Pollution control; consent judgments: Lord Corp. et al.,
FR, September 01, 2000 › Notices › Justice Department
Linked as:FR, September 01, 2000 › Notices › Justice Department
Linked as:Text
Federal Register: September 1, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 171)NoticesPage 53224-53225From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DOCID:fr01se00-37
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act
In accordance with
Under the proposed consent decree, 11 Settling Performing Parties (Amcast Industrial Corp., General Electric Co., Lord Corp., Meritor Automotive, Inc., Molded Fiberglass Cos., Monogram Industries, Inc., PPG Industries, Inc., Premix, Inc., Reliance Electric Co., Waste Management of Pennsylvania, Inc.) would be obligated to finance and perform the remedy modification and operation and maintenance of the remedial action at the Site as specified in the Record of Decision (``ROD''), as modified by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (``EPA's'') ROD Amendment, issued November 16, 1999, at an estimated net present value cost of $800,000. The Settling Performing Parties would be required to reimburse the Superfund $16.2 million, plus 90% of interest accrued on settlement amounts deposited in a commercial escrow account, toward the United States' past costs at the Site. The Settling Performing Parties would be required to reimburse the State of Ohio (the ``State'') $1.8 million, plus 10% of interest accrued on settlement amounts deposited in commercial escrow account, toward the State's past costs at the Site. In addition, the Settling Performing Parties would be required to reimburse EPA's and the State's future response costs at the Site as well as documented oversight costs accruing since December 1, 1996. The remaining settling parties have been designated as Settling Non-Performing Parties or Settling De Minimis Parties and will pay amounts to the Settling Performing Parties in facilitation of the Settling Performing Parties' obligations under the proposed consent decree.
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, Environment and Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC 20530, and should refer to United States v. Lord Corp., Civil No. 4:89-CV-2001 (N.D. Ohio), and DOJ Reference No. 980-11-2-502. Commenters may request an opportunity for a public meeting in the affected area, in accordance with Section 7003(d) of RCRA, 42 U.S.C. 6973(d).
The proposed consent decree may be examined at: (1) the Office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, 1800 Bank One Center, 600 Superior Avenue East, Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2600 (216- 622-3600); and (2) the United States Environmental Protection Agency (Region 5), 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois 60604-3590 (contract: Jeffrey Cahn (312-886-6670)). A copy of the proposed consent decree may be obtained by mail from the Consent Decree Library, U.S. Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7611, Washington DC 20044-7611. In requesting a copy, please refer to the referenced case and DOJ Reference
[Page 53225]Number and enclose a check in the amount of $32.00for the consent decree only (156 pages at 25 cents per page reproduction costs), or $63.00for the consent decree and all appendices (252 pages), made payable to the Consent Decree Library.
Bruce S. Gelber, Deputy Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.
FR Doc. 00-22453Filed8-31-00; 8:45 amBILLING CODE 4410-15-M
Sponsored links
This document cites
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
ver las páginas en versión mobile | web
© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.
Contents in vLex United States
Explore vLex
For Professionals
For Partners
Company
Other documents:
The Wait Is Over: FTC And DOJ Issue Their Long-Anticipated Report On Antitrust Enforcement And Intellectual ... | Thomas v Goord 2nd Cir 2007 | undheim vs. barnhart, (5th cir. 2007) | Investment Company Act of 1940: Deregistration applications Premium Portfolios et al., | sentencia nº 1361 de consiglio di stato march 12 2008 | Sentencia nº 3632 de Consiglio di Stato, July 10, 2008 | Dan de baja a carabinero que atropelló a un civil | Sentencia nº 2484 de Consiglio di Stato, May 13, 2008