

[Federal Register: September 6, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 172)]
[
Rules and Regulations]               
[Page 52460-52464]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr06se06-21]                         

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0337-200613(f); FRL-8216-7]

 
Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans for Kentucky: 
Air Permit Regulations

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: EPA is now taking final action to approve two of four 
requested revisions to the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for the 
Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted to EPA on March 15, 2001. The two 
revisions being approved today regard two main changes to Kentucky's 
rules. The first change involves the removal and separation of rule 401 
Kentucky Administrative Regulations (KAR) 50:035 (``Permits'') into 
three separate rules under a new Chapter 52 (Permits, Registrations, 
and Prohibitory Rules). Specifically, these rules are 52:001 
(Definitions for 401 KAR Chapter 52), 52:030 (Federally-enforceable 
permits for non-major sources), and 52:100 (``Public, affected state, 
and U.S. EPA review''). The second change involves corrections to 
grammatical errors in rule 50:032 (``Prohibitory Rule for Hot Mix 
Asphalt Plants'') and the removal of rule 50:032 from Chapter 50 and 
adding it to Chapter 52, under 52:090 (``Prohibitory Rule for Hot Mix 
Asphalt Plants''). This final action also responds to adverse comments 
submitted in response to EPA's proposed rule published on December 30, 
2002. This final action does not address the removal of 401 KAR 50:030 
(``Registration of Sources'') or changes made to 401 KAR 52:080 
(``Regulatory limit on potential to emit''), that was part of the March 
15, 2001, submittal, but which will be addressed in a separate action.

DATES: Effective Date: This rule will be effective October 6, 2006.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket 
Identification No. EPA-R04-OAR-2006-0337. All documents in the docket 
are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov Web site. Although listed in the 

index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or other 
information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other 
material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the Internet 
and will be publicly available only in hard copy form. Publicly 
available docket materials are available either electronically through 
http://www.regulations.gov or in hard copy at the Regulatory Development 

Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth 
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. EPA requests that if at all 
possible, you contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT section to schedule your inspection. The Regional Office's 
official hours of business are Monday through Friday, 8:30 to 4:30, 
excluding Federal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Hou, Regulatory Development 
Section, Air Planning Branch, Air, Pesticides and Toxics Management 
Division, Region 4, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 61 Forsyth 
Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303-8960. The telephone number is (404) 
562-8965. Mr. Hou can also be reached via electronic mail at 

Hou.James@epa.gov.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Today's Action
II. Background
III. Comment and Response
IV. Final Action
V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

I. Today's Action

    EPA is now taking final action to approve two of four requested 
revisions to the (SIP) for the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted to 
EPA on March 15, 2001, and clarified in a letter dated July 18, 2001. 
The SIP submittal and the letter-clarification were submitted by the 
Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Air 
Quality. The two revisions being approved today regard two main changes 
to Kentucky's rules. The first change involves the removal and 
separation of rule 401 Kentucky Administrative Regulations (KAR) 50:035 
(``Permits'') into three separate rules under a new Chapter 52 
(Permits, Registrations, and Prohibitory Rules). Specifically, these 
rules are 52:001 (Definitions for 401 KAR Chapter 52), 52:030 
(``Federally-enforceable permits for non-major sources''), and 52:100 
(``Public, affected state, and U.S. EPA review''). The second change 
involves corrections to grammatical errors in rule 50:032 
(``Prohibitory Rule for Hot Mix Asphalt Plants'') and the removal of 
rule 50:032 from Chapter 50 and adding it to Chapter 52, under 52:090 
(``Prohibitory Rule for Hot Mix Asphalt Plants''). Today's final action 
also responds to one set of adverse comments submitted in response to 
EPA's proposed rule published on December 30, 2002 (67 FR 79543). 
Today's final action does not address the removal of 401 KAR 50:030

[[Page 52461]]

(``Registration of Sources'') or changes made to 401 KAR 52:080 
(``Regulatory limit on potential to emit''), which will be addressed in 
a separate action. Therefore, today's final action approves a total of 
four rules into the Kentucky SIP; 401 KAR 52:001, 401 KAR 52:030, 401 
KAR 52:090, and 401 KAR 52:100 and the removal of rules 401 KAR 50:032 
and 401 KAR 50:035. This final action is consistent with section 110 of 
the Clean Air Act.

II. Background

    On December 30, 2002, EPA simultaneously published a proposed rule 
(67 FR 79543, December 30, 2002) and a direct final rule (67 FR 79523, 
December 30, 2002) to approve the above described revisions to the 
Kentucky SIP, submitted by Kentucky on March 15, 2001. Because EPA 
received one set of adverse comments during the public comment period, 
EPA withdrew the direct final rule on February 10, 2003 (68 FR 6629). 
Today, EPA is taking final action on the Kentucky SIP revisions 
proposed for approval on December 30, 2002, as well as responding to 
the set of adverse comments received on that proposed action, with the 
exception of the portions of the March 15, 2001, submittal noted above.

III. Response to Comments

    EPA received comments from one commenter who opposed the proposed 
revision to the Kentucky SIP published on December 30, 2002 (67 FR 
79543). A summary of the adverse comments received on the proposed rule 
and EPA's response to the comments, is presented below.
    Comment: The commenter requests that EPA: (1) Reject approval of 
401 KAR 52:001 and 401 KAR 52:100 and reject incorporation of these 
provisions into 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 52, Subpart 
S; (2) provide an additional comment period if EPA proposes to approve 
any non-emergency amendment of 40 CFR part 52, subpart S; (3) command 
that all prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) portions of 40 
CFR part 124 apply to PSD permitting actions by Kentucky; and (4) 
cancel all authority that EPA gave to Kentucky to issue PSD permits.
    Response: The following response will address each of the issues 
raised in the above comment in turn. First, the provisions contained in 
401 KAR 52:001 (``Definitions for 401 KAR Chapter 52'') and 401 KAR 
52:100 (``Public, affected state, and U.S. EPA review'') are required 
to be a part of the Kentucky SIP. Both the definitions and the public 
review provisions are consistent with federal requirements for the 
programs to which they apply. Therefore, the proposed rules are 
approvable into the Kentucky SIP. As a point of clarification, 401 KAR 
52:001 and 52:100 relate specifically to Kentucky's Clean Air Act (CAA) 
title V permit program and Kentucky's Federally Enforceable State 
Operating Permit (FESOP) program. Kentucky's PSD permit rules, found in 
401 KAR Chapter 51, refer to the public review provisions of 401 KAR 
52:100, but only to the extent that such provisions are more stringent 
than the public review provisions found in the federal rule, 40 CFR 
51.166(q).
    Second, the Kentucky SIP, like many other SIPs, is regularly 
amended. Most recently, EPA proposed revisions to the Kentucky SIP on 
February 10, 2006 (71 FR 6988). This revision dealt specifically with 
Kentucky's PSD regulations. No public comments were received. The 
commenter failed to state any reason why the comment period for the 
present proposal (67 FR 79543) should be reopened.
    Third, the commenter's request to expand the applicability of 40 
CFR part 124 is not relevant to the present action which does not 
propose any changes to 40 CFR part 124. 40 CFR part 124 governs EPA 
procedures for certain permit actions (e.g., issuance, termination), 
but it does not apply to PSD permits issued by approved state agencies 
(40 CFR 124.1(e)). Rather, the public review procedures of PSD permits 
issued by an approved state are governed by 40 CFR 51.166(q). 
Kentucky's PSD regulations (401 KAR 51:017) require that Kentucky 
follow the public review procedures in 40 CFR 51.166(q), and any more 
stringent requirements existing in 401 KAR 52:100.
    Fourth, the present action does not relate to Kentucky's authority 
to issue PSD permits, and therefore, EPA cannot ``cancel'' Kentucky's 
authority to issue PSD permits at this time.
    Comment: EPA must act to provide a ``swift and certain remedy,'' 
(1) where KAR is different from 40 CFR 52.21(b) through (w); or (2) 
where KAR provides less effective technical environmental protection, 
less effective opportunity for public participation in the permitting 
process, or less effective legal forums and processes for review of 
questioned decisions.
    Response: The proposed SIP revision at issue (67 FR 79543) relates 
only to specific portions of the KAR and it does not relate to 
Kentucky's PSD regulations. Therefore, the comment is not relevant to 
the proposed action. Nonetheless, as a point of clarification, 40 CFR 
52.21 contains the Federal PSD program (i.e., if EPA were administering 
the PSD program). States may meet the requirements of the federal 
regulations with different but equivalent rules. As noted earlier, 
Kentucky recently revised its PSD program. That revision was noticed in 
the Federal Register and no public comments were received. It is not 
clear from the comment what ``swift and certain remedy'' the commenter 
requests EPA to take, but the comment is not relevant to the proposed 
action at issue at this time.
    Comment: 401 KAR 52:100 is patently and callously contemptuous of 
the intent of the Federal Clean Air Act.
    Response: The commenter fails to provide information demonstrating 
how 401 KAR 52:100 is ``contemptuous'' of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 401 
KAR 52:100 is consistent with federal regulations promulgated pursuant 
to EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act.
    Comment: There appears to be no parallel in the CAA or the CFR to 
401 KAR 52:100, Section 2(3)(c), which grants the applicant ten (10) 
days of exclusive lawful speech. The commenter believes that this 
provision is not consistent with the CAA and 40 CFR 124.13. The 
commenter also believes that if the applicant cannot comment within the 
same timeframe as the public, then the PSD permit should not be issued 
to the applicant.
    Response: As noted earlier, the provisions included in 40 CFR part 
124 do not apply to the issuance of PSD permits by approved states. 
With regard to the comment about 401 KAR 52:100, Section 2(3)(c), a 
state may satisfy the Federal regulations with different but equivalent 
regulations, and a state may include additional procedures not included 
in the Federal regulations so long as the rule is not less stringent. 
This provision is not less stringent and does not impact the public's 
ability to comment on the proposed action. 401 KAR 52:100 is equivalent 
to the Federal regulations for the programs to which it applies and it 
is approvable into the Kentucky SIP.
    As a point of clarification, this additional comment period is not 
an opportunity for the applicant to comment on the proposed permit, but 
rather, an opportunity for the applicant to respond to public comments 
received during the public comment period. This response to comments by 
the applicant is discretionary (i.e., the applicant may or may not 
actually provide such comments). Further, the response by the applicant 
is useful for both the reviewing agency and the public because it 
establishes a forum in which

[[Page 52462]]

the applicant is responding to the public's concerns. The response to 
comments document is made part of the public record. Many state 
permitting programs include this provision to allow for a forum in 
which the applicant can respond to public comments and assist in public 
understanding of the issues in the application.
    Comment: There appears to be no effective provision in 401 KAR 
52:100 for extension of comment time. The commenter references 40 CFR 
124.13, which allows for a comment period longer than 30 days to give 
reasonable opportunity to reply if such a need for time is 
demonstrated.
    Response: As a general matter, the provisions of 40 CFR part 124 
apply only to EPA and not to approved states. For state approved 
programs, such as CAA title V or PSD permit programs, the applicable 
public participation regulations are found in the federal regulations 
applicable to that specific state approved program. For example, for 
title V purposes, state programs must comply with the public 
participation provisions described in 40 CFR part 70; for PSD purposes, 
state programs must comply with the public participation provisions 
described in 40 CFR 51.166(q). 401 KAR 52:100 is consistent with the 
federal regulations for the programs to which it applies.
    Comment: The commenter expresses that Section 3 of 401 KAR 52:100 
is written as if a public hearing is optional. The commenter refers to 
the CAA and suggests that a hearing is obligated for many PSD matters.
    Response: Kentucky's PSD regulations (401 KAR 51:017) require that 
the permitting authority follow the applicable procedures of 40 CFR 
51.166(q) and 401 KAR 52:100.
    Comment: The commenter states that citizens, in an area where a new 
major source is to be located or where an existing source is requesting 
a major modification, should be entitled and informed of the public 
participation process including five elements. These elements obligate 
a hearing if there is a request; affords time, such as at least 30 
calendar days prior to the hearing during which citizens may 
familiarize themselves with the draft, the technical support of the 
draft, and the application; grant to anyone who makes some cogent 
timely comment, the legal standing right to appeal any issue raised by 
anyone's cogent timely comment; obligate that if a cogent technical 
comment is made orally at the hearing, that it has the full force of 
law and that it need not be submitted by the speaker in writing in 
order to be an item preserved for review (although encouraging written 
submissions for accuracy and courtesy to the permitting agency is 
proper), and; afford time, such as at least 12 calendar days following 
the hearing, during which citizens may timely file written comment on 
the draft after having had the opportunity to have heard the matters 
expressed in the hearing. The commenter further requests that EPA 
initiate rulemaking for various regulatory permit programs to 
``codify'' certain public participation elements.
    Response: With regard to the actions at issue at this time, 
Kentucky's provisions are equivalent to applicable federal regulations. 
Therefore, Kentucky's rules proposed for inclusion into the SIP are 
approvable by EPA.
    Comment: The commenter expresses that Section 5 of 401 KAR 52:100 
does not contain ``identical, synonymous, or superior text as a notice 
requirement.'' The commenter points to a January 2002 legal notice 
published by the Kentucky Division for Air Quality (KDAQ) as an example 
of a deficient public notice.
    Response: In accordance with Kentucky's rules, public notice and 
participation on PSD permits is governed by 40 CFR 51.166(q). It is 
unclear whether the commenter believes that the KDAQ January 2002 legal 
notice fails to comply with the provisions in the Kentucky rules which 
apply to such notices. Nonetheless, the SIP action proposed by EPA on 
December 30, 2002, does not relate to the January 2002 public notice on 
a PSD permit discussed by the commenter. Comments regarding specific 
PSD permits and corresponding public notices should be raised during 
the public comment period on that permit and addressed to the agency 
responsible for issuing that permit. This comment is not relevant to 
the action at issue at this time.
    Comment: The commenter asserts that the requirements of 40 CFR 
51.166 are ``terse to the point of near meaninglessness'' and do not 
comply with Congressional intent for public participation. The 
commenter makes a similar statement regarding portions of 40 CFR part 
124. The commenter gives specific examples of what a public notice 
could include.
    Response: Neither of the provisions cited by the commenter are at 
issue in this final action regarding Kentucky's SIP. Both provisions 
are final federal rules that have been in effect for years. Comments 
regarding federal rules should have been provided within the timeframes 
for challenging such rules (i.e., when EPA proposes changes to federal 
rules, comments must be submitted within the stated timeframes in order 
to be considered by EPA for that rulemaking). The present action will 
have no impact on 40 CFR 51.166 or 40 CFR part 124.
    Comment: The commenter notes that Section 2(4) of 401 KAR 52:100 
will make public comments available upon request and believes the 
comments may be abridged, which does not meet the requirements set 
forth in 40 CFR 51.166.
    Response: The commenter appears confused about the application of 
401 KAR 52:100 to different air permit programs. As noted earlier, 
Kentucky's PSD permitting regulations require that the permitting 
authority follow the provisions described in 40 CFR 51.166 for public 
participation. 401 KAR 52:100 applies specifically to CAA title V 
operating permits (401 KAR 52:020) and Federally Enforceable State 
Operating Permits (FESOPs) (401 KAR 52:030). The language included in 
401 KAR 52:100 is equivalent to federal regulations regarding public 
participation for the programs to which it applies. Therefore, the 
regulations proposed by Kentucky for inclusion in the Kentucky SIP are 
approvable.
    Comment: The commenter states that much of 401 KAR 52:001 does not 
meet requirements established in 40 CFR 51.166(a). The commenter 
identifies several examples where the commenter believes that 
definitions in 401 KAR 52:001 are less stringent than the federal 
definitions, or otherwise problematic. As examples, the commenter cites 
to the definition of ``electric utility steam generating unit,'' 
``commence,'' and ``major modification.''
    Response: Kentucky's PSD permitting definitions are found in 401 
KAR 51:001, not 52:001. Kentucky's rules, including 401 KAR 52:001, are 
equivalent to the applicable federal regulations, and are approvable 
into the Kentucky SIP. Notably, the definitions included in Kentucky's 
PSD permit program (401 KAR Chapter 51) were recently revised by 
Kentucky to include new regulations promulgated by EPA in December, 
2002. EPA published a notice regarding Kentucky's PSD program in the 
Federal Register on February 10, 2006 (71 FR 9688); no public comments 
were received on that proposed action. EPA took final action to approve 
those changes on July 11, 2006 (71 FR 38990).
    Comment: With regard to a statement in 67 FR 79524 (the direct 
final rule that was withdrawn), the commenter states that ``[t]he 
people are reasonably entitled to review EPA's work again prior to EPA 
granting any additional misplaced authority to a rogue state.''
    Response: The procedure followed by EPA in the present action 
included the simultaneous publication of both a direct final rule (67 
FR 79524, December 30, 2002) and a proposed rule (67 FR

[[Page 52463]]

79543, December 30, 2002). As noted in the direct final action, when 
EPA receives adverse comments on direct final rules, EPA withdraws the 
direct final rule and issues a final rule based on the simultaneously 
published proposed rule. EPA withdrew the direct final rule on February 
10, 2003 (68 FR 6629). EPA's review of the proposed SIP revision by 
Kentucky was comprehensive. EPA is now taking final action based on the 
proposal, and addressing the one set of adverse comments received on 
the proposed action.
    Comment: The commenter states that 67 FR 79523 and 79543 are devoid 
of explanation for the proposed addition of 401 KAR 52:001 and 401 KAR 
52:100. The commenter further notes that 40 CFR part 52, subpart S is 
defective.
    Response: EPA disagrees with the commenter's statement. The two 
Federal Register notices cited by the commenter include specific 
information regarding what actions are being taken by EPA. The Kentucky 
SIP contains rules that are equivalent to the applicable Federal rules. 
The commenter fails to provide any reason why 40 CFR part 52, subpart S 
is defective.
    Comment: The commenter states that Kentucky should be sanctioned 
for having acted in contempt of the CAA.
    Response: The commenter has not provided any information 
demonstrating how Kentucky has acted in ``contempt'' of the CAA. This 
comment does not appear relevant to the action proposed by EPA 
regarding the Kentucky SIP. EPA disagrees with the commenter's 
conclusion regarding sanctions.
    Comment: The commenter states that there can be no doubt that 
Kentucky knowingly and intentionally submitted to EPA rules that 
provide less effective technical environmental protection; less 
effective opportunity for informed public participation in the 
permitting process; and less effective legal forums and processes for 
review of questioned decisions than that given to those where 40 CFR 
52.21 and 40 CFR part 124 are fully applicable to PSD permits.
    Response: EPA has no information or evidence suggesting that 
Kentucky has knowingly and intentionally violated any provision of the 
CAA or its implementing regulations. As noted earlier, 40 CFR part 124 
does not apply to PSD permits issued by state permitting authorities 
and likewise, the provisions in 40 CFR 52.21 govern only EPA issuance 
of PSD permits.
    Comment: The commenter appears to state concern regarding the time 
that EPA took to review the Kentucky SIP revision at issue.
    Response: In reviewing the Kentucky SIP revision at issue, EPA 
followed its SIP processing guidance, its regulations at 40 CFR part 
51, Appendix V, and the requirements of Section 110 of the Clean Air 
Act.

IV. Final Action

    EPA is now taking final action to approve two of four requested 
revisions to the SIP for the Commonwealth of Kentucky submitted to EPA 
on March 15, 2001. The first revision being approved regards the 
removal and separation of rule 401 Kentucky Administrative Regulations 
(KAR) 50:035 (``Permits'') into three separate rules under a new 
Chapter 52 (Permits, Registrations, and Prohibitory Rules). 
Specifically, these rules are 52:001 (Definitions for 401 KAR Chapter 
52), 52:030 (Federally-enforceable permits for non-major sources), and 
52:100 (``Public, affected state, and U.S. EPA review''). The second 
change involves corrections to grammatical errors in rule 50:032 
(``Prohibitory Rule for Hot Mix Asphalt Plants'') and the removal of 
rule 50:032 from Chapter 50 and adding it to Chapter 52, under 52:090 
(``Prohibitory Rule for Hot Mix Asphalt Plants'').

V. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), this 
action is not a ``significant regulatory action'' and therefore is not 
subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget. For this 
reason, this action is also not subject to Executive Order 13211, 
``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy 
Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001). This action 
merely approves state law as meeting Federal requirements and imposes 
no additional requirements beyond those imposed by state law. 
Accordingly, the Administrator certifies that this rule will not have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities 
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Because 
this rule approves pre-existing requirements under state law and does 
not impose any additional enforceable duty beyond that required by 
state law, it does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or 
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
    This rule also does not have tribal implications because it will 
not have a substantial direct effect on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian tribes, or 
on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the Federal 
Government and Indian tribes, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 
FR 67249, November 9, 2000). This action also does not have federalism 
implications because it does not have substantial direct effects on the 
states, on the relationship between the national government and the 
states, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government, as specified in Executive Order 13132 (64 
FR 43255, August 10, 1999). This action merely approves a state rule 
implementing a Federal standard, and does not alter the relationship or 
the distribution of power and responsibilities established in the Clean 
Air Act. This rule also is not subject to Executive Order 13045 
``Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and Safety 
Risks'' (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is not economically 
significant.
    In reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state 
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act. In 
this context, in the absence of a prior existing requirement for the 
Commonwealth to use voluntary consensus standards (VCS), EPA has no 
authority to disapprove a SIP submission for failure to use VCS. It 
would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for EPA, when it reviews 
a SIP submission, to use VCS in place of a SIP submission that 
otherwise satisfies the provisions of the Clean Air Act. Thus, the 
requirements of section 12(d) of the National Technology Transfer and 
Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) do not apply. This rule 
does not impose an information collection burden under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
    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. A major rule cannot 
take effect until 60 days after it is published in the Federal 
Register. This action is not a ``major rule'' as defined by 5 U.S.C. 
804(2).

[[Page 52464]]

    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 November 6, 2006. 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 Clean Air Act section 307(b)(2).

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Ozone, Reporting 
and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: August 25, 2006.
A. Stanley Meiburg,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.

0
40 CFR part 52 is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart S--Kentucky

0
2. Section 52.920(c) Table 1 is amended:
0
a. In paragraph (c) by removing entries for 401 KAR 50:035 titled 
``Permits'' and 401 KAR 50:032 titled ``Prohibitory rule for hot mix 
asphalt plants'',
0
b. In paragraph (c) adding in numerical order a new chapter heading 
``Chapter 52 Permits, Registrations, and Prohibitory Rules'' and 
entries for 401 KAR 52:001 titled ``Definitions for 401 KAR Chapter 
52'', 401 KAR 52:030 titled ``Federally enforceable permits for non-
major sources'', 401 KAR 52:090 titled ``Prohibitory rule for hot mix 
asphalt plants'' and 401 KAR 52:100 titled ``Public, affected state, 
and U.S. EPA review'' to read as follows:


Sec.  52.920  Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (c) * * *

                                   Table 1.--EPA-Approved Kentucky Regulations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            State
          State citation               Title/subject      effective     EPA approval date        Explanation
                                                             date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                 * * * * * * *
                            Chapter 52 Permits, Registrations, and Prohibitory Rules
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
401 KAR 52:001...................  Definitions for 401      01/15/01  09/06/06 [Insert
                                    KAR Chapter 52.                    citation of
                                                                       publication].
401 KAR 52:030...................  Federally                01/15/01  09/06/06 [Insert
                                    enforceable permits                citation of
                                    for non-major                      publication].
                                    sources.
401 KAR 52:090...................  Prohibitory rule for     01/15/01  09/06/06 [Insert
                                    hot mix asphalt                    citation of
                                    plants.                            publication].
401 KAR 52:100...................  Public, affected         01/15/01  09/06/06 [Insert
                                    state, and U.S. EPA                citation of
                                    review.                            publication].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 06-7415 Filed 9-5-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
