[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 132 (Monday, July 12, 1999)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37406-37411]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-17338]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Parts 52 and 81
[TN-217-1-9920a; FRL-6373-9]
Implementation Plan and Redesignation Request for the Williamson
County, Tennessee Lead Nonattainment Area
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Direct final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: EPA is simultaneously approving the lead state implementation
plan (SIP) and redesignation request for the Williamson County,
Tennessee, lead nonattainment area. Both plans, dated May 12, 1999,
were submitted by the State of Tennessee for the purpose of
demonstrating that the Williamson County area has attained the lead
national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS).
DATES: This direct final rule is effective September 10, 1999 without
further notice, unless EPA receives adverse
[[Page 37407]]
comment by August 11, 1999. If adverse comment is received, EPA will
publish a timely withdrawal of the direct final rule in the Federal
Register and inform the public that the rule will not take effect.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Kimberly Bingham at the EPA Region
4 address listed below. Copies of the material submitted by the
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) may be
examined during normal business hours at the following locations:
Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center (Air Docket 6102), U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington DC 20460.
Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 Air Planning Branch, Atlanta
Federal Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-3104
Tennessee Air Pollution Control Board, 9th Floor, L&C Annex, 401 Church
Street, Nashville, Tennessee 37243-1531.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kimberly Bingham, Regulatory Planning
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management
Division, Region 4, Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta Federal
Center, 61 Forsyth Street, SW, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The telephone
number is (404) 562-9038.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background--Lead SIP
Section 107(d)(5) of the Clean Air Act as amended in 1990 (CAA)
provides for areas to be designated as attainment, nonattainment, or
unclassifiable with respect to the lead NAAQS. Governors are required
to submit recommended designations for areas within their states. When
an area is designated nonattainment, the state must prepare and submit
a SIP pursuant to sections 110(a)(2) and 172(c) of the CAA
demonstrating how the area will be brought into attainment.
On January 6, 1992, EPA designated the portion of Williamson County
around the General Smelting and Refining, (GSR) Inc. (now Metalico-
College Grove, Inc.) lead smelter as a nonattainment area for lead.
This nonattainment designation was based on lead NAAQS violations
recorded by monitors located near the GSR facility during the fourth
quarter of 1990 and the second quarter of 1991.
On July 2, 1993, the State of Tennessee through the Tennessee
Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) submitted a SIP for
attaining the lead NAAQS in the Williamson County lead nonattainment
area. EPA found the SIP to be inadequate because it did not meet all of
the requirements of section 172(c) of the CAA and requested that TDEC
make the necessary corrections and submit supplemental information to
address the deficiencies.
On June 23, 1995, EPA promulgated the national emission standards
for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) for secondary lead smelters.
Because the existing GSR facility could not meet the new NESHAP
requirements without extensive modifications, the company elected to
build an entirely new lead smelter designed to meet the new NESHAP
regulations. Subsequently, on January 16, 1997, TDEC issued a
construction permit to GSR, Inc.
In late 1997, the facility was sold and renamed Metalico-College
Grove, (MCG) Inc. The new owner proposed changes to the facility's
design and submitted a new permit application to TDEC on July 13, 1998,
reflecting those changes. At that point, TDEC had begun developing a
new lead SIP and redesignation request based on the GSR, Inc. facility.
TDEC elected to submit a lead SIP and redesignation request dated
September 11, 1998, based on the GSR facility, while acknowledging that
a new lead SIP would be necessary to accommodate the new MCG, Inc.
smelter, as reflected by the July 13, 1998, permit application.
On December 22, 1998, the old facility was completely shutdown, and
the new smelter began operation. As a result, TDEC developed a new lead
SIP and redesignation request dated May 12, 1999, based on the new MCG,
Inc. lead smelter. Further, TDEC withdrew both the 1993 and 1998 lead
SIPs and replaced them with the new lead SIP submittal and
redesignation request.
II. Analysis of the State Submittal
The 1999 SIP revision was reviewed using the criteria established
by the CAA in section 110(a)(2). Section 172(c) of the CAA specifies
the provisions applicable to areas designated as nonattainment for any
of the NAAQS. EPA has also issued a General Preamble describing how EPA
will review SIPs and SIP revisions submitted under Title I of the CAA,
including those state submittals containing lead nonattainment area SIP
requirements (see generally 57 FR 13498 (April 16, 1992) and 57 FR
18070 (April 28, 1992)). Because the EPA is describing its
interpretations here only in broad terms, the reader should refer to
the General Preamble for a more detailed discussion of the
interpretations of Title I advanced in today's approval and the
supporting rationale (57 FR 13549, April 16, 1992).
A. Attainment Demonstration
Section 192(a) of the CAA requires that SIPs must provide for
attainment of the lead NAAQS as expeditiously as practicable but not
later than five years from the date of an area's nonattainment
designation. The lead nonattainment designation for the Williamson
County area was effective on January 6, 1992; therefore, the latest
attainment date permissible by statute would be January 6, 1997. The
Williamson County area has air quality data showing attainment of the
lead NAAQS for the years 1996 through 1998 and to date for 1999.
To demonstrate that the area will continue to be in attainment with
the lead NAAQS, emission limits were set through the application of
reasonable achievable control technologies (RACT) and workplace
standards at the MCG facility. The emission limits were evaluated using
air dispersion modeling. This modeling predicts the impact of emissions
on the environment surrounding the facility and whether or not the area
will attain the lead NAAQS. The modeling demonstration submitted by
TDEC for the MCG facility shows a predicted maximum quarterly ambient
air lead concentration of 0.218 micrograms per cubic meter (g/
m\3\) which is well below the NAAQS for lead of 1.5 g/m\3\.
B. Emissions Inventory
Section 172(c)(3) of the CAA requires that nonattainment plan
provisions include a comprehensive, accurate, current inventory of
actual emissions from all sources of relevant pollutants in the
nonattainment area. Because it is necessary to support an area's
attainment demonstration, the emission inventory must be included with
the SIP submission.
TDEC submitted an emissions inventory for the base year 1998. The
inventory identifies the secondary lead smelter owned and operated by
MCG as the sole major source of lead emissions in the Williamson County
area when violations were recorded. The EPA is approving the emissions
inventory because it is accurate and comprehensive, and provides a
sufficient basis for determining the adequacy of the attainment
demonstration for this area consistent with the requirements of the
CAA.
C. Reasonably Available Control Measures (RACM) (Including Reasonably
Available Control Technology (RACT))
States with lead nonattainment areas must submit provisions to
assure that RACM (including RACT) are
[[Page 37408]]
implemented (see section 172(c)(1)). All smelting processes at the MCG
facility are enclosed in a single concrete and steel building, and the
building is kept under negative pressure. Baghouses at the facility
control emissions from the blast and reverberatory furnaces and
associated process equipment. Other than the flues for the indirect
fired refining kettles, which contain natural gas combustion products
and no lead emissions, the exhausts of the two baghouses and the wet
scrubber are the only emission points for the smelter. All of the
control measures employed at the MCG facility were evaluated for
reasonableness and technological and economical feasibility. EPA has
determined that requirements for RACM (including RACT) have been met.
D. Other Measures Including Emission Limitations, and Timetables
Pursuant to 172(c)(6) of the CAA, all nonattainment SIPs must
contain enforceable emission limitations, other control measures, and
schedules and timetables for compliance.
The emission limits for the MCG facility were submitted as a part
of the lead SIP and used in the modeling study. The facility-wide
emissions of lead for MCG are limited to 0.863 pounds per hour (lbs/
hr). Any relaxation of the emission limits which results in a computer
modeling prediction of a maximum quarterly lead concentration off the
MCG plant property exceeding 0.218 g/m\3\ will require a
revision of this lead SIP.
The CAA also requires that nonattainment SIPs include other
measures and schedules and timetables for compliance that may be needed
to ensure the attainment of the relevant NAAQS by the applicable
attainment date. Because the Williamson County area has been attaining
the lead NAAQS since 1996, it is not necessary to require other control
measures or a schedule and timetable for compliance with the NAAQS.
E. Computer Modeling
Section 110(a)(2)(K) of the CAA requires the use of air quality
modeling to predict the effect on ambient air quality from any
emissions of an air pollutant for which a NAAQS has been established.
Therefore, TDEC was required to submit a modeling demonstration with
the lead SIP. TDEC used the current long-term ISCLT3 and CTSCREEN
models. The 1998 modeling results reveal that the maximum quarterly
lead concentration was 0.218 g/m\3\ which is well below the
1.5 g/m\3\ lead NAAQS. Furthermore, it is predicted that the
maximum quarterly lead concentration in the year 2011 shall be either
at or below the 1998 value.
F. Reasonable Further Progress (RFP)
The SIP must provide for RFP, defined in section 171(1) of the CAA
as such reductions in emissions of the relevant air pollutant as are
required by section 172(c)(2), or may reasonably be required by the
Administrator for the purpose of ensuring attainment of the applicable
NAAQS by the applicable date.
The EPA reviewed the attainment demonstration for the area to
determine whether annual incremental reductions different from those
provided in the SIP should be required in order to ensure continued
attainment of the lead NAAQS. The EPA found that at the emission rate
established through RACT limits and control measures utilized at the
old GSR facility has provided continuous attainment of the lead NAAQS
since 1996. The emission rate, RACT limits and controls implemented at
the new MCG facility are more stringent than those at the old GSR
facility and constitute adequate reasonable further progress for the
Williamson County area. Furthermore, the air quality monitoring data
indicate no exceedances of the lead NAAQS since 1996 and the modeling
study predicts no future exceedances. Therefore, no additional
incremental reductions in emissions are needed.
G. New Source Review (NSR)
Section 172(c)(5) of the CAA requires that the submittal include a
permit program for the construction and operation of new and modified
major stationary sources. The federally approved Rule 1200-3-9 of the
Tennessee Air Pollution Control Regulations identifies the current
specific permitting requirements for nonattainment areas in the State
of Tennessee. Rule 1200-3-9--Prevention of Significant Deterioration of
Air Quality will replace this rule once the Williamson County lead
nonattainment area is redesignated to attainment. An analysis of the
redesignation request is discussed later in this document. This rule
meets the requirements of the CAA.
H. Contingency Measures
As provided in section 172(c)(9) of the CAA, all nonattainment area
SIPs that demonstrate attainment must include contingency measures.
Contingency measures should consist of other available measures that
are not part of the area's control strategy. These measures must take
effect without further action by the state or EPA, upon a determination
that the area has failed to meet RFP or attain the lead NAAQS by the
applicable attainment date.
If a violation of the Lead NAAQS occurs in the Williamson County
area, TDEC will proceed within 60 days to take appropriate enforcement
action for that violation, and, if necessary incorporate a schedule of
corrective action into any order issued as a result of that enforcement
action. EPA has determined this requirement in the Tennessee SIP to
meet the contingency measure provisions of the CAA.
The EPA is approving the lead SIP for Williamson County, Tennessee
because it meets the requirements set forth in section 110(a)(2) and
172(c) of the CAA.
III. Background and Analysis of the Redesignation Request
In 1995, TDEC submitted a proposal package requesting that the
Williamson County area to be redesignated attainment for the lead
NAAQS. Subsequent violations of the lead NAAQS recorded the entire
calendar year of 1995 prevented TDEC from submitting a final
redesignation request. After the area had sufficient air quality
monitoring data, on September 11, 1998, TDEC submitted a lead SIP and
redesignation request that has been withdrawn and replaced with a new
request dated May 13, 1999.
Pursuant to section 107(d)(3)(E) of the CAA, five requirements must
be met before a nonattainment area can be redesignated to attainment.
The following describes how each of the five requirements has been
achieved.
A. Attainment of the Lead NAAQS
The EPA requires eight consecutive quarters or two calendar years
of air quality monitoring data showing attainment to justify a
redesignation to attainment for the lead NAAQS. To demonstrate that the
Williamson County area is in attainment with the NAAQS for lead, TDEC
included air quality data for the years 1996-1998 in the submittal. The
data has been quality assured, and can be found in EPA's Aerometric
Information Retrieval System. This monitoring data which covers over 12
consecutive quarters without an exceedance, is adequate to demonstrate
attainment of the lead NAAQS. TDEC will continue to monitor the air
quality of the Williamson County area to verify continued maintenance
of the lead NAAQS.
A modeling demonstration is also required to redesignate a lead
nonattainment area to attainment. The EPA believes that the modeling
analysis included in the 1999 lead SIP also being approved in this
document satisfies this
[[Page 37409]]
requirement. As stated previously in this notice, the results of the
modeling analysis indicate that the lead NAAQS will continue to be
maintained.
B. Section 110(k) SIP Approval
The SIP for the area must be fully approved under section 110(k)
and must satisfy all requirements that apply to the area. Approval
actions on SIP elements and the redesignation request may occur
simultaneously as in the case of this lead SIP and redesignation
request. The SIP elements for the lead SIP were discussed previously in
the ``Analysis of the State Submittal'' section of this document. The
EPA has determined that the approval of the lead SIP for the Williamson
County area meets the requirements of section 110(k).
C. Permanent and Enforceable Improvement in Air Quality
A state must be able to reasonably attribute the improvement in air
quality to permanent and enforceable emission reductions. The MCG
facility provides more stringent emission limits and lower emission
rates compared to those at the old GSR facility which provide
enforceable and permanent emission reductions needed to attain and
maintain the lead NAAQS. This is evidenced by the area having more than
12 consecutive quarters of clean air quality data. Furthermore, the
modeling study shows that the area will remain in attainment through
the year 2011. Subsequently, EPA has determined that there is a
permanent and enforceable improvement in the air quality in Williamson
County.
D. Compliance With Section 110(a)(2) and Part D of the CAA
To be redesignated to attainment, section 107(d)(3)(E) requires
that an area must have met all applicable requirements of section
110(a)(2) and part D of the CAA. The EPA has determined that the lead
SIP for the Williamson County lead nonattainment area meets the
requirements of section 110(a)(2) and part D of the CAA and is
approving the submittal in this document. A detailed explanation of the
requirements can be found in the ``Analysis of the State Submittal''
section of this document.
E. Maintenance Plan
Section 175(A) of the CAA requires states that submit a
redesignation request to include a maintenance plan to ensure that the
attainment of NAAQS for the relevant pollutant is maintained. The plan
must demonstrate continued attainment of the applicable NAAQS for at
least ten years after the approval of a redesignation to attainment. To
provide for the possibility of future NAAQS violations, the maintenance
plan must contain such contingency measures necessary to assure that a
state will promptly correct any violation of the standard that occurs
after redesignation. The contingency provisions must include a
requirement that a state will implement all measures for controlling
the air pollutant concerned that were contained in the SIP prior to
redesignation.
TDEC demonstrated that the lead SIP also being approved in this
action is adequate to maintain compliance with the lead NAAQS for at
least ten years. The EPA agrees that the lead SIP satisfies the
requirements of section 175(A) of the CAA to show maintenance of the
lead NAAQS. The control measures and lead emission limits included in
the SIP have been implemented at the MCG facility to ensure the
continued attainment of the lead NAAQS. The modeling demonstration
supporting the lead SIP shows maintenance of the lead standard through
2011, meeting the requirement to show maintenance for ten years. The
lead SIP also includes contingency measures that will take effect if a
violation of the lead NAAQS occurs. Since these measures were not
implemented to attain the lead NAAQS, they can be used as contingency
measure for maintenance.
IV. Final Action
EPA is approving the lead SIP and redesignation of the Williamson
County lead nonattainment area to attainment because the submittal
meets the requirements of the CAA as discussed in this document. The
EPA is publishing this rule without prior proposal because the Agency
views this as a noncontroversial submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. However, in the proposed rules section of this Federal
Register publication, EPA is publishing a separate document that will
serve as the proposal to approve the SIP revision should adverse
comments be filed. This rule will be effective September 10, 1999
without further notice unless the Agency receives adverse comments by
August 11, 1999.
If the EPA receives such comments, then EPA will publish a document
withdrawing the final rule and informing the public that the rule will
not take effect. All public comments received will then be addressed in
a subsequent final rule based on the proposed rule. The EPA will not
institute a second comment period. Parties interested in commenting
should do so at this time. If no such comments are received, the public
is advised that this rule will be effective on September 10, 1999 and
no further action will be taken on the proposed rule.
V. Administrative Requirements
A. Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this
regulatory action from Executive Order (E.O.) 12866, entitled
``Regulatory Planning and Review.''
B. Executive Order 12875
Under Executive Order 12875, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute and that creates a mandate upon a State, local
or tribal government, unless the Federal government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance costs incurred by those
governments, or EPA consults with those governments. If EPA complies by
consulting, Executive Order 12875 requires EPA to provide to the Office
of Management and Budget a description of the extent of EPA's prior
consultation with representatives of affected State, local and tribal
governments, the nature of their concerns, copies of any written
communications from the governments, and a statement supporting the
need to issue the regulation. In addition, Executive Order 12875
requires EPA to develop an effective process permitting elected
officials and other representatives of State, local and tribal
governments ``to provide meaningful and timely input in the development
of regulatory proposals containing significant unfunded mandates.''
Today's rule does not create a mandate on state, local or tribal
governments. The rule does not impose any enforceable duties on these
entities. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1(a) of E.O. 12875
do not apply to this rule.
C. Executive Order 13045
Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety
Risks (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), applies to any rule that: (1) is
determined to be ``economically significant'' as defined under E.O.
12866, and (2) concerns an environmental health or safety risk that EPA
has reason to believe may have a disproportionate effect on children.
If the regulatory action meets both criteria, the Agency must evaluate
the environmental health or safety effects of the planned rule on
children, and explain why the planned regulation is preferable to other
potentially effective
[[Page 37410]]
and reasonably feasible alternatives considered by the Agency.
This rule is not subject to E.O. 13045 because it does not involve
decisions intended to mitigate environmental health or safety risks.
D. Executive Order 13084
Under Executive Order 13084, EPA may not issue a regulation that is
not required by statute, that significantly or uniquely affects the
communities of Indian tribal governments, and that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs on those communities, unless the Federal
government provides the funds necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by the tribal governments, or EPA consults with those
governments. If EPA complies by consulting, Executive Order 13084
requires EPA to provide to the Office of Management and Budget, in a
separately identified section of the preamble to the rule, a
description of the extent of EPA's prior consultation with
representatives of affected tribal governments, a summary of the nature
of their concerns, and a statement supporting the need to issue the
regulation. In addition, Executive Order 13084 requires EPA to develop
an effective process permitting elected officials and other
representatives of Indian tribal governments ``to provide meaningful
and timely input in the development of regulatory policies on matters
that significantly or uniquely affect their communities.''
Today's rule does not significantly or uniquely affect the
communities of Indian tribal governments. This action does not involve
or impose any requirements that affect Indian Tribes. Accordingly, the
requirements of section 3(b) of E.O. 13084 do not apply to this rule.
E. Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) generally requires an agency
to conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis of any rule subject to
notice and comment rulemaking requirements unless the agency certifies
that the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. Small entities include small
businesses, small not-for-profit enterprises, and small governmental
jurisdictions. This final rule will not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities because SIP approvals under
section 110 and subchapter I, part D of the Clean Air Act do not create
any new requirements but simply approve requirements that the State is
already imposing. Therefore, because the Federal SIP approval does not
create any new requirements, I certify that this action will not have a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Moreover, due to the nature of the Federal-State relationship under the
Clean Air Act, preparation of flexibility analysis would constitute
Federal inquiry into the economic reasonableness of state action. The
Clean Air Act forbids EPA to base its actions concerning SIPs on such
grounds. Union Electric Co., v. U.S. EPA, 427 U.S. 246, 255-66 (1976);
42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2).
F. Unfunded Mandates
Under section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(``Unfunded Mandates Act''), signed into law on March 22, 1995, EPA
must prepare a budgetary impact statement to accompany any proposed or
final rule that includes a Federal mandate that may result in estimated
annual costs to State, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate;
or to private sector, of $100 million or more. Under section 205, EPA
must select the most cost-effective and least burdensome alternative
that achieves the objectives of the rule and is consistent with
statutory requirements. Section 203 requires EPA to establish a plan
for informing and advising any small governments that may be
significantly or uniquely impacted by the rule.
EPA has determined that the approval action promulgated does not
include a Federal mandate that may result in estimated annual costs of
$100 million or more to either State, local, or tribal governments in
the aggregate, or to the private sector. This Federal action approves
pre-existing requirements under State or local law, and imposes no new
requirements. Accordingly, no additional costs to State, local, or
tribal governments, or to the private sector, result from this action.
G. Submission to Congress and the Comptroller General
The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. EPA will submit a report containing this rule and other
required information to the U.S. Senate, the U.S. House of
Representatives, and the Comptroller General of the United States prior
to publication of the rule in the Federal Register. This rule is not a
``major'' rule as defined by 5 U.S.C. 804(2).
H. Petitions for Judicial Review
Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by September 10, 1999. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this rule for the purposes of judicial
review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for judicial
review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness of such
rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in proceedings
to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Intergovernmental
relation, Lead, Reporting and record keeping requirements.
List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 81
Environmental protection, Air pollution control, National parks,
Wilderness areas.
Dated: June 17, 1999.
Winston A. Smith,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
Chapter I, title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, is amended as
follows:
PART 52--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart RR--Tennessee
2. Section 52.2220(d) is amended by adding at the end of the table
a new entry for the Metalico College Grove, Inc. facility to read as
follows:
Sec. 52.2220 Identification of plan.
* * * * *
(d) EPA-approved State Source specific requirements.
[[Page 37411]]
EPA-Approved Tennessee Source--Specific Requirements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State
Name of source Permit No. effective EPA approval date Explanation
date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * *
*
Metalico College Grove, Inc......... N/A 05/12/99 July 12, 1999..........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 81--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 81 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.
Subpart C--Section 107 Attainment Status Designations
2. In Sec. 81.343, the attainment status table for lead is amended
by revising the Designated Area, Designation Date and type entry for
Williamson County (part) to read as follows:
Sec. 81.343 Tennesse.
Tennessee--Lead
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Designation Classification
Designated area ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date Type Date Type
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Williamson County (part):
Area encompassed by a circle September 10, 1999.......... Attainment..................
centered on Universal
Transverse Mercator
coordinate 530.38 E, 3961.60
N (Zone 16) with a radius of
1.5 kilometers.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[FR Doc. 99-17338 Filed 7-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
