25250 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 1995 / Notices

COPS grant. The Troops to COPS

Application will seek basic information

about the veteran who was hired and a

brief itemization of training costs for

which the agency seeks to be

reimbursed.

Agencies may apply for

reimbursement only after a veteran has

satisfied the normal hiring standards

and procedures of that agency. To be

eligible for reimbursement, the veterans

hired must have been a member of the

armed forces or reserves on or after

October 1, 1993, and must have been

honorably discharged or released from

active duty characterized as honorable.

Preference will be given to the requests

of those departments who have hired a

veteran who: (1) Has been involuntarily

separated; or (2) is approved for

separation under the Armed Forces

Voluntary Separation Incentive, or the

Special Separation Benefits program; or

(3) has retired pursuant to the

Transition Assistance Act; and (4) has

experience in the military police of the

respective branch of the armed forces.

The Troops to COPS Application Kit

will contain a more detailed explanation

of these preferences.

An award under Troops to COPS will

not affect the eligibility of an agency for

a grant under any other COPS program.

Dated: April 24, 1995.

Joseph E. Brann,

Director.

[FR Doc. 95–11005 Filed 5–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Clean Water Act

In accordance with Department of

Justice policy, 28 C.F.R. § 50.7 notice is

hereby given that on April 28, 1995, a

proposed consent decree in United

States v. Blackbird Mining Co., et al.,

and State of Idaho, et al. v. The M.A.

Hanna Company, Consolidated Case No.

83–4179 (D. Idaho), was lodged with the

United States District Court for the

District of Idaho. The consent decree

resolves claims against the M.A. Hanna

Company, Hanna Services Company,

Noranda Mining Inc., Noranda

Exploration, Inc., Blackbird Mining

Company Limited Partnership, and

Alumet Corporation pursuant to the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation and Liability

Act of 1980, as amended (‘‘CERCLA’’),

42 U.S.C. 9601, et seq., and against the

M.A. Hanna Company, Hanna Services

Company, Noranda Mining Inc.,

Noranda Exploration, Inc., Blackbird

Mining Company Limited Partnership

pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution

Control Act (Clean Water Act, or

‘‘CWA’’), 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., and the

Endangered Species Act (‘‘ESA’’), 16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq., to accomplish the

clean up of the contamination and

restoration of the natural resources at

the Blackbird Mine in central Idaho and

for the recovery of past and future

response costs. The United States’

claims were filed in June 1993 against

the past and current owners and

operators of the mine on behalf of the

Forest Service and NOAA acting as

natural resource trustees and on behalf

of the EPA. The United States case was

consolidated with a case filed by the

State of Idaho in 1983 against most of

the same parties.

This settlement is a joint coordinated

plan developed by the Governments’, in

consultation and cooperation with the

Settling Defendants, for the restoration

and replacement of the injured natural

resources at the site. The major

provisions of the Consent Decree (CD)

consist of cash payments to the

Governments, implementation of a

Biological Restoration and

Compensation Plan (BRCP) that is filed

with the Consent Decree, and a

commitment to clean up the site

pursuant to a series of Response Actions

and implementation of the final remedy

selected by EPA under the CERCLA

remediation process. Specifically, the

Consent Decree provides as follows:

A. Cash payments

(1) Cash payment at time of entry to

the Natural Resource Trustees (NOAA,

USDA Forest Service, and Idaho) of $4.7

million which was expended on the

Natural Resource Damage Assessment,

(2) Payment of $328,742 to EPA,

NOAA and USDA for past response

costs, and

(3) Payment of $2.5 million into a

trust fund for implementation of the

Hatchery Component of the BRCP.

B. Natural Resource/Biological

Restoration and Compensation Plan

This portion of the Settlement

commits the Defendants to implement

and pay for a two-part program to fully

compensate the Natural Resources

Trustees for losses resulting from the

injury or destruction of natural

resources—including the ‘‘threatened’’

spring/summer chinook salmon—due to

releases of hazardous substances from

Blackbird Mine. The proposed projects

are valued by the Trustees at

approximately $17 million, and include

restoration as well as compensation for

‘‘interim’’ losses.

One part of the program, known as the

‘‘Hatchery Operations Program,’’

consists of construction of fish hatchery

facilities and associated structures

necessary to catch adult salmon brood

stock, raise the smolts and reintroduce

them into Panther Creek (and possibly

other streams in the Salmon River

Basin). These activities are not intended

to commence until 2005. The costs of

these facilities is approximately $2.5

million. This money is being placed in

a trust fund that may be withdrawn by

the Trustees and used for alternative

restoration projects if the Trustees for

any reason determine not to implement

the proposed Hatchery Program.

The second part of the BRCP is

referred to as the ‘‘Smolt Survival Plan’’.

This habitat improvement program

commits the Defendants to realign

approximately 1.2 miles of degraded

salmon rearing habitat in Panther Creek

and maintain protective barriers on this

portion of the stream for 100 years. The

defendants are also required to exclude

cattle on 2 miles of valuable salmon

rearing habitat in Panther Creek, and on

an additional 8 miles on other streams

to be identified and selected elsewhere

in the Salmon River Basin. The cattle

exclusion measures must be maintained

for 50 years. Defendants will also

construct at least 2 acres of off channel

rearing ponds for juvenile salmon.

Defendants will pay all planning

costs, monitoring costs and up to $2

million for Trustee oversight costs, and

comply with NEPA, ESA and other

permitting requirements. The BRCP

monitoring program is a complex

technical/scientific program designed to

insure appropriate water quality that

will support all life stages of salmonids

and the continued health of the

ecosystem.

The BRCP commits the Defendants to

restore water quality so that the

Hatchery Operation plan may begin by

2005. If this is not achieved, Defendants

are subject at the Governments’

discretion to: specific performance, and/

or liquidated damages of $25,000 for

each month that the hatchery operation

is delayed or interrupted because of

failure to meet the water quality

standard, or the reopening of the

lawsuit. The water quality standard is

based on EPA’s ambient water quality

for both chronic and acute toxicity for

copper.

The Consent Decree also commits the

Defendants to remediate the site

pursuant to early Response Actions and

a ROD under the EPA CERCLA process.

There are specific performance

provisions, stipulated penalties, and a

reopener to assure full remediation of

the site. The Defendants finally commit

to pay the Government’s future response

costs.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 91 / Thursday, May 11, 1995 / Notices 25251

The Department of Justice will receive

comments relating to the proposed

consent decree for a period of thirty (30)

days from the date of this publication.

Comments should be addressed to the

Assistant Attorney General,

Environment and Natural Resources

Division, Department of Justice, P.O.

Box 7611, Ben Franklin Station,

Washington, D.C. 20044, and refer to

United States v. Blackbird Mining Co.,

et al., and State of Idaho, et al. v. The

M.A. Hanna Company, DOJ number 90–

11–2–816.

Copies of the proposed consent decree

may be examined at the Office of the

Attorney General, Chief Natural

Resources Division, 700 W. Jefferson,

Ste. 210, Boise, Idaho; Office of the

United States Attorney, 877 W. Main

St., Ste. 201, Boise, Idaho; and the

Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street

NW., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C.

20005, (202) 624–0892. A copy of the

proposed consent decree may be

obtained by mail or in person from the

Consent Decree Library. When

requesting a copy of the consent decree,

please enclose a check in the amount of

$22.75 (25 cents per page reproduction

costs) payable to the ‘‘Consent Decree

Library’’. When requesting a copy please

refer to United States v. Blackbird

Mining Co., et al., and State of Idaho, et

al. v. The M.A. Hanna Company,

Consolidated Case No. 83–4179 (D.

Idaho), DOJ Case number 90–11–2–816.

Copies of reports which were relied

upon by the United States and the State

of Idaho in entering into the consent

decree are available for inspection at the

Office of the United States Attorney, 877

W. Main St., Ste. 201, Boise, Idaho.

Joel Gross,

Acting Chief, Environmental Enforcement

Section, Environment and Natural Resources

Division.

[FR Doc. 95–11573 Filed 5–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Clean Water Act and

the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899

In accordance with Department of

Justice policy, 28 C.F.R. § 50.7, notice is

hereby given that a consent decree in

United States of America v. Philip M.

Punzelt, Jr., John Giunta and Jeff

Northrop, (D. Conn. No. 3:95CV000156

(DJS)), was lodged with the United

States District Court for the District of

Connecticut on January 26, 1995.

The proposed Consent Decree

concerns alleged violations of Sections

301 and 404 of the Clean Water Act, 33

U.S.C. 1311 and 1344(s), and Section 10

of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899,

33 U.S.C. 403, by defendants Philip M.

Punzelt, Jr., John Giunta and Jeff

Northrop.

As described more fully in the

Complaint, on December 15, 1982, the

Department of the Army, Corps of

Engineers, issued a permit to Philip M.

Punzelt, Jr. to perform specified work,

including construction of a seawall, in

the navigable waters of the Saugatuck

River, Westport, Connecticut. The

permit expired on December 31, 1987.

Defendant Punzelt and his contractor,

defendant John Guinta, continued to

perform construction of the seawall and

placed fill material into the navigable

waters of the United States after

expiration of the permit. In addition,

defendants Philip Punzelt and Jeff

Northrop placed unauthorized floats

and docks in the navigable waters of the

United States.

This work, and the placement of the

unauthorized structures, constitute

violations of Sections 301 and 404 of the

Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311 and

1344, as well as Section 10 of the Rivers

and Harbors Act of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 403.

The proposed Consent Decree calls for

a civil penalty of $20,000.00 to be paid

by defendant Philip M. Punzelt, Jr.

under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.

1311 and 1344, and requires Mr. Punzelt

to submit to the Corps of Engineers an

application for an After-the-Fact permit

to retain the unauthorized fill material,

floats and docks, and abide by the

outcome of the permit process. Under

the Consent Decree, defendant John

Giunta must pay a civil penalty of

$6,000.00 under the Clean Water Act, 33

U.S.C. 1311 and 1344; and defendant

Jeff Northrop must pay $16,000.00 as

disgorgement of economic benefit

derived from activities in violation of

Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act

of 1899, 33 U.S.C. 403. Mr. Northrop is

alleged to have placed and/or

maintained unauthorized floats and

docks in the Saugatuck River, and

received income from rental of the

unauthorized structures. Finally, the

proposed Consent Decree provides that

the defendants will be enjoined from

future violations of the Clean Water Act

and the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899.

The United States Attorney’s Office

will receive written comments relating

to the Consent Decree until June 12,

1995. Comments should be addressed to

Sharon E. Jaffe, Esq., Assistant United

States Attorney, District of Connecticut,

P.O. Box 1824, New Haven, Connecticut

06508, and should refer to United States

of America v. Philip M. Punzelt, Jr., et

al., (D. Conn. No. 3:95CV000156 (DJS)).

The Complaint and Consent Decree in

this case may be examined at the Clerk’s

office, United States District Court, 450

Main Street, Hartford, Connecticut

06103.

Letitia J. Grishaw,

Chief, Environmental Defense Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 95–11572 Filed 5–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Antitrust Division

Notice Pursuant to the National

Cooperative Research and Production

Act of 1993 HDP User Group

International, Inc.

Notice is hereby given that, on

February 27, 1995, pursuant to section

6(a) of the National Cooperative

Research and Production Act of 1993,

15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (‘‘the Act’’), HDP

USER GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

an Arizona non-profit corporation, has

filed written notifications

simultaneously with the Attorney

General and the Federal Trade

Commission disclosing changes in its

membership. The notifications were

filed for the purpose of invoking the

Act’s provisions limiting the recovery of

antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages

under specified circumstances.

Specifically, ASAT, Palo Alto, CA;

ESEC, Phoenix, AZ; IMC, Linkoping,

SWEDEN; Combitech, Jonkoping,

SWEDEN; National Semiconductor,

Santa Clara, CA; and Delco Electronics

(a subsidiary of GM), Kokomo, IN have

become members of the HDP User

Group.

No other changes have been made in

either the membership or the planned

activity of the joint venture.

Membership remains open and HDP

intends to file additional written

notification disclosing all changes in

membership.

On September 14, 1994, the HDP User

Group filing its original notification

pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. A

notice was published in the Federal

Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the

Act on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15306–

7).

Constance K. Robinson,

Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 95–11637 Filed 5–10–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Notice Pursuant to the National

Cooperative Research and Production

Act of 1993; Michigan Materials and

Processing Institute

Notice is hereby given that, on

February 14, 1995, pursuant to section

6(a) of the National Cooperative

Research and Production Act of 1993,