d. Finding 6(a)—$205,640.00—

Documentation not maintained for

Federal activities.

e. Finding 8—$8,109.41—Computer

lease payments not properly

allocated.

f. Finding 9—$17,614.62—Expenditures

obligated after project end.

g. Finding 12—$1,828.00—Unallowable

interest charges.

On October 27, 1993 the Commission

filed an application for review of the

PDD with the Office of Administrative

Law Judges (OALJ). On September 26,

1994, the Regional Commissioner filed a

Notice of Reduction of Claim notifying

the OALJ that, based upon new

information submitted by the

Commission, Finding 6(a) was reduced

by $139,353.37. Thus, the total amount

outstanding in the appeal was reduced

to $154,878.63.

The Office of the State Auditor

conducted another audit covering the

period July 1, 1990 through June 30,

1991. A final audit report was issued on

February 23, 1993 (ACN: 04–23165G

SC) (hereinafter ‘‘SC II’’). In SC II, the

Regional Commissioner issued a PDD on

September 29, 1993 in which he

requested that the Commission repay

$129,369.26 of funds under the Act.

There were three different monetary

findings as follows:

a. Finding 1—$88,805.26—Time

distribution records not maintained

for employees.

b. Finding 2—$18,156.80—Using funds

under the Act for unallowable

expenditures.

c. Finding 3—$22,407.20—Purchases

not properly allocated to particular

cost objectives.

The Commission filed an appeal of

the PDD with the OALJ on November 3,

1993.

The Commission and ED have agreed

to settle all of the issues in these cases.

The outstanding amounts in the two

cases are covered by the Settlement

Agreements.

Under the terms of the proposed

agreement in SC I, the Commission

owes ED a total of $68,955. This

repayment amount, including four

percent interest accruing from July 15,

1995, is to be paid in three equal annual

payments of $23,904 beginning July 15,

1995 and continuing through July 15,

1997. The Commission would be

assessed interest at a rate of four percent

per year if any of the foregoing

payments are not made in a timely

fashion. Failure to make timely payment

within 20 days would result in a late

payment fee of 10 percent of the

payment due. Finally, under the

agreement, the parties would jointly

move for dismissal of the appeal.

For the following reasons, ED

recommends approval of the proposed

Settlement Agreement in SC I. The

Commission has agreed to repay in full

the cost disallowances in Findings 1, 2,

8, and 12. In Finding 9, ED determined

that there was insufficient evidence of

harm to the Federal interest and, as a

result, agreed not to seek any recovery

on this issue in the agreement.

With respect to Finding 4, which

pertains to a time distribution issue for

employees, the parties agreed that the

Commission should repay $15,826,

which represents a repayment of greater

than 30 percent of the original

disallowed amount of $51,294.74. The

evidence presented by the Commission

demonstrated that the employees in

question worked a substantial portion of

time on grant activities. Although the

Commission clearly had an obligation to

keep time distribution records, it

presented other less reliable and

circumstantial evidence that could

persuade an administrative law judge or

a Federal court to rule in substantial

part or in full for its position.

With respect to the final issue,

Finding 6(a), ED originally

recommended a cost disallowance of

$205,640 for the failure of the

Commission to maintain proper

documentation for Federal activities.

Following an on-site review of the

documentation in question in this issue,

ED agreed to reduce the cost

disallowance to $66,286.63, which

consisted of obligations the liquidation

of which the Commission had been

unable to verify. Notwithstanding the

Commission’s failure to satisfy its

burden of providing this information,

ED did not have evidence demonstrating

that all of these outstanding obligations

were, in fact, unliquidated or detailing

the extent to which the Federal interest

was harmed. In order to reach a

settlement of all the issues in this case,

ED agreed to a 50 percent payback of

$33,143 on this issue.

Based upon the foregoing, ED believes

that it is prudent to accept the

settlement offer in SC I, which

represents almost 45 percent of the

disallowed costs outstanding in this

case.