Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices 33277 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Adrienne A. Coleman, Superintendent, 

Rock Creek Park, 3545 Williamsburg 

Lane, NW., Washington, DC 20008, 

(202) 895–6000. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

Although you can ask us in your 

comment to withhold your personal 

identifying information from public 

review, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. We will make all 

submissions from organizations, 

businesses, or individuals identifying 

themselves as representatives or 

officials of organizations or businesses, 

available for public inspection in their 

entirety. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The DEIS 

evaluates four alternatives for managing 

white-tailed deer in the park. The 

document describes and analyzes the 

environmental impacts of the No-Action 

Alternative and three Action 

Alternatives. When approved, the plan 

will guide deer management actions in 

Rock Creek Park over the next 15 years. 

Alternative A (No Action) would 

continue the existing deer management 

actions and policies of monitoring 

vegetation, deer density and relative 

numbers, using limited protection 

fencing and deer repellents to protect 

rare plants in natural areas and small 

areas in landscaped and cultural areas, 

data management, continuing current 

educational and interpretive measures, 

as well as inter-jurisdictional 

communication; no new deer 

management actions would be 

implemented. 

Alternative B would include all 

actions described under Alternative A, 

but would incorporate several nonlethal actions to protect forest seedlings, 

promote forest regeneration, and 

gradually reduce the deer numbers in 

the park. Additional actions under 

Alternative B would include large-scale 

exclosures (fencing) and reproductive 

control of does via sterilization and 

immunocontraceptives when feasible. 

Alternative C would include all 

actions described under Alternative A, 

but would also incorporate two lethal 

deer management actions to reduce the 

herd size. Additional actions under 

Alternative C would include reduction 

of the deer herd by either sharpshooting 

or capture and euthanasia of individual 

deer. Capture and euthanasia of 

individual deer would be an approach 

used in limited circumstances where 

sharpshooting may not be appropriate. 

Alternative D (the NPS Preferred 

Alternative) would include all actions 

described under Alternative A, but 

would also include a combination of 

certain additional lethal and non-lethal 

actions from Alternatives B and C to 

reduce deer herd numbers. The lethal 

actions would include both 

sharpshooting and capture/euthanasia 

and would be taken initially to quickly 

reduce the deer herd numbers. 

Population maintenance would be 

conducted via reproductive control 

methods if these are available and 

feasible. Sharpshooting would be used 

as a default option for maintenance if 

reproductive control methods would 

prove to be unavailable and infeasible. 

Alternative D would fully meet the plan 

objectives and has more certainty of 

success than the other alternatives 

analyzed. The relatively rapid reduction 

in both deer density and browsing 

pressure on native plant communities 

and species of special concern would 

provide beneficial impacts to the natural 

and cultural resources of the park. 

Dated: May 1, 2009. 

Margaret O’Dell, 

Regional Director, National Capital Region. 

[FR Doc. E9–16328 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–34–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

National Park Service 

Notice of Availability of a Record of 

Decision, White-tailed Deer 

Management Plan and Final 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Catoctin Mountain Park, MD 

AGENCY: National Park Service, 

Department of the Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of Availability of a 

Record of Decision on the White-tailed 

Deer Management Plan/Final 

Environmental Impact Statement for 

Catoctin Mountain Park, Maryland. 

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 

U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park 

Service announces the availability of the 

Record of Decision for the White-tailed 

Deer Management Plan/Final 

Environmental Impact Statement (Plan/ 

FEIS) for Catoctin Mountain Park, 

Maryland. The Plan/FEIS analyzed four 

alternatives. Alternative C, the selected 

alternative, includes two lethal actions 

that will be used in combination to 

reduce and control deer herd numbers. 

Qualified federal employees or 

contractors will conduct sharpshooting 

to reduce the deer population, and 

individual deer will be captured and 

euthanized in certain circumstances 

where sharpshooting is not appropriate. 

DATES: The Record of Decision for the 

project was approved on April 17, 2009, 

by the Regional Director, National 

Capital Region, National Park Service. 

As soon as practicable, the National 

Park Service will begin to implement 

the Preferred Alternative contained in 

the Final Environmental Impact 

Statement issued on December 12, 2008. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Copies of the Record of Decision may be 

obtained from Becky Loncosky, Park 

Biologist, Catoctin Mountain Park, 6602 

Foxville Road, Thurmont, Maryland 

21788, (301) 416–0135, or Online at 

http://parkplanning.nps.gov/cato. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Alternative A was the No Action 

Alternative studied by the Plan/EIS. The 

three Action Alternatives each used 

different combinations of non-lethal and 

lethal management tools to reduce the 

deer population and thus address 

declining forest regeneration and ensure 

that natural processes (including the 

presence of deer) support native 

vegetation, wildlife, and the cultural 

landscape of the park. 

All Action Alternatives included 

limited fencing, use of repellents around 

landscaped areas, deer and vegetation 

monitoring, data management, and 

research, as currently implemented 

under the No Action Alternative. Action 

Alternatives also utilize an adaptive 

management strategy in order to better 

manage based on uncertainty 

concerning the impacts that the change 

in deer population densities will have 

on vegetation recovery. By using an 

adaptive management approach, park 

managers will be able to change the 

timing or intensity of management 

treatments to better meet the goals of the 

plan as new information is obtained. 

Alternative B combined several nonlethal actions including large-scale 

exclosures (fencing), additional use of 

repellents in limited areas, and 

reproductive control of does to 

gradually reduce the deer population in 

the park. 

Alternative C will utilize two lethal 

actions in combination to reduce and 

control deer herd numbers. Qualified 

federal employees or contractors will 

conduct sharpshooting to reduce the 

deer population, and individual deer 

will be captured and euthanized in 

circumstances where sharpshooting is 

determined to be inappropriate. 

Alternative D combined elements 

from alternatives B and C to include 

sharpshooting, capture and euthanasia, 

and reproductive control of does. For all 

alternatives, the full range of foreseeable 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES
33278 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 131 / Friday, July 10, 2009 / Notices 

environmental consequences was 

assessed and appropriate mitigating 

measures were identified. 

The Record of Decision includes a 

description of the project’s background, 

a statement of the decision made, 

synopses of other alternatives 

considered, the basis for the decision, 

findings on impairment of park 

resources and values, a description of 

the environmentally preferred 

alternative, a listing of measures to 

minimize environmental harm, and an 

overview of public involvement in the 

decision-making process. 

Dated: June 2, 2009. 

Margaret O’Dell, 

Regional Director, National Capital Region. 

[FR Doc. E9–16329 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4312–59–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree 

Under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act 

Notice is hereby given that on June 

29, 2009, a proposed Consent Decree in 

United States of America v. AlcatelLucent USA Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 

09–CV–2902, was lodged with the 

United States District Court for the 

Eastern District of Pennsylvania. 

In this action the United States sought 

to recover from the defendants response 

costs incurred by the United States 

Environmental Protection Agency 

(‘‘EPA’’) in responding to releases or 

threatened releases of hazardous 

substances at or from the Heleva 

Landfill Site, located in North Whitehall 

Township, Lehigh County, 

Pennsylvania (the ‘‘Site’’). The Consent 

Decree memorializes the settlement that 

requires the settling parties, AlcatelLucent USA Inc. as successor in interest 

to AT&T Inc., Olin Corporation, and 

Pfizer Inc., to reimburse EPA’s past and 

future response costs related to the Site. 

The Consent Decree requires the 

settling parties to pay to the EPA 

Hazardous Substance Superfund the 

principal sum of $603,047.49 plus 

interest, in two installments. The first 

payment of $433,553.75 is due within 

forty-five (45) days of entry of the 

Consent Decree. The second payment of 

$169,493.74, plus interest, is due within 

two hundred and seventy (270) days of 

entry of the Consent Decree. The 

Consent Decree also requires that the 

settling parties pay future response costs 

incurred by EPA. 

The Department of Justice will receive 

for a period of thirty (30) days from the 

date of this publication comments 

relating to the Decree. Comments should 

be addressed to the Assistant Attorney 

General, Environmental and Natural 

Resources Division, and either e-mailed 

to pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or 

mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S. 

Department of Justice, Washington, DC 

20044–7611, and should refer to United 

States of America v. Alcatel-Lucent USA 

Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 09–CV– 

2902 (E.D. Pa.), D.J. Ref. 90–11–2–684/ 

1. 

The Decree may be examined at the 

Office of the United States Attorney, 

Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 615 

Chestnut Street, Suite 1250, 

Philadelphia, PA 19106, and at U.S. 

EPA Region III, 1650 Arch Street, 

Philadelphia, PA 19103. During the 

public comment period, the Decree, may 

also be examined on the following 

Department of Justice Web site, http:// 

www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the 

Decree may also be obtained by mail 

from the Consent Decree Library, P.O. 

Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice, 

Washington, DC 20044–7611 or by 

faxing or e-mailing a request to Tonia 

Fleetwood (tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov), 

fax no. (202) 514–0097, phone 

confirmation number (202) 514–1547. In 

requesting a copy from the Consent 

Decree Library, please enclose a check 

in the amount of $9.25 (25 cents per 

page reproduction cost) payable to the 

U.S. Treasury or, if by e-mail or fax, 

forward a check in that amount to the 

Consent Decree Library at the stated 

address. 

Maureen Katz, 

Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement 

Section, Environment and Natural Resources 

Division. 

[FR Doc. E9–16308 Filed 7–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Public Comment Period for 

Proposed Consent Decree and 

Settlement Agreement Under the Clean 

Air Act, RCRA and CERCLA 

Under 28 CFR 50.7, notice is hereby 

given that, for a period of 30 days, the 

United States will receive public 

comments on a proposed Consent 

Decree and Settlement Agreement 

(‘‘Decree’’) in In Re: G–I Holdings, Inc., 

et al., (Bankr. Case Nos. 01–30135 (RG) 

and 01–38790 (RG) and United States v. 

G–I Holdings, Inc. (Adversary 

Proceeding No. 08–2531 (RG), which 

was lodged with the U.S. Bankruptcy 

Court for the District of New Jersey on 

July 2, 2009. The United States, on 

behalf of U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (‘‘EPA’’), U.S. Department of the 

Interior (‘‘DOI’’), the U.S. National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (‘‘NOAA’’), the State of 

Vermont, and the debtor, G–I Holdings, 

Inc. (‘‘G–I’’) entered into the settlement 

under the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation 

and Liability Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 

9601 et seq.; the Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (‘‘RCRA’’), 42 U.S.C. 

6901 et seq.; the Clean Air Act, 42 

U.S.C. 7401 et seq.; the Federal Water 

Pollution Control Act (‘‘FWPCA’’), 33 

U.S.C. 1251 et seq.; and Title 10, 

Vermont Annotated Statutes §§ 1259, 

1274, 6610a, 6615 and 6616. The 

proposed Decree would resolve the 

proofs of claim of the United States on 

behalf of EPA, DOI and NOAA, and the 

State of Vermont, and would also 

resolve the Adversary Proceeding 

United States v. G. Holdings, Inc., Adv. 

Pro. No. 08–2531 (RG), which seeks 

injunctive relief against G–I under 

section 303 of the Clean Air Act, 42 

U.S.C. 7603, and section 7003 of RCRA, 

42. U.S.C. 6973. 

The Decree addresses 13 hazardous 

waste sites across the country, including 

the Vermont Asbestos Mine Group Site 

(‘‘the VAG Site’’), in Eden and Lowell, 

Vermont. Under the terms of the 

settlement, G–I will establish and fund 

a Custodial Trust which will take 

immediate steps to secure the VAG Site 

by constructing fencing, gates and road 

barriers, and posting security guards. In 

addition, the Custodial Trust will 

conduct air monitoring and dust 

suppression, if determined to be 

necessary, and will assist and/or 

contribute to the off-site investigative 

and abatement work undertaken by EPA 

and the State of Vermont, over eight 

years, at a cost of up to $7.75 million. 

The proposed settlement also requires 

G–I to reimburse EPA for remediation of 

the VAG Site and off-site locations 

where waste from the mine may be 

located up to $300 million paid at 8.6 

cents on the dollar. The United States’ 

and Vermont’s claims for natural 

resource damages are resolved through 

a series of payments over nine years 

totaling $850,000. The settlement also 

resolves EPA’s claims for past and 

future response costs and NOAA’s claim 

for natural resource damages at nine 

Generator Sites for $104,615. 

Finally, under the terms of the 

settlement the United States has up to 

10 years to file suit to collect on 

monetary claims related to three sites in 

New Jersey and New York, the GAF 

Chemicals Site, the LCP Chemicals Inc. 

Superfund Site, and the Diamond Alkali 

Superfund Site, referred to as the 


sroberts on DSKD5P82C1PROD with NOTICES