Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 40 / Wednesday, March 1, 1995 / Notices 11113

requirements following enactment of enabling

legislation by Alabama and Mississippi authorizing

the creation of MARA which it states had not been

completed at the time the original notice was filed.

On February 8, 1995, Redmont filed an amended

verified notice of exemption.

In a related notice of exemption in MississippiAlabama Railroad Authority—Acquisition

Exemption—Norfolk Southern Railway Company,

Finance Docket No. 32615, MARA seeks to acquire

from NS the 41.5-mile rail line segment. This 41.5-

mile rail line segment is embraced within a feeder

line application in Sunshine Mills, Inc.—Feeder

Line Acquisition—Norfolk Southern Railway

Company Line Between Corinth, MS, and

Haleyville, AL, Finance Docket No. 32337. NS and

MARA state that upon approval of the acquisition

transaction, Sunshine is expected to request

dismissal of the feeder line application.

2CAGY Industries, Inc., a noncarrier, owns the

majority of the outstanding stock of Columbus and

Greenville Railway Company (C&G) and all of the

outstanding capital stock of Chattooga &

Chickamauga Railway Co. (CCKY). The control of

these carriers was authorized in CAGY Industries,

Inc.—Control Exemption—Chattooga &

Chickamauga Railway Co., Finance Docket No.

31422 (ICC served June 12, 1989).

Redmont will also acquire incidental

trackage rights to operate over 2.2 miles

of NS’s track between NS milepost IC–

529.5 at Corinth and NS milepost IC–

527.3 at NS’ Corinth Yard.

This proceeding is related to CAGY

Industries, Inc.—Continuance in Control

Exemption—Redmont Railway

Company, Inc., Finance Docket No.

32617, wherein CAGY Industries, Inc.

(CAGY) has concurrently filed a notice

of exemption to continue in control of

Redmont, a wholly owned subsidiary of

CAGY, upon Redmont becoming a class

III rail carrier.2 The parties intended to

consummate the proposed transaction

on or after February 15, 1995.

Any comments must be filed with the

Commission and served on: Eric M.

Hocky, 213 West Miner Street, P.O. Box

796, West Chester, PA 19381–0796.

This notice is filed under 49 CFR

1150.31. If the notice contains false or

misleading information, the exemption

is void ab initio. Petitions to revoke the

exemption under 49 U.S.C. 10505(d)

may be filed at any time. The filing of

a petition to revoke will not

automatically stay the transaction.

Decided: February 17, 1995.

By the Commission, David M. Konschnik,

Director, Office of Proceedings.

Vernon A. Williams,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 95–5040 Filed 2–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7035–01–P

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Information Collections Under Review

The Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) has been sent the following

collection(s) of information proposals

for review under the provisions of the

Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C.

Chapter 35) and the Paperwork

Reduction Reauthorization Act since the

last list was published. Entries are

grouped into submission categories,

with each entry containing the

following information:

(1) The title of the form/collection;

(2) The agency form number, if any, and

the applicable component of the

Department sponsoring the collection;

(3) Who will be asked or required to

respond, as well as a brief abstract;

(4) An estimate of the total number of

respondents and the amount of time

estimated for an average respondent

to respond;

(5) An estimate of the total public

burden (in hours) associated with the

collection; and

(6) An indication as to whether Section

3504(h) of Public Law 96–511 applies.

Comments and/or suggestions

regarding the item(s) contained in this

notice, especially regarding the

estimated public burden and associated

response time, should be directed to the

OMB reviewer, Mr. Jeff Hill, on (202)

395–7340 and to the Department of

Justice’s Clearance Officer, Mr. Robert B.

Briggs, on (202) 514–4319. If you

anticipate commenting on a form/

collection, but find that time to prepare

such comments will prevent you from

prompt submission, you should notify

the OMB reviewer and the Department

of Justice Clearance Officer of your

intent as soon as possible. Written

comments regarding the burden

estimate or any other aspect of the

collection may be submitted to Office of

Information and Regulatory Affairs,

Office of Management and Budget,

Washington, DC 20503, and to Mr.

Robert B. Briggs, Department of Justice

Clearance Officer, Systems Policy Staff/

Information Resources Management/

Justice Management Division, Suite 850,

WCTR, Washington, DC 20530.

New Collection

(1) COPS FAST Community Policing

and Budget Summary Form.

(2) COPS 005/01. Office of Community

Oriented Policing Services, United

States Department of Justice.

(3) Primary = State, Local or Tribal

Government, Others = None. The

COPS FAST Community Policing and

Budget Summary form is to be used

by COPS FAST grant recipients to

supply information, including a

community plan, hiring retention

plan, and budget worksheets, relating

to the hiring of new police officers to

engage in community oriented

policing.

(4) 6,660 annual respondents at 4.33

hours per response.

(5) 50,149.80 annual burden hours.

(6) Not applicable under Section

3504(h) of Public Law 96–511.

Dated: February 23, 1995.

Public comment on this item is

encouraged.

Robert B. Briggs,

Department Clearance Officer, United States

Department of Justice.

[FR Doc. 95–4915 Filed 2–28–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410–21–M

Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree

Pursuant to the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation, and Liability Act

(‘‘CERCLA’’)

Notice is hereby given that a proposed

consent decree in United States v.

Allied-Signal, Inc. et al., (1;95 CV 085)

was lodged on February 16, 1995, with

the United States District Court for the

Eastern District of Texas.

The United States brought a civil

action against Allied-Signal, Inc.;

Atlantic Richfield Company;

Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc., formerly

d/b/a/ Firestone Tire and Rubber

Company, Inc.; The Dow Chemical

Company; Goodyear Tire & Rubber

Company; Mobil Oil Corporation; Olin

Corporation; PPG Industries, Inc.; Union

Oil Company of California, d/b/a

Unocal; and Unocal Corporation

pursuant to Sections 106 and 107 of the

Comprehensive Environmental

Response, Compensation, and Liability

Act of 1980 (‘‘CERCLA’’), 42 U.S.C. 9606

and 9607. The Complaint, filed

concurrently with the lodging of the

Consent Decree, alleges that the

defendants are liable for injunctive

relief necessary to abate a threatened

release of hazardous substances and for

all costs of removal and/or remedial

actions incurred by the United States in

responding to releases or threatened

releases of hazardous substances at the

Bailey Waste Disposal Site. The Bailey

Waste Disposal Site encompasses

approximately 280 acres located 3 miles

southwest of Bridge City in Orange

County, Texas. Further, the Complaint

alleges that each of the defendants, at

times relevant to this action, by

contract, agreement, or otherwise

arranged for the disposal of hazardous

substances at the Site. The Consent

Decree provides for reimbursement to

the Hazardous Substance Superfund

(‘‘the Fund’’) by the Settling Defendants

of the greater of (1) 85.3 percent of 20

percent of those funds expended by the

Bailey Task Force in completing its