Notice of Lodging of Second Amendment to First Amended Consent Decree Under the Clean Water Act, 33769-33770 [2012-13827]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2012 / Notices
(v) Explain how the exclusion order
and cease and desist order would
impact consumers in the United States.
Written submissions must be filed no
later than by close of business on June
15, 2012.
Persons filing written submissions
must file the original document
electronically on or before the deadline
stated above and submit 8 true paper
copies to the Office of the Secretary by
noon the next day pursuant to section
210.4(f) of the Commission’s Rules of
Practice and Procedure (19 CFR
210.4(f)). Submissions should refer to
the investigation number (‘‘Inv. No.
337–TA–772’’) in a prominent place on
the cover page and/or the first page. (See
Handbook for Electronic Filing
Procedures, https://www.usitc.gov/
secretary/fed_reg_notices/rules/
handbook_on_electronic_filing.pdf).
Persons with questions regarding filing
should contact the Secretary (202–205–
2000).
Any person desiring to submit a
document to the Commission in
confidence must request confidential
treatment. All such requests should be
directed to the Secretary to the
Commission and must include a full
statement of the reasons why the
Commission should grant such
treatment. See 19 CFR 201.6. Documents
for which confidential treatment by the
Commission is properly sought will be
treated accordingly. A redacted nonconfidential version of the document
must also be filed simultaneously with
any confidential filing. All nonconfidential written submissions will be
available for public inspection at the
Office of the Secretary and on EDIS.
This action is taken under the
authority of section 337 of the Tariff Act
of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1337),
and of sections 201.10 and 210.50 of the
Commission’s Rules of Practice and
Procedure (19 CFR 201.10, 210.50).
Issued: June 1, 2012.
By order of the Commission.
Lisa R. Barton,
Acting Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2012–13718 Filed 6–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020–02–P
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree
under Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation and Liability
Act
Notice is hereby given that on May 31,
2012, two proposed consent decrees in
U.S. v. Jacob Goldberg & Son, Inc., et al.,
Civil Action No. 10 Civ. 3237, were
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Jun 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
lodged with the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New
York.
In this action the United States sought
recovery, pursuant to the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability
Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq.,
of response costs regarding the Port
Refinery Superfund Site in the Village
of Rye Brook, N.Y. (‘‘Site’’). One of the
settlements, referred to as the ‘‘Second
Partial Consent Decree,’’ provides for
PSC Metals, Inc. and PSC Metals–New
York, LLC to pay $225,000, and resolves
the United States’ claims against these
defendants regarding the Site. The other
settlement, referred to as the ‘‘Third
Partial Consent Decree,’’ provides for
Vincent A. Pace Scrap Metals, Inc. to
pay $20,000 and also resolves the
United States’ claims against this
defendant regarding the Site.
The Department of Justice will receive
for a period of 30 days from the date of
this publication comments relating to
the two consent decrees. Comments
should be addressed to the Assistant
Attorney General, Environment and
Natural Resources Division, and either
emailed to pubcommentees.enrd@usdoj.gov or mailed to P.O.
Box 7611, U.S. Department of Justice,
Washington, DC 20044–7611, and
should refer to U.S. v. Jacob Goldberg &
Son, Inc., et al., D.J. Ref. 90–11–3–1142/
1.
During the public comment period,
the two consent decrees may also be
examined on the following Department
of Justice Web site: https://
www.usdoj.gov/enrd/
Consent_Decrees.html. Copies of the
two consent decrees 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 emailing a
request to ‘‘Consent Decree Copy’’
(eescdcopy.enrd@usdoj.gov), fax number
(202) 514–0097, phone confirmation
number (202) 514–5271. If requesting
copies of the two settlements from the
Consent Decree Library by mail, please
enclose a check in the amount of $8.00
(25 cents per page reproduction cost)
payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if
requesting by email or fax, forward a
check in that amount to the Consent
Decree Library at the address given
above.
Ronald G. Gluck,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2012–13761 Filed 6–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
33769
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Second
Amendment to First Amended Consent
Decree Under the Clean Water Act
Notice is hereby given that on May 31,
2012, a proposed Second Amendment to
First Amended Consent Decree
(‘‘Amendment’’) in United States and
State of Georgia v. City of Atlanta, Civil
Action No. 1:98–CV–1956–TWT, was
lodged with the United States District
Court for the Northern District of
Georgia.
In this action the United States, on
behalf of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (‘‘U.S. EPA’’), and
the State of Georgia, at the request of
Environmental Protection Division
(‘‘EPD’’) sought penalties and injunctive
relief under the Clean Water Act
(‘‘CWA’’) against the City of Atlanta
(‘‘Defendant’’) relating to Defendant’s
wastewater treatment facilities and the
Defendant’s wastewater collection and
transmission system. The complaint
alleged that Defendant violated the
CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., and the
Georgia Water Quality Control Act,
O.C.G.A. § 12–5–21 et seq. (‘‘GWQCA’’).
On December 22, 1999, the Court
entered the First Amended Consent
Decree (‘‘Decree’’), resolving the
allegations in the complaint regarding
the Defendant’s wastewater treatment
facilities and Defendant’s collection and
transmission system. On April 28, 2003,
the Court entered Amendments to the
Decree to allow the substitution of
certain projects required under the
Decree.
Defendant satisfied obligations under
the Section VII Decree and the Court
terminated the Decree on March 31,
2004 as to those obligations. Defendant
has completed the majority of the work
requirements of the Decree and has
made substantial reductions in the total
volume of sewage overflows. In order to
comply with the requirements of the
Decree, the Defendant has raised water
and sewer rates by 252% over the past
ten years. In addition, a 1% municipal
option sales tax within the boundaries
of the City of Atlanta has been imposed
to contribute to the financing of the
City’s obligations under the Decree.
Despite the Defendant’s efforts and
the increase in financing to support
those efforts, the Defendant requested a
thirteen year extension of the schedule
set forth in the Decree to complete the
remaining work, due to the financial
circumstances the Defendant is facing.
The Plaintiffs evaluated the Defendant’s
financial information and model and the
financial condition the Defendant is
facing and determined that, based on all
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
33770
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 110 / Thursday, June 7, 2012 / Notices
of the circumstances, the Defendant’s
request for an extension was reasonable.
Documents relative to the Decree,
including the proposed Amendment,
can be accessed at www.
cleanwateratlanta.org. See, specifically,
City of Atlanta, First Amended Consent
Decree, 1:98–CV–1956–TWT, Financial
Capability-Based Amendment &
Schedule Extension Request. Further
information pertaining to the
Defendant’s water system can be
accessed at www.atlantawatershed.org.
The Department of Justice will receive
for a period of thirty (30) days from the
date of this publication comments
relating to the Amendment. Comments
should be addressed to the Assistant
Attorney General, Environment and
Natural Resources Division, P.O. Box
7611, U.S. Department of Justice,
Washington, DC 20044–7611, and either
emailed 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 and State of Georgia v.
City of Atlanta, D.J. Ref. 90–5–1–1–
4430. During the public comment
period, the Amendment may also be
examined on the following Department
of Justice Web site, https://www.usdoj.
gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. A copy
of the Amendment 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 emailing a request to
‘‘Second Amendment to First Amended
Consent Decree Copy’’ (EESCDCopy.
ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. (202) 514–
0097, phone confirmation number (202)
514–5271. In requesting a copy from the
Consent Decree Library, please enclose
a check in the amount of $4.750
(25 cents per page reproduction cost)
payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if by
email or fax, forward a check in that
amount to the Consent Decree Library at
the stated address.
Henry Friedman,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental
Enforcement Section, Environment and
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2012–13827 Filed 6–6–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Drug Enforcement Administration
Pharmboy Ventures Unlimited, Inc.,
Decision and Order
On August 26, 2011, the Deputy
Assistant Administrator, Office of
Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement
Administration, issued an Order to
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Jun 06, 2012
Jkt 226001
Show Cause to Pharmboy Ventures
Unlimited, Inc., d/b/a Brent’s Pharmacy
and Diabetes Care (Applicant), of St.
George, Utah. The Show Cause Order
proposed the denial of Applicant’s
application for a DEA Certificate of
Registration as a retail pharmacy, on the
ground that its ‘‘registration would be
inconsistent with the public interest.’’
Show Cause Order, at 1 (citing 21 U.S.C.
823(f)).
The Show Cause Order alleged that on
February 28, 2011, Applicant submitted
an application for a DEA Registration as
a retail pharmacy and that while
applicant is owned by Caroline
McFadden, her husband Brent
McFadden is Applicant’s pharmacist-incharge and sole pharmacist. The Show
Cause Order then alleged that in 2010,
Brent McFadden, while working as a
pharmacist at Lin’s Pharmacy, had
unlawfully taken phentermine, a
schedule IV controlled substance, from
the pharmacy’s stock and ingested it;
the Order also alleged that Brent
McFadden had failed to document the
disposition of the phentermine he had
taken. Id. at 1–2 (citing 21 U.S.C. 844;
827; 21 CFR 1304.22(c); 1306.06;
1306.21). The Order also alleged that
while working as a pharmacist at Lin
Pharmacy, Mr. McFadden had, on four
or more occasions when it was open to
the public, left the pharmacy
unattended by a pharmacist, in violation
of Utah Admin. Code R156–1–102a. Id.
at 2.
Next, the Show Cause Order alleged
that based on the various acts set forth
above, on October 27, 2010, the Utah
Division of Occupational and
Professional Licensing (DOPL) issued a
consent order to Mr. McFadden placing
his pharmacist’s license on probation
for three years. Id. The Order also
alleged that on January 20, 2011,
Mr. McFadden had pled no contest to
seven state law counts of making or
altering a false prescription based on his
conduct in taking phentermine from
Lin’s Pharmacy, and that he had been
sentenced to eighteen-months’
probation, fined, and ordered to
undergo a substance abuse evaluation.
Id. (citing Utah Code Ch. 58,
§ 37(3)(a)(iii)). Finally, the Order alleged
that Mr. McFadden had engaged in such
other conduct which may threaten
public health and safety because he
‘‘took and consumed legend drugs and
food items’’ from his former employer
without paying for them, and that
because of the aforementioned acts, he
was terminated from his employment.
Id. (citing 21 U.S.C. 823(f)(5)).
The Show Cause Order, which also
notified Applicant of its right to request
a hearing on the allegations or to submit
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a written statement in lieu of a hearing,
the procedures for electing either
option, and the consequences for failing
to do either, id. at 2–3 (citing 21 CFR
1301.43); was served on Applicant by
certified mail, return receipt requested,
addressed to it at the address of its
proposed registered location. GX C. As
evidenced by the signed return receipt
card, service was accomplished on
September 2, 2011. Since that date,
more than thirty days have now passed,
and neither Applicant, nor anyone
purporting to represent it, has either
requested a hearing or submitted a
written statement in lieu of a hearing.
Accordingly, I find that Applicant has
waived its right to a hearing and issue
this Decision and Order based on
relevant evidence contained in the
investigative record submitted by the
Government. I make the following
findings of fact.
Findings
On February 28, 2011, Applicant filed
an application for a DEA Certificate of
Registration as a retail pharmacy. GX A.
Applicant’s application was signed by
Ms. Caroline McFadden. Id. In response
to one of the application’s liability
questions, Applicant noted that ‘‘Brent
McFadden, corporate owner, charges of
unprofessional conduct and unlawful
conduct for leaving the pharmacy
unattended for thirty minutes and for
taking 7 phentermine tablets from
pharmacy stock and injesting [sic]
them.’’ GX A.
Upon reviewing the application, a
DEA Diversion Investigator (DI) noticed
Applicant’s statement regarding the
action taken by the State of Utah against
Brent McFadden. GX D, at 1. The DI
learned that Applicant has a state
pharmacy license and that Caroline
McFadden was listed as the applicant
and owner of the pharmacy. Id. at 1–2.
The DI also obtained a report by a DOPL
Investigator regarding an August 17,
2010 interview she did of Mr.
McFadden, who had previously worked
at the pharmacy in Lin’s Supermarket,
a grocery store located in St. George,
Utah. Id.; GX F, at 1.
During the interview, Mr. McFadden
admitted that he had taken both
phentermine, a schedule IV stimulant,
and Maxzide (Triamterene-HCTZ), a
non-controlled legend drug used as a
diuretic, from the store’s pharmacy,
where he had been employed for sixteen
years. GX D, at 2. With respect to his use
of phentermine, Mr. McFadden initially
claimed that the drug had been
prescribed to him by J.R.M., a
physician’s assistant and neighbor of
his. Id. However, Mr. McFadden later
admitted that J.R.M. had not treated him
E:\FR\FM\07JNN1.SGM
07JNN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 110 (Thursday, June 7, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 33769-33770]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13827]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Second Amendment to First Amended Consent
Decree Under the Clean Water Act
Notice is hereby given that on May 31, 2012, a proposed Second
Amendment to First Amended Consent Decree (``Amendment'') in United
States and State of Georgia v. City of Atlanta, Civil Action No. 1:98-
CV-1956-TWT, was lodged with the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia.
In this action the United States, on behalf of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (``U.S. EPA''), and the State of
Georgia, at the request of Environmental Protection Division (``EPD'')
sought penalties and injunctive relief under the Clean Water Act
(``CWA'') against the City of Atlanta (``Defendant'') relating to
Defendant's wastewater treatment facilities and the Defendant's
wastewater collection and transmission system. The complaint alleged
that Defendant violated the CWA, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., and the
Georgia Water Quality Control Act, O.C.G.A. Sec. 12-5-21 et seq.
(``GWQCA''). On December 22, 1999, the Court entered the First Amended
Consent Decree (``Decree''), resolving the allegations in the complaint
regarding the Defendant's wastewater treatment facilities and
Defendant's collection and transmission system. On April 28, 2003, the
Court entered Amendments to the Decree to allow the substitution of
certain projects required under the Decree.
Defendant satisfied obligations under the Section VII Decree and
the Court terminated the Decree on March 31, 2004 as to those
obligations. Defendant has completed the majority of the work
requirements of the Decree and has made substantial reductions in the
total volume of sewage overflows. In order to comply with the
requirements of the Decree, the Defendant has raised water and sewer
rates by 252% over the past ten years. In addition, a 1% municipal
option sales tax within the boundaries of the City of Atlanta has been
imposed to contribute to the financing of the City's obligations under
the Decree.
Despite the Defendant's efforts and the increase in financing to
support those efforts, the Defendant requested a thirteen year
extension of the schedule set forth in the Decree to complete the
remaining work, due to the financial circumstances the Defendant is
facing. The Plaintiffs evaluated the Defendant's financial information
and model and the financial condition the Defendant is facing and
determined that, based on all
[[Page 33770]]
of the circumstances, the Defendant's request for an extension was
reasonable.
Documents relative to the Decree, including the proposed Amendment,
can be accessed at www.cleanwateratlanta.org. See, specifically, City
of Atlanta, First Amended Consent Decree, 1:98-CV-1956-TWT, Financial
Capability-Based Amendment & Schedule Extension Request. Further
information pertaining to the Defendant's water system can be accessed
at www.atlantawatershed.org.
The Department of Justice will receive for a period of thirty (30)
days from the date of this publication comments relating to the
Amendment. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney
General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, P.O. Box 7611,
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20044-7611, and either
emailed 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 and State of Georgia v. City of Atlanta, D.J. Ref. 90-
5-1-1-4430. During the public comment period, the Amendment may also be
examined on the following Department of Justice Web site, https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the Amendment 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 emailing a request to ``Second Amendment to First Amended
Consent Decree Copy'' (EESCDCopy.ENRD@usdoj.gov), fax no. (202) 514-
0097, phone confirmation number (202) 514-5271. In requesting a copy
from the Consent Decree Library, please enclose a check in the amount
of $4.750 (25 cents per page reproduction cost) payable to the U.S.
Treasury or, if by email or fax, forward a check in that amount to the
Consent Decree Library at the stated address.
Henry Friedman,
Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment
and Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 2012-13827 Filed 6-6-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-15-P