Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 174 / Monday, September 11, 2023 / Notices 62395 

consumers, lesser quality products that do 

not have the longevity consumers have come 

to expect and ultimately harm the industry. 

Fortune’s business model relies less and less 

on small business relationships, rather they 

are actively moving away from these smaller 

companies in favor of larger distributors, big 

box stores, online retailers, etc. Since it is not 

clear if Yale Mechanical hardware (different 

from Smart locks) will be included in the 

divestiture, please note that the Masterlock 

Brand along with Yale’s padlocks could make 

for one sided market position. Also of note, 

Schaub’s product offering is not considered 

Mechanical door hardware. 

Furthermore, the combination of Assa 

Abloy’s acquisition of Spectrum Brands’ HHI 

division and Fortune Brands’ acquisition of 

Emtek could give these companies a 

dominant market position in the residential 

lock and hardware industry. This could lead 

to higher prices, reduced innovation, and 

further reliance on overseas manufacturing 

where quality is often sacrificed and 

corporate profits are favored. The harm small 

and medium-sized businesses could 

experience is not conducive to sustaining 

healthy business practices that rely on these 

companies for their lock and hardware needs. 

Specifically, regarding the acquisition of 

Spectrum Brands’ HHI division by Assa 

Abloy, consideration must be given to the 

reduced intensity of competition that could 

take place should the following door 

hardware brands share common ownership: 

Yale, Kwikset, Baldwin, Weiser, National 

Hardware, EZset. 

I urge the Department of Justice to carefully 

consider the implications of both the 

proposed acquisition of Spectrum Brands’ 

HHI division by Assa Abloy and the 

divestiture of Emtek and Schaub to Fortune 

Brands. The value of small businesses to our 

economy, especially in the Residential 

housing market is not to be taken lightly. 

The antitrust laws are in place to protect 

the American people, and I trust that the 

Department of Justice will take the necessary 

steps to ensure fair competition in the 

market. 

I wish to thank Attorney General Merrick 

Garland and Deputy Attorney General Lisa 

Monaco for their high level of service to the 

American People. 

Thank you for your time and consideration 

in this matter. 

Sincerely, 

Joseph Storrs 

[FR Doc. 2023–19530 Filed 9–8–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–11–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

Notice of Lodging of Proposed 

Consent Decree Under the Toxic 

Substances Control Act 

On September 5, 2023, the 

Department of Justice lodged a proposed 

Consent Decree (the ‘‘Consent Decree’’) 

with the District Court of the Southern 

District of New York in a lawsuit 

entitled United States of America v. 

Apex Building Company, Inc., Civil 

Action No. 23–cv–007838. 

In this action, the United States seeks, 

as provided under Toxic Substances 

Control Act (‘‘TSCA’’), injunctive relief 

from Apex Building Company, Inc., 

among others, in connection with the 

defendant’s unlawful work practices 

during renovations governed by an 

implementing regulation of the TSCA— 

the Renovation, Repair, and Painting 

Rule, 40 CFR part 745. The proposed 

consent decree resolves the United 

States’ claims, requires Apex Building 

Company, Inc. to pay $606,706, and 

imposes injunctive relief. 

The publication of this notice opens 

the public comment on the proposed 

settlement. Comments should be 

addressed to the Assistant Attorney 

General, Environment and Natural 

Resources Division, and should refer to 

United States of America v. Apex 

Building Company, Inc., DJ #90–5–2–1– 

12388. All comments must be submitted 

no later than 30 days after the 

publication date of this notice. 

Comments may be submitted either by 

email or by mail: 

To submit 

comments: Send them to: 

By email ....... pubcomment-ees.enrd@

usdoj.gov. 

By mail ......... Assistant Attorney General,U.S. DOJ—ENRD, 

P.O. Box 7611, Washington, D.C. 20044–7611. 

During the public comment period, 

the settlement may be examined and 

downloaded at this Justice Department 

website: https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/ 

Consent_Decrees.html. We will provide 

a paper copy of the settlement upon 

written request and payment of 

reproduction costs. Please email your 

request and payment to: Consent Decree 

Library, U.S. DOJ–ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, 

Washington, DC 20044–7611. 

Please enclose a check or money order 

for $13.00 (25 cents per page 

reproduction cost) payable to the United 

States Treasury. 

Henry S. Friedman, 

Assistant Section Chief, Environmental 

Enforcement Section, Environment and 

Natural Resources Division. 

[FR Doc. 2023–19532 Filed 9–8–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4410–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 

[OMB Number 1117–0009] 

Agency Information Collection 

Activities; Proposed eCollection 

eComments Requested; Extension of a 

Previously Approved Collection; 

Controlled Substances Import/Export 

Declaration 

AGENCY: Drug Enforcement 

Administration, Department of Justice. 

ACTION: 60-Day notice. 

SUMMARY: The Drug Enforcement 

Administration (DEA), Department of 

Justice (DOJ), will be submitting the 

following information collection request 

to the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) for review and approval in 

accordance with the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995. 

DATES: Comments are encouraged and 

will be accepted for 60 days until 

November 13, 2023. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If 

you have additional comments 

especially on the estimated public 

burden or associated response time, 

suggestions, or need a copy of the 

proposed information collection 

instrument with instructions or 

additional information, please contact 

Scott A. Brinks, Regulatory Drafting and 

Policy Support Section, Drug 

Enforcement Administration; Mailing 

Address: 8701 Morrissette Drive, 

Springfield, Virginia 22152; Telephone: 

(571) 362–3261, Email: scott.a.brinks@

dea.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Written 

comments and suggestions from the 

public and affected agencies concerning 

the proposed collection of information 

are encouraged. Your comments should 

address one or more of the following 

four points: 

—Evaluate whether the proposed 

collection of information is necessary 

for the proper performance of the 

functions of the Bureau of Justice 

Statistics, including whether the 

information will have practical utility; 

—Evaluate the accuracy of the agency’s 

estimate of the burden of the 

proposed collection of information, 

including the validity of the 

methodology and assumptions used; 

—Evaluate whether and if so how the 

quality, utility, and clarity of the 

information to be collected can be 

enhanced; and 

—Minimize the burden of the collection 

of information on those who are to 

respond, including through the use of 

appropriate automated, electronic, 

mechanical, or other technological 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with NOTICES1