[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