21442 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

section 112(l) to approve programs to

limit potential to emit of HAP directly

under section 112(l) prior to this

revision to Subpart E. The EPA is

therefore approving Pinal’s synthetic

minor program now so that Pinal may

begin to issue federally enforceable

synthetic minor permits as soon as

possible.

The EPA believes that Pinal’s

synthetic minor program meets the

approval criteria specified in the June

28, 1989 Federal Register notice and in

section 112(l)(5) of the Act. Please refer

to the Technical Support Document for

a thorough analysis of the June 28, 1989

criteria and the statutory criteria of

section 112(l)(5) as applied to Pinal’s

synthetic minor program.

The EPA has evaluated the submitted

rules and has determined that they are

consistent with the CAA, EPA

regulations, and EPA policy. Therefore,

Pinal County Air Quality Control

District Code of Regulations Chapter 1,

Article 3, section 1–3–140, Definitions,

subsections 5, 15, 21, 32, 33, 35, 50, 51,

58, 59, 103, and 123; Chapter 3, Article

1, section 3–1–081, Permit conditions,

subsection (A)(8)(a); Chapter 3, Article

1, section 3–1–084, Voluntarily

Accepted Federally Enforceable

Emissions Limitations; Applicability;

Reopening; Effective Date; and Chapter

3, Article 1, section 3–1–107, Public

Participation, are being approved under

section 110(k)(3) of the CAA as meeting

the requirements of section 110(a) and

Part D and under section 112(l) of the

CAA as meeting the requirements of

section 112(l)(5).

Pinal has already begun to issue

permits containing voluntarily accepted

limits pursuant to the regulations listed

above. If the District followed its own

procedures, each of these permits was

subject to public notice and prior EPA

review. Therefore, EPA will consider all

voluntarily accepted limits in District

permits that were processed in a manner

consistent with the District regulations

being acted upon today and the five

June 28, 1989 criteria to be federally

enforceable with the promulgation of

this rule provided that any such permits

containing the voluntarily accepted

limits that the District wishes to make

federally enforceable are submitted to

EPA and accompanied by

documentation that the procedures

approved today have been followed.

The EPA will expeditiously review any

individual permits so submitted to

ensure their conformity to the program

requirements.

Nothing in this action should be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

implementation plan. Each request for

revision to the state implementation

plan shall be considered separately in

light of specific technical, economic,

and environmental factors and in

relation to relevant statutory and

regulatory requirements.

The EPA is publishing this notice

without prior proposal because the

Agency views this as a noncontroversial

amendment and anticipates no adverse

comments. However, in a separate

document in this Federal Register

publication, EPA is proposing to

approve the SIP revision and section

112(l) submittal should adverse or

critical comments be filed. This action

will be effective July 3, 1995, unless by

June 1, 1995, adverse or critical

comments are received.

If EPA receives such comments, this

action will be withdrawn before the

effective date by publishing a

subsequent notice that will withdraw

the final action. All public comments

received will then be addressed in a

subsequent final rule based on this

action serving as a proposed rule. The

EPA will not institute a second

comment period on this action. Any

parties interested in commenting on this

action should do so at this time. If no

such comments are received, the public

is advised that this action will be

effective July 3, 1995.

Regulatory Process

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises and government entities

with jurisdiction over population of less

than 50,000.

Application for limits under Pinal’s

synthetic minor provisions is voluntary

and therefore this approval under

sections 110 and 112 of the Act does not

create any new requirements. Therefore,

because the federal SIP-approval and

section 112(l) approval does not impose

any new requirements, I certify that it

does not have a significant impact on

any small entities affected. Moreover,

due to the nature of the federal-state

relationship under the CAA, preparation

of a regulatory flexibility analysis would

constitute federal inquiry into the

economic reasonableness of state action.

The CAA forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S. Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410 (a)(2).

The OMB has exempted this action

from review under Executive Order

12866.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Environmental protection, Air

pollution control, Incorporation by

reference, Intergovernmental relations,

Reporting and recordkeeping

requirements.

Note: Incorporation by reference of the

State Implementation Plan for the State of

Arizona was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register on July 1, 1982.

Dated: March 28, 1995.

Felicia Marcus,

Regional Administrator.

Part 52, chapter I, title 40 of the 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. 7401–7671q.

Subpart D—Arizona

2. Section 52.120 is amended by

adding paragraphs (c)(71) to read as

follows:

§ 52.120 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(71) New and amended regulations for

the following agencies were submitted

on August 15, 1994 by the Governor’s

designee.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Pinal County Air Quality Control

District.

(1) Chapter 1, Article 3, section 1–3–

140, subsections 5, 15, 21, 32, 33, 35, 50,

51, 58, 59, 103, and 123, adopted on

November 3, 1993; Chapter 3, Article 1,

section 3–1–081(A)(8)(a), adopted on

November 3, 1993; Chapter 3, Article 1,

section 3–1–084, adopted on August 11,

1994; and Chapter 3, Article 1, section

3–1–107, adopted on November 3, 1993.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 95–10698 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–W

40 CFR Part 52

[MS–20–1–6562a; FRL–5173–9]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans; Mississippi:

Approval of Revisions to Construction

and Operation Permit Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 21443

SUMMARY: EPA is approving revisions to

the Mississippi State Implementation

Plan (SIP) to allow the State of

Mississippi to issue Federally

enforceable state operating permits

(FESOP). On January 26, 1994, the State

of Mississippi through the Mississippi

Department of Environmental Quality

(MDEQ) submitted a SIP revision

fulfilling the requirements necessary for

a state FESOP program to become

Federally enforceable. In order to extend

the Federal enforceability of

Mississippi’s FESOP program to

hazardous air pollutants (HAP), EPA is

also approving Mississippi’s FESOP

program pursuant to section 112 of the

Clean Air Act as amended in 1990

(CAA) so that the State may issue

FESOP for HAP.

DATES: This final rule will be effective

July 3, 1995 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by June 1, 1995.

If the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be addressed to Scott Miller, at the EPA

Regional Office listed below. Copies of

the documents relative to this action are

available for public inspection during

normal business hours at the following

locations. The interested persons

wanting to examine these documents

should make an appointment with the

appropriate office at least 24 hours

before the visiting day.

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 Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, NE, Atlanta, Georgia

30365

Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality, Bureau of Air

Quality Control, Air Quality Division,

Post Office Box 10385, Jackson,

Mississippi 39285

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Carla Pierce, Title V, Regional Program

Manager, Air Programs Branch, Air,

Pesticides & Toxics Management

Division, Region 4, Environmental

Protection Agency, 345 Courtland

Street, NE., Atlanta, Georgia 30365. The

telephone number is 404/347–2864.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On

January 26, 1994, the State of

Mississippi through the MDEQ

submitted a SIP revision designed to

make certain permits issued under

Mississippi’s existing minor source

operating permit program Federally

enforceable pursuant to EPA

requirements as specified in a Federal

Register notice, ‘‘Requirements for the

preparation, adoption, and submittal of

implementation plans; air quality, new

source review; final rules,’’ (see 54 FR

22274, June 28, 1989). The State will

continue to issue permits which are not

Federally enforceable under its existing

minor source operating permit rules as

it has done in the past. The SIP revision

which is the subject of today’s

rulemaking adds additional

requirements to the State’s current

minor source operating permit program

which allows the State to issue FESOP.

This voluntary SIP revision allows EPA

and citizens under the CAA to enforce

terms and conditions of Mississippi’s

FESOP program. Operating permits that

are issued under the State’s FESOP

program that is approved into the State

SIP and under section 112(l) will

provide federally enforceable limits to

an air pollution source’s potential to

emit. Limiting of a source’s potential to

emit through federally enforceable

operating permits can affect a source’s

applicability to federal regulations such

as title V operating permits, New Source

Review (NSR) preconstruction permits,

Prevention of Significant Deterioration

(PSD) preconstruction permits for

criteria pollutants and federal air toxics

requirements mandated under section

112 of the CAA.

In the aforementioned June 28, 1989,

Federal Register notice, EPA listed five

criteria necessary to make a State’s

minor source operating permit program

Federally enforceable and, therefore,

approvable into the SIP. This revision

satisfies the five criteria for Federal

enforceability of the State’s FESOP

program.

The first criteria for a state’s operating

permit program to become Federally

enforceable is that the permit program

that the state wishes to be Federally

enforceable must be approved into the

SIP. On January 26, 1994, the State of

Mississippi submitted through MDEQ a

SIP revision designed to meet the five

criteria for Federal enforceability.

Today’s action will approve these

regulations into the Mississippi SIP,

thereby, meeting the first criteria for

Federal enforceability.

The second criteria for a state’s

operating permit program to become

Federally enforceable is that the

regulations approved into the SIP

impose a legal obligation that operating

permit holders adhere to the terms and

limitations of such permits.

Mississippi’s regulations meet this

criteria in Regulation APC–S–2, Section

II of the State regulations by requiring

the following:

In addition to the requirements contained

herein, no permit shall be issued unless the

applicant has complied with applicable

requirements including * * * and additional

relevant Rules and Regulations promulgated

by the Commission and/or Permit Board.

Hence, the second criteria for Federal

enforceability is met.

The third criteria necessary for a

state’s operating permit program to be

Federally enforceable is that the state

operating permit program require that

all emissions limitations, controls, and

other requirements imposed by such

permits will be at least as stringent as

any other applicable limitations and

requirements contained in the SIP or

enforceable under the SIP, and that the

program may not issue permits that

waive, or make less stringent, any

limitations or requirements contained in

or issued pursuant to the SIP, or that are

otherwise ‘‘Federally enforceable’’ (e.g.

standards established under sections

111 and 112 of the Act). Mississippi

satisfies this criteria in two regulations

included in the State’s SIP submittal.

APC–S–2, Section II.B.5 requires that all

permits to construct or operate shall

specify in their application the air

emission rate for each air pollutant

subject to regulation under the Federal

Clean Air Act that can be reasonably

expected to be emitted from a facility.

In addition, Regulation APC–S–2,

Section VI.E.4 provides that the granting

of a permit shall not relieve an air

pollution source of the responsibility to

comply with other applicable

requirements of the permitting

regulation or other applicable

regulations or law. Taken together, these

two regulations satisfy the third criteria

for Federal enforceability.

The fourth criteria for a state’s

operating permit program to become

Federally enforceable is that limitations,

controls, and requirements in the

operating permits are quantifiable, and

otherwise enforceable as a practical

matter. While a determination of what is

practically enforceable will generally

differ based on process type and

emissions, the State has included

several regulations designed to ensure

that permit limitations are enforceable

as a practical matter. APC–S–2, Section

VII.B.2 requires that when performing

stack tests to determine compliance

with an applicable regulation that the

results be expressed in units consistent

with the emission standard of the

applicable regulation for which the

source is attempting to show

compliance. In addition, this regulation

requires that the stack test

demonstration be reported in ‘‘units of

mass per time’’ of the applicable

regulation. Regulation APC–S–2,

Section XI, provides that MDEQ may

require in any permit the installation of
21444 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations

1The EPA intends to issue guidance addressing

the technical aspects of how these criteria pollutant

limits may be recognized for purposes of limiting

a source’s potential to emit of HAP to below section

112 major source levels.

sampling ports with access and the

installation, maintenance and use of

monitoring equipment as well as be

required to maintain records to show

compliance with applicable emission

standards. Therefore, the Mississippi

FESOP program satisfies the fourth

criteria for Federal enforceability.

The fifth criteria for a state’s operating

permit program to become Federally

enforceable is to provide EPA and the

public with timely notice of the

proposal and issuance of such permits,

and to provide EPA, on a timely basis,

with a copy of each proposed (or draft)

and final permit intended to be federally

enforceable. This process also must

provide for an opportunity for public

comment on the permit applications

prior to issuance of the final permit.

Regulation APC–S–2, Section V

provides a 30 day opportunity for public

comment period as well as the

opportunity for a public hearing on any

application where MDEQ believes there

is sufficient interest. Regulation APC–S–

2, Section V.C provides that ‘‘the Permit

Board may provide notice to the public

and provide opportunity for public

comment on any application for a

Construction Permit or Operating

Permit.’’ EPA notes that any permit

which has not gone through an

opportunity for public comment and

EPA review in the Mississippi FESOP

program will not be Federally

enforceable.

In addition to requesting approval

into the SIP, Mississippi has also

requested approval of its FESOP

program under section 112(l) of the Act

for the purpose of creating Federally

enforceable limitations on the potential

to emit of HAP through the issuance of

FESOP. Approval under section 112(l) is

necessary because the proposed SIP

approval discussed above only extends

to the control of criteria pollutants.

Federally enforceable limits on criteria

pollutants (i.e., VOC’s or PM–10) may

have the incidental effect of limiting

certain HAP listed pursuant to section

112(b).1 However, section 112 of the Act

provides the underlying authority for

controlling all HAP emissions.

EPA believes that the five approval

criteria for approving FESOP programs

into the SIP, as specified in the June 28,

1989, Federal Register notice, are also

appropriate for evaluating and

approving the programs under section

112(l). The June 28, 1989, notice does

not address HAP because it was written

prior to the 1990 amendments to section

112, not because it establishes

requirements unique to criteria

pollutants.

In addition to meeting the criteria in

the June 28, 1989, notice, a FESOP

program that addresses HAP must meet

the statutory criteria for approval under

section 112(l)(5). Section 112(l) allows

EPA to approve a program only if it: (1)

Contains adequate authority to assure

compliance with any section 112

standards or requirements; (2) provides

for adequate resources; (3) provides for

an expeditious schedule for assuring

compliance with section 112

requirements; and (4) is otherwise likely

to satisfy the objectives of the CAA.

EPA plans to codify the approval

criteria for programs limiting potential

to emit of HAP, such as FESOP

programs, through amendments to

Subpart E of Part 63, the regulations

promulgated to implement section

112(l) of the CAA. (See 58 FR 62262,

November 26, 1993.) EPA currently

anticipates that these regulatory criteria,

as they apply to FESOP programs, will

mirror those set forth in the June 28,

1989, notice. The EPA currently

anticipates that since FESOP programs

approved pursuant to section 112(l)

prior to the planned Subpart E revisions

will have been approved as meeting

these criteria, further approval actions

for those programs will not be

necessary.

EPA believes it has authority under

section 112(l) to approve programs to

limit potential to emit of HAP directly

under section 112(l) prior to this

revision to Subpart E. Section 112(l)(5)

requires the EPA to disapprove

programs that are inconsistent with

guidance required to be issued under

section 112(l)(2). This might be read to

suggest that the ‘‘guidance’’ referred to

in section 112(l)(2) was intended to be

a binding rule. Even under this

interpretation, EPA does not believe that

section 112(l) requires this rulemaking

to be comprehensive. That is, it need

not address every possible instance of

approval under section 112(l). EPA has

already issued regulations under section

112(l) that would satisfy any section

112(l)(2) requirement for rulemaking.

Given the severe timing problems posed

by impending deadlines set forth in

‘‘maximum achievable control

technology’’ (MACT) emission

standards under section 112 and for

submittal of title V permit applications,

EPA believes it is reasonable to read

section 112(l) to allow for approval of

programs to limit potential to emit prior

to promulgation of a rule specifically

addressing this issue. EPA is therefore

approving Mississippi’s FESOP program

so that Mississippi may begin to issue

FESOP as soon as possible.

EPA believes that Mississippi’s

FESOP program meets the approval

criteria specified in the June 28, 1989

Federal Register notice and in section

112(l)(5) of the CAA. As discussed

previously in this notice, Mississippi’s

FESOP program meets the five criteria

necessary for Federal enforceability.

Regarding the statutory criteria of

section 112(l)(5) referred to above, EPA

believes Mississippi’s FESOP program

contains adequate authority to assure

compliance with section 112

requirements because the third criterion

of the June 28, 1989, notice is met, that

is, because the program does not allow

for the waiver of any section 112

requirement. Sources that become minor

through a permit issued pursuant to this

program would still be required to meet

section 112 requirements applicable to

non-major sources.

Regarding the requirement for

adequate resources, EPA believes

Mississippi has demonstrated that it can

provide for adequate resources to

support the FESOP program. EPA

expects that resources will continue to

be adequate to administer that portion

of the State’s minor source operating

permit program under which FESOP

will be issued since Mississippi has

administered a minor source operating

permit program for several years. EPA

will monitor Mississippi’s

implementation of its FESOP to ensure

that adequate resources are in fact

available. EPA also believes that

Mississippi’s FESOP program provides

for an expeditious schedule for assuring

compliance with section 112

requirements. This program will be used

to allow a source to establish a

voluntary limit on potential to emit to

avoid being subject to a CAA

requirement applicable on a particular

date. Nothing in Mississippi’s FESOP

program would allow a source to avoid

or delay compliance with a CAA

requirement if it fails to obtain an

appropriate federally enforceable limit

by the relevant deadline. Finally, EPA

believes it is consistent with the intent

of section 112 and the CAA for states to

provide a mechanism through which

sources may avoid classification as a

major source by obtaining a Federally

enforceable limit on potential to emit.

With the addition of these provisions,

Mississippi’s FESOP program satisfies

all the requirements listed in the June

28, 1989, Federal Register notice. EPA

is approving this revision to the State of

Mississippi’s SIP thus making the

State’s FESOP program Federally

enforceable.
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 84 / Tuesday, May 2, 1995 / Rules and Regulations 21445

Final Action

In this action, EPA is approving the

Mississippi FESOP program. EPA is

publishing this action without prior

proposal because the Agency views this

as a noncontroversial amendment and

anticipates no adverse comments.

However, in a separate document in this

Federal Register publication, EPA is

proposing to approve the SIP revision

should adverse or critical comments be

filed. This action will be effective July

3, 1995 unless, within 30 days of its

publication, adverse or critical

comments are received. If EPA receives

such comments, this action will be

withdrawn before the effective date by

publishing a subsequent document that

will withdraw the final action. All

public comments received will then be

addressed in a subsequent final rule

based on this action serving as a

proposed rule. EPA will not institute a

second comment period on this action.

Any parties interested in commenting

on this action should do so at this time.

If no such comments are received, the

public is advised that this action will be

effective July 3, 1995.

The Agency has reviewed this request

for revision of the federally-approved

SIP for conformance with the provisions

of the 1990 Amendments enacted on

November 15, 1990. EPA has

determined that this action conforms

with those requirements.

Under section 307(b)(1) of the CAA,

42 U.S.C. 7607(b)(1), petitions for

judicial review of this action must be

filed in the United States Court of

Appeals for the appropriate circuit by

July 3, 1995. Filing a petition for

reconsideration by the Administrator of

this final rule does not affect the finality

of this rule for 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) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C.

7607(b)(2).) The Office of Management

and Budget has exempted this action

from review under Executive Order

12866.

Nothing in this action shall be

construed as permitting or allowing or

establishing a precedent for any future

request for a revision to any SIP. Each

request for revision to the SIP shall be

considered separately in light of specific

technical, economic, and environmental

factors and in relation to relevant

statutory and regulatory requirements.

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act,

5 U.S.C. 600 et seq., EPA must prepare

a regulatory flexibility analysis

assessing the impact of any proposed or

final rule on small entities. 5 U.S.C. 603

and 604. Alternatively, EPA may certify

that the rule will not have a significant

impact on a substantial number of small

entities. Small entities include small

businesses, small not-for-profit

enterprises, and government entities

with jurisdiction over populations of

less than 50,000.

SIP approvals under section 110 and

subchapter I, part D of the CAA do not

create any new requirements, but

simply approve requirements that the

State is already imposing. Therefore,

because the federal SIP-approval does

not impose any new requirements, I

certify that it does not have a significant

impact on any small entities affected.

Moreover, due to the nature of the

federal-state relationship under the

CAA, preparation of a regulatory

flexibility analysis would constitute

federal inquiry into the economic

reasonableness of state action. The CAA

forbids EPA to base its actions

concerning SIPs on such grounds.

Union Electric Co. v. U.S. E.P.A., 427

U.S. 246, 256–66 (S.Ct. 1976); 42 U.S.C.

7410(a)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

Air pollution control, Carbon

monoxide, Hydrocarbons, Incorporation

by reference, Lead, Nitrogen dioxide,

Intergovernmental relations, Particulate

matter, Ozone and Sulfur oxides.

Dated: March 1, 1995.

Patrick M. Tobin,

Acting Regional Administrator.

Part 52 of 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. 7401–7671q.

Subpart Z—Mississippi

2. Section 52.1270 is amended by

adding paragraph (c)(25) to read as

follows:

§ 52.1270 Identification of plan.

* * * * *

(c) * * *

(25) Revisions to minor source

operating permit rules submitted by the

Mississippi Department of

Environmental Quality on January 26,

1994.

(i) Incorporation by reference.

(A) Regulation APC–S–2, effective

January 9, 1994.

(ii) Other material. None.

[FR Doc. 95–10700 Filed 5–1–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P

40 CFR Part 52

[KY–86–1–6932a; FRL–5189–6]

Approval and Promulgation of

Implementation Plans State: Kentucky;

Approval of Revisions to State

Implementation Plan Regarding

Emission Statements

AGENCY: Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Direct final rule.

SUMMARY: EPA is approving the State

Implementation Plan (SIP) revision

submitted by the Commonwealth of

Kentucky through the Natural Resources

and Environmental Protection Cabinet

(Cabinet) for the purpose of

implementing an emission statement

program. The SIP was submitted by the

Cabinet on January 15, 1993. As a result

of EPA comments, the Cabinet

submitted another SIP on December 29,

1994, to satisfy the Federal requirements

for an emission statement program.

DATES: This final rule will be effective

June 16, 1995 unless adverse or critical

comments are received by June 1, 1995.

If the effective date is delayed, timely

notice will be published in the Federal

Register.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this

action should be addressed to Scott

Southwick at the EPA Regional Office

listed below.

Copies of the documents relative to

this action are available for public

inspection during normal business

hours at the following locations. The

interested persons wanting to examine

these documents should make an

appointment with the appropriate office

at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

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 Programs Branch, 345

Courtland Street, NE., Atlanta,

Georgia 30365.

Division for Air Quality, Department for

Environmental Protection, Natural

Resources and Environmental

Protection Cabinet, 316 St. Clair Mall,

Frankfort, Kentucky 40601.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Scott Southwick, Regulatory Planning

and Development Section, Air Programs

Branch, Air, Pesticides & Toxics

Management Division, Region 4