09/14/87

Processing of Consent Decrees

MEMORANDUM                             SEP. 14, 1987

SUBJECT:  Processing of Consent Decrees

FROM:     /s/ Thomas L. Adams, Jr.
              Assistant Administrator

TO:       OECM Attorneys

    The August 10-12 meeting on Enhancing and Streamlining the Enforcement
Process produced several promising proposals for long-term improvements in
the way our Agency conducts enforcement.  In addition to following up these
proposals, I am currently looking for ways to streamline our own internal
operations and thereby shorten the time for Headquarters review of documents
submitted by the Regions.

    One suggestion which I plan to implement immediately is designed to
speed up Headquarters processing of consent decrees.  Consent decrees are
normally sent to Headquarters with a cover memorandum which explains the
nature of the case, the contents of the settlement, and other important
issues.  The staff attorney prepares a memorandum to me recommending that
the decree be forwarded to the Department of Justice.  This memorandum, in
part, summarizes or restates the facts and issues discussed in the Regional
cover memorandum.

    Rather than reiterating the information contained in the Region's cover
memorandum, I would prefer that you refer to and attach that memorandum
where appropriate.  Of course, any items requiring further discussion should
also be addressed in the cover memorandum you prepare.

    In any case, the package sent to me for signature should contain, in the
cover memorandum you prepare or in the attached Regional submission, the
following information:

    (1)  identification of the cause of action ( including statutory and
         regulatory provisions at issue ) and the basic facts of the case;

    (2)  summary of the terms of the settlement, including anticipated
         environmental results and an explanation of any significant
         variance from established guidance on drafting consent decrees;

                                    -2-

    (3)  discussion of precedential issues and issues of national
         importance;

    (4)  discussion of whether the penalty comports with the applicable
         penalty policy ( there should be a full explanation of any penalty
         figure below that which is recommended by the applicable policy );

    (5)  discussion of any unusual injunctive relief obtained ( e.g.,
         environmental auditing or credit projects );

    (6)  if the consent decree allows the defendant to come into compliance
         after the statutory deadline, discussion of the reason for doing
         so; and

    (7)  if the settlement is not complete, discussion of the elements and
         issues of the remaining case.

    Thank you for your cooperation in implementing this new procedure.  I
would enjoy hearing any additional ideas you may have for avoiding
duplication of effort or otherwise streamlining the enforcement process.

cc:  Regional Counsels, Regions I - X