Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 74 / Monday, April 17, 2000 / Notices 20487

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decrees

Under the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

Notice is hereby given that on March

14, 2000, a complaint and a proposed

consent decree in United States and the

State of Colorado v. Beazer East, Inc.

and Butala Construction Company,

Civil Action No. 00–D–561, were lodged

with the United States District Court for

the District of Colorado.

In this action the United States seeks

recovery of approximately $631,000 in

unreimbursed response costs incurred

in relation to Operable Unit #2 of the

Smeltertown Superfund Site, located

near Salida, Colorado, under Section

107(a) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act. The

State of Colorado seeks recovery of

response costs to be incurred at the Site.

Under the proposed decree, the

defendants implement a remedial action

selected by the United States

Environmental Protection Agency,

which is designed to prevent the further

migration of hazardous substances at

Operable Unit #2, and will reimburse all

of EPA’s past costs, as well as all of

EPA’s and the State of Colorado’s future

response costs incurred at Operable

Unit #2.

The Department of Justice will receive

for a period of thirty (30) days from the

date of this publication comments

relating to the proposed consent decree.

Comments should be addressed to the

Assistant Attorney General of the

Environment and Natural Resources

Division, Department of Justice,

Washington, DC 20530, and should refer

to United States and State of Colorado,

v. Beazer East, Inc. and Butala

Construction Company, D.J. Ref. 90–11–

3–1522.

The proposed consent decree may be

examined at the Office of the United

States Attorney, 1961 Stout Street, 11th

Floor, Drawer 3608, Denver, CO 80294

and at U.S. EPA Region VIII, 999 18th

Street, Denver, Colorado 8020. A copy

of the Decree may be obtained by mail

from the Consent Decree Library, P.O.

Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044–7611.

In requesting a copy, please enclose a

check in the amount of $20.00 (25 cents

per page reproduction cost) payable to

the Consent Decree Library.

Joel M. Gross,

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 00–9427 Filed 4–14410–15–M

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Under Sections 107 and 113 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act

Notice is hereby given that on March

14, 2000, a complaint and proposed

Consent Decree (‘‘Decree’’) in United

States v. the Lockheed Martin

Corporation (D. CO) Civil Action No.

00–562, was lodged with the United

States District Court for the District of

Colorado.

The United States filed this action

under Sections 107 and 113 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. §§ 9607 and

9613, and RCRA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 6901 et

seq. In the complaint, the United States

Air Force (‘‘USAF’’) seeks, among other

things, contribution from Lockheed

Martin Corporation (‘‘LMC’’) for costs

incurred and to be incurred by the

USAF for response actions as the PJKS

National Priorities List site in Jefferson

County, Colorado (‘‘Site’’).

The proposed consent decree resolves

the USAF’s CERCLA Sections 107 and

113 claims against LMC and the

contribution claims LMC could bring

against the USAF under Section

113(f)(1) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C.

§ 9613(f)(1). The proposed decree

provides for a cash payment of $3.5

million over 10 years from LMC to the

USAF and clean up services from LMC,

specified under separate agreement with

the USAF, that could ultimately reduce

total clean up costs to the USAF by as

much as $35.25 million.

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 of the Environment and Natural

Resources Division, Department of

Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and

should refer to, United States v. The

Lockheed Martin Corporation (D. CO),

and D.J. Ref. #90–11–3–925/1.

The Decree may be examined at the

office of the U.S. Attorneys Office for

the District of Colorado, 1961 Stout

Street, Suite 1200, Denver, CO 80294. A

copy of the Decree may be obtained by

mail from the Consent Decree Library,

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

7611. In requesting a copy, please

enclose a check in the amount of $15.75

for the Decree or (25 cents per page

reproduction cost) payable to the

Consent Decree Library.

Joel M. Gross,

Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section,

Environment and Natural Resources Division.

[FR Doc. 00–9428 Filed 4–14–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–15–M

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Office of the Secretary

Submission for OMB Review;

Comment Request

April 7, 2000.

The Department of Labor (DOL) has

submitted the following public

information collection requests (ICRs) to

the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) for review and approval in

accordance with the Paperwork

Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–13,

44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). A copy of each

individual ICR, with applicable

supporting documentation may be

obtained by calling the Department of

Labor. To obtain documentation for

BLS, ETA, PWBA, and OASAM contact

Karin Kurz ((202) 219–5096 ext. 159 or

by E-mail to Kurz-Karin@dol.gov). To

obtain documentation for ESA, MSHA,

OSHA, and VETS contact Darrin King

((202) 219–5096 ext. 151 or by E-Mail to

King-Darrin@dol.gov).

Comments should be send to Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Attn: OMB Desk Officer for BLS, DM,

ESA, ETA, MSHA, OSHA, PWBA, or

VETS, Office of Management and

Budget, Room 10235, Washington, DC

20503 ((202) 395–7316), on or before

May 17, 2000.

The OMB is particularly interested in

comments which:

* 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;

* 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;

* Enhance the quality, utility, and

clarity of the information to be

collected; 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 collection techniques or

other forms of information technology,

e.g., permitting electronic submission of

responses