Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Notices 36081

The Commission transmitted its

determination in this investigation to

the Secretary of Commerce on June 24,

1996. The views of the Commission are

contained in USITC Publication 2976

(July 1996) entitled ‘‘Engineered Process

Gas Turbo-Compressor Systems from

Japan: Investigation No. 731–TA–748

(Preliminary).’’

By order of the Commission.

Issued: July 1, 1996.

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–17427 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

[Investigation No. 337–TA–372 Enforcement

Proceeding]

Certain Neodymium-Iron-Boron

Magnets, Magnet Alloys, and Articles

Containing Same; Notice of Referral of

Formal Enforcement Proceeding to an

Administrative Law Judge for Issuance

of a Recommended Determination

AGENCY: U.S. International Trade

Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that

the Commission has referred the formal

enforcement proceeding instituted on

April 25, 1996, in the above-captioned

investigation to an administrative law

judge for appropriate proceedings and

the issuance of a recommended

determination.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jay

H. Reiziss, Esq., Office of the General

Counsel, U.S. International Trade

Commission, telephone 202–252–3116.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

October 10, 1995, the Commission

issued a notice that it had determined

not to review an initial determination

(Order No. 29) of the presiding

administrative law judge in the abovecaptioned investigation granting a

motion to terminate the investigation as

to respondents San Huan New Materials

High Tech, Inc., Ningbo Konit

Industries, Inc., and Tridus

International, Inc. (the ‘‘San Huan

respondents’’) on the basis of a Consent

Order, and subsequently issued the

Consent Order. The Consent Order

provides that the San Huan

respondents:

shall not sell for importation, import into the

United States or sell in the United States after

importation or knowingly aid, abet,

encourage, participate in, or induce the sale

for importation, importation into the United

States or sale in the United States after

importation of neodymium-iron-boron

magnets which infringe any of claims 1–3 of

the ’439 patent, or articles or products which

contain such magnets, except under consent

or license from Crucible.

On March 4, 1996, complainant

Crucible Materials Corporation filed a

complaint alleging that the San Huan

respondents had violated the Consent

Order and seeking institution of a

formal enforcement proceeding.

Crucible requested that the Commission

enforce the Consent Order, impose civil

penalties, assess reasonable attorney’s

fees, and impose such other remedies

and sanctions as are appropriate. On

March 12 and 28, 1996, the San Huan

respondents filed letters objecting, inter

alia, to a formal enforcement proceeding

and requesting that an informal

enforcement proceeding instead be

instituted.

On April 25, 1996, the Commission

issued an Order instituting a formal

enforcement proceeding and instructing

the Secretary to transmit the

enforcement proceeding complaint to

the San Huan respondents through

counsel for a response. On June 4, 1996,

the San Huan respondents filed a

response to the complaint, denying

violation of the Consent Order and

infringement of the patent claims at

issue and requesting that the

Commission deny all relief sought and

terminate the enforcement proceeding

with prejudice.

Having examined the San Huan

respondents’ response to the formal

enforcement proceeding complaint filed

by Crucible, and having found that

issues concerning possible violation of

the Commission’s Consent Order

remain, the Commission determined to

refer the enforcement proceeding to

Judge Paul J. Luckern for issuance of a

recommended determination

concerning whether San Huan New

Materials High Tech, Inc., Ningbo Konit

Industries, Inc., and/or Tridus

International, Inc. are in violation of the

Commission’s Consent Order. The

recommended determination is to be

issued within six (6) months of the

Commission Order referring the

enforcement proceeding to the

administrative law judge.

This action is taken under the

authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act

of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. § 1337),

and section 210.75 of the Commission’s

Rules of Practice and Procedure (19

C.F.R. § 210.75).

Copies of the Commission’s Order and

all other nonconfidential documents

filed in connection with this

enforcement proceeding are or will be

available for inspection during official

business hours (8:45 a.m. to 5:15 p.m.)

in the Office of the Secretary, U.S.

International Trade Commission, 500 E

Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20436,

telephone 202–205–2000. Hearingimpaired persons are advised that

information on this matter can be

obtained by contacting the

Commission’s TDD terminal on 202–

205–1810.

Issued: July 1, 1996.

By order of the Commission.

Donna R. Koehnke,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 96–17426 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020–02–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act and

the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act

In accordance with Department of

Justice Policy, 28 CFR 50.7, 38 FR

19029, and 42 U.S.C. § 9622(d), notice is

hereby given that on June 24, 1996, a

proposed Consent Decree was lodged

with the United States District Court for

the Western District of Washington,

United States v. ASARCO Inc., Civil

Action No. C91–5528B. The proposed

Consent Decree settles claims asserted

by the United States at the request of the

United States Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) for releases of hazardous

substances at the Asarco Smelter

Operable Unit of the Commencement

Bay Nearshore/Tideflats Superfund Site

in Ruston and Tacoma, Washington.

The defendant in the action is ASARCO

Incorporated (Asarco). The claims of the

United States on behalf of EPA are

based upon contamination of the Asarco

Smelter Site. The Asarco Smelter Site is

comprised of the Asarco smelter facility,

which is approximately sixty-seven

acres in size, and the adjacent twentythree acre slag peninsula.

In its amended complaint, the United

States asserted claims against Asarco

pursuant to Sections 106 and 107(a) of

the Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act (CERCLA), as amended, 42 U.S.C.

§§ 9606 and 9607(a), and Section 7003

of the Resource Conservation and

Recovery Act (RCRA), 42 U.S.C. § 6973,

for injunctive relief to abate an

imminent and substantial endangerment

to public health or welfare or the

environment due to the release or

threatened release of hazardous

substances at the Asarco Smelter Site.

The United States also sought recovery

of costs that have been and will be

incurred in response to releases and
36082 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 132 / Tuesday, July 9, 1996 / Notices

threatened releases of hazardous

substances at the Asarco Smelter Site,

and a declaration that Asarco is liable

for such costs.

In the Consent Decree, Asarco agrees

to implement the remedy set forth in

EPA’s Record of Decision (ROD) for the

Asarco Smelter Site dated March 24,

1995. Asarco agrees to: (1) excavate

approximately 160,000 cubic yards of

soil and slag contaminated above action

levels; (2) dispose of the contaminated

soil and demolition debris designated as

hazardous waste in an on-site

containment facility (OCF) which meets

or exceeds regulatory standards for

hazardous waste landfills; (3) cap the

entire Site with a low-permeability cap

composed of layers of clean soils, gravel

and clay; (4) demolish the remaining

buildings and structures on the Site; (5)

replace the entire surface water drainage

system; (6) armor portions of the plant

site and slag peninsula shoreline; (7)

continue to monitor the sediments and

groundwater under an Administrative

Order on Consent currently in effect;

and (8) develop and implement an

enforceable program of restrictions and

guidelines to supplement the actual

cleanup activities to ensure that the

remedial action remains protective and

that development activities do not

impact the long-term effectiveness of the

cleanup. Asarco will also reimburse the

United States for $3,081,510.00 in past

response costs that the United States has

incurred relating to the Asarco Smelter

Site and will reimburse the United

States for all of its future response costs

at the Site.

In exchange, Asarco will receive a

covenant not to sue from the United

States with respect to the Asarco

Smelter Site for claims pursuant to

Sections 106 and 107(a) of CERCLA and

Section 7003 of RCRA.

The Department of Justice will receive

written comments relating to the

proposed Consent Decree for thirty (30)

days from the date of publication of this

notice. Comments should be addressed

to the Assistant Attorney General of the

Environment and Natural Resources

Division, U.S. Department of Justice,

Washington, D.C. 20530, and should

refer to United States v. ASARCO Inc.,

D.J. Ref. No. 90–11–2–698A.

Commenters may request an

opportunity for a public meeting in the

affected area, in accordance with

Section 7003 of RCRA.

The proposed Consent Decree and

exhibits may be examined at the

following locations: the Region 10

Office of EPA, 7th Floor Records Center,

1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101;

ASARCO Information Center, 5311

North Commercial, Ruston, Washington

98407; the Tacoma Public Library, Main

Branch, 1102 Tacoma Avenue South,

Northwest Room, Tacoma, WA 98402;

and Citizens for a Healthy Bay, 771

Broadway, Tacoma, WA 98402. The

complete Administrative Record for the

Asarco Smelter Site may be reviewed at

the EPA Region 10 office in Seattle and

at the Main Branch of the Tacoma

Public Library.

A copy of the Consent Decree and

exhibits (if requested) may be obtained

in person or by mail from the Consent

Decree Library, 1120 G Street, N.W., 4th

Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005, (202)

624–0892. In requesting copies, please

enclose a check in the amount of $22.75

(without exhibits) or $297.00 (with

exhibits) (25 cents per page

reproduction cost) payable to the

‘‘Consent Decree Library.’’

Bruce Gelber,

Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement

Section, Environment and Natural Resources

Division.

[FR Doc. 96–17311 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–01–M

Drug Enforcement Administration

Importation of Controlled Substances;

Notice of Application

Pursuant to Section 1008 of the

Controlled Substances Import and

Export Act (21 U.S.C. 958(i)), the

Attorney General shall, prior to issuing

a registration under this Section to a

bulk manufacturer of a controlled

substance in Schedule I or II and prior

to issuing a regulation under Section

1002(a) authorizing the importation of

such a substance, provide

manufacturers holding registrations for

the bulk manufacture of the substance

an opportunity for a hearing.

Therefore, in accordance with Section

1311.42 of Title 21, Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR), notice is hereby

given that on February 23, 1996, MedPharmex Inc., 2727 Thompson Creek

Road, Pomona, California 91767, made

application to the Drug Enforcement

Administration to be registered as an

importer of pentobarbital (2270) a basic

class of controlled substance listed

Schedule II.

The firm plans to import

pentobarbital to manufacture an

euthanasia product for animals.

Any manufacturer holding, or

applying for, registration as a bulk

manufacturer of this basic class of

controlled substance may file written

comments on or objections to the

application described above and may, at

the same time, file a written request for

a hearing on such application in

accordance with 21 CFR 1301.54 in

such form as prescribed by 21 CFR

1316.47.

Any such comments or objections

may be addressed, in quintuplicate, to

the Deputy Assistant Administrator,

Office of Diversion Control, Drug

Enforcement Administration, United

States Department of Justice,

Washington, D.C. 20537, Attention: DEA

Federal Register Representative (CCR),

and must be filed no later than August

8, 1996.

This procedure is to be conducted

simultaneously with and independent

of the procedures described in 21 CFR

1311.42 (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f). As noted

in a previous notice at 40 FR 43745–46

(September 23, 1975), all applicants for

registration to import a basic class of

any controlled substance in Schedule I

or II are and will continue to be required

to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant

Administrator, Office of Diversion

Control, Drug Enforcement

Administration that the requirements

for such registration pursuant to 21

U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21

CFR 1311.42 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f)

are satisfied.

Dated: July 1, 1996.

Gene R. Haislip,

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of

Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement

Administration.

[FR Doc. 96–17337 Filed 7–8–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–09–M

Immigration and Naturalization Service

Agency Information Collection

Activities: Revision of Existing

Collection; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice of Information Collection

Under Review; Guam Visa Waiver

Information.

The proposed information collection

is published to obtain comments from

the public and affected agencies.

Comments are encouraged and will be

accepted for ‘‘sixty days’’ from the date

listed at the top of this page in the

Federal Register.

Request written comments and

suggestions from the public and affected

agencies concerning the proposed

collection of information. Your

comments should address one or more

of the following four points:

(1) evaluate whether the proposed

collection of information is necessary

for the proper performance of the

functions of the agency, including

whether the information will have

practical utility;