Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 92 / Friday, May 10, 1996 / Notices 21489

Road, Old Saybrook, Connecticut,

without a permit as required by 33

U.S.C. 1344. Defendants Maia and

Kathryn Chiat, successors in title to the

property, will perform certain removal

and restoration work and will apply to

the Army Corps of Engineers for a

permit to maintain the fill remaining

after the restoration work is completed.

The United States Attorney’s Office

will receive written comments relating

to the proposed Consent Decree for a

period of 30 days from the date of

publication of this notice. Comments

should be addressed to John B. Hughes,

Esq., Assistant U.S. Attorney, District of

Connecticut, P.O. Box 1824, New

Haven, Connecticut 06508, and should

refer to United States v. Martin H.

Frimberger, Citicorp Mortgage, Inc. and

Maia and Kathryn Chiat, Civil No.

3:90CV136 (DJS) (D. Conn.).

The Complaint and proposed Consent

Decree in this case may be examined at

the Clerk’s Office, United States District

Court for the District of Connecticut,

450 Main Street, Hartford, Connecticut

06103.

Letitia J. Grishaw,

Chief, Environmental Defense Section,

Environmental & Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 96–11655 Filed 5–9–96; 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 a proposed Final

(Consent) Judgment in United States v.

Seminole Fertilizer Corp., Case No. 96–

735–CIV–T–24B (M.D. Fla.), was lodged

with the United States District Court for

the Middle District of Florida on April

15, 1996.

The proposed Final (Consent)

Judgment concerns alleged violations of

section 301(a) and 404 of the Clean

Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1311(a) and 1344.

Specifically, Defendant Seminole

Fertilizer Corporation exceeded the

terms of a permit issued by the Corps of

Engineers under Clean Water Act

section 404 in connection with

Seminole’s phosphate mining

operations. As a result of the alleged

violation, fill material was unlawfully

discharged into approximately 15.0

unpermitted acres of wetlands. The

proposed Final (Consent) Judgment

would require Seminole Fertilizer

Corporation to complete an on-site

mitigation project and to pay a $40,000

civil penalty.

The United States Attorney’s Office

will receive written comments relating

to the proposed Final (Consent)

Judgment for a period of 30 days from

the date of publication of this notice.

Comments should be addressed to

Michael A. Cauley, Assistant U.S.

Attorney, Middle District of Florida, 500

Zack Street, Room 400, Tampa, FL

33602, and should refer to United States

v. Seminole Fertilizer Corp., Case No.

96–735–CIV–T–24B (M.D. Fla.).

The Complaint and proposed Final

(Consent) Judgment in this case may be

examined at the Clerk’s Office, United

States District Court for the Middle

District of Florida, 611 North Florida

Avenue, Tampa, Florida 33602.

Letitia J. Grishaw,

Chief, Environmental Defense Section,

Environmental & Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 96–11656 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Clean Water Act

In accordance with Departmental

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

given that a consent decree in United

States of America v. Robert V. Spiller,

CV–96–1010 (W.D. La.), was lodged

with the United States District Court for

the Western District of Louisiana on

April 23, 1996. The proposed decree

concerns alleged violations of the Clean

Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1311, as a result

of the discharge of fill materials onto

approximately 7.2 acres of wetlands by

Roger V. Spiller (‘‘Spiller’’), near New

Iberia, Louisiana.

The Consent Decree provides for the

payment of a $2,000.00 civil penalty to

the United States and requires partial

restoration of the violation site in accord

with a partial restoration plan approved

by the United States Environmental

Protection Agency (‘‘EPA’’).

The Department of Justice will receive

written comments relating to the

consent decree for a period of thirty (30)

days from the date of this notice.

Comments should be addressed to the

Assistant Attorney General,

Environment and Natural Resources

Division, U.S. Department of Justice,

Attention: John A. Sheehan,

Environmental Defense Section, P.O.

Box 23986, Washington, D.C. 20026–

3986, and should refer to United States

v. Spiller, DJ Reference No. 90–5–1–1–

4132.

The proposed consent decree may be

examined at the Offices of the United

States Attorney for the Western District

of Louisiana, 600 Jefferson Street, Suite

1000, Lafayette, Louisiana 70501; the

offices of Region VI of the United States

Environmental Protection Agency, 1445

Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202, and

at the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G

Street, N.W., 4th Floor, Washington,

D.C. 20005. In requesting a copy, please

enclose a check in the amount of $7.75

for a copy of the consent decree with

attachments.

Letitia J. Grisaw,

Chief, Environmental Defense Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division,

United States Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 96–11654 Filed 5–9–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Antitrust Division

United States of America v. Woman’s

Hospital Foundation & Woman’s

Physician Health Organization;

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)–(h), that a proposed

Final Judgment, Stipulation, and a

Competitive Impact Statement have

been filed with the United States

District Court for the Middle District of

Louisiana in United States of America v.

Woman’s Hospital Foundation &

Woman’s Physician Health

Organization, Civil No. 96–389–BM2.

The complaint alleges that defendants

entered into an agreement that

unreasonably restrained competition

among physicians in the Baton Rouge,

Louisiana area, in violation of Section 1

of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 1. The

complaint also alleges that Woman’s

Hospital Foundation willfully attempted

to maintain and maintained its

monopoly in inpatient obstetrical

services in the Baton Rouge, Louisiana

area, in violation of Section 2 of the

Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. 2.

The proposed Final Judgment, agreed

to by the defendants, prohibits

defendants’ unlawful agreement and the

additional acts of Woman’s Hospital

Foundation that gave rise to the

violations of Section 2.

Public comment on the proposed

Final Judgment is invited within the

statutory 60-day comment period. Such

comments and responses thereto will be

published in the Federal Register and

filed with the Court. Comments should

be directed to Gail Kursh, Chief; Health

Care Task Force; United States

Department of Justice; Antitrust

Division; 325 7th Street, NW.; Room