Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 37 / Friday, February 24, 1995 / Notices 10393

needed to more appropriately focus

resources on the highest risks first. We

also need to determine how to include

new requirements in the priority

scheme. EPA Contact: Connie Bosma,

(202) 260–5526.

Revising Chemical Monitoring

Requirements and Defining Source

Water Protection as Best Available

Technology

Public water systems are required to

monitor for 66 different inorganic (e.g.,

mercury), synthetic organic (e.g.,

atrazine) and volatile organic

compounds (e.g., benzene) found in

drinking water. Costs to collect and

analyze these chemicals can be several

thousands of dollars per year, which can

be beyond the resource capacities for

small systems. Several statutory

(Chafee-Lautenberg Amendment) and

regulatory (e.g., grandfathering data,

compositing, State-approved waivers)

provisions have provided flexibility to

systems to reduce or forego monitoring

for at least some chemicals. EPA

believes it would be appropriate to

consider other revisions to chemical

monitoring requirements by, for

example, targeting systems at risk of

contamination, targeting vulnerable

time periods and allowing States greater

flexibility to integrate source water

protection efforts. EPA also believes it

might be useful to consider regulatory

changes to allow water systems to use

source water protection as an alternative

form of treatment for certain

contaminants under limited conditions,

provided such an alternative provides

equivalent health protection. EPA

Contact: Mike Muse, (202) 260–3874.

Other Revisions to Strengthen

Enforcement and Implementation

Recognizing the limited resources in

the drinking water program, EPA is

interested in hearing ideas to further

strengthen the public health protection

provided by the SDWA and the

regulations while at the same time

streamlining the program. These

activities could take the form of

outreach, technical assistance and

capacity building, or use of authorities

provided under other environmental

statutes. For example, some potential

activities in this area might include the

production of special health

notifications for serious drinking water

contamination, particularly for sensitive

subpopulations; additional joint State/

EPA efforts to develop State capacity to

implement and enforce the drinking

water program; and streamlining and

strengthening EPA’s ability to collect

information from drinking water

systems (particularly in cases where

contamination is suspected or where a

system is required to monitor on a

greatly reduced basis). The activities in

this area would be designed to ensure

greater public health protection and

would link to the actions being

proposed in other areas (e.g., regulatory

realignment, review of priority guidance

and greater emphasis on source water

protection.) EPA Contact: Bob Blanco,

(202) 260–5522.

Dated: February 21, 1995.

Peter L. Cook,

Deputy Director, Office of Ground Water and

Drinking Water.

[FR Doc. 95–4598 Filed 2–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

[FRL–5156–6]

Administrative Settlement Pursuant to

Section 122(h) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response,

Compensation and Liability Act of 1980

(CERCLA), as Amended, 42 U.S.C.

9622(h), Resource Services, Inc. Site,

Springfield, Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency.

ACTION: Notice; request for public

comment.

SUMMARY: In accordance with Section

122(i) of the Comprehensive

Environmental Response, Compensation

and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as

amended by the Superfund

Amendments and Reauthorization Act

of 1986 (SARA), notice is hereby given

that an administrative cost recovery

settlement concerning the Resource

Services, Inc. Site (‘‘the Site’’) located in

Springfield, Missouri, was entered into

by the Environmental Protection Agency

(‘‘the Agency’’) on December 22, 1994.

The settlement resolves certain Agency

claims under section 107 of CERCLA

against the Settling Parties who are

named in an attachment to the

settlement which is available at EPA

Region 7 at the address shown below.

The settlement requires the Settling

Parties to pay $50,000.00 to the

Hazardous Substance Superfund toward

past response costs incurred in relation

to the Site.

For thirty (30) days following the date

of the publication of this notice, the

Agency will accept written comments

relating to the settlement. The Agency’s

response to any comments received will

be available for public inspection at the

EPA Region 7 Office, located at 726

Minnesota Avenue in Kansas City,

Kansas 66101.

DATES: Comments must be submitted on

or before March 27, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The settlement and

additional background information

relating to the settlement are available

for public inspection during weekday

business hours at the EPA Region 7

Office at 726 Minnesota Avenue in

Kansas City, Kansas 66101. A copy of

the settlement may be obtained from

Venessa Cobbs, Regional Docket Clerk,

EPA Region 7, 726 Minnesota Avenue,

Kansas City, Kansas 66101, telephone:

(913) 551–7630.

Comments on the settlement should

reference the Resource Services, Inc.

Site, in Springfield, Missouri, and EPA

Docket No. VII–92–F–0015 and should

be addressed to Ms. Cobbs at the

address above.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Sarah Toevs Sullivan, Associate

Regional Counsel, EPA Region 7, Office

of Regional Counsel, 726 Minnesota

Avenue, Kansas City, Kansas 66101,

telephone: (913) 551–7010.

Dated: February 7, 1995.

Delores Platt,

Acting Regional Administrator, Region 7.

[FR Doc. 95–4294 Filed 2–23–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–M

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Oconomowoc Bancshares, Inc.;

Formation of, Acquisition by, or

Merger of Bank Holding Companies

The company listed in this notice has

applied for the Board’s approval under

section 3 of the Bank Holding Company

Act (12 U.S.C. 1842) and § 225.14 of the

Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.14) to

become a bank holding company or to

acquire a bank or bank holding

company. The factors that are

considered in acting on the applications

are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act

(12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).

The application is available for

immediate inspection at the Federal

Reserve Bank indicated. Once the

application has been accepted for

processing, it will also be available for

inspection at the offices of the Board of

Governors. Interested persons may

express their views in writing to the

Reserve Bank indicated for that

application or to the offices of the Board

of Governors. Any comment on an

application that requests a hearing must

include a statement of why a written

presentation would not suffice in lieu of

a hearing, identifying specifically any

questions of fact that are in dispute and

summarizing the evidence that would

be presented at a hearing.