<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">

<TITLE>Association between Ozone and Asthma Emergency Department Visits in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada</TITLE>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content=document name=resource-type>
<META content=global name=Distribution>
<META
content="David M. Stieb, Richard T. Burnett, Robert C. Beveridge, Jeffrey R. Brook"
name=Author>
<META
content="Association between Ozone and Asthma Emergency Department Visits in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada"
name=Description>
<META content="air pollution, asthma, emergency department, ozone"
name=KeyWords>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.3086" name=GENERATOR>

Environmental Health
Perspectives, Volume 104, Number 12, December 1996

[Citation
in PubMed] [Related
Articles]

Association between Ozone and Asthma Emergency Department Visits in Saint
John, New Brunswick, Canada
David M. Stieb,1 Richard T.
Burnett,2 Robert C. Beveridge,3 and Jeffrey R.
Brook4

1Air Quality Health Effects Research Section, Health Canada;
2Biostatistics Division, Environmental Health Directorate, Health
Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada; 3Department of Emergency Medicine,
Region 2 Hospital Corporation, Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada;
4Atmospheric Environment Service, Environment Canada, Downsview,
Ontario, Canada

Abstract

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

Abstract

This study examines the relationship of asthma emergency department (ED)
visits to daily concentrations of ozone and other air pollutants in Saint John,
New Brunswick, Canada. Data on ED visits with a presenting complaint of asthma
(n = 1987) were abstracted for the period 1984-1992 (May-September). Air
pollution variables included ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfate,
and total suspended particulate (TSP); weather variables included temperature,
humidex, dewpoint, and relative humidity. Daily ED visit frequencies were
filtered to remove day of the week and long wave trends, and filtered values
were regressed on air pollution and weather variables for the same day and the 3
previous days. The mean daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration during the study
period was 41.6 ppb. A positive, statistically significant (p<0.05)
association was observed between ozone and asthma ED visits 2 days later, and
the strength of the association was greater in nonlinear models. The frequency
of asthma ED visits was 33% higher (95% CI, 10-56%) when the daily 1-hr maximum
ozone concentration exceeded 75 ppb (the 95th percentile). The ozone
effect was not significantly influenced by the addition of weather or other
pollutant variables into the model or by the exclusion of repeat ED visits.
However, given the limited number of sampling days for sulfate and TSP, a
particulate effect could not be ruled out. We detected a significant association
between ozone and asthma ED visits, despite the vast majority of sampling days
being below current U.S. and Canadian standards. Key words: air
pollution, asthma, emergency department, ozone. Environ Health Perspect
104:1354-1360 (1996)

Address correspondence to D.M. Stieb, Air Quality Health Effects Research
Section, Health Canada Building 8, (postal locator 0803C), Tunney's Pasture,
Ottawa, ON K1A 0L2.

This study was supported by Health Canada (contract #H4078-4-C472/01-SS) and
by the Environmental Trust Fund, Government of New Brunswick. The authors would
like to thank Marc Smith-Doiron and Serge Beaulieu for data management and
analysis and the Ministry of Environment of New Brunswick for providing air
quality data.

Received 7 March 1996; accepted 16 August 1996.

Introduction
Recent evidence has implicated ground-level ozone as a
contributor to both mortality (1) and morbidity, including hospital admissions
(2-4), emergency department visits (5-9), symptoms (10,11), pulmonary function
changes (11,12), and inflammatory changes in the respiratory tract (13,14). Data
on emergency department (ED) visits have been used to examine the effects of a
variety of air pollutants including particulates, ozone, sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen dioxide, sulfate, and hydrogen sulfide (5-9,15-21). As health
endpoints, ED visits have the advantages of reflecting an adverse health event
of clear clinical significance, which at the same time is more frequent in
occurrence than death or hospital admission. Conversely, abstracted ED visit
data in a form amenable to analysis together with environmental exposure data
are not widely available. In this study, we employed ED visit data that had
previously been abstracted from clinical records for administrative and
quality-of-care assessment purposes.

The primary objective of this study was to further examine the relationship
between daily ozone concentrations and emergency department visits for asthma,
including analysis of lag periods ranging from 0 to 3 days, assessment of the
impact of other pollution and weather variables on the ozone effect, and
examination of differences in effects between children and adults. Unique
features of our analysis include an examination of the shape of the
dose-response function and assessment of the impact of repeat ED visits on the
strength of the association.

Methods
This study was carried out in Saint John,
New Brunswick, a city of approximately 75,000 people (surrounding metropolitan
area with an additional 50,000) on Canada's Atlantic coast. Local air pollution
sources include a large petroleum refinery, two oil-fired generating stations,
and two pulp mills. The area is also subject to long range transport of air
pollutants from eastern Canada and the eastern United States. The city has two
hospital emergency departments, with a combined annual volume of approximately
90,000 visits. Access to emergency services is universal under Canada's publicly
provided health care system.

Data on ED visits were obtained from the Saint John Regional Hospital's ED
visit database, which consists of electronic records created by the registration
clerk at the time each patient enters the emergency department. Data were
obtained for the period 1984-1992 (May-September only) for visits with a
presenting complaint of asthma. At the time of registration, the patient
provided a presenting complaint to the registration clerk, who then coded the
complaint from a predefined menu, which included a category (other) for
complaints that did not clearly fit the menu. In addition to the presenting
complaint, extracted information included patient's age and sex and the date of
visit. Original ED charts for all visits made between May and September 1987
were also reviewed manually by research nurses, and data were abstracted for
both presenting complaint and discharge diagnosis. This permitted an analysis of
the relationship between presenting complaint and discharge diagnosis, as well
as agreement between the database and manual reviewers on coding of presenting
complaint.

Air pollution data [ozone (O3), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfate (SO42-), total
suspended particulate (TSP)] and meteorological data (temperature, dewpoint,
relative humidity, and humidex) were obtained from Environment Canada and the
New Brunswick Ministry of Environment. Where data were available from more than
one monitoring station, mean values were used. Ozone was measured continuously
using instruments based on the UV absorption method. The instrument types
employed were either a Monitor Labs (Model 8810; Englewood, CO) or a Dasibi
(Model 1003; Glendale, CA). SO2 was measured continuously using the
pulsed fluorescence detection method (Monitor Labs-Model 8850) and
NO2 was measured continuously using the chemiluminescence detection
method (Monitor Labs Model 8840). TSP samples were collected over 24-hour
periods using standard high-volume samplers and Teflon-coated glass fibre
filters (Pallflex, Putnam, CT). Particulate sulfate on the high volume samples
was determined using ion chromatography. Daily O3, NO2,
and SO2 data were utilized, while only every sixth day
SO42- and TSP data were available. No inhalable or
respirable particulate data were available. Humidex is an index in which a
certain number of degrees Celsius are added to the dry bulb temperature to
account for the additional discomfort associated with excessive humidity.

Analysis was conducted on an IBM RS-6000 mini computer (IBM, Armonk, NY)
using UNIX-based SAS statistical software (SAS, Cary, NC). Daily frequencies of
asthma visits were filtered to remove day of the week and long wave (e.g.
seasonal) trends, which might otherwise confound the relationship with air
pollution. Daily frequencies were related to air pollution and weather variables
by the regression equation:

where E(yt) is the expected number of ED visits on the
tth day of sampling; yt is the actual number of ED visits
on the tth day of sampling; Dt is the average number of ED
visits by day of the week (seven distinct values);

is a normalizing constant;

is a 19 day symmetric linear filter, where 0 ... 9 are
unique weights given by 0.0874, 0.0857, 0.0807, 0.0729, 0.0629, 0.0518, 0.0404,
0.0296, 0.0200, and 0.0123 with l = -l
(22);  and ß are the regression intercept and coefficient, respectively; and
xt is the value of the environmental variable on the tth
day. Because the daily frequency of visits was small, the variance was
assumed to be proportional to the expected response (i.e., V(yt)
= E(yt), where  is a proportionality
constant). The relationship between pollutant/meteorological variables, lagged
0-3 days, and ED visit frequency was assessed using the SAS NLIN procedure (23),
setting the regression weights equal to the inverse of the expected response.
This is equivalent to a generalized estimating equation approach and is
identical to Poisson regression when the variance is equal to the expected
response (i.e.,  = 1 above) (24). This procedure is more general than Poisson
regression and allows for Poisson over and under dispersion (i.e.,  >1
or
<1) (24). Because the daily frequency of asthma ED visits may be serially
autocorrelated (i.e., the frequency of visits on day t + 1 may be related to the
frequency of visits on day t due, for example, to repeat visits by the same
patient in relation to the same asthma episode or to multiday pollution
episodes), first order autocorrelation was assessed using the autocorrelation
coefficient and Durbin-Watson d statistic. These were derived from the SAS REG
procedure, setting the regression weights equal to
[(StDt/C) (a + bxt)]-1, where a and
b are, respectively, estimates of the regression intercept, alpha, and
coefficient, ß, estimated based on the NLIN procedure. Failure to control for
autocorrelation could result in biased estimates of the statistical significance
of air pollution effects. Positive autocorrelation would result in
underestimates of the standard errors of regression coefficients, while negative
autocorrelation would result in overestimates (25).

Results
A descriptive summary of air pollution and
meteorological data is presented in Table 1, together with Pearson correlation
coefficients. There was generally weak correlation among air pollution
variables, although SO42- and TSP were moderately
correlated, and as expected, maximum temperature and maximum dewpoint
temperature were highly correlated with maximum humidex. Canada's National
Ambient Air Quality Objective for ozone (80 ppb) was exceeded on 3.7% of study
days, while the U.S. standard (120 ppb) was exceeded on 0.4% of days. Pearson
correlations between daily 1-hr maximum and daily average concentrations were
high for ozone, SO2, and NO2 (0.9; p = 0.0001).

During the study period, 1,163 individuals made a
total of 1987 ED visits with a presenting complaint of asthma. Forty-seven
percent of asthma ED visitors were male and 49% were 15 years of age or younger.
Respectively, 1.5, 6.5, and 10.2% of asthma ED visitors (including admitted and
discharged patients) made a return visit within 24 and 72 hr and 14 days. For
the period May-September 1987, presenting complaints coded by research nurses
based on a manual review of ED charts agreed with those contained in the ED
database 97% of the time. Ninety-three percent of visits with a presenting
complaint of asthma were assigned a discharge diagnosis of asthma (the remaining
7% received discharge diagnoses of upper respiratory infection, pneumonia,
bronchitis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, croup, and
noncardiorespiratory conditions). Conversely, visits with a presenting complaint
of asthma accounted for 43% of all visits with a discharge diagnosis of asthma.

The average number of visits per day with a presenting complaint of asthma
(henceforth referred to as asthma visits) was 1.5 (minimum of 0 and maximum of
8). There were no asthma visits on 27% of days, one visit on 30% of days, two
visits on 24% of days, and more than two visits on 19% of days. Significant
variability was observed in visit frequency by day of the week, ranging from a
mean of 1.3 visits per day on Wednesday and Friday to 1.7 visits per day on
Sunday. Variability was also observed by month, with the greatest number of
visits in May and September, relative to the other months. The impact of
filtering on temporal variability in visit frequency is revealed in Figure 1,
which plots data for 1990, the year during which the greatest seasonal
variability was observed. In Figure 1A, the value of the filter (St),
which smoothes daily oscillations in visit frequency, is overlaid on the
unfiltered visit frequency data (yt). Figure 1B plots the filtered
data, Ft = yt/(StDt/C), which
reflect the removal of seasonal trends from the raw data.

Figure 1. (A) Unfiltered asthma visit frequency,
yt and filter, St; (B) filtered asthma visit frequency,
Ft, May-September 1990.

Scatter plots were produced of the relationship of pollutant and meteorologic
variables to filtered asthma ED visits in order to screen for nonlinearity. Only
ozone appeared to have a nonlinear relationship with visit rates. Based on this
screening analysis, for daily average and daily 1-hr maximum ozone
concentrations, ED visit rates were regressed on an indicator variable
representing days above and below the 95th percentile concentration,
as well as linear, quadratic, and linear-quadratic ozone terms. Visit rates were
regressed linearly on other individual pollutant and meteorologic variables.

Of all pollutants considered, only ozone exhibited a
consistently positive association with asthma visit rates 2 days later, which
was statistically significant (p<0.05) or borderline significant in all model
forms (see Table 2). Compared to the linear model, the nonlinear models revealed
stronger associations between both daily average and maximum ozone and asthma ED
visits, based on the model p-value. A plot of data collapsed into
<30th percentile, 30-60th percentile,
60th-95th percentile, and >95th percentile
for daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration reveals the apparent nonlinearity of
the ozone effect (Figure 2) (a similar trend was observed for daily average
concentration). The first order autocorrelation coefficient for the filtered
daily visits series for both daily average and 1-hr maximum models was low and
negative (-0.142 and -0.137, respectively), and the Durbin-Watson d statistic
was close to 2 (2.284 and 2.274, respectively), indicating that there was no
important autocorrelation in the filtered visit data. The frequency of asthma ED
visits (filtered as above) was 33% higher (95% CI, 10-56%) when the daily 1-hr
maximum exceeded 75 ppb (the 95th percentile). Ozone was not
significantly associated with asthma visits for other lags (p>0.05).

Figure 2. Filtered asthma emergency department (ED)
visit frequency (Ft) versus daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration
(percentiles <30, 30-60, 60-, >95).

To assess whether the ozone effect (lag 2 days) was
confounded by other pollution and weather variables, days above and below the
95th percentile for daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration (lag 2
days) were compared with respect to the other pollution and weather variables.
As shown in Table 3, average SO2 (lag 0 days) was lower on high ozone
days, while maximum NO2 (lag 2 days), SO42-
(lag 3 days), TSP (lag 3 days), maximum temperature (lag 1 day), maximum humidex
(lag 1 day), maximum dewpoint temperature (lag 2 days), and mean relative
humidity (lag 1 day) were all higher on high ozone days. (The lag periods for
the pollution and weather variables shown in this table were those for which the
strongest association with asthma visits was observed in single variable
regressions.) These variables were then added to the model for daily 1-hr
maximum ozone indicator (lag 2 days) (the effects of TSP and
SO42- were examined separately from the other pollution
and weather variables because of the smaller sample size resulting from every
sixth day sampling frequency). As seen in Table 4, the ozone coefficient
increased slightly in both models and remained statistically significant in
model 1, which had a larger sample size based on daily data. Of the other
variables, only the effect of mean relative humidity (lag 1 day) was
statistically significant.

The appropriateness of the 95th
percentile as a cutpoint in the ozone models was examined by removing days with
the top 5% of ozone concentrations and rerunning the regressions. Ozone no
longer exhibited a statistically significant association with ED visits in this
subset of the data [e.g., for the daily 1-hr maximum ozone linear model (lag 2
days), ß = -0.0013 visits/ppb and p = 0.5758].

Figure 3. Filtered asthma emergency department (ED)
visit frequency (Ft) versus daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration,
by age group (percentiles <30, 30-60, 60-95, >95).

Differences in ozone effect for adult (>15 years of age) and childhood
(</=15 years of age) asthma visits were also examined. As shown in Figure 3,
the rate of ED visits was slightly higher for adults than children, as was the
proportional increase in visits when daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration was
above the 95th percentile (47% and 15%, respectively). In regression
models, the association of ED visits with daily 1-hr maximum, as well as daily
average ozone concentration, was statistically significant for adults but not
for children (see Table 5).

Specificity of the ozone effect was assessed by
examining the relationship between ozone and visits with respiratory presenting
complaints other than asthma (cough, congestion, wheeze, shortness of breath, or
difficulty breathing). This constituted a heterogeneous group of 8238 visits, a
significant proportion of which were assigned a nonrespiratory discharge
diagnosis (30% in the case of shortness of breath and difficulty breathing).
None of the pollutants exhibited a statistically significant association with
this group of visits (p>0.05).

Although we did not detect important first order autocorrelation in the data,
we did note (see above) that a small but nontrivial proportion of individuals
making asthma visits made repeat visits within 14 days. Because this might
spuriously increase the apparent association between asthma visits and ozone, we
reran the NLIN procedure, excluding repeat visits within 24 and 72 hr and 14
days of an earlier visit. As seen in Table 6, coefficients were reduced
slightly, but remained statistically significant. The 95% confidence intervals
on these coefficients overlapped those derived from analyses that included
repeat visits. The largest reduction in coefficient occurred with the exclusion
of repeat visits within 72 hr and 14 days, which reduced the coefficient for
daily 1-hr maximum ozone by 13%.

Discussion
We have found that asthma ED visits
increased by 33% when the daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration exceeded 75
ppb. This is consistent with findings in New Jersey where asthma ED visits
increased by 26% when the daytime mean ozone concentration (10 a.m. to 3 p.m.)
exceeded 60 ppb (5), in Atlanta, Georgia, where pediatric asthma ED visits
increased by 37% following days when the daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration
exceeded 110 ppb (7), and in Mexico City where pediatric asthma visits increased
by 68% following 2 days on which the 1-hr maximum ozone concentration exceeded
110 ppb (8). In other studies, however, ozone has not exhibited a significant
association with respiratory or asthma visits (15-19). While there are a variety
of factors that may account for these differences, in Vancouver (15) and
Barcelona (16,18), ozone levels were relatively low compared to other studies in
which significant ozone effects were observed.

Effects of daily average and daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration were
similar in magnitude and statistical significance in our study. It has been
suggested that a measure of maximum cumulative exposure such as the daily
maximum 8-hr moving average may be more relevant than daily average measures in
terms of cumulative exposure (26). White et al. (7) found a high correlation (r
= 0.95) between daily 1-hr maximum and daily maximum 8-hr moving average ozone
concentrations, as well as apparently similar effects on asthma visits. Romieu
et al. (8) also found a high correlation (r = 0.91) between these two ozone
metrics, and on this basis only examined the effect of daily 1-hr maximum
concentration on ED visits. We found a high correlation of average ozone
concentration between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. with both daily 1-hr maximum (r = 0.85)
and daily average (r = 0.94) concentrations. Results of regressions relating
average ozone concentration between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. with asthma visits were
consistent with results for the other metrics. The lack of a clearly stronger
predictor of asthma visits among the three metrics probably reflects the high
degree of collinearity.

In our study, a 2-day lag was observed between elevated ozone concentrations
and increased asthma ED visits. In ED studies in New Jersey and Baton Rouge,
Louisiana (5,6,9), the strongest effects were for same day ozone concentration
(i.e., lag 0 days), while in the Mexico City study, the best fitting model
included ozone concentration (lag 1 day) (8). In a study of air pollution and
hospital admissions in Ontario (3), the largest ozone effects for all
respiratory admissions were for lags of 1 and 2 days, while in a similar study
in New York State (4), the largest effects differed by city and diagnosis, with
the peak asthma admission effect at 3 days and 1 day in Buffalo and New York
City, respectively. We were not able to detect an ozone effect for multiple lag
periods, in contrast to other studies (3-6,8). It is not clear why various
studies differ with respect to the observed lag between ozone concentrations and
asthma ED visits or hospital admissions, although possible factors include both
methodological differences and differences in study populations, exposure
characteristics, and outcomes studied (e.g., hospital admissions vs. ED visits).

To better understand the lag between exposure and effect in our study
population, we conducted preliminary analyses of 3 months of enhanced ED data
(July-September 1994) being collected in a subsequent phase of this study, in
which ED visitors were interviewed in detail both at the time of their visit and
in follow-up 2 weeks later. These analyses indicated that for asthma patients
the median number of days between symptom onset and ED visit was 2.0 (mean of
4.4) (27). Although this appears to be slightly longer than in some reports
(28-31), it is consistent with one other study among children in Toronto (32)
and corresponds to the 2 day lag effect we observed for ozone. While this is not
sufficient evidence to infer a causal association, it does suggest that on
average, the timing of the ozone effect is consistent with the temporal pattern
of asthma exacerbations in this population.

In our study, quadratic, linear-quadratic, and indicator models consistently
fit the data better than the linear model, suggesting that ozone effects are
reduced or absent below a certain concentration. This is consistent with the
finding of White et al. (7) that there appeared to be no effect of ozone on
pediatric asthma visits when ozone concentrations were below 110 ppb. This is
contrary to the findings in the Ontario hospital admission study in which there
appeared to be no concentration at which ozone effects could not be detected
(3). Again, interstudy differences could reflect a variety of factors. Emergency
department visitors may, for example, be less sensitive to lower levels of air
pollution than patients admitted to hospitals.

We did not detect significant effects of co-pollutants, either on their own
or in terms of their impact on the ozone effect. Given the limited number of
sampling days for sulfates and TSP, however, we cannot rule out an association
between particles and asthma ED visits. The effects of these variables in other
ED visit studies is inconsistent. As noted earlier, in some ED visit studies,
other pollutants have had significant effects while ozone did not. In one study
in Southern California (20), a significant ozone effect was noted in the region
with the highest ozone levels, while sulfate effects were dominant in other
regions. In Saint John, acid aerosols are a potentially important unmeasured
co-pollutant in this analysis (33), and daily measurement of particle strong
acidity is now under way to be used in future analyses with respect to ED
visits. With respect to weather variables, temperature appears to be an
inconsistent explanatory variable in ED visit studies. In one study, it was
positively associated with ED visits for various respiratory conditions (20); in
another study, a positive association was observed in winter and a negative
association in summer (21), while in other studies, temperature was negatively
associated (5,6,16,18,19).

We observed positive associations between ozone concentration and asthma ED
visits for both adult and childhood asthma, although the subgroup analysis for
children was not statistically significant. Burnett et al. (3) found that the
age group with the largest proportion of asthma hospital admissions attributable
to ozone was 0-1 year of age; however, asthma remains an unclear diagnosis in
infants (34). In those above 2 years of age, the largest ozone effects were in
those above 35 years of age (3), which is more consistent with our results. Age
alone may be of limited usefulness as a subgrouping variable for asthmatics.
Baseline severity, premorbid asthma management, and other coincident exposures
(e.g. viral infections, allergens, tobacco smoke) may be more clinically
relevant. These variables are currently being measured in a subsequent phase of
this study.

We observed that a small proportion of ED visits were followed by repeat
visits within 24 and 72 hr and 14 days. While relapse has not been consistently
defined or applied in studies of asthma ED visits, our observations were
consistent with comparably defined relapse rates reported in other studies
(31,35,36). The strength of the association between ozone and asthma ED visits
was reduced slightly, but remained statistically significant when we excluded
repeat visits, the largest reduction in the coefficient (13%) being of marginal
practical importance. To our knowledge, this issue has not been addressed in
other time-series analyses of ED visits and air pollution, although in their
study, White et al. (7) excluded repeat visits within 24 hr at the time of data
collection. While repeat visits do not appear to have influenced our results,
further examination of their influence in time-series studies would be of
interest, particularly where relapse rates are higher than observed here.

Our results appeared to be specific for asthma visits. We were unable to
demonstrate a relationship between ozone and ED visits for
respiratory-presenting complaints other than asthma. This probably reflects the
heterogeneity of this group of visits, in terms of their eventual discharge
diagnosis. Although the vast majority of ED visits with a presenting complaint
of asthma did in fact represent asthma exacerbations, having a presenting
complaint of asthma was a relatively insensitive indicator of the presence of
asthma as assessed by a physician, accounting for less than half of visits with
a discharge diagnosis of asthma. It is unclear to what extent and in what
direction this might bias our estimate of the effect of ozone on asthma. At this
point we do not know how asthmatics who report asthma as their presenting
complaint differ from those with some other presenting complaint such as
shortness of breath or wheezing. In particular, it is unclear whether the former
group of patients would tend to have more severe asthma and thus be more
sensitive to air pollution and other triggers or alternatively better informed
about their condition, better able to manage it, and thus less sensitive. We
will be able to assess more accurately how these populations differ with respect
to severity, appropriateness of management, and other parameters in subsequent
phases of this study.

Conclusions
We detected a significant
association between ozone and emergency department visits for asthma 2 days
later, despite the vast majority of sampling days being below current U.S. and
Canadian standards. The effect of ozone appeared to be reduced or absent when
ozone concentrations were below 75 ppb. It was not influenced by the addition of
co-pollutants into multivariate models or by the removal of repeat visits.
However, given the limited number of sampling days for sulfate and TSP, a
particulate effect could not be ruled out. Subsequent phases of this study will
shed further light on a number of aspects of the observed association.

References

1. Kinney PL, Ozkaynak H. Associations of daily mortality and
air pollution in Los Angeles County. Environ Res 54:99-120 (1991).

2. Bates DV, Sizto R. Air pollution and hospital admissions in
southern Ontario: the acid summer haze effect. Environ Res 43:317-331
(1987).

3. Burnett RT, Dales RE, Raizenne ME, Krewski D, Summers PW,
Roberts GR, Raad-Young M, Dann T, Brook J. Effects of low ambient levels of
ozone and sulfates on the frequency of respiratory admissions to Ontario
hospitals. Environ Res 65:172-194 (1994).

4. Thurston GD, Ito K, Kinney PL, Lippmann M. A multi-year
study of air pollution and respiratory hospital admissions in three New York
State metropolitan areas: results for 1988 and 1989. J Expo Anal Environ
Epidemiol 2:429-450 (1992).

5. Weisel CP, Cody RP, Lioy PJ. Relationship between summertime
ambient ozone levels and emergency department visits for asthma in central New
Jersey. Environ Health Perspect 103(suppl 2):97-102 (1995).

6. Cody RP, Weisel CP, Birnbaum G, Lioy PJ. The effect of ozone
associated with summertime photochemical smog on the frequency of asthma visits
to hospital emergency departments. Environ Res 58:184-194 (1992).

7. White MC, Etzel RA, Wilcox WD, Lloyd C. Exacerbations of
childhood asthma and ozone pollution in Atlanta. Environ Res 65:56-68
(1994).

8. Romieu I, Meneses F, Sienra-Monge JJL, Huerta J, Velasco SR,
White MC, Etzel RA, Hernandez-Avila M. Effects of urban air pollutants on
emergency visits for childhood asthma in Mexico City. Am J Epidemiol 141:546-553
(1995).

9. Jones GN, Sletten C, Mandry C, Brantley PJ. Ozone level
effect on respiratory illness: an investigation of emergency department visits.
South Med J 88:1049-1056 (1995).

10. Oxman AD, Krueger PD, Zangwill LM, Julian JA, Pengelly LD,
Silverman F, Torrance GW. The health effects of tropospheric ozone: a systematic
overview. Report for the Environmental Health Directorate, Health and Welfare
Canada. SSC Contract #H4078-1-C082/01-SS. Hamilton, ON:McMaster University,
1992.

11. Horstman DH, Folinsbee LJ, Ives PJ, Abdul-Salaam S,
McDonnell WF. Ozone concentration and pulmonary response relationships for
6.6-hour exposures with five hours of moderate exercise to 0.08, 0.10 and 0.12
ppm. Am Rev Respir Dis 142:1158-1163 (1990).

12. Spektor DM, Lippmann, M, Lioy PJ, Thurston GD, Citak K,
James DJ, Bock N, Speizer FE, Hayes C. Effects of ambient ozone on respiratory
function in active, normal children. Am Rev Respir Dis 137:313-320
(1988).

13. Crapo J, Miller FJ, Mossman B, Prior WA, Kiley JP.
Relationship between acute inflammatory responses to air pollutants and chronic
lung disease. Am Rev Respir Dis 145:1506-1512 (1992).

14. Devlin RB, McDonnell WF, Mann R, Becker S, House DE,
Schreinemachers D, Koren HS. Exposure of humans to ambient levels of ozone for
6.6 hours causes cellular and biochemical changes in the lung. Am J Respir Cell
Mol Biol 4:72-81 (1991).

15. Bates DV, Baker-Anderson M, Sizto R. Asthma attack
periodicity: a study of hospital emergency visits in Vancouver. Environ Res
51:51-70 (1990).

16. Castellsague J, Sunyer J, Sáez M, Antó JM. Short-term
association between air pollution and emergency room visits for asthma in
Barcelona. Thorax 50:1051-1056 (1995).

17. Schwartz J, Slater D, Larson TV, Pierson WE, Koenig JQ.
Particulate air pollution and hospital emergency room visits for asthma in
Seattle. Am Rev Respir Dis 147:826-831 (1993).

18. Sunyer J, Antó JM, Murillo C, Sáez M. Effects of urban air
pollution on emergency room admissions for chronic obstructive pulmonary
disease. Am J Epidemiol 134:277-286 (1991).

19. Samet JM, Bishop Y, Speizer FE, Spengler JD, Ferris BG. The
relationship between air pollution and emergency room visits in an industrial
community. J Air Pollut Control Assoc 31:236-240 (1981).

20. Goldsmith JR, Griffith HL, Detels R, Beeser S, Neumann L.
Emergency room admissions, meteorologic variables, and air pollutants: a path
analysis. Am J Epidemiol 118(5):759-778 (1983).

21. Rossi OVJ, Kinnula VL, Tienari J, Huhti E. Association of
severe asthma attacks with weather, pollen, and air pollutants. Thorax 4:244-248
(1993).

22. Shumway RH, Tai R, Tai L, Pawitan Y. Statistical analysis
of daily London mortality and associated weather and pollution effects.
Technical Report 53. Davis, CA: Division of Statistics, University of
California, Davis, 1983.

23. SAS Institute Inc. SAS/STAT user's guide, version 6. 4th
ed, vol 2. Cary, NC:SAS Institute Inc., 1989.

24. Wedderburn RWM. Quasi-likelihood functions, generalized
linear models and the Gauss-Newton method. Biometrika 61:439-447 (1974).

25. Box GEP, Jenkins GM. Time series analysis: forecasting and
control. San Francisco, CA:Holden-Day, 1976.

26. WHO Regional Office for Europe. Update and revision of the
Air Quality Guidelines for Europe. Copenhagen:World Health Organization Regional
Office for Europe, 1995.

27. Stieb DM, Beveridge RC, Brook J, Burnett RT, Anis AH, Dales
RE. The Saint John particle health effects study: measuring health effects,
health costs and quality of life impacts using enhanced administrative data. In:
Particulate matter: health and regulatory issues (VIP-49), proceedings of an
international specialty conference, 4-6 April 1995, Pittsburgh, PA.
Pittsburgh:Air and Waste Management Association, 1995;131-142.

28. Chidley KE, Wood-Baker R, Town GI, Sleet RA, Holgate ST.
Reassessment of asthma management in an accident and emergency department.
Respir Med 85:373-377 (1991).

29. Reed S, Diggle S, Cushley MJ, Sleet RA, Tattersfield AE.
Assessment and management of asthma in an accident and emergency department.
Thorax 40:897-902 (1985).

30. Fitzgerald JM, Hargreave FE. Acute asthma: emergency
department management and prospective evaluation of outcome. Can Med Assoc J
142(6):591-595 (1990).

31. O'Halloran SM, Heaf DP. Accident and emergency department
attendance by asthmatic children. Thorax 44:700-705 (1989).

32. Canny GJ, Reisman J, Healy R, Schwartz C, Petrou C, Rebuck
AS, Levison H. Acute asthma: observations regarding the management of a
pediatric emergency room. Pediatrics 83(4):507-512.

33. Brook JR, Wiebe HA, Stieb DM, Burnett RT. Saint John, NB,
particle health effects study: determination of ambient exposures to respirable
particles. In: Particulate matter: health and regulatory issues (VIP-49),
proceedings of an international specialty conference, 4-6 April 1995,
Pittsburgh, PA. Pittsburgh: Air and Waste Management Association,
1995;347-357.

34. Martinez FD, Wright AL, Taussig LM, Holberg CJ, Halonen M,
Morgan WJ, Group Health Medical Associates. Asthma and wheezing in the first six
years of life. N Engl J Med 332(3):133-138 (1995).

35. Yaacob I, Omar R, Ahmad Mustafa WN. The outcome of patients
with acute bronchial asthma presenting to the emergency room. Singapore Med J
32:166-168 (1991).

36. Newcomb RW, Akhter J. Outcomes of emergency room visits for
asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 77:309-314 (1986).

[Table
of Contents] [Citation
in PubMed] [Related
Articles]

Last Update: February 24, 1997


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 44 (Tuesday, March 6, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 13200-13205]
[FR Doc No: 2012-5376]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 271

[EPA-R06-RCRA-2011-0478; FRL-9643-7]

Texas: Final Authorization of State Hazardous Waste Management
Program Revision

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Immediate final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The State of Texas has applied to the EPA for Final
authorization of the changes to its hazardous waste program under the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). EPA has determined that
these changes satisfy all requirements needed to qualify for Final
authorization, and is authorizing the State's changes through this
immediate final action. The EPA is publishing this rule to authorize
the changes without a prior proposal because we believe this action is
not controversial and do not expect comments that oppose it. Unless we
receive written comments which oppose this authorization during the
comment period, the decision to authorize Texas' changes to its
hazardous waste program will take effect. If we receive comments that
oppose this action, we will publish a document in the Federal Register
withdrawing this rule before it takes effect, and a separate document
in the proposed rules section of this Federal Register will serve as a
proposal to authorize the changes.

DATES: This final authorization will become effective on May 7, 2012
unless the EPA receives adverse written comment by April 5, 2012. If
the EPA receives such comment, it will publish a timely withdrawal of
this immediate final rule in the Federal Register and inform the public
that this authorization will not take effect.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments by one of the following methods:
    1. Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov. Follow
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    2. Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    3. Mail: Alima Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization
Coordinator, State/Tribal Oversight Section (6PD-O), Multimedia
Planning and Permitting Division, EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue,
Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    4. Hand Delivery or Courier: Deliver your comments to Alima
Patterson, Region 6, Regional Authorization Coordinator, State/Tribal
Oversight Section (6PD-O), Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division,
EPA Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733.
    Instructions: Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI
or otherwise protected through regulations.gov, or email. The Federal
regulations.gov Web site is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means
the EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an email comment
directly to the EPA without going through regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured and included as part of the
comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the
Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, the EPA recommends that
you include your name and other contact information in the body of your
comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If the EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, the EPA may not be able to consider your comment.
Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form
of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. You can view and
copy Texas' application and associated

publicly available materials from 8:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. Monday through
Friday at the following locations: Texas Commission on Environmental
Quality, (TCEQ) 12100 Park S. Circle, Austin, TX 78753-3087, (512) 239-
6079 and EPA, Region 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733,
phone number<PHONE_NUMBER>. Interested persons wanting to examine
these documents should make an appointment with the office at least two
weeks in advance.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alima Patterson, Region 6 Regional
Authorization Coordinator, State/Tribal Oversight Section (6PD-O),
Multimedia Planning and Permitting Division,<PHONE_NUMBER>, EPA Region
1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, Texas 75202-2733, and email address
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Why are revisions to State programs necessary?

    States which have received final authorization from the EPA under
RCRA section 3006(b), 42 U.S.C. 6926(b), must maintain a hazardous
waste program that is equivalent to, consistent with, and no less
stringent than the Federal program. As the Federal program changes,
States must change their programs and ask the EPA to authorize the
changes. Changes to State programs may be necessary when Federal or
State statutory or regulatory authority is modified or when certain
other changes occur. Most commonly, States must change their programs
because of changes to the EPA's regulations in 40 Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) parts 124, 260 through 268, 270, 273, and 279.

B. What decisions have we made in this rule?

    We conclude that the State of Texas' application to revise its
authorized program meets all of the statutory and regulatory
requirements established by RCRA. Therefore, we grant the State of
Texas Final Authorization to operate its hazardous waste program with
the changes described in the authorization application. The State of
Texas has responsibility for permitting treatment, storage, and
disposal facilities within its borders (except in Indian Country) and
for carrying out the aspects of the RCRA program described in its
revised program application, subject to the limitations of the
Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments of 1984 (HSWA). New Federal
requirements and prohibitions imposed by Federal regulations that the
EPA promulgates under the authority of HSWA take effect in authorized
States before they are authorized for the requirements. Thus, the EPA
will implement those requirements and prohibitions in Texas including
issuing permits, until the State is granted authorization to do so.

C. What is the effect of today's authorization decision?

    The effect of this decision is that a facility in the State of
Texas subject to RCRA will now have to comply with the authorized State
requirements instead of the equivalent Federal requirements in order to
comply with RCRA. The State of Texas has enforcement responsibilities
under its State hazardous waste program for violations of such program,
but the EPA retains its authority under RCRA sections 3007, 3008, 3013,
and 7003, which include, among others, authority to:
     Do inspections, and require monitoring, tests, analyses,
or reports;
     Enforce RCRA requirements and suspend or revoke permits;
and
     Take enforcement actions after notice to and consultation
with the State.
    This action does not impose additional requirements on the
regulated community because the regulations for which the State of
Texas is being authorized by today's action are already effective under
State law, and are not changed by today's action.

D. Why wasn't there a proposed rule before today's rule?

    The EPA did not publish a proposal before today's rule because we
view this as a routine program change and do not expect comments that
oppose this approval. We are providing an opportunity for public
comment now. In addition to this rule, in the proposed rules section of
today's Federal Register we are publishing a separate document that
proposes to authorize the State program changes.

E. What happens if the EPA receives comments that oppose this action?

    If the EPA receives comments that oppose this authorization, we
will withdraw this rule by publishing a document in the Federal
Register before the rule becomes effective. The EPA will base any
further decision on the authorization of the State program changes on
the proposal mentioned in the previous paragraph. We will then address
all public comments in a later final rule. You may not have another
opportunity to comment. If you want to comment on this authorization,
you must do so at this time. If we receive comments that oppose only
the authorization of a particular change to the State hazardous waste
program, we will withdraw only that part of this rule, but the
authorization of the program changes that the comments do not oppose
will become effective on the date specified in this document. The
Federal Register withdrawal document will specify which part of the
authorization will become effective, and which part is being withdrawn.

F. For what has Texas previously been authorized?

    The State of Texas initially received final authorization on
December 26, 1984 (49 FR 48300), to implement its Base Hazardous Waste
Management Program. This authorization was clarified in a notice
published March 26, 1985 (50 FR 11858). Texas received authorization
for revisions to its program, effective October 4, 1985 (51 FR 3952),
February 17, 1987 (51 FR 45320), March 15, 1990 (55 FR 7318), July 23,
1990 (55 FR 21383), October 21, 1991 (56 FR 41626), December 4, 1992
(57 FR 45719), June 27, 1994 (59 FR 16987), June 27, 1994 (59 FR
17273), November 26, 1997 (62 FR 47947), December 3, 1997 (62 FR
49163), October 18, 1999 (64 FR 44836), November 15, 1999 (64 FR
49673), September 11, 2000 (65 FR 43246), June 14, 2005 (70 FR 34371),
December 29, 2008, (73 FR 64252), and July 13, 2009 (74 FR 22469). The
EPA incorporated by reference Texas' then authorized hazardous waste
program effective December 3, 1997 (62 FR 49163), November 15, 1999 (64
FR 49673), December 29, 2008 (73 FR 64252) and March 7, 2011 (76 FR
12285) effective May 6, 2011.
    On March 24, 2010, Texas submitted a final complete program
revision application, seeking authorization of its program revision in
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. In 1991, Texas Senate Bill 2 created the
Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) which combined
the functions of the former Texas Water Commission and the former Texas
Air Control Board. The transfer of functions to the TNRCC from the two
agencies became effective on September 1, 1993. House Bill 2912,
Article 18 of the 77th Texas Legislature, 2001, changed the name of the
TNRCC to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) and
directed the TNRCC to adopt a timetable for phasing in the change of
the agency's name. The TNRCC decided to make the change of the agency's
name to the TCEQ effective September 1, 2002. The change of name became
effective September 1, 2002, and the legislative history of the name
change is documented at (See, Act of June 15, 2001, 77th Leg. R. S., Ch
965, Section 18.01, 2001 Tex. Gen. Laws 1985). The

TCEQ may perform any act authorized by law either as the TNRCC or as
the TCEQ. Id. Therefore, references to the TCEQ are references to TNRCC
and to its successor, the TCEQ.
    The TCEQ has primary responsibility for administration of laws and
regulations concerning hazardous waste. The official State regulations
may be found in Title 30, Texas Administrative Code, Chapters 305 and
335, effective October 29, 2009. Some of the State rules incorporate
the Federal regulations by reference. Texas Water Code Section 5.102
confers on the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality the powers to
perform any acts necessary and convenient to the exercise of its
jurisdiction. The TCEQ is authorized to administer the RCRA program.
However, the Railroad Commission (RRC) has jurisdiction over the
discharge, storage, handling, transportation, reclamation, or disposal
of waste materials (both hazardous and non hazardous) that result from
the activities associated with the exploration, development, or
production of oil or gas or geothermal resources and other activities
regulated by the RRC. A list of activities that generate wastes that
are subject to the jurisdiction of the RRC is found at 16 Tex. Admin.
Code Section 3.8(a)(30) and at 30 Tex. Admin. Code Sec.  335.1. Such
wastes are termed ``oil and gas wastes.'' The TCEQ has responsibility
to administer the RCRA program, however, hazardous waste generated at
natural gas or natural gas liquids processing plants or reservoir
pressure maintenance or repressurizing plants are subject to the
jurisdiction of the TCEQ until the RRC is authorized by EPA to
administer those waste under RCRA. The TCEQ jurisdiction over Solid
waste can be found at Chapter 361 of the Texas Health and Safety Code
Sections 361.001 through 361.754. The TCEQ's jurisdiction encompasses
both hazardous and nonhazardous, industrial and municipal Solid waste.
The definition of Solid waste can be found at Texas Health and Safety
Code Section 361.003(34). When the RRC is authorized by EPA to
administer the RCRA program for these wastes, jurisdiction over such
hazardous waste will transfer from the TCEQ to the RRC. The EPA has
designated the TCEQ as the lead agency to coordinate RCRA activities
between the two agencies. The EPA is responsible for the regulation of
any hazardous waste for which TCEQ has not been previously authorized.
    Further clarification of the jurisdiction between the TCEQ and the
RRC can be found in a separate document. This document, a Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU), became effective on May 31, 1998.
    The TCEQ has the rules necessary to implement EPA's RCRA Clusters
XVI through XVIII including Post-Closure Permit Requirement and Closure
Process (Checklist 174) and also Hazardous Air Pollutant Standards for
Combustors: Interim Standards (Checklist 197) revisions to the Federal
Hazardous Waste Program promulgated from October 22, 1998, February 13,
2002 and July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008. The adoption for RCRA
Clusters XVI through XVIII with Checklists 174 and 197 include changes
to 30 Texas Administrative Code Chapters 305 and 335. The Commissioners
adopted these rules on July 25, 2007 and the rules became effective on
October 29, 2009. The TCEQ authority to incorporate Federal rules by
reference can be found at Texas Government Code Annotated Section
311.027 (Vernon 1998) and adoption of the hazardous waste rules in
general are pursuant to the following statutory provisions: Tex. Water
Code Ann. Sections 5.1032000), effective September 1995, as amended
(TCEQ's authority to adopt any rules necessary to carry out its powers
and duties). Texas did not adopt the Federal regulations 40 CFR part
266, subpart N, Appendix III and also Appendices IV through XIII.
Therefore, the State is not authorized for those regulations. The State
has not made program revisions to the Federal Used Oil regulations in
Checklist 214 therefore, EPA is excluding this portion of the Federal
regulations from this Federal Register notice.

G. What changes are we approving with today's action?

    On March 24, 2010, the State of Texas submitted a final complete
program application, seeking authorization of their changes in
accordance with 40 CFR 271.21. We now make an immediate final decision,
subject to receipt of written comments that oppose this action, that
the State of Texas' hazardous waste program revision satisfies all of
the requirements necessary to qualify for final authorization. The
State of Texas revisions consist of regulations which specifically
govern Federal Hazardous Waste revisions promulgated from October 22,
1998, February 13, 2002 and July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2008. The
adoption for RCRA Clusters XVI through XVIII with Checklists 174 and
197 are included in a chart with this document.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Federal Register
    Description of federal        date and page
     requirement  (include         (and/or RCRA       Analogous state
    checklist , if         statutory            authority
           relevant)                authority)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Post-Closure Permits         63 FR 56710-       Texas Water Code
 Requirement and Closure         56735, October     Annotated Sections
 Process. (Checklist 174).       22, 1998.          5.103 and 5.105,
                                                    7.031, Texas Health
                                                    & Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Section
                                                    361.024, 361.082;
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapter
                                                    335.151(d),
                                                    335.2(m), 335.151(e)
                                                    and 335.156(a)(3)
                                                    intro,
                                                    335.156(a)(3)(A),
                                                    335.1(9),
                                                    335.151(e)(2) and
                                                    335.156(a)(3)(B),
                                                    IBR at
                                                    335.152(a)(5),
                                                    335.151(e) intro,
                                                    335.151(f) and
                                                    335.156(a)(4),
                                                    335.151(e)(1),
                                                    335.151(e)(2),
                                                    335.7, 335.167(c),
                                                    335.179(a), 37.11,
                                                    37 Subchapter P
                                                    (37.6001 et seq.),
                                                    IBR at 335.112(a)(5)
                                                    and 335.116(g)
                                                    intro,
                                                    335.116(g)(1),
                                                    335.116(g)(2),
                                                    335.112(a)(6),
                                                    335.111(e)(1) intro,
                                                    335.111(e)(2),
                                                    335.111(d) intro,
                                                    335.111(d)(1),
                                                    335.111(d)(2),
                                                    336.167(c),
                                                    335.111(d)(3),
                                                    Chapter 39 Subpart
                                                    N, 335.118(c),
                                                    335.119(c), Chapter
                                                    39 Subchapter N,
                                                    335.7,
                                                    335.111(d)(4),
                                                    335.167(c),
                                                    335.179(a), 37.11,
                                                    37 Subchapter P
                                                    (37.6001 et seq.),
                                                    335.2(i), 305.2(28),
                                                    335.1(117), 305.41,
                                                    305.50(a) intro,
                                                    305.50(a)(4)(A) and
                                                    305.50(b) intro,
                                                    305.50(b)(1)-(3),
                                                    305.2(1), 305.42(a),
                                                    305.43(b), 305.47,
                                                    305.50(b)(5)-(b)(7),
                                                    305.156(a)(1) &
                                                    (a)(2), as amended
                                                    effective through
                                                    October 29, 2009.
2. Hazardous Air Standards for  67 FR 6792-6818    Texas Water Code
 Combustors: Interim             February 13,       Annotated Sections
 Standards. (Checklist 197).     2002.              5.103 and 5.105,
                                                    Texas Health &
                                                    Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Section
                                                    361.017 and 361.024;
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    335.152(a)(13),
                                                    335.112(a)(14),
                                                    335.221(a)(1),
                                                    305.50(a)(4)(A),
                                                    305.571(b), 305.175,
                                                    305.571(b) and
                                                    305.572(a)(6), as
                                                    amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
3. Universal Waste Rule:        70 FR 45508-       Texas Water Code
 Specific Provisions for         45522, August 5,   Annotated Sections
 Mercury Containing Equipment.   2005.              5.103 and 5.105,
 (Checklist 209).                                   Texas Health &
                                                    Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Section,
                                                    361.017 and 361.024,
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    335.261(b)(16)(F)(ii
                                                    i), 335.1(162),
                                                    335.431(b)(3), and
                                                    335.261(a), as
                                                    amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
4. Standardized Permit for      70 FR 53420-       Texas Water Code
 RCRA Hazardous Waste            53478, September   Annotated Sections
 Management facilities.          8, 2005.           5.103 and 5.105
 (Checklist 210).                                   Texas Health &
                                                    Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Sections
                                                    361.017 and 361.024
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    39.503,
                                                    39.403(b)(1),
                                                    335.1(111), 335.602,
                                                    335.1(142), 335.1,
                                                    305.661, 39.503(a),
                                                    39.503(a)(2),
                                                    39.503(c), 305.650,
                                                    305.651, 305.42(f),
                                                    50.133, 305.651,
                                                    305.653(b), 55.156
                                                    and 50.117(f),
                                                    50.139, 305.661,
                                                    335.1(59), 305.150
                                                    and 335.31, 335.504,
                                                    335.601,
                                                    335.602(a)(1)-(6),
                                                    335.602(c),
                                                    335.602(a)(7)-(9),
                                                    335.2(c), 305.42(b),
                                                    305.63(a),
                                                    305.64(g),
                                                    305.69(b)(1)(c),
                                                    305.66(a), 305.65,
                                                    305.650, 305.651,
                                                    305.652, 305.653,
                                                    305.654, 305.655,
                                                    305.656, 305.657,
                                                    305.658, 305.659,
                                                    305.660 and 305.661,
                                                    as amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
5. Revision of Wastewater       70 FR 57769-       Texas Water Code
 Treatment Exemptions for        57785, October     Annotated Sections
 Hazardous Waste Mixtures        4, 2005.           5.103 and 5.105,
 (``Headworks exemption'').                         Texas Health &
 (Checklist 211).                                   Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Sections
                                                    361.017 and 361.024,
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code Chapter
                                                    335.504, as amended
                                                    effective through
                                                    October 29, 2009.
6. NESHAP: Final Standards for  70 FR 59402-       Texas Water Code
 Hazardous Waste Combustors      59579, October     Annotated Sections
 (Phase I Final Replacement      12, 2005.          5.103 and 5.105,
 Standards and Phase II).                           Texas Health &
 (Checklist 212).                                   Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Sections
                                                    361.017 and 361.024,
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    305.150,
                                                    335.152(a)(13),
                                                    335.112(a)(14),
                                                    335.221(a)(3),
                                                    305.150,
                                                    305.50(a)(15),
                                                    305.50(a)(4)(A),
                                                    305.571(b) and
                                                    305.50(a)(4)(A),
                                                    305.50(a)(16),
                                                    305.69(i)(1),
                                                    305.69(k)(L)(10),
                                                    305.175, 305.571,
                                                    and 305.572(a)(6),
                                                    as amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
7. Burden Reduction             71 FR 16862-       Texas Water Code
 Initiative. (Checklist 213).    16915, April 4,    Annotated Sections
                                 2006.              5.103 and 5.105,
                                                    Texas Health &
                                                    Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Sections
                                                    361.017 and 361.024,
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    335.504,
                                                    335.1(134)(A)(iv),
                                                    IBR 335.2(g),
                                                    335.152(a)(1),
                                                    335.152(a)(3)-(4),
                                                    335.164(7)(B)-(C),
                                                    335.165(6)-(7),
                                                    335.166(7),
                                                    335.152(a)(5)-(8),
                                                    335.152(a)(10),
                                                    335.172(b),
                                                    335.175(a),
                                                    335.175(b)-(d),
                                                    335.175(c),
                                                    335.152(a)(13)-(15),
                                                    335.152(a)(18),
                                                    335.152(a)(20),
                                                    335.112(a)(1),
                                                    335.112(a)(3)-(13),
                                                    335.125(a),
                                                    335.125(b)-(f),
                                                    335.125(f),
                                                    335.112(a)(18),
                                                    335.112(a)(20),
                                                    335.112(a)(22),
                                                    335.221(a)(6),
                                                    335.224(11),
                                                    335.221(a)(14),
                                                    335.431(c)(1),
                                                    305.45(a)(6) and
                                                    305.50(a)(1),
                                                    305.144(1),
                                                    305.69(k)(O)
                                                    Appendix I, as
                                                    amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.

8. Corrections to Errors in     71 FR 40254-       Texas Water Code
 the Code of Federal             40280, July 14,    Annotated Sections
 Regulations. (Checklist 214).   2006.              5.103 and 5.105,
                                                    Texas Health &
                                                    Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Sections
                                                    361.017 and 361.024,
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    335.1(76),
                                                    335.1(112),
                                                    335.1(162),
                                                    335.1(167),
                                                    335.29(4), 335.22,
                                                    335.23, 335.504(1),
                                                    335.504(1),
                                                    335.504(3),
                                                    335.504(2),
                                                    335.29(4),
                                                    335.29(3),
                                                    335.69(a)(1)(D),
                                                    335.13, 335.13(h),
                                                    335.76,
                                                    335.41(d)(4),
                                                    335.76(h),
                                                    335.24(b),
                                                    335.152(a)(1),
                                                    335.163(1)(A),
                                                    335.163(1)(A)(i),
                                                    335.163(9)(E),
                                                    335.164(1)(B),
                                                    335.164(7)(D)(i),
                                                    335.165(11),
                                                    335.152(a)(5),
                                                    335.179(b),
                                                    37.211(f),
                                                    37.211(g),
                                                    37.241(f),
                                                    37.201(f)(1)-(2),
                                                    37.231(f), 37.261(a)-
                                                    (e), 37.231(a),
                                                    37.211(c), 37.651,
                                                    37.351, 37.661(2),
                                                    37.661(13)-(14),
                                                    37.531(c)-(d),
                                                    37.621, 37.311,
                                                    37.611, 37.671(a),
                                                    37.671(3),
                                                    37.671(12),
                                                    37.671(16),
                                                    335.152(a)(8),
                                                    335.168(c),
                                                    335.29(2)
                                                    335.168(e)(1)(A)-(C)
                                                    , 335.152(a)(9)-
                                                    (10), 335.170(a)(1),
                                                    335.152(a)(10),
                                                    335.172(c)(7),
                                                    335.172(d),
                                                    335.152(a)(11),
                                                    335.173(a)(3),
                                                    335.173(e)(1)(b),
                                                    335.152(a)(12),
                                                    335.175(d)(2),
                                                    335.152(a)(13)-(20)
                                                    335.112,
                                                    335.112(a)(1),
                                                    335.112(a)(3),
                                                    335.116(d),
                                                    335.118(b),
                                                    335.112(a)(6),
                                                    37.6001, 37.6021,
                                                    37.531,
                                                    335.112(a)(8)-(13),
                                                    335.125,
                                                    335.112(a)(16),
                                                    335.112(a)(18)-(19),
                                                    335.112(a)(21),
                                                    335.112(a)(22),
                                                    335.112(a)(24)(A),
                                                    (D), and (E),
                                                    334.241(a), 335.251,
                                                    335.221(a)(1),
                                                    335.223(a),
                                                    335.221(a)(6),
                                                    335.221(a)(8),
                                                    335.221(a)(10),
                                                    335.224(5),
                                                    335.221(a)(11),
                                                    335.221(a)(13),
                                                    335.221(a)(17),
                                                    335.221(a)(20),
                                                    37.351,
                                                    335.431(c)(1),
                                                    Chapter 335 Index,
                                                    335.2(a)-(c),
                                                    335.47(a)(1),
                                                    335.41(d)(2),
                                                    335.1(105),
                                                    335.1(123),
                                                    305.50(a)(8),
                                                    305.44(b),
                                                    305.45(a)(7)(G),
                                                    305.50(a)(4)(A),
                                                    305.122(a),
                                                    335.201(a),
                                                    305.69(e)(2)(A),
                                                    306.69 Appendix I,
                                                    305.42(b),
                                                    335.261(b)(16)(F),
                                                    335.261(a), Chapter
                                                    324, as amended
                                                    effective through
                                                    October 29, 2009.
9. Cathode Ray Tubes Rule.      71 FR 42928-       Texas Water Code
 (Checklist 215).                42949, July 28,    Annotated Sections
                                 2006.              5.103 and 5.105,
                                                    7.031, Texas Health
                                                    & Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Section
                                                    361.024, 361.082;
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapters
                                                    335.1(17),
                                                    335.1(35),
                                                    335.1(36),
                                                    335.1(37),
                                                    335.1(138)(A)(iv),
                                                    as amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
10. Exclusion of Oil-Bearing    73 FR 57-72,       Texas Water Code
 Secondary Materials Processed   January 2, 2008.   Annotated Sections
 in a Gasification System to                        5.103 and 5.105,
 Produce Synthesis Gas.                             Texas Health &
 (Checklist 216).                                   Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Section
                                                    361.017 and 361.024;
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapter
                                                    335.1(64),
                                                    335.504(1), as
                                                    amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
11. NESHAP: Final Standards     73 FR 18970-       Texas Water Code
 for Hazardous Waste             18984, April 8,    Annotated Sections
 Combustors (Phase I Final       2008.              5.103 and 5.105,
 Replacement Standards and                          Texas Health &
 Phase II) Amendments.                              Safety Code
 (Checklist 217).                                   Annotated Section
                                                    361.017 and 361.024;
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapter
                                                    335.152(a)(13) and
                                                    335.221(a), as
                                                    amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
12. F019 Exemption for          73 FR 31756-       Texas Water Code
 Wastewater Treatment Sludges    31769, June 4,     Annotated Sections
 from Auto Manufacturing Zinc    2008.              5.103 and 5.105,
 Phosphating Processes.                             Texas Health &
 (Checklist 218).                                   Safety Code
                                                    Annotated Section
                                                    361.017 and 361.024;
                                                    Texas Administrative
                                                    Code, Chapter
                                                    335.504(2), as
                                                    amended effective
                                                    through October 29,
                                                    2009.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

H. Where are the revised State rules different from the Federal rules?

    The State hazardous waste program is at least as equivalent to the
Federal program in all areas, except where the State program is more
stringent and broader in scope. The State of Texas Section 305.50(b)(1)
is more stringent than the Federal program, because the State request
from the owner/operator additional information that the executive
director determines is necessary from 40 CFR 270.14 including post-
closure cost estimates. Chapters 39.503, 305.653(b) through 305.661,
55.25 and 50.117(f) are more stringent than the Federal regulations at
40 CFR 124.207, 124.208 and 124.209 regarding public notice, public
comments and hearing on draft permit decisions and the requirements for
responding to comments. Other State regulations that are also more
stringent than the Federal regulations can be found at Sections
335.175(b)-(d), 335.175(c). There are also some rules that are broader
in scope because they cover both hazardous waste and Class 1 non-
hazardous waste, whereas the Federal regulations cover only hazardous
waste. Other differences contained in the current authorization
application are that of the Standard Permit public notice and financial
assurance requirements are broader in scope. Therefore, EPA cannot
authorize broader in scope provisions because the Agency cannot enforce
those regulations.

I. Who handles permits after the authorization takes effect?

    The State of Texas will issue permits for all the provisions for
which it is authorized and will administer the permits it issues. The
EPA will continue to administer any RCRA hazardous waste permits or
portions of permits which we issued prior to the effective date of this
authorization. We will not issue any more new permits or new portions
of permits for the provisions listed in the Table in this document
after the effective date of this authorization. The EPA will continue
to implement and issue permits for HSWA requirements for which Texas is
not yet authorized.

J. How does today's action affect Indian Country (18 U.S.C. 1151) in
Texas?

    The State of Texas Hazardous Program is not being authorized to
operate in Indian Country.

K. What is codification and is the EPA codifying Texas' hazardous waste
program as authorized in this rule?

    Codification is the process of placing the State's statutes and
regulations that comprise the State's authorized hazardous waste
program into the CFR. We do this by referencing the authorized State
rules in 40 CFR part 272. We reserve the amendment of 40 CFR part 272,
subpart SS for this authorization of Texas' program changes until a
later date. In this authorization application the EPA is not codifying
the rules documented in this Federal Register notice.

L. Administrative Requirements

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has exempted this action
from the requirements of Executive Order 12866 (58 FR 51735, October 4,
1993), and therefore this action is not subject to review by OMB. This
action authorizes State requirements for the purpose of RCRA 3006 and
imposes no additional requirements beyond those imposed by State law.
Accordingly, I certify that this action 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 action
authorizes preexisting 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). For the same reason, this action also does
not significantly or uniquely affect the communities of Tribal
governments, as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 9, 2000). This action will 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), because it merely authorizes State
requirements as part of the State RCRA hazardous waste program without
altering the relationship or the distribution of power and
responsibilities established by RCRA. This action also is not subject
to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997), because it is
not economically significant and it does not make decisions based on
environmental health or safety risks. This rule is not subject to
Executive Order 13211, ``Actions Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'' (66 FR 28355
(May 22, 2001)) because it is not a significant regulatory action under
Executive Order 12866.
    Under RCRA 3006(b), the EPA grants a State's application for
authorization as long as the State meets the criteria required by RCRA.
It would thus be inconsistent with applicable law for the EPA, when it
reviews a State authorization application, to require the use of any
particular voluntary consensus standard in place of another standard
that otherwise satisfies the requirements of RCRA. 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. As required
by section 3 of Executive Order 12988 (61 FR 4729, February 7, 1996),
in issuing this rule, the EPA has taken the necessary steps to
eliminate drafting errors and ambiguity, minimize potential litigation,
and provide a clear legal standard for affected conduct. The EPA has
complied with Executive Order 12630 (53 FR 8859, March 15, 1988) by
examining the takings implications of the rule in accordance with the
``Attorney General's Supplemental Guidelines for the Evaluation of Risk
and Avoidance of Unanticipated Takings'' issued under the Executive
Order. 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. The EPA will submit a report containing this document
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 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). This
action will be effective May 7, 2012.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 271

    Environmental protection, Administrative practice and procedure,
Confidential business information, Hazardous waste, Hazardous waste
transportation, Indian lands, Intergovernmental relations, Penalties,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Authority:  This action is issued under the authority of
sections 2002(a), 3006, and 7004(b) of the Solid Waste Disposal Act
as amended 42 U.S.C. 6912(a), 6926, 6974(b).

    Dated: February 17, 2012.
 Al Armendariz,
Regional Administrator, EPA Region 6.
[FR Doc. 2012-5376 Filed 3-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P