### 1 Maryland Department of the Environment
Attachment to Consistency Update Letter Dated 5/6/16

The following rules have been revised since January 8, 2014 under the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) Title 26 Subtitle 11:
COMAR 26.11.01-—General Administrative Provisions

 Final Effective Date 7/20/15

– Amendments to Regulation .01

– Cement (with 26.11.09)

o NPA published 4/17/15

o NFA published 7/10/15

 Effective Date 2/15/16

– Amendments to Regulation .01 & .10

– CEMS (with 26.11.08)

o NPA published 11/13/15

o NFA published 2/5/16

COMAR 26.11.02—Permits, Approvals, and Registrations

 Final Effective Date 12/10/15

– Amendments to Regulations .02,.07, .11 & .12

o NPA published 9/4/15

o NFA published 11/30/15

COMAR 26.11.08—Control of Incinerators (same action as 26.11.01 CEMs 2/15/16)

 Final Effective Date 2/15/16

– Amendments to Regulations .01, .04, .07 &.08

o NPA published 11/13/15

o NFA published 2/5/16

COMAR 26.11.09—Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations

Final Effective Date March 3, 2014—Amendments to Regulation .08C Kraft Pulp Mills

o NPA published 11/13/15

o NFA published 2/21/14

Final Effective Date April 28, 2014– Amendments to Regulations .01, .04,.06, .07, .09, .10, .12
Biomass

o NPA published 1/24/14

o NFA published 4/18/14

### 2 Final Effective Date July 20, 2015

– Amendments to Regulation 08H & I (with 26.11.01 Cement)

o NPA published 4/17/15

o NFA published 7/10/15

COMAR 26.11.13—Control of Gasoline and Volatile Organic Compound Storage and Handling

 Final Effective Date 7/21/14

– Amendments to Regulations for Transflo

o NPA published 4/18/14

o NFA published 7/11/14

COMAR 26.11.19—Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes – One Amendment effective September 28, 2015

 Final Effective Date 5/26/14

– Amendments to Regulation .08 (Metal Parts)

o NPA published 11/15/13

o NFA published 5/16/14

 Final Effective Date 9/28/15

– Amendments to Regulations .26 & .26

‐ 1 Fiberglass boats

o NPA published 6/26/15

o NFA published 9/18/15

New Chapter COMAR 26.11.39—Architectural Coatings Regulations .01 - .08 – One Amendment effective April 25, 2016. After 1/1/2017, COMAR 26.11.33 is no longer the controlling regulation for this category and will be repealed.

 Final Effective Date April 25, 2016

– New Regulations

o NPA published 1/22/16

o NFA published 4/15/16PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 621

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Proposed Action [15-115-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to: (1) Amend Regulation .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; (2) Amend Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations ; and (3) Adopt new Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to create a separate chapter applicable to Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants containing requirements unique to them. The new chapter combines existing requirements in COMAR 26.11.01, .06, and .29 regarding NO x , SO x , visible emissions, and particulate matter that apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants into one chapter. This action establishes slightly more stringent emission NO x limitations based upon recommended limits for cement kilns from the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) to satisfy Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements under the Clean air Act for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. Older, less stringent NO x limits in COMAR 26.11.09.08 will be repealed. This action also establishes a new method for continuous monitoring of particulate matter emissions for both cement kilns and clinker coolers required by the 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants effective September 1, 2016. The two Portland cement manufacturing plants in Maryland are required to operate continuous opacity monitors (COMs). EPA has recently added requirements for continuously monitoring particulate matter in the 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants which provided an alternative monitoring procedure for visible emissions. In this action cement kilns have the option of using continuous opacity monitors or the NESHAP alternative methods of visible emission monitoring for opacity. Clinker coolers and kilns have the option of using continuous opacity monitors or the NESHAP alternative methods of visible emission monitoring for opacity after September 1, 2016. Under these regulations, operation of a COM requires the facility to follow the quality assurance procedures in COMAR 26.11.31.
Background In an effort to streamline regulations pertaining to Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) is compiling the requirements for these facilities in a separate chapter. This action separates Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants and Natural Gas Compression Stations currently together in COMAR 26.11.29 into two separate chapters: COMAR 26.11.29 Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations and COMAR 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants. The existing COMAR 26.11.06.05 Sulfur Compounds from Other than Fuel-Burning Equipment establishes a concentration standard for SO 2 for cement kilns depending on the location of the plant and the date the plant was constructed. These requirements for SO 2 are being moved into COMAR 26.11.30. The NO x emission standards and continuous emission monitoring requirements for installations at Portland cement plants were specified in COMAR 26.11.29. These requirements for NO x are also included in new COMAR 26.11.30 In 2012, EPA designated areas as attainment and nonattainment with respect to the national ambient air quality standard for ozone revised in 2008. Under the federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq., sources in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above are subject to a NO x Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirement. Areas in the Ozone Transport Region are also subject to this requirement regardless of designation. Section 182 of the Clean Air Act requires the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to review and revise NO x RACT requirements in the Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) as necessary in light of the new more stringent ambient air quality standards. In reviewing existing NO x RACT requirements for adequacy, MDE considers technological advances and the stringency of the revised ozone standard. In 2007, the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) compiled a Technical Support Document on Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control Measures which included recommendations for NO x emission limitations for cement kilns based on the type of kiln. MDE concluded the recommended rates represented RACT for cement kilns in Maryland and these rates will become effective April 1, 2017. New particulate matter (PM) continuous emission monitoring procedures are specified in EPA ’ s 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants. After September 1, 2016, these facilities will be required to use these procedures to determine compliance with particulate matter standards. The NESHAP procedure uses stack test data to calibrate a PM continuous emission monitor (CEM) and then uses the PM CEM as a Continuous Parametric Monitoring System (CPMS). The PM CPMS can also be calibrated for use as a parametric monitoring device to determine compliance with opacity standards. The system offers an alternative to COMs for monitoring visible emissions. Under this action MDE proposes the option to either operate COMs or PM CPMS to monitor visible emissions.. The NESHAP procedures have been integrated into the Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter requirements of the new chapter 30.

Sources Affected and Location There are two existing Portland cement manufacturing plants in Maryland, one in Carroll County and one in Washington County. The Carroll County plant has a pre-calciner, pre-heater kiln. The Washington County plant is currently modifying their kiln from a long-dry kiln to a pre-calciner, pre-heater kiln and will complete the modification by 2017.
Requirements This action is to: 1. Combine all of the existing requirements in COMAR 26.11.01, .06, and .29 regarding NO x , SO x , visible emissions and particulate matter that apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants into one chapter; 2. Repeal NO x emission limitations in COMAR 26.11.09.08 which apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants and establish new NO x emission limitations based upon recommended control measures for cement kilns from the 2007 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) Technical Support Document on Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control Measures;FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 884

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, IS SUE 14, FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2015 

# Subtitle 18 LARGE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOMES

Notice of Final Action [15-094-F] On June 26, 2015, the State Superintendent of Schools adopted: (1) Regulations .02

— .05 under COMAR 13A.18.02 Registration Application and Maintenance ; (2) Regulations .03

— .06 under COMAR 13A.18.03 Management and Administration ; (3) Regulation .03 under COMAR 13A.18.05 Home Environment and Equipment ; (4) Regulations .02 and .05

— .07 under COMAR 13A.18.06 Provider and Staff Requirements ; (5) Regulation .01 under COMAR 13A.18.08 Child Supervision ; (6) Regulation .01 under COMAR 13A.18.09 Program Requirements ; and (7) Regulation .01 under COMAR 13A.18.12 Nutrition

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:6 Md. R. 535

— 539 (March 20, 2015), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.
Attorney General’s Certification In accordance with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: At 13A.18.02.03A(3), change “.02B(2)(b)” to read “.02C(2)(b); at 13A.18.02.04A(2), ch ange “.02B(1)” to read “.02C(1)”; and at 13A.18.02.05B(2)(d), change “.02B(2)(a)” to read “.02C(2)(a)”. The changes are nonsubstantive and were made to clarify the authority for the regulations and to ensure that cross-references were correct.


## 13A.18.02 Registration Application and

Maintenance

Authority: Family Law Article, §§5-501, 5-505, 5-550

— 5-557.1, and 5-560

— 5-563; Human Services Article, §1-202; State Government Article, §10-617; Annotated Code of Maryland Agency Note: Federal Statutory Reference

— Americans with Disabilities Act

of 1990 (42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq.); Pro-Children Act of 1994 (20 U.S.C. §6081 et seq.)
.03 Continuing Registration. A. Application for Continuing Registration. To obtain a continuing registration, a provider shall submit to the office before expiration of the initial registration: (1)

— (2) (proposed text unchanged) (3) A medical evaluation that meets the requirements of Regulation [[ .02B(2)(b) ]] .02C(2)(b) of this chapter for: (a)

— (c) (proposed text unchanged) (4)

— (6) (proposed text unchanged) B. (proposed text unchanged)
.04 Provisional Status and Conditional Registration. A. Provisional Status. (1) (proposed text unchanged) (2) An initial registration may not be approved if the office has not yet received evidence that the applicant and, as applicable, each individual specified in Regulation [[ .02B(1) ]] .02C(1) and (2)(a) of this chapter has successfully passed a federal and State criminal background check and a review of child and adult abuse and neglect records. (3)

— (4) (proposed text unchanged) B. (proposed text unchanged)
.05 Resumption of Service. A. (proposed text unchanged) B. The application to resume service shall meet all initial registration application requirements, except that: (1) (proposed text unchanged) (2) The office may accept as applicable to the new application the: (a)

— (c) (proposed text unchanged) (d) Results of the original child and adult abuse and neglect clearances conducted pursuant to Regulation [[ .02B(2)(a) ]] .02C(2)(a) of this chapter, if the clearances were completed within 12 months of the application; and (e) (proposed text unchanged)
LILLIAN M. LOWERY, Ed.D. State Superintendent of Schools


# Title 14 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Subtitle 09 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 14.09.04 Legal Representation and Fees

Authority: Labor and Employment Article, §§9-309 and 9-731, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-107-F] On June 25, 2015, the Workers’ Compensation Commission adopted amendments to Regulation .03 under COMAR 14.09.04.03 Legal Representation and Fees . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:7 Md. R. 573

— 574 (April 3, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.

R. KARL AUMANN Chairman


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Final Action [15-115-F] On June 23, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted: (1) Amendments to Regulation .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; (2) Amendments to Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations ; and (3) New Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants

.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 885

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 14, FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2015 This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:8 Md. R. 621

— 625 (April 17, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment 

# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.29 Control of NO x 

## Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, and 2-301

— 2-303, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-109-F] On June 23, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted the repeal of existing Regulations .01

— .05 and new Regulations .01

— .05 under COMAR 26.11.29 Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:8 Md. R. 625

— 626 (April 17, 2015), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.
Attorney General’s Certification In accordance with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: Regulation .03A(2): The added text is to clarify that the report is required annually; therefore there is no change to the intent or impact of the regulation.
.03 Monitoring Requirements. A. A person who owns or operates a stationary internal combustion engine subject to Regulation .02C of this chapter shall: (1) (proposed text unchanged) (2) On or before May 1, 2002, and every year thereafter, collect NO x emissions data that was obtained pursuant to §A(1) of this regulation; and (3) (proposed text unchanged) B. (proposed text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the EnvironmentPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 622

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 3. Add cement kilns to COMAR 26.11.01.10 which delineates the types of facilities that need to operate a COM to measure opacity; 4. Establish new continuous particulate matter monitoring procedures, as specified in EPA ’ s 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants. The new procedures will be used to demonstrate compliance with particulate matter emissions limitations and may be used to demonstrate compliance with opacity standards for cement kilns and clinker coolers under the specified circumstances instead of using a COM; and 5. Require cement kilns subject to COM requirements to comply with the Quality Assurance Requirements for COMs in existing COMAR 26.11.31. The Department makes note that under separate action amendments to COMAR 26.11.29 are being proposed. Existing and new requirements for Control of NO x Emissions from Internal Combustion Engines Located at Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations will be under COMAR 26.11.29. Existing and new requirements for Portland cement manufacturing plants will be under COMAR 26.11.30.
Expected Emissions Reductions On and after April 1, 2017, Portland cement kilns will need to meet a NO x emission limitation based upon recommended control measures for cement kilns from the 2007 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) Technical Support Document on Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control Measures. The proposed NO x emission rate for long dry kilns is 3.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced and for pre-calciner kilns, an emissions rate of 2.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced. As a result of this action, the Portland cement plant in Carroll County will reduce annual NO x emissions by about 14% or 400 tons based on 2012/2013 production. The Portland cement plant in Washington County will reduce annual NO x emissions by about 33% or 510 tons based on 2012/2013 production.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact I. Summary of Economic Impact. This action only requires affected sources to increase the amount of ammonia reagent used in existing pollution control equipment to meet the proposed NO x emission limitations in 2017.The Portland cement plant in Carroll County is a pre-calciner, preheater kiln. Currently, the operators inject 600

— 730 liters/hr of ammonia into their Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) control technology to keep NO x emissions below 2.5 lbs/ton of clinker to ensure compliance with the current 2.8 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker limit. Operating the SNCR costs approximately $1,000,000 per year. Using a linear equation, the plant would need to inject 760 liters/hr of ammonia to keep their NO x emissions below 2.4 lbs/ton clinker to ensure compliance with a margin of safety. To meet the NO x emission rate of 2.4 lbs/ton clinker produced, the additional ammonia could cost approximately $150,000 per year. As part of a federal action, the Portland cement plant inWashington County will be upgrading the kiln to a pre-heater/precalciner kiln by September 6, 2016. The kiln will then be required to meet a year round NO x limit of 1.8 lbs NO x /ton of clinker on a 30- day rolling average. The 1.8 lbs NO x /ton per ton of clinker is lower than the 2.4 lbs NO x /ton of clinker in these regulations, so the regulations do not have an economic impact on the Washington County facility. The operation of a continuous particulate matter emissions monitor is required under the federal cement NESHAP. The option to use this instrument to satisfy the COM requirement for monitoring opacity from cement kilns represents a possible cost savings to the facility. Monitoring of opacity has been required since the early 1990s and is not an additional cost.
Revenue (R+/R-) II. Types of Economic Impact. Expenditure (E+/E-) Magnitude

A. On issuing agency: NONE
B. On other State agencies: NONE C. On local governments: NONE

Benefit (+) Cost (-) Magnitude

D. On regulated industries or trade groups: Compliance costs (-) $150,000 E. On other industries or trade groups:
MD contractors (+) Indeterminable
F. Direct and indirect effects on public: NONE III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from Section II.) D. Ammonia reagent injection with the existing control technology is required to meet the NO x emission rate. E. Installation of technology and maintenance is usually performed by specially trained tradesmen. The magnitude of demand is unknown.

Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on May 19, 2015, at 10 a.m., at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or email to Randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than May 19, 2015, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Dep artment of the Environment ’ s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/reqco mments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration offices; and • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 623

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department ’ s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.



## 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements. A. Applicability and Exceptions. (1)

— (4) (text unchanged) (5) The owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may discontinue use of a COM when a PM CPMS is installed and operated in accordance with the requirements of COMAR 26.11.30. B.

— E. (text unchanged) F. 

### Fuel burning equipment subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.09.05 and cement kilns subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.30 are subject to the COM requirements contained in COMAR 26.11.31.


## 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.08 Control of NO x Emissions for Major Stationary Sources. A.

— G. (text unchanged) H. Requirements for [ Cement Manufacturing Facilities, ] Municipal Waste Combustors, and Hospital, Medical, and Infectious Waste Incinerators. (1) A person who owns or operates a [ cement manufacturing facility or a ] municipal waste combustor shall install, operate, and maintain a CEM for NO x emissions. [ (2) NO x emissions from cement manufacturing kilns may not exceed the following total hourly NO x emissions as determined on a 30-day rolling average of the daily average: (a) 1,000 pounds for a facility with a total kiln capacity of 600,000 tons per year or less; and (b) 1,800 pounds for a facility with a total kiln capacity greater than 600,000 tons per year. ] [ (3) ] (2) NO x emissions from municipal waste combustors may not exceed the NO x emissions standards in COMAR 26.11.08.07 and COMAR 26.11.08.08 [ (205 ppm 24-hour average) ] or applicable Prevention of Significant Deterioration limits, whichever is more restrictive. [ (4) ] (3) (text unchanged) I. Requirements for Glass Melting Furnaces [ and Internal Combustion Engines at Natural Gas Pipeline Stations ]

. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) [ (3) A person who owns or operates an internal combustion engine at a natural gas pipeline station with a capacity factor over 15 percent shall perform either parametric optimization or engine rebuild to meet the following emission standards: (a) Facilities with five or less engines shall meet a combined maximum hourly emission rate of 300 pounds per hour; and (b) Facilities with more than five engines shall meet a combined maximum hourly emissions rate of 566 pounds per hour. (4) Records demonstrating performance of parametric optimization shall be maintained on site for at least 2 years and made available to the Department upon request. ] J.

— K. (text unchanged)


## 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement

Manufacturing Plants

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.01 Scope. This chapter contains all of the general requirements that apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants. New or modified cement plants may be subject to more restrictive requirements that are included in a permit issued by the Department. Portland cement manufacturing plants subject to this chapter may also be subject to federal New Source Performance Standards under 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart F, and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry under 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LLL.
.02 Applicability. A. The requirements of this chapter apply to cement kilns and other installations located at Portland cement manufacturing plants. B. Any source which is subject to the provisions of this chapter may also be subject to the provisions of any other chapter. However, when this chapter establishes an emission standard for a specific installation which differs from the general emission standards in COMAR 26.11.06.01

— .09, this chapter takes precedence.
.03 Definitions. A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated. B. Terms Defined. (1) “ Cement kiln ” means an installation, including any associated pre-heater or pre-calciner devices, that produces clinker by heating limestone and other materials to produce Portland

cement. (2) “ Cement manufacturing installation ” means process equipment used for subsequent production of Portland cement. (3) “ Clinker cooler ” means an installation into which clinker product leaving the kiln is placed to be cooled by air supplied by a forced air draft or natural draft supply system. (4) “ Long dry kiln ” means a cement kiln that does not have a pre-calciner and in which dry starting raw materials are fed into the kiln. (5) “ PM continuous parametric monitoring system ” (CPMS) means a continuous emission monitoring system used to establish a parameter range for the purposes of demonstrating compliance. (6) “ Pre-calciner kiln ” means a cement kiln that contains a pre-calciner at the bottom of the pre-heater tower before the materials enter the kiln. (7) “ 30-day rolling average ” means the arithmetic average of all valid hourly NO x emission rates of the previous 720 valid hours on a rolling basis. (8) “ 30 process operating day ” means: (a) The first day after the compliance date following completion of the field testing and data collection that demonstrates that the CPMS or CEMS has satisfied the relevant CPMS performance evaluation or CEMS performance specification acceptance criteria; and (b) For purposes of this chapter, the performance test period is complete at the end of the 30th consecutive operating day.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 624

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 .04 Particulate Matter. A. The owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions of particulate matter to exceed the limits in §B of this regulation. B. Emission Limits. (1) Areas I, II, V, and VI. In Areas I, II, V, and VI, a person may not cause or permit particulate matter to be discharged from any installation in excess of 0.05 grains per standard cubic foot dry. (2) Areas III and IV. In Areas III and IV, a person may not cause or permit particulate matter to be discharged from any installation in excess of 0.03 grains per standard cubic foot dry. (3) Compliance with the particulate matter standards of §B(1) and (2) of this regulation shall be demonstrated by a 3-run stack test using Method 5 or Method 5I of 40 CFR Part 60. C. Particulate Matter Monitoring Requirements for Cement Kilns and Clinker Coolers. On or after September 1, 2016, the owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall: (1) Use a PM continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS) to establish a site-specific operating parameter limit corresponding to the results of the performance test as required in §B(3) of this regulation demonstrating compliance with the PM limits in §B(1) and (2) of this regulation; (2) Conduct the performance test as required in §B(3) of this regulation using Method 5 or Method 5I of 40 CFR part 60; (3) Use the PM CPMS to demonstrate continuous compliance with the site-specific operating parameter limit established in §C(1) of this regulation; (4) Repeat the performance test as required in §B(3) of this regulation annually and reassess and adjust the site-specific operating parameter limit of §C(1) of this regulation in accordance with the results of the performance test using the procedures in 40 CFR §63.1349(b)(1)(i)

— (ix); and (5) Follow the procedures in 40 CFR §63.1350(b)(iii) and (iv) for any exceedance of the established operating parameter limit of §C(1) of this regulation on a 30 process operating day basis.

.05 Visible Emission Standards. A. The owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions which exceed the visibility standards in §B of this regulation. B. Visibility Standards. (1) In Areas I, II, V, and VI a person may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions from any installation or building, other than water in an uncombined form, which is greater than 20 percent opacity. (2) In Areas III and IV a person may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions from any installation or building, other than water in an uncombined form, which is visible to human observers. (3) Compliance with the visibility standards of §B(1) and (2) of this regulation shall be demonstrated by a visible emission observation using Method 9 of 40 CFR Part 60. C. Visible Emission Monitoring Requirements for Cement Kilns. The owner or operator of a cement kiln at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall either: (1) Use a COM in accordance with the requirements of COMAR 26.11.01.10; or (2) Use a PM continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS) to establish a site-specific operating parameter limit for continuous visible emission compliance determinations in accordance with Regulation .04C of this chapter. D. Visible Emission monitoring requirements for clinker coolers. On or after September 1, 2016, the owner or operator of a clinker cooler at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall either: (1) Use a COM in accordance with the requirements of COMAR 26.11.01.10; or (2) Use a PM continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS) to establish a site-specific operating parameter limit for continuous visible emission compliance determinations in accordance with Regulation .04C(1)

— (5) of this chapter.
.06 Sulfur Compounds. A. Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ). (1) Areas I, II, V, and VI. In Areas I, II, V, and VI, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions into the atmosphere with an SO 2 concentration greater than 2,000 ppm for sources constructed before January 17, 1972, or 500 ppm for sources constructed on or after January 17, 1972. (2) Areas III and IV. In Areas III and IV, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions into the atmosphere with an SO 2 concentration greater than 2,000 ppm for sources constructed before February 21, 1971, or 500 ppm for sources constructed on or after February 21, 1971. B. Sulfuric Acid and Sulfur Trioxide. (1) Areas I, II, V, and VI. In Areas I, II, V, and VI, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions of sulfuric acid, sulfur trioxide, or any combination of them, in excess of 70 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid, for any source constructed before January 17, 1972, or 35 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid, for any source constructed on or after January 17, 1972. (2) Areas III and IV. In Areas III and IV, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions of sulfuric acid, sulfur trioxide, or any combination of them, in excess of 70 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid for any source constructed before February 21, 1971, or 35 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid for any source constructed on or after February 21, 1971. C. All calculations of emissions for §§A and B of this regulation shall be adjusted to standard conditions and 7 percent oxygen.
.07 Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ). A. A person who owns or operates a cement kiln at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall meet the following applicable NO x emission standards: (1) For long dry kilns, maximum emissions of 5.1 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced; and

(2) For pre-calciner kilns, maximum emissions of 2.8 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced. B. On and after April 1, 2017, the requirements in §A of this regulation no longer apply and cement kilns shall meet the applicable NO x emission standards in §C of this regulation. C. On and after April 1, 2017, a person who owns or operates a cement kiln at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall meet the following applicable NO x emission standards: (1) For long dry kilns, maximum emissions of 3.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced; and (2) For pre-calciner kilns, maximum emissions of 2.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced. D. Compliance with the emission standards in §§A and C of this regulation shall be demonstrated as a 30-day rolling average.

.08 NO x Continuous Emission Monitoring Requirements. A. The owner or operator of a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall: (1) Continuously monitor NO x emissions with a continuous emissions monitor (CEM) system in accordance with COMAR 26.11.01.11B(1) and (4) and C; (2) Collect NO x emissions data that was obtained pursuant to §A(1) of this regulation; andPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 625

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 (3) Submit emissions data collected pursuant to §A(2) of this regulation to the Department as specified under COMAR 26.11.01.11E(2). B. The NO x emissions data collected pursuant to §A(2) of this regulation shall be used to demonstrate compliance with the applicable NO x emission rate in Regulation .07 of this chapter.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.29 [NO x 

## Reduction Requirements for NonElectric Generating Units] Control of NO x 

## Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, and 2-301

— 2-303, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Proposed Action [15-109-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to repeal existing Regulations .01

— .05 and adopt new Regulations .01

— .05 under COMAR 26.11.29 Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to maintain and consolidate NO x emission requirements for internal combustion engines used to compress natural gas located at natural gas pipeline compression stations. These NO x emission requirements were established under the NO x SIP Call for affected nontrading sources. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan.
Background In order to consolidate NO x emission requirements for internal combustion engines used to compress natural gas located at natural gas pipeline compression stations, the Department proposes to repeal the existing chapter 29 and replace it. The new chapter 29, titled Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations, requires the affected facilities to continue to meet the maximum hourly NO x emission limits and the NO x emission concentration requirements. There are no additional requirements established at this time.

Sources Affected and Location This action affects one facility in Garrett County with two engines and one facility in Howard County with over five engines. Both facilities are currently in compliance with all the requirements.
Requirements This action proposes to repeal existing chapter 29 titled “NO x Reduction Requirements for Non- Electric Generating Units”. The Department proposes new regulations .01

— .05 under COMAR 26.11.29 now titled “Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations” which will keep the existing NO x emission standards for internal combustion engines located at natural gas pipeline compression stations from the repealed regulation.05 under chapter 29. This action further clarifies the monitoring, compliance demonstration and record keeping requirements for internal combustion engines located at natural gas pipeline compression stations. There are no additional requirements resulting from this action. Expected Emission Reductions There are no expected emission reductions from this action.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on May 19, 2015 at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or email to Randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than May 19, 2015, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/reqco mments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Adminis tration offices; and • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department’s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537

- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.
.01 Definitions. A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated. B. Terms Defined. (1) “ Natural gas pipeline compression station ” means a main line natural gas transmission station, consisting of one or more internal combustion engines, used to compress natural gas, thereby sustaining flow of natural gas through the pipeline. (2) “ Parametric optimization ” means the adjustment of an internal combustion engine, such as adjustment of the air-to-fuel ratio, that maximizes engine efficiency and minimizes emissions.
.02 Applicability and General Requirements. A. Applicability. This chapter applies to stationary internal combustion engines used to compress natural gas located at natural gas pipeline compression stations. B. NOx Emission Limits. A person who owns or operates a stationary internal combustion engine to which this chapter applies shall perform either parametric optimization or engine rebuild to meet the following NO x emission limits: (1) Facilities with five or fewer internal combustion engines shall meet a combined maximum hourly emission limit of 300 pounds per hour or less.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1465

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 310 Prostitution and Related Crimes Prostitution, etc.

— Human trafficking, take, harbor, or unlawfully detain a minor for prostitution 1-0754 1

- 0756 1

- 0758 1

- 0761 1-0786 1-0787 1-0788 1-0789 CR, §11- 303(c)(2) Felony 25Y Person II $15,000

311

— 384-3 (text unchanged)

385 Theft, Crimes Involving Misdemeanor theft or theft scheme, less than $100 1-0521 1

- 1631 CR, §7- 1 04(g)(3) Misd. 90D Property VII $500

386

— 402 (text unchanged)

403 Weapons Crimes

— In General Possession of regulated firearm after having been convicted of a crime of violence or select drug crimes 1-1609 PS, §5-133(c) Felony 15Y MM* = 5Y [ 1 ] 2 Person V

404

— 420 (text unchanged)

1 A court may depart from this proscribed mandatory minimum sentence if the court finds and states on the record that, giving due regard to the nature of the crime, the history and character of the defendant, and the defendant ’ s chances of successful rehabilitation: (1) imposition of the mandatory minimum sentence would result in substantial injustice to the defendant; and (2) the mandatory minimum sentence i s not necessary for the protection of the public. [ 1 ] 2 At the time of the offense, if more than 5 years has elapsed since the person completed serving the sentence for the most recen t conviction of a crime of violence or select drug crimes (including all imprisonment, mandatory supervision, probation, and parole), the im position of the mandatory minimum sentence is within the discretion of the court. MM* = Non-suspendable mandatory minimum penalty ♦ Defined as a violent crime in Correctional Services Article, §7 -101, Annotated Code of Maryland. At the time of imposition of a sentence of incarceration for these offenses, Criminal Procedure Article, §6-217, Annotated Code of Maryland indicates the Court shall s tate in open court the minimum time the defendant must serve before becoming eligible for parole.
♦♦ Defined as a violent crime only under certain circ umstances specified in Criminal Law Article, §14 -101, Annotated Code of Maryland. General Rules (text unchanged)

DAVID SOULE Executive Director

______________________________________


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Proposed Action [15-360-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend: (1) Regulations .01 and .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; and (2) Regulations .01
, .04
, .07 , and .08 under COMAR 26.11.08 Control of Incinerators

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to make amendments that will: 1. Clarify requirements for incinerators and Portland cement plants that demonstrate compliance with visible emissions (VE) standards through use of continuous opacity monitors (COMs); 2. Delete the applicability of the Department’s Technical Memorandum 90-01 (TM) for incinerators equipped with COMs; and 3. Exempt incinerators that are (1) owned or operated by a government entity and (2) used solely to destroy illegal or prohibited goods from COMAR 26.11.08 requirements. The amendments will be submitted to EPA for review and approval to be included in Maryland’s Section 111(d) Plan an d as part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan.

Background Compliance Clarification for Sour ces Required to Operate COMs In 1991, the Department adopted regulations that required certain major sources to install and operate COMs and to demonstrate compliance with opacity standards using COM data. At that time, the Department also adopted its TM that provided the methods to be used to demonstrate compliance with VE requirements using COM data. For COMs, compliance was based on achieving the applicable VE standard for a certain percentage of the source’s operating time. Through these amendments the Department will eliminate the use of the TM for COMs and develop specific requirements to replace the TM. Part II of the TM contained QA/QC procedures for COMs that has been codified in COMAR 26.11.31. During the past several years, the EPA has adopted numerous requirements for incinerators under Clean Air Act Section 111(d). Nearly all incinerators in Maryland are subject to regulations that are based on Section 111(d) requirements. Most incinerators subject to these federal requirements are subject to 10 percent opacity. ThesePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1466

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 regulations are more restrictive than the 20 percent opacity requirement contained in COMAR 26.11.08.04A(1) that applies to incinerators in the rural areas of the State. Therefore, those rural incinerators are subject to a 10 percent opacity standard when operating a COM. Under EPA Method 9 observations, the visible emission exceptions of COMAR 26.11.08.04C apply. For incinerators that are required to install and operate a COM, visible emissions may not exceed 10 percent opacity. Sources may request an alternate opacity limit for specific operating conditions based on technological limitations which will be subject to approval by MDE and EPA. Portland cement plants located in urban areas of Maryland are subject to a 10 percent opacity standard, whereas rural cement plants are subject to a 20 percent opacity standard as specified in COMAR 26.11.30.05. Under EPA Method 9 observations, the visible emissions standards in COMAR 26.11.30.05B(1) and (2) do not apply to emissions as specified in COMAR 26.11.06.02A(2). For cement kilns that are required to install and operate a COM, visible emissions may not exceed the applicable standards as specified in COMAR 26.11.30.05B(1) and (2). Sources may request an alternate opacity limit for specific operating conditions based on technological limitations which will be subject to approval by MDE and EPA. Under COMAR 26.11.30.05, cement kilns or clinker coolers may either operate COMs or PM CPMS (particulate matter continuous parameter monitoring systems).

Incinerator Exemption A number of law enforcement agencies, military installations and other government entities are using modified 55-gallon drums to destroy illegal drugs and trash from international flights that might cause biocontamination. The drums, commonly called cyclonic burn barrels, are equipped with fans, lids and other accessories that, when taken altogether, make these drums fit the definition of an incinerator. The Department is taking action to exempt these drums from the incinerator requirements as the federal government has also done. Under federal New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart EEEE), an in cinerator unit that is owned or operated by a government agency that combusts contraband or prohibited goods is exempt from the federal requirements. The Department is incorporating this provision into the definition of incinerator so that Maryland regulations do not conflict with the federal exemption.

Sources Affected and Location The amendments will affect four existing municipal waste combustors (MWCs). One MWC is lo cated in Baltimore City, one in Frederick County, one in Harford County and one in Montgomery County. The amendments will also affect two existing Portland cement manufacturing plants in Maryland.

Requirements Amendments to COMAR 26.11.01.10 clarify requirements for incinerators and Portland cement plants that demonstrate compliance with visible emissions (VE) standards through use of continuous opacity monitors (COMs). The amendments reference appropriate regulations where VE standards are contained, establish compliance criteria for these sources, and specify use of the QA/QC procedures in COMAR 26.11.31. MWCs located in the Baltimore/Washington areas are subject to the no visible emissions requirement contained in COMAR 26.11.08.04A(2). In these areas, compliance with the no VE requirement is demonstrated with a COM if VE are less than 10 percent opacity. Regulation 26.11.08.04 Visible Emissions now includes requirements for incinerators equipped with COMs. Regulation 26.11.08.07 is approved as part of Maryland’s Section 111(d) Plan and is amended to clarify that the regulation applies to small MWCs. Regulation 26.11.08.08 is approved as part of Maryland’s Section 111(d) Plan for large MWCs. The amendments remove the applicability of TM 90-01 and add the requirement that the QA/QC will be as in new COMAR 26.11.31.

Expected Emissions Reductions These amendments clarify and streamline the regulations and are unlikely to produce emission reductions. The action establishes revised compliance procedures relatin g to sources that are required to operate continuous opacity monitors under COMAR 26.11.01.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on December 14, 2015 at 1 p.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or emailed to randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than December 14, 2015 or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration Office in Baltimore; and • The regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department’s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537

- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.



## 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.01 Definitions. A. (text unchanged) B. Terms Defined. (1)

— (8) (text unchanged)PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1467

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 (8-1) Continuous Burning. (a) “ Continuous burning ” means the continuous, semicontinuous, or batch feeding of municipal solid waste for purposes of waste disposal, energy production, or providing heat to the combustion system in preparation for waste disposal or energy production. (b) “ Continuous burning ” does not include the period when municipal solid waste is solely used to provide thermal protection of the grate or hearth

. (9)

— (27) (text unchanged) (27-1) Operating Time. (a) “ Operating time ” means, for the purpose of determining compliance or non-compliance with COM requirements of this chapter for cement kilns, the actual ti me in hours that an affected unit operates, beginning when the raw feed is being continuously introduced into the kiln for at least 120 minutes or when the raw feed rate exceeds 60 percent of the kiln design limitation rate, whichever occurs first, and ending when the introduction of raw feed to the kiln is halted. (b) “ Operating time ” means, for the purpose of determining compliance or non-compliance with COM requirements of this chapter for municipal waste combustors , the actual time in hours that an affected unit operates, beginning when continuous burning of solid waste starts and ending when continuous burning of solid waste

ceases. (28)

— (53) (text unchanged)
.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements. A. Applicability and Exceptions. (1)

— (5) (text unchanged) (6) Sources may request for approval by the Department and EPA an alternate limit for specific operating conditions in which the technological limitations of the control equipment adversely affects the ability of the source to comply with visible emissions limits by following the recommendations at 80 FR 33980. The alternate limit shall be submitted to EPA as a SIP revision and included in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V 52.1070(d) for Maryland Source Specific SIP revisions

. B. General Requirements for COMs. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) (3) A COM shall comply with the applicable requirements in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix P, [ Sections 3.3

— 3.9, ] as amended, which is incorporated by reference. (4) (text unchanged) (5) The owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler that is operating a COM is subject to the following requirements. (a) The owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions which exceed the visibility standards in COMAR 26.11.30.05B. (b) The visibility standards in COMAR 26.11.30.05B(1) and (2) do not apply to emissions as specified in COMAR 26.11.06.02A(2) during EPA reference Method 9 observations. (c) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with COMAR 26.11.30.05B(2) when using a COM, emissions that are visible to a human observer are those that are equal to or greater than 10 percent opacity. (d) For the owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler that is operating a COM, compliance with visible emission standards is achieved if visible emissions do not exceed the applicable visible emission limitations in 26.11.30.05B(1) or (2) as applicable. (e) Notwithstanding the requirements in §B(5)(a)-(d) of thisregulation, the Department may determine compliance and noncompliance with the visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9 observations. (f) The owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler that is operating a COM shall meet the quality assurance requirements under COMAR 26.11.31. (6) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM is subject to the following requirements. (a) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions which exceed the visibility standards in COMAR 26.11.08.04 as determined by EPA reference Method 9 observations. (b) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with COMAR 26.11.08.04 when using a COM, emissions that are visible to a human observer are those that are equal to or greater than 10 percent opacity. (c) For the owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM, compliance with visible emission standards is achieved if visible emissions do not exceed 10 percent opacity. (d) Notwithstanding the requirements in §B(6)(a)-(c) of thisregulation, the Department may determine compliance and noncompliance with the visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9 observations. (e) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is operating a COM shall meet the quality assurance requirements under COMAR 26.11.31. C.

— E. (text unchanged) [ F. Fuel burning equipment subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.09.05 and cement kilns subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.30 are subject to the COM requirements contained in COMAR 26.11.31. ]



## 26.11.08 Control of Incinerators

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 2-406, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.01 Definitions. A. (text unchanged) B. Terms Defined. (1)

— (19) (text unchanged) (20) Incinerator. (a)

— (b) (text unchanged) (c) “ Incinerator ” does not mean any unit owned or operated by a government agency to destroy illegal or prohibited goods. The exclusion does not apply to items either confiscated or incinerated by private, industrial, or commercial entities. (21)

— (61) (text unchanged)

.04 Visible Emissions. A.

— C. (text unchanged) D. The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM is subject to the requirements in COMAR 26.11.01.10.
.07 Requirements for [Certain] Municipal Waste Combustors with a Capacity of 35 tons or greater per day and less than or equal to 250 Tons Per Day. (text unchanged)
.08 Requirements for an Existing Large MWC with a Capacity Greater Than 250 Tons Per Day. A. Emission Standards and General Requirements. (1) (text unchanged)PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1468

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 (2) Emission Standards and General Requirements.

Pollutant or Parameter Emission Standards for a

Large MWC Performance and Compliance Test Requirements Carbon Monoxide* (text unchanged) (text unchanged) Dioxin/Furans* (text unchanged) (text unchanged) Particulate Matter* (text unchanged) (text unchanged) Opacity 10 percent opacity with [ CEMS ] COMs

. Averaging time is 6 minutes. EPA Reference Method 9 and [ CEMS ] COMS

. Applicable test procedures and methods as specified in 40 CFR §60.58b(c). Quality assurance and quality control requirements are as in [ Technical Memorandum 90 -01 ] COMAR 26.11.31

. [ In case of inconsistencies in data or conflicting data Method 9 results will determine compliance. ] Notwithstanding the requirements in COMAR 26.11.01.10B(6)(a)

- (c), the Department m ay determine compliance and non -compliance with the visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9 observations based on a 6 minute block average. Cd (Cadmium)*

— Fugitive Ash Emissions (text unchanged) * Corrected to 7 percent oxygen on dry basis. If a CO 2 monitor is selected as the dilutent monitor it must meet the requirements of 40CFR §60.58b(b)(6) (3) (text unchanged) B. Monitoring Requirements. (1) A person who owns or operates an existing MWC subject to this regulation shall: (a) Install, calibrate, operate, and maintain continuous [ emission ] monitors for carbon monoxide, o xygen, opacity, oxides of nitrogen, and sulfur dioxide; (b)

— (d) (text unchanged) (2) (text unchanged) (3) The monitors required by §B(1)(a) and (b) of this regulation shall meet the installation, certif ication, reporting, record-keeping, and other requirements of COMAR 26.11.01.10, and 26.11.01.11, performance specifications in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B, the quality assurance procedures in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix F, all requirements in 40 CFR §60.58b , COMAR 26.11.31 [ , and the specification in the Department ’ s Air and Radiation Management Administration Technical Memorandum 90-01, “ Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM) Policies and Procedures ” , which is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.10E ]

. (4) (text unchanged) C. Reporting and Record-Keeping Requirements. (1) (text unchanged) (2) Continuous [ emissions ] monitoring data reduction and data availability shall be as prescribed in COMAR 26.11.01.10 and 26.11.01.11. If there is any inconsistency between COMAR 26.11.01.10 and 26.11.01.11 and 40 CFR 60, the [ requirement ] requirements of 40 CFR 60 govern. D. (text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment



# Title 31 MARYLAND INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION

Subtitle 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS 31.01.02 Emergency Powers

Authority: Health-General Article, §19-706; Insurance Article, §2-115; Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-345-P] The Insurance Commissioner proposes to amend Regulations .02

— .04 and .07 under COMAR 31.01.02 Emergency Powers

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to better align the elements of the Maryland Insurance Administrati on’s data requests for claims information during an emergency with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ curre nt data collection template.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment Comments may be sent to Catherine Grason, Director of Regulatory Affairs, Maryland Insurance Administration, 200 St. Paul Place, Ste. 2700, Baltimore, MD 21202, or call 410-468-2201, or email to insuranceregreview.mia@maryland.gov, or fax to 410-468- 2020. Comments will be accepted through November 16, 2015. A public hearing has not been scheduled.
.02 Applicability. A. (text unchanged) B. This chapter also applies to the Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund (MAIF) [

, ] and the Joint Insurance Association (JIA) [

, the Injured Workers Insurance Fund (IWIF) and the Maryland Health Insurance Plan (MHIP) ]

. .03 Definitions. A. (text unchanged)FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 273

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 3, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2016 

# Subtitle 09 MEDICAL CARE PROGRAMS 10.09.34 Therapeutic Behavioral Services

Authority: Health-General Article, §§2-104(b), 15-103, and 15-105, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-392-F] On January 26, 2016, the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene adopted amendments to Regulations .02 and .06 under COMAR 10.09.34 Therapeutic Behavioral Services . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:25 Md. R. 1551

— 1552 (December 11, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

VAN T. MITCHELL Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene



# Subtitle 09 MEDICAL CARE PROGRAMS 10.09.61 Medical Day Care Services Waiver

Authority: Health-General Article, §§2-104(b), 15-103, and 15-111, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-393-F] On January 26, 2016, the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene adopted amendments to Regulations .01 and .03 under COMAR 10.09.61 Medical Day Care Services Waiver . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:25 Md. R. 1552 (December 11, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

VAN T. MITCHELL Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene


# Title 15 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Subtitle 20 SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION 15.20.05 Manure Transport Project

Authority: Agriculture Article, §8-704.2, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-560-F] On January 14, 2016, the Secretary of Agriculture adopted Regulations .02

— .04 and .06 , new Regulation .07 , and the recodification of existing Regulations .07

— .09 to be Regulations .08

— .10 under COMAR 15.20.05 Manure Transport Project . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:19 Md. R. 1241

— 1243 (September 18, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

JOSEPH BARTENFELDER Secretary of Agriculture 

# Title 20 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Subtitle 08 SUPPLIER DIVERSITY PROGRAM
20.08.01 General

Authority: Public Utilities Article, §§2-113 and 2-121, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-133-F] On January 13, 2016, the Public Service Commission adopted new Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 20.08.01 General , under a new subtitle, Subtitle 08 Supplier Diversity Program . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:11 Md. R. 733

— 734 (May 29, 2015) and reproposed in 42:22 Md. R. 1401 (October 30, 2015), has been adopted as reproposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

DAVID J. COLLINS Executive Secretary


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Final Action [15-360-F] On January 27, 2016, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to: (1) Regulations .01 and .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; and (2) Regulations .01

, .04

, .07 , and .08 under COMAR 26.11.08 Control of Incinerators

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:23 Md. R. 1465

— 1468 (November 13, 2015), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: February 15, 2016.
Attorney General's Certification In accordan ce with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: COMAR 26.11.01.10B(6)(c): The additional text clarifies the operating time intended for a COM system to demonstrate compliance and is consistent with COMAR 26.11.01.10D(2), as well as incinerator compliance demonstrat ion requirements identified in COMAR 26.11.08.08A(2) and corresponding federal law (40 CFR 60.58b(c), 40 CFR 63.1209). This language was within the intent and scope of the original proposal and is not a substantive change.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 274

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 3, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2016 

## 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements. A. (proposed text unchanged) B. General Requirements for COMs. (1)

— (5) (proposed text unchanged) (6) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM is subject to the following requirements: (a)

— (b) (proposed text unchanged) (c) For the owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM, compliance with visible emission standards is achieved if visible emissions do

not exceed 10 percent opacity for a 6-mi nute block average during the unit's operating time. (d)

— (e) (proposed text unchanged) C.

— E. (proposed text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Title 31 MARYLAND INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION

Subtitle 10 HEALTH INSURANCE

— GENERAL

31.10.27 Health Insurance

— Notice of the

Maryland Health Insurance Plan

Authority: Insurance Article, §§2-109, 14-501, and 15-1303(c), Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-376-F] On January 20, 2016, the Insurance Commissioner adopted the repeal of Regulations .01

— .03 under COMAR 31.10.27 Health Insurance

— Notice of the Maryland Health Insurance Plan . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:24 Md. R. 1527 (November 30, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: February 15, 2016. ALFRED W. REDMER, JR. Insurance Commissioner



# Subtitle 16 MISCELLANEOUS

Notice of Final Action [15-379-F] On January 22, 2016, the Insurance Commissioner adopted: (1) Amendments to the authority line under COMAR 31.16.01 Disclosure to Policyholders of the Possible Effects of Assessable Insurance Policies ; (2) Amendments to the authority line under COMAR 31.16.04 Provision of Completed Premium Finance Agreement to Insured ; (3) The repeal of Regulation .01 under COMAR 31.16.05 Cancellation of Insurance Contracts by Premium Finance Companies ; (4) Amendments to the authority line under COMAR 31.16.06 Bulk Reinsurance, Stock, and Mutual Insurers ; and (5) The repeal of Regulations .01

— .09 under COMAR 31.16.07 Holocaust Victims Insurance Claims and Reports

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:24 Md. R. 1528 (November 30, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016. ALFRED W. REDMER, JR. Insurance Commissioner


# Title 34 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING

Subtitle 04 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL PROGRAMS 34.04.09 Maryland Historical Trust African

American Heritage Preservation Program

Authority: State Finance and Procurement Article, §5A-330, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-397-F] On January 26, 2016, the Maryland Department of Planning adopted the repeal of existing Regulations .01

— .11 and adopted new Regulations .01

— .11 under COMAR 34.04.09 Maryland Historical Trust African American Heritage Preservation Program . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:25 Md. R. 1568

— 1572 (December 11, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

DAVID R. CRAIG Secretary of PlanningPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1195

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 18, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 (o) Terrorism and weapons of mass destruction ; (p) Sensitivity to cultural and gender diversity; and (q) Individuals with physical, intellectual, developmental, and psychiatric disabilities

. (2) (text unchanged) D.

— I. (text unchanged)
.11 Voluntary Attendance at an Entrance-Level Training Program. A. (text unchanged) B. Selection Standards

— Voluntary Entrance-Level Training. (1) (text unchanged) (2) The training director accepting an individual volunteering to attend police officer entrance-level training shall: (a) Ensure a criminal record check is performed on the individual through, at a minimum, the National Crime Information Center (NCIC) to determine if there is [ derogatory ] supplemental information that conflicts with the requirements of the academy or Commission; (b)

— (c) (text unchanged) C.

— E. (text unchanged)
.15 Drug Screening Procedures. A.

— B. (text unchanged) C. Urine Sample Analysis. (1) (text unchanged) (2) A law enforcement agency conducting drug screening and analyzing a urine sample shall: (a) Conduct urine sample analysis according to provisions under Health-General Article, §17-214, Annotated Code of Maryland; [ (a) ] (b) Ensure that the urine sample is screened by an enzyme immunoassay, radioimmunoassay testing method, or another equally scientifically rigorous screening method; and [ (b) ] (c) [ Ensure ] At a minimum, ensure that the screening method includes [ , at a minimum, ] testing for the presence of the [ following ] controlled dangerous substances, narcotic drugs, or marijuana, or classes of controlled dangerous substances, or their metabolites [ , at the minimum levels measured in nanograms per milliliter specified for each controlled dangerous substance, narcotic drug, or marijuana: ] listed in §C(3) of this regulation. (3) A positive screen is indicate d if the test result meets or exceeds an amount at the following levels measured in nanograms per milliliter specified for each controlled dangerous substance, narcotic drug, or marijuana, or classes of controlled dangerous substances, or their metabolites as follows: [ (i) ] (a)

— [ vii ] (f) (text unchanged) [ (vii) ] (g) Benzodiazepines

— 300 [ ; ]

. (4) Confirmation of a Positive Screen Required. [ (c) ] (a) [ Ensure a ] A positive [ screening ] screen of a urine sample [ under §C(2)(b) of this regulation is confirmed ] for each substance identified under §C(3) of this regulation shall be confirmed using gas chromatography, mass spectrometry, or other equally scientifically rigorous testing method [ ; and (d) Conduct urine sample analysis according to provisions under Health-General Article, §17-214, Annotated Code of Maryland ]

. [ (3) The Commission considers a urine sample analyzed according to §C(2) of this regulation that shows the presence of a controlled dangerous substance, narcotic drug, or marijuana in an amount that meets or ex ceeds the nanograms per milliliter specified to be a positive screen and requires confirmation according to §C(2)(c) of this regulation. ] [ (4) ] (b) [ Unless confirmed according to §C(2)(c) of this regulation, the Commission considers a ] A urine sample [ screened ] resulting in a positive screen using the method under [ §C(2)(a) ] §C(2)(b) of this regulation alone is inconclusive , unless the positive screen result is confirmed according to §C(4)(a) of this regulation

. .16 Prior Substance Abuse by Applicants for Certification. A.

— E. (text unchanged) F. Indication of Use of a Controlled Dangerous Substance, Narcotic Drug, or Marijuana. (1) (text unchanged) (2) The law enforcement agency shall verify the veracity of the applicant's statements, responses to questions, [ or ] and any other information provided by the applicant related to the use of a controlled dangerous substance, narcotic drug, or marijuana using a truth verification device. (3)

— (5) (text unchanged) G.

— H. (text unchanged) STEPHEN T. MOYER Secretary of Public Safety and Correctional Services 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.02 Permits, Approvals, and Registration

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 1-601

— 1-606, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2-303, and 2-401

— 2-404, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-248-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulations .07
, .11 , and .12 under COMAR 26.11.02 Permits, Approvals, and Registration

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to implement the statutory requirements of S.B. 1065, Acts of 2009, which were effective on January 1, 2010. The amendments also incorporate requirements of H.B. 554 and H.B. 95, Acts of 2013, both of which were effective October 1, 2013. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland's State Implementation Plan (SIP).
Background S.B. 1065 expanded standing for challenges to most of the Department’s major permits and substituted direct judicial review for the previous contested case process for those same permits. The most significant impact on the Department’s permitting process was the

e limination of the Office of Administrative Hearings’ (OAH) adjudicatory hearing process. Instead, permits are now issued and are effective upon a final determination, and citizens contesting the issuance of a permit must appeal directly to circuit court. While the Department continues to follow many of the previous procedures governing issuance of permits, the new law required some regulatory and procedural changes. H.B. 554 required the Department to notify elected officials of permit proceedings within a 1-mile radius of a source subject to the expanded public participation requirements. Elected officials include mayors, county officials, and State legislators. H.B. 95 established an alternate public participation process for sources subject to expanded public participation that trigger EPA New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) only. Examples of NSPS-only sources include small combined heat and power facilities and medium-sized boilers. If the NSPS source is also listed as a StatePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1196

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 18, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 permit to operate source, it is not affected by H.B. 95. These sources continue to be subject to expanded public participation requirements.

Requirements This action implements the requirements of S.B. 1065, H.B. 554, and H.B. 95 as discussed above.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on October 6th, 2015, at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or emailed to randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than October 6th, 2015, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations:

x The Department of the Environment’s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages /reqcomments.aspx

x The Air and Radiation Management Administration Office in Baltimore; and

x The regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Departm ent’s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537-3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1- 800-735-2258.
.07 Procedures for Denying, Revoking, or Reopening and Revising a Permit or Approval. A. [ Notification of Denial; Hearings. A denial of a permit to construct, an approval, a State permit to operate, or the State-only enforceable provisions of a Part 70 permit shall be served as summonses are served or by certified mail upon the applicant, and is final unless the applicant requests a hearing before the Department within 15 days after service. When a hearing is requested by the applicant, it shall be held pursuant to the contested case provisions of State Government Article, Title 10, Subtitle 2, and Environment Article, §2-605, Annotated Code of Maryland. ] Denial of Approvals, State Permits to Operate or State-Only Enforceable Provisions of a Part 70 Permit. (1) Denial is final unless the applicant requests a hearing before the Department within 15 days after service. (2) When a hearing is requested by the applicant, it shall be held pursuant to the contested case provisions of State Government Article, Title 10, Subtitle 2, Annotated Code of Maryland. (3) Denials shall be served as summonses are served, or by certified mail upon the applicant. B. Denial of Permits to Construct. (1) A denial of a permit to construct a source, except for a permit to construct a source subject to Regulation .12 of this chapter, is a final determination subject to judicial review in accordance with Regulation .11M of this chapter. (2) Notice of the denial of a permit to construct shall be given in accordance with the notice of final determination provisions in Regulation .11L of this chapter. [ B. ] C. Revoking or Reopening a Permit. Except as protected by a permit shield provided in accordance with COMAR 26.11.03.23, the Department may issue an order revoking or reopening a State permit to operate, or the State-only enforceable provisions of a Part 70 permit, for violation of a provision of the permit or this subtitle. An order revoking or reopening a permit shall be served as summonses are served or by certified mail upon the permittee, and is final unless the permittee requests a contested case hearing [ before the Department ] within 15 days after service. When a hearing is requested by the permittee, it shal l be held pursuant to the contested case provisions of State Government Article, Title 10, Subtitle 2, [ and Environment Article, §2-605, ] Annotated Code of Maryland.
.11 Procedures for Obtaining Permits to Construct Certain Significant Sources. A. Applicability. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) (3) Before issuing a permit to construct for any of the activities listed in §A(2) of this regulation, at a source that is subject to federal new source performance standards under 40 CFR 60, the Department shall either comply with the provisions of §§E

—

N of this regulation, or with the following procedures: (a) Electronically post a notice of an application for the permit on the Department’s website in accordance with Environment Article, §1-602(B)(2), Annotated Code of Maryland; (b) Give notice to the chief executive of any county or municipal corporation in which any portion of the source is located or is proposed to be located; and (c) Receive comments from the public on the permit application. B. Exception for an Approval and for Certain Control Equipment. Notwithstanding the requirements of §A, this regulation does not apply to: (1) (text unchanged) (2) [ A source that constitutes ] The construction or installation of

air pollution control equipment for which a permit to construct is required, as provided in Regulation .09 of this chapter, and that will control an existing source. C.

— D. (text unchanged) E. Notice of Application; Informational Meeting. (1) The Department shall require the applicant to send to a newspaper for publication a notice regarding the application that satisfies the requirements of Environment Article, §1-602(a), Annotated Code of Maryland. As determined by the Department, the notice shall provide for an informational meeting or an opportunity for the public to request an informational meeting within 10 days of publication of the notice. If the Department decides to hold an informational meeting because of requests for a meeting, the Department shall publish or require the applicant to publish a notice regarding the informational meeting that satisfies the requirements of Environment Article, §1-602(a), Annotated Code of Maryland. Unless the Department determines otherwise, notice of an informational meeting shall be published not later than 10 days before the meeting is held. (2) In addition to the requirements under §E(1) of this regulation, on receipt of an application for a permit to construct subject to this regulation, the Department shall give noticePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1197

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 18, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 immediately or require the applicant to give notice immediately of the application, by certified mail, to: (a) The governing body of each county or municipal corporation in which any portion of the source is located or is proposed to be located; (b) The governing body of each county or municipal corporation within 1 mile of the property line of the source or the proposed location of the source; (c) Each member of the General Assembly representing any part of a county in which any portion of the source is located or proposed to be located; and (d) Each member of the General Assembly representing any part of each county within 1 mile of the property line of the source or the proposed location of the source. F.

— G. (text unchanged) H. Tentative Determination. (1) The Department shall prepare a tentative determination regarding the application. The content of the tentative determination shall include: [ (1) ] (a)

— [ (4) ] (d) (text unchanged) [ (5) ] (e) If the tentative determination is to issue the permit, a draft permit, which [ will ] shall be available to the public for inspection and copying. (2) In addition to the content of the tentative determination, the following documents shall be made available to the public for inspection and copying no later than the date of issuance of the tentative determination: (a) The permit application and all supporting documents submitted with the application; (b) All nonprivileged documents the Department relied upon in making the tentative determination; and (c) A privilege log that identifies all withheld documents and states the reasons for withholding each document. I. Notice of Tentative Determinati on; Public Comment; Public Hearing. The Department shall publish or require the applicant to publish a notice regarding the ten tative determination that satisfies the requirements of Environment Article, §1-602 [ (a) ] , Annotated Code of Maryland. [ As determined by the Department, the ] The notice shall provide the opportunity for written public comment [ within ] for a period of 30 days [ and ] , which may be extended no more than once by an additional 60 days, upon written request received by the Department within the original comment period. As determined by the Department, the notice shall provide either that a public, nonadjudicatory hearing will be held regarding the tentative determination or that the public may request in writing within 20 days that a public hearing be held. If the Department decides to hold a public hearing because of requests for a hearing from the general public filed in writing within the 20-day request period, or from the applicant, the Department shall publish or require the applicant to publish a notice regarding the hearing that satisfies the requirements of Environment Article, §1-602(a), Annotated Code of Maryland. J. Public Comments. If a public hearing is held regarding the tentative determination, the applicant shall attend the hearing and present information concerning the application. Written public comments will be accepted if they are received by the Department at the public hearing or within 5 days after the public hearing or before the close of the public comment period. Oral public comments may be made at the public hearing. The Department shall consider all public comments that raise issues of law or material fact regarding an application for a permit or a tentative determination, but only if the issues are pertinent to requirements of the Clean Air Act or State air pollution control law applicable to the proposed permit to construct. Comments raising issues that relate to the location or nature of a proposed source may be considered only if the commenter first demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Department that the Department is required by law to consider the issues. K. Final Determination. (1) The Department shall prepare a final determination if: [ (1) ] (a)

— [ (2) ] (b) (text unchanged) [ (3) ] (c) The final determination is substantively different from the tentative determination [ and all persons aggrieved by the final determination have not waived in writing their right to request a contested case hearing ]

. (2) The final determination shall constitute the Department’s final decision. L. Notice of Final Determination. (1) If the Department is required to prepare a final determination, as provided in §K of this regulation [ , the Department shall ] : (a) Subject to the requirements of §L(1)(b)(i)

— (iii) of this regulation, the Department shall publish or require the applicant to publish a [ notice of the final determination ] Notice of Final Determination that satisfies the requirements of Environment Article, §1-602(a), Annotated Code of Maryland [ : ] ; and (b) If the final determination differs substantively from the tentative determination, then prior to publishing a Notice of Final Determination pursuant to §L(1)(a) of this regulation the Department
may: (i) Publish a Notice of Intent to Issue a Final Determination that includes a proposed final determination, and provides the opportunity for written public comment for a period of 30 days on the portion of the proposed final determination that differs substantively from the tentative determination; (ii) Consider all public comments submitted on the portion of the proposed final determination that differs substantively from the tentative determination, subject to the criteria set forth in COMAR 26.11.02.11J; and (iii) Prepare written responses to public comments submitted on the proposed final determination. (2) If the Department is not required to prepare a final determination under §K of this regulation, the Department shall issue or deny the permit and the tentative determination becomes the final determination and shall constitute th e Department’s final de cision. (3) The Department shall electronically post notice that the tentative determination has become the final determination on the Department’s website. [ M. ] (proposed for repeal) M. Judicial Review. (1) In accordance with Environment Article, §1-601(c), Annotated Code of Maryland, a final determination by the Department to issue or deny a permit to construct subject to Environment Article, §2-404, Annotated Code of Maryland, shall be subject to judicial review at the request of any person who: (a) Meets the threshold standing requirements under federal law; and (b) Is the applicant or participated in a public participation process through the submission of written or oral comments, unless an opportunity for public participation was not provided. (2) Judicial review shall be on the administrative record before the Department and limited to objections raised during the public comment period, unless the petitioner demonstrates that: (a) The objections were not reasonably ascertainable during the comment period; or (b) Ground for objections arose after the comment period. (3) Unless otherwise required by statute, a petition for judicial review shall be filed with the circuit court for the county where the application for the permit states that the proposed activity will occur.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1198

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 18, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 (4) A person submitting a petiti on for judicial review shall file the petition within 30 days after publication of a Notice of Final Determination. (5) Except as expressly provided in Environment Article, §1- 605(d), Annotated Code of Maryland, a party to the judicial review action may not challenge a facility’s compliance with zoning and land use requirements. (6) Judicial review under this re gulation shall be limited to a record compiled by the Department consisting of: (a) Any permit application and any data submitted to the Department in support of the application; (b) Any draft permit issued by the Department; (c) Any notice of intent from the Department to deny the application or to terminate the permit; (d) A statement or fact sheet explaining the basis for the determination by the Department; (e) All documents referenced in the statement or fact sheet explaining the basis for the determination by the Department; (f) All documents, except documents for which disclosure is precluded by law or that are subject to privilege, contained in the supporting file for any draft permit; (g) All comments submitted to the Department during the public comment period, including comments made on the draft application; (h) Any tape or transcript of any public hearings held on the application; and (i) Any response to any comments submitted to the Department. N. For the purposes of this regulation, a notice that satisfies the requirements of Environment Article, §1-602(a), Annotated Code of Maryland, is a notice that is published at least once a week for 2 consecutive weeks in a daily newspaper of general circulation in the geographic area in which the [ proposed ] source is

, [ to ] or will be

, located. The Department may also require the applicant to mail notice to any other person who has requested the notice, or to the person's authorized representative, and may require the applicant to post the notice in the vicinity of the propos ed source or at public facilities in the geographic area of the proposed source. The applicant shall bear all costs related to providing the notice.
.12 Procedures for Obtaining Approvals of PSD Sources and NSR Sources, Certain Permits to Construct, and [Permit to Construct] Case-by-Case MACT Determinations [On a Case-by-Case Basis] in Accordance with 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart B[, and Certain 100-Ton Sources]. A. Applicability. [ Except as provided in §B of this regulation, the ] The owner or operator of a source shall comply with the procedures in this regulation when applying for the following: (1) (text unchanged) (2) [ Except as required in ] Unless it is subject to Regulation .11 of this chapter: (a)

— (b) (text unchanged) (3) (text unchanged) (4) A [ permit to construct a ] case-by-case MACT determination [ on a case-by-case basis ] for a source, in accordance with 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart B. [ B. ] (proposed for repeal) B. Procedures. The owner or operator of a source subject to this regulation shall comply with the procedures in §§C

—

L of this regulation. C.

— L. (text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment 

# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.24 [Stage II] Vapor Recovery at Gasoline

Dispensing Facilities

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-404, 2-103, 2-301

— 2-303, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-249-P-I] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulation .01

, .01-1

, .02

, .03

, .04 , and .07 and adopt new regulations .03-1 under COMAR 26.11.24 Vapor Recovery at Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to allow new gasoline dispensing facilities (GDFs) and GDFs undergoing major modifications the option to choose not to install or decommission existing Stage II vapor recovery equipment. Existing GDFs may decommission Stage II vapor recovery equipment after October 1, 2016. Owners and operators of GDFs that elect to continue with their Stage II equipment can do so, but must continue to test, repair, replace, retrofit, and maintain the Stage II equipment in accordance with Stage II requirements. The proposed regulation will be submitted to the U.S. EPA for approval as a revision to Maryland's State Implementation Plan (SIP).

Background The Clean Air Act (CAA) §182(b)(3) required Stage II vapor recovery for areas classified as moderate, serious, severe, and extreme ozone nonattainment areas. Stage II or Stage II equivalent measures were required Statewide because Maryland is part of the Ozone Transport Region. Equivalent measures rather than Stage II were adopted in attainment areas of the State. Stage II systems transfer by displacement the vapors consisting of fuel air mixture, from the motor vehicle fuel tank fill pipe to the gasoline service station underground storage tank thus preventing volatile organic compounds (VOC) from polluting the air during refueling. The capture of vapors takes place at the interface between the fill pipe and the dispensing nozzle. In the underground tank, the vapors remain in either gaseous or liquid phase as equilibrium between the phases is established. COMAR 26.11.24, as currently promulgated, requires Stage II Vapor Recovery at all gasoline dispensing facilities built after November 15, 1990, in Baltimore City and Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Calvert, Carroll, Cecil, Charles, Frederick, Harford, Howard, Montgomery, and Prince George's counties. Affected sources have been required to install Stage II systems that meet California Air Resources Board (CARB) standards, wi th all parts clearly identified as being CARB certified. Over 40 types of Stage II systems have met the rigorous CARB certification standards and carry specific Executive Order numbers. Under existing Maryland requirements, facilities must have at least one person trained to operate and maintain the installed Stage II systems. Facilities required to install and operate Stage II systems are subject to initial and annual testing and inspection requirements, and must maintain records of Stage II maintenance and a malfunction log. COMAR 26.11.24 is currently part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act. Onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) is a vehicle emission control system required under CAA §202(a)(6) starting with certain 1998 model year gasoline-powered light duty motor vehicles, and covering most vehicles by model year 2006. This system transfers the vapors to a canister in the vehicle filled with activated carbon. The energy content of the captured vapors in the ORVR canister isFINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1506

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 24, MONDAY NOVEMBER 30, 2015 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.02 Permits, Approvals, and Registration

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 1-601

— 1-606, 2-101

— 2-

103, 2-301

— 2-303, and 2-401

— 2-404, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-248-F] On November 10, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to Regulations .07

, .11 , and .12 under COMAR 26.11.02 Permits, Approvals, and Registration . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:18 Md. R. 1195

— 1198 (September 4, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: December 10, 2015. BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.38 Control of NO x 

## Emissions from CoalFired Electric Generating Units

Authority: Environment Article §§1-404, 2-103, and 2-301

— 2-303, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-254-F] On November 17, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to Regulation .01 , amendments to and the recodification of existing Regulations .04 and .05 to be Regulations .05 and .06 , and new Regulations .04 and .07 under COMAR 26.11.38 Control of NO x Emissions from Coal-Fired Electric Generating Units . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:19 Md. R. 1243

— 1246 (September 18, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: December 10, 2015. BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Title 28 OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

Subtitle 03 FEES

28.03.01 Fees

Authority: State Government Article, §§9-1604(b)(1)(v) and (vi), Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-119-F] On July 14, 2015, the Office of Administrative Hearings adopted amendments to Regulation .03 under COMAR 28.03.01 Fees . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:11 Md. R. 738 (May 29, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: December 10, 2015.

THOMAS DEWBERRY Chief Administrative Officer



# Subtitle 03 FEES

28.03.01 Fees

Authority: State Government Article, §§9-1604(b)(1)(v) and (vi), Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-142-F] On July 14, 2015, the Office of Administrative Hearings adopted amendments to Regulation .06 under COMAR 28.03.01 Fees . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:11 Md. R. 738 (May 29, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: December 10, 2015.

THOMAS DEWBERRY Chief Administrative Officer


# Title 30 MARYLAND INSTITUTE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

SYSTEMS (MIEMSS)

Subtitle 08 DESIGNATION OF

TRAUMA AND SPECIALTY REFERRAL CENTERS

30.08.12 Perinatal and Neonatal Referral Center

Standards

Authority: Education Article, §13-509, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-259-F] On November 10, 2015, the Maryland State Emergency Medical Services Board adopted amendments to Regulation .11 under COMAR 30.08.12 Perinatal and Neonatal Referral Center Standards . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:19 Md. R. 1246

— 1247 (September 18, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: December 10, 2015.
KEVIN G. SEAMEN, M.D. Executive DirectorPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1465

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 310 Prostitution and Related Crimes Prostitution, etc.

— Human trafficking, take, harbor, or unlawfully detain a minor for prostitution 1-0754 1

- 0756 1

- 0758 1

- 0761 1-0786 1-0787 1-0788 1-0789 CR, §11- 303(c)(2) Felony 25Y Person II $15,000

311

— 384-3 (text unchanged)

385 Theft, Crimes Involving Misdemeanor theft or theft scheme, less than $100 1-0521 1

- 1631 CR, §7- 1 04(g)(3) Misd. 90D Property VII $500

386

— 402 (text unchanged)

403 Weapons Crimes

— In General Possession of regulated firearm after having been convicted of a crime of violence or select drug crimes 1-1609 PS, §5-133(c) Felony 15Y MM* = 5Y [ 1 ] 2 Person V

404

— 420 (text unchanged)

1 A court may depart from this proscribed mandatory minimum sentence if the court finds and states on the record that, giving due regard to the nature of the crime, the history and character of the defendant, and the defendant ’ s chances of successful rehabilitation: (1) imposition of the mandatory minimum sentence would result in substantial injustice to the defendant; and (2) the mandatory minimum sentence i s not necessary for the protection of the public. [ 1 ] 2 At the time of the offense, if more than 5 years has elapsed since the person completed serving the sentence for the most recen t conviction of a crime of violence or select drug crimes (including all imprisonment, mandatory supervision, probation, and parole), the im position of the mandatory minimum sentence is within the discretion of the court. MM* = Non-suspendable mandatory minimum penalty ♦ Defined as a violent crime in Correctional Services Article, §7 -101, Annotated Code of Maryland. At the time of imposition of a sentence of incarceration for these offenses, Criminal Procedure Article, §6-217, Annotated Code of Maryland indicates the Court shall s tate in open court the minimum time the defendant must serve before becoming eligible for parole.
♦♦ Defined as a violent crime only under certain circ umstances specified in Criminal Law Article, §14 -101, Annotated Code of Maryland. General Rules (text unchanged)

DAVID SOULE Executive Director

______________________________________


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Proposed Action [15-360-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend: (1) Regulations .01 and .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; and (2) Regulations .01
, .04
, .07 , and .08 under COMAR 26.11.08 Control of Incinerators

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to make amendments that will: 1. Clarify requirements for incinerators and Portland cement plants that demonstrate compliance with visible emissions (VE) standards through use of continuous opacity monitors (COMs); 2. Delete the applicability of the Department’s Technical Memorandum 90-01 (TM) for incinerators equipped with COMs; and 3. Exempt incinerators that are (1) owned or operated by a government entity and (2) used solely to destroy illegal or prohibited goods from COMAR 26.11.08 requirements. The amendments will be submitted to EPA for review and approval to be included in Maryland’s Section 111(d) Plan an d as part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan.

Background Compliance Clarification for Sour ces Required to Operate COMs In 1991, the Department adopted regulations that required certain major sources to install and operate COMs and to demonstrate compliance with opacity standards using COM data. At that time, the Department also adopted its TM that provided the methods to be used to demonstrate compliance with VE requirements using COM data. For COMs, compliance was based on achieving the applicable VE standard for a certain percentage of the source’s operating time. Through these amendments the Department will eliminate the use of the TM for COMs and develop specific requirements to replace the TM. Part II of the TM contained QA/QC procedures for COMs that has been codified in COMAR 26.11.31. During the past several years, the EPA has adopted numerous requirements for incinerators under Clean Air Act Section 111(d). Nearly all incinerators in Maryland are subject to regulations that are based on Section 111(d) requirements. Most incinerators subject to these federal requirements are subject to 10 percent opacity. ThesePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1466

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 regulations are more restrictive than the 20 percent opacity requirement contained in COMAR 26.11.08.04A(1) that applies to incinerators in the rural areas of the State. Therefore, those rural incinerators are subject to a 10 percent opacity standard when operating a COM. Under EPA Method 9 observations, the visible emission exceptions of COMAR 26.11.08.04C apply. For incinerators that are required to install and operate a COM, visible emissions may not exceed 10 percent opacity. Sources may request an alternate opacity limit for specific operating conditions based on technological limitations which will be subject to approval by MDE and EPA. Portland cement plants located in urban areas of Maryland are subject to a 10 percent opacity standard, whereas rural cement plants are subject to a 20 percent opacity standard as specified in COMAR 26.11.30.05. Under EPA Method 9 observations, the visible emissions standards in COMAR 26.11.30.05B(1) and (2) do not apply to emissions as specified in COMAR 26.11.06.02A(2). For cement kilns that are required to install and operate a COM, visible emissions may not exceed the applicable standards as specified in COMAR 26.11.30.05B(1) and (2). Sources may request an alternate opacity limit for specific operating conditions based on technological limitations which will be subject to approval by MDE and EPA. Under COMAR 26.11.30.05, cement kilns or clinker coolers may either operate COMs or PM CPMS (particulate matter continuous parameter monitoring systems).

Incinerator Exemption A number of law enforcement agencies, military installations and other government entities are using modified 55-gallon drums to destroy illegal drugs and trash from international flights that might cause biocontamination. The drums, commonly called cyclonic burn barrels, are equipped with fans, lids and other accessories that, when taken altogether, make these drums fit the definition of an incinerator. The Department is taking action to exempt these drums from the incinerator requirements as the federal government has also done. Under federal New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) (40 CFR Part 60, Subpart EEEE), an in cinerator unit that is owned or operated by a government agency that combusts contraband or prohibited goods is exempt from the federal requirements. The Department is incorporating this provision into the definition of incinerator so that Maryland regulations do not conflict with the federal exemption.

Sources Affected and Location The amendments will affect four existing municipal waste combustors (MWCs). One MWC is lo cated in Baltimore City, one in Frederick County, one in Harford County and one in Montgomery County. The amendments will also affect two existing Portland cement manufacturing plants in Maryland.

Requirements Amendments to COMAR 26.11.01.10 clarify requirements for incinerators and Portland cement plants that demonstrate compliance with visible emissions (VE) standards through use of continuous opacity monitors (COMs). The amendments reference appropriate regulations where VE standards are contained, establish compliance criteria for these sources, and specify use of the QA/QC procedures in COMAR 26.11.31. MWCs located in the Baltimore/Washington areas are subject to the no visible emissions requirement contained in COMAR 26.11.08.04A(2). In these areas, compliance with the no VE requirement is demonstrated with a COM if VE are less than 10 percent opacity. Regulation 26.11.08.04 Visible Emissions now includes requirements for incinerators equipped with COMs. Regulation 26.11.08.07 is approved as part of Maryland’s Section 111(d) Plan and is amended to clarify that the regulation applies to small MWCs. Regulation 26.11.08.08 is approved as part of Maryland’s Section 111(d) Plan for large MWCs. The amendments remove the applicability of TM 90-01 and add the requirement that the QA/QC will be as in new COMAR 26.11.31.

Expected Emissions Reductions These amendments clarify and streamline the regulations and are unlikely to produce emission reductions. The action establishes revised compliance procedures relatin g to sources that are required to operate continuous opacity monitors under COMAR 26.11.01.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on December 14, 2015 at 1 p.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or emailed to randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than December 14, 2015 or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration Office in Baltimore; and • The regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department’s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537

- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.



## 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.01 Definitions. A. (text unchanged) B. Terms Defined. (1)

— (8) (text unchanged)PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1467

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 (8-1) Continuous Burning. (a) “ Continuous burning ” means the continuous, semicontinuous, or batch feeding of municipal solid waste for purposes of waste disposal, energy production, or providing heat to the combustion system in preparation for waste disposal or energy production. (b) “ Continuous burning ” does not include the period when municipal solid waste is solely used to provide thermal protection of the grate or hearth

. (9)

— (27) (text unchanged) (27-1) Operating Time. (a) “ Operating time ” means, for the purpose of determining compliance or non-compliance with COM requirements of this chapter for cement kilns, the actual ti me in hours that an affected unit operates, beginning when the raw feed is being continuously introduced into the kiln for at least 120 minutes or when the raw feed rate exceeds 60 percent of the kiln design limitation rate, whichever occurs first, and ending when the introduction of raw feed to the kiln is halted. (b) “ Operating time ” means, for the purpose of determining compliance or non-compliance with COM requirements of this chapter for municipal waste combustors , the actual time in hours that an affected unit operates, beginning when continuous burning of solid waste starts and ending when continuous burning of solid waste

ceases. (28)

— (53) (text unchanged)
.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements. A. Applicability and Exceptions. (1)

— (5) (text unchanged) (6) Sources may request for approval by the Department and EPA an alternate limit for specific operating conditions in which the technological limitations of the control equipment adversely affects the ability of the source to comply with visible emissions limits by following the recommendations at 80 FR 33980. The alternate limit shall be submitted to EPA as a SIP revision and included in 40 CFR Part 52 Subpart V 52.1070(d) for Maryland Source Specific SIP revisions

. B. General Requirements for COMs. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) (3) A COM shall comply with the applicable requirements in 40 CFR Part 51, Appendix P, [ Sections 3.3

— 3.9, ] as amended, which is incorporated by reference. (4) (text unchanged) (5) The owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler that is operating a COM is subject to the following requirements. (a) The owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions which exceed the visibility standards in COMAR 26.11.30.05B. (b) The visibility standards in COMAR 26.11.30.05B(1) and (2) do not apply to emissions as specified in COMAR 26.11.06.02A(2) during EPA reference Method 9 observations. (c) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with COMAR 26.11.30.05B(2) when using a COM, emissions that are visible to a human observer are those that are equal to or greater than 10 percent opacity. (d) For the owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler that is operating a COM, compliance with visible emission standards is achieved if visible emissions do not exceed the applicable visible emission limitations in 26.11.30.05B(1) or (2) as applicable. (e) Notwithstanding the requirements in §B(5)(a)-(d) of thisregulation, the Department may determine compliance and noncompliance with the visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9 observations. (f) The owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler that is operating a COM shall meet the quality assurance requirements under COMAR 26.11.31. (6) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM is subject to the following requirements. (a) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions which exceed the visibility standards in COMAR 26.11.08.04 as determined by EPA reference Method 9 observations. (b) For the purpose of demonstrating compliance with COMAR 26.11.08.04 when using a COM, emissions that are visible to a human observer are those that are equal to or greater than 10 percent opacity. (c) For the owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM, compliance with visible emission standards is achieved if visible emissions do not exceed 10 percent opacity. (d) Notwithstanding the requirements in §B(6)(a)-(c) of thisregulation, the Department may determine compliance and noncompliance with the visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9 observations. (e) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is operating a COM shall meet the quality assurance requirements under COMAR 26.11.31. C.

— E. (text unchanged) [ F. Fuel burning equipment subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.09.05 and cement kilns subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.30 are subject to the COM requirements contained in COMAR 26.11.31. ]



## 26.11.08 Control of Incinerators

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 2-406, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.01 Definitions. A. (text unchanged) B. Terms Defined. (1)

— (19) (text unchanged) (20) Incinerator. (a)

— (b) (text unchanged) (c) “ Incinerator ” does not mean any unit owned or operated by a government agency to destroy illegal or prohibited goods. The exclusion does not apply to items either confiscated or incinerated by private, industrial, or commercial entities. (21)

— (61) (text unchanged)

.04 Visible Emissions. A.

— C. (text unchanged) D. The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM is subject to the requirements in COMAR 26.11.01.10.
.07 Requirements for [Certain] Municipal Waste Combustors with a Capacity of 35 tons or greater per day and less than or equal to 250 Tons Per Day. (text unchanged)
.08 Requirements for an Existing Large MWC with a Capacity Greater Than 250 Tons Per Day. A. Emission Standards and General Requirements. (1) (text unchanged)PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1468

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2015 (2) Emission Standards and General Requirements.

Pollutant or Parameter Emission Standards for a

Large MWC Performance and Compliance Test Requirements Carbon Monoxide* (text unchanged) (text unchanged) Dioxin/Furans* (text unchanged) (text unchanged) Particulate Matter* (text unchanged) (text unchanged) Opacity 10 percent opacity with [ CEMS ] COMs

. Averaging time is 6 minutes. EPA Reference Method 9 and [ CEMS ] COMS

. Applicable test procedures and methods as specified in 40 CFR §60.58b(c). Quality assurance and quality control requirements are as in [ Technical Memorandum 90 -01 ] COMAR 26.11.31

. [ In case of inconsistencies in data or conflicting data Method 9 results will determine compliance. ] Notwithstanding the requirements in COMAR 26.11.01.10B(6)(a)

- (c), the Department m ay determine compliance and non -compliance with the visible emission limitations by performing EPA reference Method 9 observations based on a 6 minute block average. Cd (Cadmium)*

— Fugitive Ash Emissions (text unchanged) * Corrected to 7 percent oxygen on dry basis. If a CO 2 monitor is selected as the dilutent monitor it must meet the requirements of 40CFR §60.58b(b)(6) (3) (text unchanged) B. Monitoring Requirements. (1) A person who owns or operates an existing MWC subject to this regulation shall: (a) Install, calibrate, operate, and maintain continuous [ emission ] monitors for carbon monoxide, o xygen, opacity, oxides of nitrogen, and sulfur dioxide; (b)

— (d) (text unchanged) (2) (text unchanged) (3) The monitors required by §B(1)(a) and (b) of this regulation shall meet the installation, certif ication, reporting, record-keeping, and other requirements of COMAR 26.11.01.10, and 26.11.01.11, performance specifications in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix B, the quality assurance procedures in 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix F, all requirements in 40 CFR §60.58b , COMAR 26.11.31 [ , and the specification in the Department ’ s Air and Radiation Management Administration Technical Memorandum 90-01, “ Continuous Emission Monitoring (CEM) Policies and Procedures ” , which is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.10E ]

. (4) (text unchanged) C. Reporting and Record-Keeping Requirements. (1) (text unchanged) (2) Continuous [ emissions ] monitoring data reduction and data availability shall be as prescribed in COMAR 26.11.01.10 and 26.11.01.11. If there is any inconsistency between COMAR 26.11.01.10 and 26.11.01.11 and 40 CFR 60, the [ requirement ] requirements of 40 CFR 60 govern. D. (text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment



# Title 31 MARYLAND INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION

Subtitle 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS 31.01.02 Emergency Powers

Authority: Health-General Article, §19-706; Insurance Article, §2-115; Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-345-P] The Insurance Commissioner proposes to amend Regulations .02

— .04 and .07 under COMAR 31.01.02 Emergency Powers

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to better align the elements of the Maryland Insurance Administrati on’s data requests for claims information during an emergency with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ curre nt data collection template.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment Comments may be sent to Catherine Grason, Director of Regulatory Affairs, Maryland Insurance Administration, 200 St. Paul Place, Ste. 2700, Baltimore, MD 21202, or call 410-468-2201, or email to insuranceregreview.mia@maryland.gov, or fax to 410-468- 2020. Comments will be accepted through November 16, 2015. A public hearing has not been scheduled.
.02 Applicability. A. (text unchanged) B. This chapter also applies to the Maryland Automobile Insurance Fund (MAIF) [

, ] and the Joint Insurance Association (JIA) [

, the Injured Workers Insurance Fund (IWIF) and the Maryland Health Insurance Plan (MHIP) ]

. .03 Definitions. A. (text unchanged)FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 273

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 3, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2016 

# Subtitle 09 MEDICAL CARE PROGRAMS 10.09.34 Therapeutic Behavioral Services

Authority: Health-General Article, §§2-104(b), 15-103, and 15-105, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-392-F] On January 26, 2016, the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene adopted amendments to Regulations .02 and .06 under COMAR 10.09.34 Therapeutic Behavioral Services . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:25 Md. R. 1551

— 1552 (December 11, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

VAN T. MITCHELL Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene



# Subtitle 09 MEDICAL CARE PROGRAMS 10.09.61 Medical Day Care Services Waiver

Authority: Health-General Article, §§2-104(b), 15-103, and 15-111, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-393-F] On January 26, 2016, the Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene adopted amendments to Regulations .01 and .03 under COMAR 10.09.61 Medical Day Care Services Waiver . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:25 Md. R. 1552 (December 11, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

VAN T. MITCHELL Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene


# Title 15 DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Subtitle 20 SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION 15.20.05 Manure Transport Project

Authority: Agriculture Article, §8-704.2, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-560-F] On January 14, 2016, the Secretary of Agriculture adopted Regulations .02

— .04 and .06 , new Regulation .07 , and the recodification of existing Regulations .07

— .09 to be Regulations .08

— .10 under COMAR 15.20.05 Manure Transport Project . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:19 Md. R. 1241

— 1243 (September 18, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

JOSEPH BARTENFELDER Secretary of Agriculture 

# Title 20 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Subtitle 08 SUPPLIER DIVERSITY PROGRAM
20.08.01 General

Authority: Public Utilities Article, §§2-113 and 2-121, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-133-F] On January 13, 2016, the Public Service Commission adopted new Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 20.08.01 General , under a new subtitle, Subtitle 08 Supplier Diversity Program . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:11 Md. R. 733

— 734 (May 29, 2015) and reproposed in 42:22 Md. R. 1401 (October 30, 2015), has been adopted as reproposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

DAVID J. COLLINS Executive Secretary


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Final Action [15-360-F] On January 27, 2016, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to: (1) Regulations .01 and .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; and (2) Regulations .01

, .04

, .07 , and .08 under COMAR 26.11.08 Control of Incinerators

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:23 Md. R. 1465

— 1468 (November 13, 2015), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: February 15, 2016.
Attorney General's Certification In accordan ce with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: COMAR 26.11.01.10B(6)(c): The additional text clarifies the operating time intended for a COM system to demonstrate compliance and is consistent with COMAR 26.11.01.10D(2), as well as incinerator compliance demonstrat ion requirements identified in COMAR 26.11.08.08A(2) and corresponding federal law (40 CFR 60.58b(c), 40 CFR 63.1209). This language was within the intent and scope of the original proposal and is not a substantive change.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 274

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 3, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 2016 

## 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements. A. (proposed text unchanged) B. General Requirements for COMs. (1)

— (5) (proposed text unchanged) (6) The owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM is subject to the following requirements: (a)

— (b) (proposed text unchanged) (c) For the owner or operator of a municipal waste combustor that is required to install and operate a COM, compliance with visible emission standards is achieved if visible emissions do

not exceed 10 percent opacity for a 6-mi nute block average during the unit's operating time. (d)

— (e) (proposed text unchanged) C.

— E. (proposed text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Title 31 MARYLAND INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION

Subtitle 10 HEALTH INSURANCE

— GENERAL

31.10.27 Health Insurance

— Notice of the

Maryland Health Insurance Plan

Authority: Insurance Article, §§2-109, 14-501, and 15-1303(c), Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-376-F] On January 20, 2016, the Insurance Commissioner adopted the repeal of Regulations .01

— .03 under COMAR 31.10.27 Health Insurance

— Notice of the Maryland Health Insurance Plan . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:24 Md. R. 1527 (November 30, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: February 15, 2016. ALFRED W. REDMER, JR. Insurance Commissioner



# Subtitle 16 MISCELLANEOUS

Notice of Final Action [15-379-F] On January 22, 2016, the Insurance Commissioner adopted: (1) Amendments to the authority line under COMAR 31.16.01 Disclosure to Policyholders of the Possible Effects of Assessable Insurance Policies ; (2) Amendments to the authority line under COMAR 31.16.04 Provision of Completed Premium Finance Agreement to Insured ; (3) The repeal of Regulation .01 under COMAR 31.16.05 Cancellation of Insurance Contracts by Premium Finance Companies ; (4) Amendments to the authority line under COMAR 31.16.06 Bulk Reinsurance, Stock, and Mutual Insurers ; and (5) The repeal of Regulations .01

— .09 under COMAR 31.16.07 Holocaust Victims Insurance Claims and Reports

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:24 Md. R. 1528 (November 30, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016. ALFRED W. REDMER, JR. Insurance Commissioner


# Title 34 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING

Subtitle 04 HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL PROGRAMS 34.04.09 Maryland Historical Trust African

American Heritage Preservation Program

Authority: State Finance and Procurement Article, §5A-330, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-397-F] On January 26, 2016, the Maryland Department of Planning adopted the repeal of existing Regulations .01

— .11 and adopted new Regulations .01

— .11 under COMAR 34.04.09 Maryland Historical Trust African American Heritage Preservation Program . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:25 Md. R. 1568

— 1572 (December 11, 2015), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: February 15, 2016.

DAVID R. CRAIG Secretary of PlanningPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1981

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSU E 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2013 Department and to the taxpayer a full report of its audit procedures, tests, matters examined, and findings.(11) The Comptroller retains its audit authority under the TaxGeneral Article, Annotated Code of Maryland. B. Inquiries; Duty of Business Entities to Respond. (1) If the Department becomes aware of facts and circumstances that reasonably warrant further inquiry into the

this chapter, the Department may make written inquiry, including a request for the production, inspection, or copying of documents specified in the inquiry, of any taxpayer or holder of a certificate of eligibility for a tax credit under this chapter to obtain information bearing on the eligibility of the taxpayer or o partners, shareholders, members, or beneficiaries for that credit. The inquiry may include, but may not be limited to, whether the claimed costs were in fact incurred in the State. (2) A taxpayer to which a written inquiry from the Department is directed under §B(1) of this regulation shall submit a full and complete written response, with copies of all requested documents, within 45 days of the date of the inquiry. The response shall be verified as true and correct by oath or affirmation made under penalty of perjury by the individual proprietor or by an individual officer, partner, or member of the taxpayer.

.13 Waiver. The Secretary may waive or vary particular provisions of thischapter to the extent that the waiver is not inconsistent with TaxGeneral Article, §10-735, Annotated Code of Maryland.

DOMINICK MURRAY Secretary of Business and Economic Development


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Proposed Action [13-372-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend: (1) Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of FuelBurning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations ; and (2) Regulations .06 and .07 under COMAR 26.11.14 Control of Emissions from Kraft Pulp Mills

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to: (1) Accurately describe the Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) control system and requirements; (2) Incorporate existing NO x RACT requirements into this chapter;

x (4) Clarify that the monitoring and reporting requirements apply to the owner of a boiler and combustion turbine at a Kraft pulp mill. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland's State Implementation Plan. Background NO x Emissions The NO x emissions discharge through a common stack and are currently subject to reasonably available control technology (RACT) requirements under COMAR 26.11.09.08 and 26.11.14.07A(2)(b) respectively. RACT requires the units to reduce NO x emissions to meet an emissions rate of 0.70 pounds per million Btu during the period May 1 to September 30 (ozone season) of each year and a rate of 0.99 pounds per million Btu for the rest of the year. COMAR 26.11.14.07 prohibits total NO x ozone season emissions from the New Page Kraft pulp mill stack from exceeding 947 tons, unless the pulp mill acquires an allowance for each ton of NO x they emit over 947 tons. The regulation allows the pulp mill to secure up to 95 allowances for each period in which they exceed the 947 ton emission cap.

VOC Emissions In 2001, Regulation .06 (Control of Volatile Organic Compounds) was added to COMAR 26.11.14 for the control of VOC emissions from several process installations at Kraft pulp mills. The regulation established RACT standards to specifically control VOC emissions from Kraft pulp mill operations statewide that have actual emissions of 20 pounds or more of VOCs per day and the potential to emit total plant-wide VOC emissions of 25 tons or more per year. In addition, Kraft pulp mills are required to install VOC emission controls to meet the requirements of the Paper and Pulp MACT (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart S).

Sources Affected and Location This amendment affects two coal fired units and one gas fired unit at the Kraft pulp mill located in Luke, Maryland.

Requirements This action does not establish any new standards or requirements from fuel burning equipment located at Kraft pulp mills. The action primarily clarifies processes and consolidates requirements into a unique chapter of COMAR pertaining to Kraft pulp mills. The revisions to the regulations: n stock washers are to be collected and combusted;

brown stock washers shall be controlled by removing 90 percent or more of the condensate VOC loading by demonstrating a VOC removal or destruction efficiency of the condensate stream stripper of 90 percent or greater or a system analysis of these units;

as part of a SIP revision to demonstrate the collective VOC removal efficiency of the condensate steam stripper and other control systems as required;

emission rate of 0.70 pounds of NO x per million Btu in addition to an emission limit of 947 tons of NO x during the period May 1 through September 30 of each year;

x

x ozone

quarterly reports to the Department from COMAR 26.11.01.10G(2)(d) in D(2) of Regulation .07 to COMAR 26.11.01.11E(2).

Expected Emissions Reductions. There is no emission reduction expected as a result of this action.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1982

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2013 Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.
Est i m at e

of Econom i c

Im pact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on December 18, 2013 at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Deborah Rabin, Regulations Coordinator, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or email to debbie.rabin@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than December 18, 2013, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Deborah Rabin at (410) 537-3240. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations:

http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx

Salisbury;

separate air quality control offices. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department's Fair Practices Office at (410) 537- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.



## 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-B urning Equipment,

Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101 2-103, 2-301 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.08 Control of NO x Emissions for Major Stationary Sources. A. B. (text unchanged) C. Requirements for Fuel-Burning Equipment with a Rated Heat Input Capacity of 250 Million Btu Per Hour or Greater. (1) (text unchanged) (2) The maximum NO x emissions rates as pounds of NO x per Million Btu per hour are: (a) (g) (text unchanged) [(h) 0.70 for fuel burning equipment stacks at a non-electric generating facility during the period May 1 through September 30 of each year and 0.99 during the period October 1 through April 30 of each year.] (3) (text unchanged) D. K. (text unchanged) 

## 26.11.14 Control of Emissions from Kraft Pulp Mills

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101 2-103, 2-301 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.06 Control of Volatile Organic Compounds. A. (text unchanged) B. Control of VOC Emissions from Specific Installations. (1) (text unchanged) (2) Digester Blow Tank Systems and Knotters. (a) Condensates from digester blow tank systems shall be collected and treated in a condensate steam stripper or other control system [which has a VOC removal or destruction efficiency of 90 percent or greater]. (b) (text unchanged) (3) Evaporators. (a) (text unchanged) (b) Condensates from the evapor ators shall be segregated so that the foul condensates are collected and treated in a condensate steam stripper or other control system [that has a VOC removal or destruction efficiency of 90 percent or greater]. (4) Brown Stock Washers. (a) Wash water for brown stock washers shall consist of any combination of fresh or clean water and clean condensates. (b) Air emissions from the brown stock washers shall be collected and combusted. (5) (6) (text unchanged) (7) The evaporators, digester blow tank systems, and brown stock washers shall be controlled by removing 90 percent or greater of the condensate VOC loading by demonstrating: (a) That the VOC removal or destruction efficiencies of the condensate stream stripper is 90 percent or greater; or (b) Through a system analysis of the condensate stripper, evaporators, digester blow system tanks, and brown stock washers that VOC removal or destruction efficiency is 90 percent or greater. C. (text unchanged) D. Testing and Recordkeeping. (1) Tests shall be performed annually using EPA Test Method 25D found in 40 CFR Part 60 or other approved methods by the Department as part of a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision to demonstrate the collective VOC removal efficiency of the condensate steam stripper and other control systems as required

. (2) (5) (text unchanged)

.07 Control of NO x Emissions from Fuel Burning Equipment. A. Applicability and NO x Emission Standards. (1) (text unchanged) (2) The total combined NO x emissions of all fuel burning equipment at the Luke Kraft pulp mill to which this regulation applies may not exceed the following: (a) Except as provided in §B(1) of this regulation, an emission limit of 0.70 pounds of NO x per million Btu and 947 tons of NO x during the period May 1 through September 30 of each year; and (b) (text unchanged) (3) (text unchanged) B. Demonstrating Compliance. (1) If during the period May 1 through September 30 of any year the NO x emission limit in §A(2)(a) of this regulation is exceeded, the owner or operator of a Kraft pulp mill shall acquire one NO x ozone season allowance (as that term is defined at COMAR 26.11.01.01B( 2 4-1)) for each ton or partial ton of NO x emissions in excess of the limit in §A(2)(a) of this regulation. (2) The total number of NO x ozone season allowances acquired pursuant to §B(1) of this regulation for any one period may notPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1983

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSU E 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2013 exceed 95 and shall be of the same vintage year in which the emission limit is exceeded. (3) NO x ozone season [A] a llowances acquired pursuant to §B(1) of this regulation shall be acquired on or before November 30 and shall be submitted to the Department for retirement by December 30 of the year in which the emission limit is exceeded. C. Achieving Compliance Through the Use of NO x ozone season Allowances. The owner or operator of a Kraft pulp mill subject to this regulation that achieves compliance through the use of allowances pursuant to §B of this regulation shall: (1) Acquire the NO x ozone season allowances from a source that has been allocated allowances under COMAR 26.11.28, a NO x ozone season allowance broker or other entity that has NO x ozone

season allowances and agrees to transfer them; and (2) Transfer the NO x ozone season allowances to the Department for retirement. D. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. (1) [ The owner or operator of a ] For boilers or combustion units at a Kraft pulp mill subject to this regulation , the owner or operator of the Kraft pulp mill shall: (a) (b) (text unchanged) (2) The owner or operator of a Kraft pulp mill subject to this regulation shall include emissions data obtained from a CEM pursuant to §D(1) of this regulation in the CEM quarterly reports submitted to the Department pursuant to [COMAR 26.11.01.10G(2)(d)] COMAR 26.11.01.11E(2)

. ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from

Specific Processes

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101 2-103, 2-301 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [13-371-P-I] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to adopt the requirements of the ontrol Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for metal parts and products. EPA develops CTGs as guidance on control requirements for source categories. States can follow the CTGs or adopt more restrictive standards. MDE proposes to adopt new standards as prescribed by the federal CTG. Application method and work practice requirements will also be adopted into the regulation. These amendments affect coaters of metal parts and products and metal furniture. This action will be submitted to the U.S. EPA for approval as a revision to Maryland's State Implementation Plan.

Background EPA developed the CTG after reviewing the 1978 CTG, the 1988 NSPS for Surface Coating of Plastic Parts for Business Machines (40 CFR 60 Subpart TTT), the 1994 ACT for Surface Coating of Automotive/Transportation and Business Machine Plastic Parts, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Miscellaneous Metal Parts and Products 40 CFR 63 Subpart MMMM, and existing State and local VOC emission reduction approaches. The metal parts and products category includes fabricated metal products, small and large farm machinery, commercial and industrial machinery and equipment, automotive or transportation equipment, interior or exterior automotive parts, construction equipment, motor vehicle accessories, bicycles and sporting goods, toys, recreational vehicles, pleasure craft (recreational boats), extruded aluminum structural components, railroad cars, heavier vehicles, lawn and garden equipment, business machines, laboratory and medical equipment, electronic equipment, metal pipes, and other industrial and household products. The metal parts and products coating category does not include coatings that are a part of other product categories listed under Section 183(e) of the Act for which CTGs have been published or included in other CTGs. Several different types of application technology are used to apply liquid coatings, and the selection of the application technology can have a significant effect on the amount of coating used and the resulting VOC emissions from the operation. The CTG requires that coatings be applied by coating applicators such as: air atomized spray coating, electrostatic spray coating, high volume/low pressure (HVLP) spray coating, dip coating, flow coating, roll coating, electrocoating, and autophoretic coating. Powder coatings can be applied through electrostatic spraying or dipping. Application methods do not apply for repair coatings, touch-up coatings, coatings applied to create a textured finish and the robotic application of heavy-duty engines. Cleaning activities other than surface preparation also occur at miscellaneous metal product surface coating facilities. Additional requirements for cleaning materials and activities are covered under COMAR 26.11.19.02(I). Cleaning materials are used during these activities to remove coating residue or other unwanted materials from equipment related to coating operations, as well as the cleaning of spray guns, transfer lines (e.g., tubing or piping), tanks, and the interior of spray booths. These cleaning materials are typically mixtures of VOC containing solvents.

Affected Sources and Location These proposed amendments affect coaters of metal furniture and metal parts and products used in farm machinery, industrial machinery, automotive or transportation equipment, structural components, laboratory, medical and electronic equipment, motor vehicle accessories, bicycles and sporting goods, toys, recreational vehicles, pleasure craft (recreational boats), railroad cars, heavier vehicles, lawn and garden equipment and business machines.

Regulation Amendment COMAR 26.11.19.08 is amended to set VOC coating standards for baked and air drying methods for several coating categories. Application methods for coatings are limited to: Electrostatic application; HVLP spray; Flow coat; Roller coat; Dip coat including electrodeposition; Brush coat; or Other coating application method capable of achieving a transfer efficiency equivalent or better than that achieved by HVLP spraying. The application methods do not apply for several coating operations as specified in the regulation.

Expected Emissions Reduction The proposed amendments set standards for coatings, application methods and work practices. Emissions of VOCs from metal parts and products are expected to be reduced by 35 percent nationally. The maximum benefit will be provided during the ozone season when VOCs readily combine with NO x to form the pollutant ground level

ozone. Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 306

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 4, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2014 

# Title 24 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Subtitle 05 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 24.05.13 Maryland Public Art Initiative Program

Authority: Economic Development Article, §§4-601

— 4-608, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [13-434-F] On February 11, 2014, the Secretary of Business and Economic Development adopted amendments to Regulation .10 under COMAR 24.05.13 Maryland Public Art Initiative Program . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 40:26 Md. R. 2202 (December 27, 2013), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 3, 2014.

DOMINICK E. MURRAY Secretary of Business and Economic Development


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Final Action [13-372-F] On January 28, 2014, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to: (1) Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of FuelBurning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations ; and (2) Regulations .06 and .07 under COMAR 26.11.14 Control of Emissions from Kraft Pulp Mills

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 40:28 Md. R. 1981

— 1983 (November 15, 2013), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 3, 2014.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environment 

# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-404, 2-102, 2-103, 2-301, 2-1102, and 2- 1103, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [13-347-F-I] On January 28, 2014, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to Regulation .02 under COMAR 26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 40:23 Md. R. 1986-1988 (November 15, 2013), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 3, 2014.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environment


# Title 29 DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE

Subtitle 01 OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY 29.01.04 Hazardous Material Security

Authority: Environmental Article, §§7-701

— 7-709, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [13-401-F] On February 4, 2014, the Secretary of State Police adopted new Regulations .01

— .06 under a new chapter, COMAR 29.01.04 Hazardous Material Security . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 40:25 Md. R. 2137

— 2138 (December 13, 2013), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 3, 2014.

MARCUS L. BROWN Secretary of State PolicePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 163

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2014 Tables 3

—

4 and 6 (text unchanged) Note: Tables 5, 7, and 8 have been amended and appear as Insert A at the end of the Proposed Action on Regulations section of this issue of the Maryland Register.

ROBERT M. SUMMERS Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2-

303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Proposed Action

[14-034- P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulations .01
, .04
, .06
, .07
, .09 , and .10 and adopt new Regulation .12 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, St ationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain FuelBurning Installations

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to: 1. Incorporate the definition of biomass into Regulation .01; 2. Establish that the provisions from regulations .04 Prohibitions of Certain New Fuel-Burning Equipment, .06 Control ofParticulate Matter, and .07 Control of Sulfur Oxides from FuelBurning Equipment do not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels;3. Establish new regulation .12 Standards for Biomass FuelBurning Equipment Equal to or Greater Than 350,000 Btu/hr which sets NO x and PM standards and requirements for biomass equipment where federal standards are not established; and 4. Amend incorrect references from regulations .09 and .10. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland's State Implementation Plan.

Background There is significant potential for and interest in biomass for energy recovery and the Department is taking action to enhance and facilitate the application of renewable and energy efficient technologies and practices by establishing standards and procedures. There are existing federal regulations that apply to some of the same fuel-burning categories that Maryland’s proposed regulation will cover. Where Federal regulations are more stringent than the Maryland regulations, the federal standards apply. New technologies and environmental initiatives have recently increased the use of wood and farming by-products as a fuel to be burned to provide heat and power. To incorporate this new fuel category of biomass, the Department has proposed a new regulation COMAR 26.11.09.12 and related amendments to other pertinent sections of COMAR 26.11.09 regulations. Biomass materials include wood residue and wood products; animal manure, including litter and other bedding materials; and vegetative agricultural and silvicultural materials. Because certain components of biomass based fuel could be considered waste, EPA has spent extensive efforts to define the application of biomass any other 'non-traditional fuels'. The proposed Maryland definition of biomass includes the application of the federal legitimacy criteria procedures when required for determining if a material is classified as a solid waste or not. Non-hazardous secondary materials that have been determined not to be solid waste pursuant to 40 CFR 241.3(b)(1), and based on the legitimacy criteria under 40 CFR 241.3(d)(1) can be used in fuel-burning equipment. This determination has no impact/effect on whether the material will be considered a state solid waste. Biomass fuel, where readily and cost effectively available as a result of energy crop harvesting, sustainable forestry and poultry litter management practices can be used in fuel-burning equipment for energy recovery while meeting applicable standards and also reducing the amount of phosphorous and nitrogen entering the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. Maryland produces approximately 500-600 million chickens a year, as a result, it is projected that close to 600-700 million pounds of poultry litter is produced. The industry is one of the state’s most productive forms of agriculture, one of its largest employers, and has seen steady growth with increasing demand for low cost chicken and contributes close to $700 million to the Maryland economy. The application of technology that meets Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT)/Generally Available Control Technology (GACT)/Best Available Control Technology (BACT) standards to recover energy from poultry litter and other biomass materials would be useful to utilize renewable fuels and provide broad benefits to the environment. Federal Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards for major sources were finalized on January 31, 2013 under 40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters. The amendments to COMAR 26.11.09 and standards for biomass fuel-burning equipment will reduce the permit review and approval process by approximately 60 days and at the same time apply standards to size categories of fuel-burning equipment that do not have emission standards under MACT and GACT standards. MACT standards for industrial, commercial and institutional boilers apply to complex, non-homogeneous biomass fuels and equipment differentiated by design and heat input capacity. The MACT standards are for hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). EPA finalized 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart JJJJJJ, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers on February 1, 2013. GACT standards are applicable to boilers less than 10 MMBtu/hr heat input. Under GACT, optimization and best operating practices are required. The technology developments for different types of boilers and performance results reflected in the MACT standards have a significant impact on the development of NO x standards for different size boilers and on PM standards for small size boilers. MDE is proposing to amend the existing regulations in COMAR 26.11.09 that would be applicable to biomass fuel-burning equipment. New biomass fuel-burning equipment would be subject to standards based on MACT/GACT /BACT analysis. The amendments and new regulation have been developed to facilitate the permitting and compliance process and also apply standards to size category fuel-burning equipment in the absence of emission standards under MACT/GACT.

Sources Affected and LocationThese amendments and new regulation affect new biomass fuelburning equipment in Maryland.

Requirements Summary of Federal MACT/GACT Standards, Amendments and Related Federal MACT

– Applicability, Standards and Monitoring RequirementsPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

164

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2014 40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD (5D)

– Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards (MACT) for Boilers and Process Heaters

– standards for Major Sources 1. HAPS regulated: a) Fuel based emission standards PM and HG; b) Combustion based emissions of CO. 2. Compliance schedule for source categories: January 31, 2016 for existing sources; and January 31, 2013 or upon startup for new

sources. 3. New/existing sources with less than 10 MMBtu/hr category boilers are subject to biennial tune

– up requirement. 4. For greater than 10 MMBtu/hr new and existing

– emission standards for CO, PM and Hg are applicable. 5. Existing boilers or heaters are subject to work practice standards and energy assessment requirement. 6. Operating and monitoring parameters are based on performance tests and include operating parameters for CO and control devices such as wet scrubber, ESP and bag house with leak detection system.

Federal GACT - 40 CFR Part 63 Subpart JJJJJJ, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers 1. New biomass boilers greater than 10MMBtu/hr have to meet PM standards and implement a biennial tune-up program. 2. New biomass boilers less than 10 MMBtu/hr are required to implement a biennial tune-up program. 3. Existing biomass boilers are required to implement a biennial tune-up program. 4. Existing biomass boilers greater than 10 MMBtu/hr heat input are required to conduct energy assessment. Tune-Up Procedures 1. Inspect the flame pattern and burner. Adjust, test, clean, modify and replace as necessary under manufacturer’s specifications. 2. Inspect the system controlling the air- to -fuel ratio, calibrate and assure proper operation. 3. Optimize total CO e missions consistent with manufacturer’s specification. 4. Measure CO concentrations in the flue gas stream, both before and after the adjustments are made. A portable analyzer may be used.

Energy Assessment 1. Inspection and inventory of energy consuming systems. 2. Analysis of engineering and architectural plans. 3. A list of energy management and conservation measures. 4. Report with recommendations for energy efficiency. 5. List of energy savings.

Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction Requirements 1. Meet work practice standard by following manufacturer recommended procedures to minimize startup and shutdown procedures. 2. For exceedance of standard due to malfunction, records must be kept of malfunction and corrective actions.

Record Keeping and Reporting 1. Monitor and record hours of operation for major sources. 2. For tune-ups, information on dates, results, procedures and manufacturer’s specification. 3. The type and amount of fuel used over the 12 months prior to the biennial tune-up of the boiler. 4. For each boiler subject to an emission limit records of monthly fuel use by each boiler, including the type(s) of fuel and amount(s) used must be kept. 5. Electronic copy of reports of required performance tests using the Electronic Reporting Tool via EPA’s Central Data Exchange. 6. For area and major sources notification of compliance status, submit statement of completed energy assessment. 7. For operating units that combust non-hazardous secondary materials that have been determined not to be solid waste pursuant to § 241.3(b)(1) a record which documents how the secondary material meets each of the legitimacy criteria under § 241.3(d)(1) must be kept.

Summary of Proposed Maryland Standards

— COMAR 26.11.09 Amendments COMAR 26.11.09.04 prohibitions will not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels. COMAR 26.11.09.06 shall not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels; however, the particulate matter requirements of Regulation .12 of this Chapter will apply to new biomass units. COMAR 26.11.09.07 shall not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels COMAR 26.11.09.12 Standards for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Equal to or Greater Than 350,000 Btu/hr. 1. Standards and requirements are applicable to owners and operators of biomass fuel-burning equipment equal to or greater than 350,000 Btu/hr heat input capacity. 2. Federal requirements under 40 CFR 63 Subparts DD DDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, are applicable. 3. Emission Standards for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Greater Than or Equal to 10 MMBtu/hr Heat Input Capacity. Applicable standards a. A particulate matter emission standard of 0.07 lb/MMBtu heat input if the total heat input capacity is less than 30 MMBtu/hr; b. A particulate matter emission standard of 0.03 lb/MMBtu heat input if the total heat input capacity is equal to or greater than 30 MMBtu/hr; c. A NO x emission standard of 0.30 lb/MMBtu heat input, if the heat input capacity is less than or equal to 250 MMBtu/hr; d. A NO x emission standard of 0.25 lb/MMBtu heat input, if the heat input capacity is greater than 250 MMBtu/hr; and e. An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted. 4. Requirements for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Greater Than 1.5 MMBtu/hr and Less Than 10 MMBtu/hr Heat Input Capacity. Applicable standards: a. A particulate matter emission standard of 0.23 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas I, II, V and VI; b. A particulate matter emission standard of 0.1 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas III and IV; c. A NO x emission standard of 0.30 lb/MMBtu heat input; and d. An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted. 5. Requirements for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Less Than or Equal to 1.5 MMBtu/hr and Greater than 350,000Btu/hr Heat Input Capacity. Applicable standards: a. A particulate matter emission standard of 0.35 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas I, II, V and VI; b. A particulate matter emission standard of 0.1 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas III and IV; c. A NO x emission standard of 0.30 lb/MMBtu heat input; and d. An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted. 6. Existing biomass fuel-burning equipment: a. An initial and biennial tune-ups are required to be conducted; andPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 165

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2014 b. All the standards and requirements of must be complied with. 7. Fuel-burning equipment operation in accordance with the design and maintenance specifications of the manufacturer in order to meet and maintain compliance with the applicable emission standards and performance requirements. 8. Startup and Shutdown Requirements. The boiler's startup and shutdown periods are required to be minimized following the: a. Manufacturer's recommended procedures, if available; or b. Recommended procedures for a unit of similar design for which manufacturer's recommended procedures are available if manufacturer's recommended procedures for the actual unit are not available. 9. Compliance. a. Testing following 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, as amended. b. Sources subject to §§D and E demonstrate compliance by providing certification, on a form provided by the Department, from the manufacturer that the fuel-burning equipment is designed and tested to meet the applicable particulate matter and NO x standards including a copy of test results with EPA approved test methods onfuel-burning equipment in the same model line as the new fuelburning equipment. c. The particulate matter emission standards of §§C, D or E of this regulation and the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, are required to be complied with by: (a) Demonstrating continuous compliance with the work practice and management practice standards as specified in 40 CFR 63; and (b) Complying with the monitoring, installation, operation, and maintenance requirements as specified in 40 CFR 63. d. Fuel-burning equipment with a heat-input capacity greater than or equal to 100 MMBtu/hr and less than 250 MMBtu/hr demonstrate compliance with the §B(2) of Regulation .08. e. Fuel-burning equipment with a heat-input capacity greater than or equal to 250 MMBtu/hr demonstrate compliance by installing, operating, calibrating, and maintaining a certified NO x CEM in accordance with §C(3) of Regulation .08. 10 Record Keeping and Reporting. The following requirements are applicable: a. The record-keeping and reporting requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended. b. For the particulate matter emission standards of §§C, D or E of this regulation and for biomass fuel-burning equipment subjec t to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, the notification, reporting, and record-keeping requirements of 40 CFR 63. c. For the NO x emission standards of §C of this regulation and biomass fuel-burning equipment subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, the reporting requirements of §K of Regulation .08 of this chapter. d. For the emission standards of §§C, D or E of this regulation and biomass fuel-burning equipment not subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ keep records for each boiler that identify: (i) The date of tune-up operations; (ii) The procedures followed for tune-up; (iii) The manufacturer's specifications to which the boiler was tuned; (iv) The occurrence and duration of each malfunction of the boiler, or of the associated air pollution control, or monitoring equipment; (v) Actions taken during periods of malfunction to minimize emissions including corrective actions to restore the malfunctioning boiler, air pollution control, or monitoring equipment to its normal or usual manner of operation; e. Maintain records on site for not less than 3 years, and make these records available to the Department upon request.

Expected Emissions Reductio ns There are no emission reductions as a result of this action. New Regulation .12 will require MACT/GACT/BACT standards to be established for biomass fuel-burning equipment. This action, however, will have broad environmental benefits and reduce the amount of phosphorous and nitrogen entering the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries.

Comparison to Federal Standards In compliance with Executive Order 01.01.1996.03, this proposed regulation is more restrictive or stringent than corresponding federal standards as follows: (1) Regulation citation and manner in which it is more restrictive than the applicable federal standard: New COMAR 26.11.09.12 Equivalent to the federal NSPS 40 CFR 60 Subpart D, Db, Dc and NESHAP 40 CFR 63 Subpart DDDDD and JJJJJJ. This regulation goes further than these particular federal requirements in that it:

-- establishes NO x standards for all size categories of biomass boilers; and

-- establishes PM standards for biomass boilers less than 10MMBtu/hr whereas federal requirements for smaller boilers are limited to optimization practices. For boilers less than 10MMBtu/hr using biomass as fuel, it is important to note that under existing regulations such boilers are prohibited unless an exception is approved under COMAR 26.11.09. 04. These existing regulations are part of Maryland’s clean air plan (Clean Air Act State Implementation Plan, or SIP) and, as such, are federally enforceable requirements. One element of the exception approval is that there will be no violation of applicable emission standards. The applicable emission standard for particulate matter under the existing regulations cannot be met unless pollution controls are installed. The new regulations remove the prohibition process for biomass fuel. The new regulations, when promulgated, also lead to pollution controls needing to be installed for particulate matter. Although the new particulate matter requirements are more restrictive than those contained in the overall federal rule, they are not more restrictive than the existing, federally enforceable requirements as part of the SIP. As such, for a facility to meet the new requirements for particulate matter it will be no more expensive than it would have been had the facility installed a boiler under the existing regulatory scheme. This is because under the existing regulatory scheme similar controls must be installed on a boiler as the exception analysis would require it. (2) Benefit to the public health, safety or welfare, or the environment: The new standards for biomass fuel-burning equipment areunder proposed COMAR 26.11.09.12 Standards for Biomass Fuelburning Equipment greater than or Equal to 350,000 Btu. New biomass fuel-burning equipment under 10 MMBtu/hr will be required to meet emission standards which will necessitate control technology, whereas federal requirements did not establish standards for biomass fuel-burning equipment under 10 MMBtu/hr. Installing biomass fuel-burning equipment is a choice over conventional fuels, such as fuel oil. Exact quantification of air quality benefits depends on the type and number of units installed and cannot be quantified at this time. A farm or a school may choose a small biomass boiler for heating needs. The additional NO x and PMPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

166

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2014 standards established by the regulation will help to ensure that new biomass boilers installed in the state will have less emissions of pollutants than under the federal program, which will help reduce the state's burden in meeting federal ozone and fine particle standards. Utilizing poultry litter as fuel can possibly remove ammonia emissions that contribute to fine particulate matter formation. Selection of a biomass boiler contributes to Maryland’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, utilizing poultry biomass fuel-burning equipment may benefit water quality through better management of excess nutrients resulting in a reduction in the amount of phosphorus and nitrogen entering the Chesapeake Bay and its tributaries. (3) Analysis of additional burden or cost on the regulated
person: This regulation sets standards for new biomass fuel-burning equipment that an owner of a facility may choose to install in lieu of equipment that burns a more conventional fuel, such as oil. The new state standards would require control technology to be integrated into new biomass fuel-burning equipment. In consultation with applicable boiler manufacturers, the overall cost of a 10 MMBtu/hr or less biomass fuel-burning unit can range from $175,000 to $725,000, depending on the size of a given unit, with the pollution control portion of these costs ranging between $10,000 to $25,000. These pollution control costs reflect equipment added on to the boiler to meet Maryland’s more stringent particulate matter standard. To meet the more stringent NO x emission standard imposed under this regulation for both small and large boilers, no add-on pollution controls are needed, as NO x emissions can be achieved through boiler design (primarily by incorporating staged combustion chambers and fluidized bed reactor/feed systems into the design). Large boilers will also need to add pollution controls to meet State particulate matter standards imposed under this regulation, which are equivalent to federal standards. Costs associated with installing particulate controls to meet the state and federal standards are discussed in the Estimate of Economic Impact section of the proposed regulatory action. Also, by using biomass as a fuel source, owners of biomass equipment anticipate an overall economic benefit over the life of the unit due to reduced fuel costs. Potential fuel savings on an annual basis range from $5,000

— $15,000 for the equipment size range of 10

— 30 MMBtu/hr heat input as compared to conventional fuels. Savings are higher if the biomass is generated on site or in close proximity and minimal costs are associated with handling and storage. (4) Justification for the need for more restrictive standards: (a) The benefit from the more restrictive standard exceeds the burden or cost of the more restrictive standard on the regulated person or business: An owner of an existing or new facility may choose to install a new biomass boiler which may allow the owner to take advantage of grant or incentive opportunities. It may also provide reduced fuel costs in the lon g term by utilizing the owner’s waste products as fuel. These new technologies may divert animal waste products into use as a fuel. State legislation was enacted this year (2013 SB797, Chapter 322) mandating that the Department revise the existing regulatory exception process for solid fuel-burning equipment and make it easier to take advantage of these new technologies. This legislation prompted the Department to review andpropose revised environmental emission standards for solid fuelburning equipment such as boilers and include biomass as a solid fuel. (b) Conditions or circumstances specific or special to Maryland require that Maryland enact a more restrictive standard: Maryland is actively seeking as many NO x reductions as possible to enable Maryland to achieve compliance with the 75 ppb health based ozone standard. Maryland is the only moderate nonattainment area for ozone on the east coast. Additionally, Maryland has recently complied with the current and future fine PM health based standard but felt that restrictive standards for equipment that emits PM pollution were necessary to maintain compliance with the standard. (c) The applicable federal standard is not sufficient to protect the public health, safety, or welfare of Maryland citizens; or Fo r purposes of complying with the ozone standard the applicable federal standard is not sufficient to protect public health. The federal standards are performance based standards and not health based standards. (d) State law requires the adoption of a more restrictive standard. Not applicable

Estimate of Economic Impact I. Summary of Economic Impact. There is no mandatory economic impact upon affected sources of this regulation. This regulation sets standards for new biomass boiler equipment. An owner of a facility may choose to upgrade existing equipment or purchase new biomass boilers on a voluntary basis. The federal and State standards would require control technology to be integrated into new biomass fuel burning equipment. By using biomass as a fuel source, owners of biomass equipment anticipate an overall economic benefit over the life of the unit due to reduced fuel costs. Potential savings range from $5,000

— $15,000 in the equipment size range of 10

— 30 MMBtu/hr heat input compared to conventional fuels. Savings are higher if the biomass is generated on site or in close proximity and minimal costs are associated with handling and storage. Different options exist for boiler designers and manufacturers, including the application of low cost advanced optimization technologies to reduce emissions and meet the standards. Depending on the specific type of biomass fuel, boiler design and size, the following control technologies and costs have to be considered. 1. Cyclone $10,000 2. Multi-Cyclone $15-25,000 3. Reeltration System $65-97,000 4. ESP a. 10 MMBtu approx 3500 acfm

---- $97,000.00 b. 15 MMBtu approx 7000 acfm ----$160,000.00 c. 20 MMBtu approx 11000 acfm

--- $220,000.00 d. 25 MMBtu approx 14500 acfm

--- $290,000.00 e. 30 MMBtu approx 22500 acfm

--- $340,000.00

Capital costs with corresponding control costs for biomass fuelburning equipment in the size range 1-100 MMBtu/hr heat input that can meet the standards of the regulation are provided below: 1) 1 MMBtu/hr Capital Cost (Cap.C) $175,000 Control Cost (Con.C)$10,000 2) 2 MMBtu/hr Cap.C $350,000-$410,000 Con.C $10,000- $15,000 3) 10 MMBtu/hr Cap.C $650,000-$725,000 Con.C $15,000- $25,000 4) 20 MMBtu/hr Cap.C $1-1.25 Million Con.C ESP $220,000- $300,000 5) 30 MMBtu/hr. Cap.C $4-6 Million Con..C ESP $340,000- $550,000 6) 100 MMBtu/hr Cap.C $12-20 Million Con.C ESP $1.5-2.0 Million
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 167

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2014 Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on February 26, 2014 at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Randy Mosier, Division Chief, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or emailed to randy.mosier@maryland.gov

. Comments must be received not later than February 26, 2014, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment's website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration; • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury; • All local air quality control offices; and • Local health departments in those counties not having separate air quality control offices. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department's Fair Practices Office at (410) 537- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.

.01 Definitions. A. (text unchanged) B. Terms Defined. (1) (text unchanged) (1 -1) Biomass. (a) “Biomass” m eans solid organic material that can be combusted for use as fuel including the following:

(i) Wood residue and wood products such as trees, tree stumps, tree limbs, bark, lumber, sawdust, sander dust, chips, scraps, slabs, millings, and shavings;

(ii) Animal manure, including litter and other bedding materials; (iii) Vegetative agricultural and silvicultural materials, such as logging residues (slash), nut and grain hulls and chaff (e.g., almond, walnut, peanut, rice, and wheat), bagasse, orchard prunings, corn stalks, coffee bean hulls and ground; and

(iv) Any solid organic material that has been approved by the Department, on a case- by -case basis, utilizing the criteria established by EPA and set forth in 40 C.F.R.241.3, as amended. (b) This definition of biomass is not intended to suggest that these materials are or are not solid waste. [ (1

- 1) ] (1

- 2) (text unchanged) (2)

— (3) (text unchanged) (4) "Fuel" means: (a) Coal or any other fossil fuel [ and wood or wood products; [ and ] (b) Waste combustible fluid or used oil that has been approved by the Department to be burned as a fuel in accordance with Regulation .10 of this chapter [

. ] ; and (c) Biomass as defined in this regulation, or approved by the Department. (5)

— (18) (text unchanged) .04 Prohibition of Certain New Fuel-Burning Equipment. A.

— B. (text unchanged) C. Exceptions. (1) Fuel-Burning Equipment on Ships and Biomass FuelBurning Equipment. (a) [ Fuel-Burning Equipment on Ships. ] New fuel-burning equipment on ships is exempt from §§A(1) and B(1) of this regulation. (b) The provisions of §§A and B of this regulation do not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels. (2)

— (6) (text unchanged)

.06 Control of Particulate Matter. A.

— C. (text unchanged) D. Small Wood Boilers and Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment. (1) Small wood boilers are subject to particulate matter requirements of Regulation .11 of this chapter and exempt from the provisions of §§A and B of this regulation. (2) The provisions of §§A and B of this regulation shall not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels; however, the particulate matter requirements of Regulation .12 of this chapter apply.

.07 Control of Sulfur Oxides From Fuel

- Burning Equipment. A. (text unchanged) B. Exceptions. (1)

— (4) (text unchanged) (5) The provisions of §§A(1)(a) and A(2)(a) of this regulation shall not apply to fuel-burning equipment installed after May 1, 2014 that burns only biomass fuels. C. (text unchanged)
.09 Tables and Diagrams. (Table 1 unchanged) (a) Construction of residual oil fired units of less than 13 million Btu (13.7 gigajoules) per hour prohibited (see Regulation [ .09A(1) and B(1)) ] .04)

. (b)

— (c) (text unchanged) See Figures 1 & 2. (Figures unchanged) Notes: (Notes unchanged)
.10 Requirements to Burn Used Oil and Waste Combustible Fluid as Fuel. A. General Requirements. (1)

— (2 ) (text unchanged) (3) A person who is burning used oil or WCF under a current written approval from the Department may continue to burn the approved material if: (a) The person demonstrates that any WCF being burned satisfies the definition of that term in Regulation .01B [ (23) ] of this chapter; (b)

— (d) (text unchanged) (4)

— (7) (text unchanged) B.

— D. (text unchanged)
.12 Standards for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Equal to or Greater Than 350,000 Btu/hr. A. Applicability. The requirements of this regulation apply to a person who owns or operates biomass fuel-burning equipment equal to or greater than 350,000 Btu/hr heat input capacity. B. Federal Requirements. The requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, are applicable.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

168

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 24, 2014 C. Requirements for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Greater Than or Equal to 10 MMBtu/hr Heat Input Capacity. A person subject to the requirements of this regulation may not install or operate new biomass fuel-burning equipment, unless the following standards and requirements are met: (1) A particulate matter emission standard of 0.07 lb/MMBtu heat input if the total heat input capacity is less than 30 MMBtu/hr; (2) A particulate matter emission standard of 0.03 lb/MMBtu heat input if the total heat input capacity is equal to or greater than 30 MMBtu/hr; (3) A NO x

emission standard of 0.30 lb/MMBtu heat input, if the heat input capacity is less than or equal to 250 MMBtu/hr; (4 ) A NO x

emission standard of 0.25 lb/MMBtu heat input, if the heat input capacity is greater than 250 MMBtu/hr; and (5) An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted. D. Requirements for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Greater Than 1.5 MMBtu/hr and Less Than 10 MMBtu/hr Heat Input Capacity. A person subject to the requirements of this regulation may not install or operate new biomass fuel-burning equipment unless the following standards and requirements are met: (1) A particulate matter emission standard of 0.23 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas I, II, V and VI; (2) A particulate matter emission standard of 0.1 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas III and IV; (3) A NO x emission standard of 0.30 lb/MMBtu heat input; and (4) An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted. E. Requirements for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Less Than or Equal to 1.5 MMBtu/hr and Greater than 350,000Btu/hr Heat Input Capacity. A person subject to the requirements of this regulation may not install or operate new biomass fired fuel-burning equipment that is less than equal to 1.5 MMBtu/hr heat input and greater than 350,000 Btu/hr heat input unless the following standards

are met : (1) A particulate matter emission standard of 0.35 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas I, II, V and VI; (2) A particulate matter emission standard of 0.1 lb/MMBtu heat input in Areas III and IV; (3) A NO x emission standard of 0.30 lb/MMBtu heat input; and (4) An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted. F. A person subject to the requirements of this regulation may not operate biomass fuel-burning equipment installed prior to March 1, 2014 unless: (1) An initial and biennial tune-ups are conducted; and (2) All the standards and requirements of Regulations .03 and .05

— .09 of this chapter are met. G. A person subject to the requirements of this regulation shall operate the fuel-burning equipment in accordance with the design and maintenance specifications of the manufacturer in order to meet and maintain compliance with the applicable emission standards and performance requirements. H. Startup and Shutdown Requirements. A person subject to the requirements of §§C, D and E of this regulation shall minimize the boiler's startup and shutdown periods following the: (1) Manufacturer's recommended procedures, if available; or (2) Recommended procedures for a unit of similar design for which manufacturer's recommended procedures are available if manufacturer's recommended procedures for the actual unit are not available. I. Compliance. A person subject to the requirements of: (1) Section C of this regulation shall demonstrate compliance with the emissions standards by following 40 CFR Part 60, Appendix A, as amended. (2) Sections D and E of this regulation shall demonstrate compliance by providing certification, on a form provided by the Department, from the manufacturer that the fuel-burning equipment is designed and tested to meet the applicable particulate matter and NO x standards including a copy of test results with EPA approved test methods on fuel-burning equipment in the same model line as the new fuel-burning equipment. (3) The particulate matter emission standards of §§C, D or E of this regulation who owns or operates biomass fuel-burning equipment subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, shall: (a) Demonstrate continuous compliance with the work practice and management practice standards as specified in 40 CFR 63; and (b) Comply with the monitoring, installation, operation, and maintenance requirements as specified in 40 CFR 63. (4) The NO x

emission standards of §C of this regulation and who owns or operates biomass fuel- bu rning equipment subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, shall meet the following requirements: (a) For fuel-burning equipment with a heat-input capacity greater than or equal to 100 MMBtu/hr and less than 250 MMBtu/hr, demonstrate compliance with the NO x emission standards of §C of this regulation in accordance with Regulation .08B(2) of this chapter; and (b) For fuel-burning equipment with a heat-input capacity greater than or equal to 250 MMBtu/hr subject to the requirements of §C of this regulation shall demonstrate compliance with the NO x emission standards of Regulation .12C of this chapter in accordance with Regulation .08B(2) of this chapter by installing, operating, calibrating, and maintaining a certified NO x CEM in accordance with Regulation .08C(3) of this chapter. J. Reporting and Record-Keeping Requirements. (1) A person subject to the particulate matter emission standards of §§C, D or E of this regulation who owns or operates biomass fuel-burning equipment subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, shall comply with the notification, reporting, and record-keeping requirements of 40 CFR 63. (2) A person subject to the NO x emission standards of §C of this regulation and who owns or operates biomass fuel-burning equipment subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ, as amended, shall comply with the reporting requirements of Regulation .08K of this chapter. (3) A person subject to the to the emission standards of §§C, D or E of this regulation who owns or operates biomass fuel-burning equipment not subject to the requirements of 40 CFR 63 Subparts DDDDD and JJJJJJ shall: (a) Keep records for each boiler that identify: (i) The date of tune-up operations; (ii) The procedures followed for tune-up; (iii) The manufacturer's specifications to which the boiler was tuned; (iv) The occurrence and duration of each malfunction of the boiler, or of the associated air pollution control, or monitoring equipment; a nd

(v) Actions taken during periods of malfunction to minimize emissions including corrective actions to restore the malfunctioning boiler, air pollution control, or monitoring equipment to its normal or usual manner of operation; and (b) Maintain records on site for not less than 3 years, and make these records available to the Department upon request.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the EnvironmentFINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS

474

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 2014 

# Subtitle 13 PROCUREMENT REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

21.13.01 Reporting Requirements

Authority: State Finance and Procurement Article, §§12-101, 13-207, 14-208, 14 -305, 14-505, 15-110, 15-111, and 17-104, Annotated Code of Maryland
.16 Preferred Provider Reports. A. (proposed text unchanged) B. Within 90 days after the end of each fiscal year, a unit or State aided or controlled entity shall submit a report to the Department of General Services [[ a report ]] on the contracts awarded and payments made to preferred providers. The report format shall be determined by the Department of General Services. C. (proposed text unchanged)

SHEILA McDONALD Executive Secretary Board of Public Works


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION

Notice of Final Action [13- 40 5-F] On April 2, 2014, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to: (1) Regulation .01 under COMAR 26.08.01 General ; (2) Regulations .01

, .02

, .02-1

, .03-2

, .03-3

, .04

, .04-1

, .07

, .08

, and .11 under COMAR 26.08.02 Water Quality ; and (3) Regulations .02-1 and .04 under COMAR 26.08.04 Permits

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 40:25 Md. R. 2107

— 2136 (December 13, 2013), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: April 28, 2014.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environment 

# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2-

303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [14-034-F] On March 26, 2014, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to Regulations .01

, .04

, .06

, .07

, .09 , and .10 and adopted new Regulation .12 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 41:2 Md. R. 163

— 168 (January 24, 2014), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: April 28, 2014.

Attorney General ’ s Certification In accordance with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: Regulation .12F requires the replacement of the date March 1, 2014, with the date May 1, 2014, in the final action. This date correction does not change the intent or impact of the regulation.
.12 Standards for Biomass Fuel-Burning Equipment Equal to or Greater Than 350,000 Btu/hr. A.

— E. (proposed text unchanged) F. A person subject to the requirements of this regulation may not operate biomass fuel-burning equipment installed prior to [[ March 1 ]] May 1, 2014 unless: (1)

— (2) (proposed text unchanged) G.

— J. (proposed text unchanged)
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the EnvironmentPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 621

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Proposed Action [15-115-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to: (1) Amend Regulation .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; (2) Amend Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations ; and (3) Adopt new Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to create a separate chapter applicable to Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants containing requirements unique to them. The new chapter combines existing requirements in COMAR 26.11.01, .06, and .29 regarding NO x , SO x , visible emissions, and particulate matter that apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants into one chapter. This action establishes slightly more stringent emission NO x limitations based upon recommended limits for cement kilns from the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) to satisfy Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirements under the Clean air Act for the 2008 8-hour ozone standard. Older, less stringent NO x limits in COMAR 26.11.09.08 will be repealed. This action also establishes a new method for continuous monitoring of particulate matter emissions for both cement kilns and clinker coolers required by the 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants effective September 1, 2016. The two Portland cement manufacturing plants in Maryland are required to operate continuous opacity monitors (COMs). EPA has recently added requirements for continuously monitoring particulate matter in the 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants which provided an alternative monitoring procedure for visible emissions. In this action cement kilns have the option of using continuous opacity monitors or the NESHAP alternative methods of visible emission monitoring for opacity. Clinker coolers and kilns have the option of using continuous opacity monitors or the NESHAP alternative methods of visible emission monitoring for opacity after September 1, 2016. Under these regulations, operation of a COM requires the facility to follow the quality assurance procedures in COMAR 26.11.31.
Background In an effort to streamline regulations pertaining to Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) is compiling the requirements for these facilities in a separate chapter. This action separates Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants and Natural Gas Compression Stations currently together in COMAR 26.11.29 into two separate chapters: COMAR 26.11.29 Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations and COMAR 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants. The existing COMAR 26.11.06.05 Sulfur Compounds from Other than Fuel-Burning Equipment establishes a concentration standard for SO 2 for cement kilns depending on the location of the plant and the date the plant was constructed. These requirements for SO 2 are being moved into COMAR 26.11.30. The NO x emission standards and continuous emission monitoring requirements for installations at Portland cement plants were specified in COMAR 26.11.29. These requirements for NO x are also included in new COMAR 26.11.30 In 2012, EPA designated areas as attainment and nonattainment with respect to the national ambient air quality standard for ozone revised in 2008. Under the federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §7401 et seq., sources in ozone nonattainment areas classified as moderate and above are subject to a NO x Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT) requirement. Areas in the Ozone Transport Region are also subject to this requirement regardless of designation. Section 182 of the Clean Air Act requires the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to review and revise NO x RACT requirements in the Maryland State Implementation Plan (SIP) as necessary in light of the new more stringent ambient air quality standards. In reviewing existing NO x RACT requirements for adequacy, MDE considers technological advances and the stringency of the revised ozone standard. In 2007, the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) compiled a Technical Support Document on Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control Measures which included recommendations for NO x emission limitations for cement kilns based on the type of kiln. MDE concluded the recommended rates represented RACT for cement kilns in Maryland and these rates will become effective April 1, 2017. New particulate matter (PM) continuous emission monitoring procedures are specified in EPA ’ s 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants. After September 1, 2016, these facilities will be required to use these procedures to determine compliance with particulate matter standards. The NESHAP procedure uses stack test data to calibrate a PM continuous emission monitor (CEM) and then uses the PM CEM as a Continuous Parametric Monitoring System (CPMS). The PM CPMS can also be calibrated for use as a parametric monitoring device to determine compliance with opacity standards. The system offers an alternative to COMs for monitoring visible emissions. Under this action MDE proposes the option to either operate COMs or PM CPMS to monitor visible emissions.. The NESHAP procedures have been integrated into the Visible Emissions and Particulate Matter requirements of the new chapter 30.

Sources Affected and Location There are two existing Portland cement manufacturing plants in Maryland, one in Carroll County and one in Washington County. The Carroll County plant has a pre-calciner, pre-heater kiln. The Washington County plant is currently modifying their kiln from a long-dry kiln to a pre-calciner, pre-heater kiln and will complete the modification by 2017.
Requirements This action is to: 1. Combine all of the existing requirements in COMAR 26.11.01, .06, and .29 regarding NO x , SO x , visible emissions and particulate matter that apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants into one chapter; 2. Repeal NO x emission limitations in COMAR 26.11.09.08 which apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants and establish new NO x emission limitations based upon recommended control measures for cement kilns from the 2007 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) Technical Support Document on Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control Measures;PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 622

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 3. Add cement kilns to COMAR 26.11.01.10 which delineates the types of facilities that need to operate a COM to measure opacity; 4. Establish new continuous particulate matter monitoring procedures, as specified in EPA ’ s 2013 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry and Standards of Performance for Portland Cement Plants. The new procedures will be used to demonstrate compliance with particulate matter emissions limitations and may be used to demonstrate compliance with opacity standards for cement kilns and clinker coolers under the specified circumstances instead of using a COM; and 5. Require cement kilns subject to COM requirements to comply with the Quality Assurance Requirements for COMs in existing COMAR 26.11.31. The Department makes note that under separate action amendments to COMAR 26.11.29 are being proposed. Existing and new requirements for Control of NO x Emissions from Internal Combustion Engines Located at Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations will be under COMAR 26.11.29. Existing and new requirements for Portland cement manufacturing plants will be under COMAR 26.11.30.
Expected Emissions Reductions On and after April 1, 2017, Portland cement kilns will need to meet a NO x emission limitation based upon recommended control measures for cement kilns from the 2007 Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) Technical Support Document on Identification and Evaluation of Candidate Control Measures. The proposed NO x emission rate for long dry kilns is 3.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced and for pre-calciner kilns, an emissions rate of 2.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced. As a result of this action, the Portland cement plant in Carroll County will reduce annual NO x emissions by about 14% or 400 tons based on 2012/2013 production. The Portland cement plant in Washington County will reduce annual NO x emissions by about 33% or 510 tons based on 2012/2013 production.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact I. Summary of Economic Impact. This action only requires affected sources to increase the amount of ammonia reagent used in existing pollution control equipment to meet the proposed NO x emission limitations in 2017.The Portland cement plant in Carroll County is a pre-calciner, preheater kiln. Currently, the operators inject 600

— 730 liters/hr of ammonia into their Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR) control technology to keep NO x emissions below 2.5 lbs/ton of clinker to ensure compliance with the current 2.8 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker limit. Operating the SNCR costs approximately $1,000,000 per year. Using a linear equation, the plant would need to inject 760 liters/hr of ammonia to keep their NO x emissions below 2.4 lbs/ton clinker to ensure compliance with a margin of safety. To meet the NO x emission rate of 2.4 lbs/ton clinker produced, the additional ammonia could cost approximately $150,000 per year. As part of a federal action, the Portland cement plant inWashington County will be upgrading the kiln to a pre-heater/precalciner kiln by September 6, 2016. The kiln will then be required to meet a year round NO x limit of 1.8 lbs NO x /ton of clinker on a 30- day rolling average. The 1.8 lbs NO x /ton per ton of clinker is lower than the 2.4 lbs NO x /ton of clinker in these regulations, so the regulations do not have an economic impact on the Washington County facility. The operation of a continuous particulate matter emissions monitor is required under the federal cement NESHAP. The option to use this instrument to satisfy the COM requirement for monitoring opacity from cement kilns represents a possible cost savings to the facility. Monitoring of opacity has been required since the early 1990s and is not an additional cost.
Revenue (R+/R-) II. Types of Economic Impact. Expenditure (E+/E-) Magnitude

A. On issuing agency: NONE
B. On other State agencies: NONE C. On local governments: NONE

Benefit (+) Cost (-) Magnitude

D. On regulated industries or trade groups: Compliance costs (-) $150,000 E. On other industries or trade groups:
MD contractors (+) Indeterminable
F. Direct and indirect effects on public: NONE III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from Section II.) D. Ammonia reagent injection with the existing control technology is required to meet the NO x emission rate. E. Installation of technology and maintenance is usually performed by specially trained tradesmen. The magnitude of demand is unknown.

Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on May 19, 2015, at 10 a.m., at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or email to Randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than May 19, 2015, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Dep artment of the Environment ’ s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/reqco mments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration offices; and • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 623

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department ’ s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.



## 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.10 Continuous Opacity Monitoring Requirements. A. Applicability and Exceptions. (1)

— (4) (text unchanged) (5) The owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may discontinue use of a COM when a PM CPMS is installed and operated in accordance with the requirements of COMAR 26.11.30. B.

— E. (text unchanged) F. 

### Fuel burning equipment subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.09.05 and cement kilns subject to the COM requirements in COMAR 26.11.30 are subject to the COM requirements contained in COMAR 26.11.31.


## 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

.08 Control of NO x Emissions for Major Stationary Sources. A.

— G. (text unchanged) H. Requirements for [ Cement Manufacturing Facilities, ] Municipal Waste Combustors, and Hospital, Medical, and Infectious Waste Incinerators. (1) A person who owns or operates a [ cement manufacturing facility or a ] municipal waste combustor shall install, operate, and maintain a CEM for NO x emissions. [ (2) NO x emissions from cement manufacturing kilns may not exceed the following total hourly NO x emissions as determined on a 30-day rolling average of the daily average: (a) 1,000 pounds for a facility with a total kiln capacity of 600,000 tons per year or less; and (b) 1,800 pounds for a facility with a total kiln capacity greater than 600,000 tons per year. ] [ (3) ] (2) NO x emissions from municipal waste combustors may not exceed the NO x emissions standards in COMAR 26.11.08.07 and COMAR 26.11.08.08 [ (205 ppm 24-hour average) ] or applicable Prevention of Significant Deterioration limits, whichever is more restrictive. [ (4) ] (3) (text unchanged) I. Requirements for Glass Melting Furnaces [ and Internal Combustion Engines at Natural Gas Pipeline Stations ]

. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) [ (3) A person who owns or operates an internal combustion engine at a natural gas pipeline station with a capacity factor over 15 percent shall perform either parametric optimization or engine rebuild to meet the following emission standards: (a) Facilities with five or less engines shall meet a combined maximum hourly emission rate of 300 pounds per hour; and (b) Facilities with more than five engines shall meet a combined maximum hourly emissions rate of 566 pounds per hour. (4) Records demonstrating performance of parametric optimization shall be maintained on site for at least 2 years and made available to the Department upon request. ] J.

— K. (text unchanged)


## 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement

Manufacturing Plants

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland
.01 Scope. This chapter contains all of the general requirements that apply to Portland cement manufacturing plants. New or modified cement plants may be subject to more restrictive requirements that are included in a permit issued by the Department. Portland cement manufacturing plants subject to this chapter may also be subject to federal New Source Performance Standards under 40 CFR Part 60, Subpart F, and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from the Portland Cement Manufacturing Industry under 40 CFR Part 63, Subpart LLL.
.02 Applicability. A. The requirements of this chapter apply to cement kilns and other installations located at Portland cement manufacturing plants. B. Any source which is subject to the provisions of this chapter may also be subject to the provisions of any other chapter. However, when this chapter establishes an emission standard for a specific installation which differs from the general emission standards in COMAR 26.11.06.01

— .09, this chapter takes precedence.
.03 Definitions. A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated. B. Terms Defined. (1) “ Cement kiln ” means an installation, including any associated pre-heater or pre-calciner devices, that produces clinker by heating limestone and other materials to produce Portland

cement. (2) “ Cement manufacturing installation ” means process equipment used for subsequent production of Portland cement. (3) “ Clinker cooler ” means an installation into which clinker product leaving the kiln is placed to be cooled by air supplied by a forced air draft or natural draft supply system. (4) “ Long dry kiln ” means a cement kiln that does not have a pre-calciner and in which dry starting raw materials are fed into the kiln. (5) “ PM continuous parametric monitoring system ” (CPMS) means a continuous emission monitoring system used to establish a parameter range for the purposes of demonstrating compliance. (6) “ Pre-calciner kiln ” means a cement kiln that contains a pre-calciner at the bottom of the pre-heater tower before the materials enter the kiln. (7) “ 30-day rolling average ” means the arithmetic average of all valid hourly NO x emission rates of the previous 720 valid hours on a rolling basis. (8) “ 30 process operating day ” means: (a) The first day after the compliance date following completion of the field testing and data collection that demonstrates that the CPMS or CEMS has satisfied the relevant CPMS performance evaluation or CEMS performance specification acceptance criteria; and (b) For purposes of this chapter, the performance test period is complete at the end of the 30th consecutive operating day.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 624

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 .04 Particulate Matter. A. The owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions of particulate matter to exceed the limits in §B of this regulation. B. Emission Limits. (1) Areas I, II, V, and VI. In Areas I, II, V, and VI, a person may not cause or permit particulate matter to be discharged from any installation in excess of 0.05 grains per standard cubic foot dry. (2) Areas III and IV. In Areas III and IV, a person may not cause or permit particulate matter to be discharged from any installation in excess of 0.03 grains per standard cubic foot dry. (3) Compliance with the particulate matter standards of §B(1) and (2) of this regulation shall be demonstrated by a 3-run stack test using Method 5 or Method 5I of 40 CFR Part 60. C. Particulate Matter Monitoring Requirements for Cement Kilns and Clinker Coolers. On or after September 1, 2016, the owner or operator of a cement kiln or clinker cooler at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall: (1) Use a PM continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS) to establish a site-specific operating parameter limit corresponding to the results of the performance test as required in §B(3) of this regulation demonstrating compliance with the PM limits in §B(1) and (2) of this regulation; (2) Conduct the performance test as required in §B(3) of this regulation using Method 5 or Method 5I of 40 CFR part 60; (3) Use the PM CPMS to demonstrate continuous compliance with the site-specific operating parameter limit established in §C(1) of this regulation; (4) Repeat the performance test as required in §B(3) of this regulation annually and reassess and adjust the site-specific operating parameter limit of §C(1) of this regulation in accordance with the results of the performance test using the procedures in 40 CFR §63.1349(b)(1)(i)

— (ix); and (5) Follow the procedures in 40 CFR §63.1350(b)(iii) and (iv) for any exceedance of the established operating parameter limit of §C(1) of this regulation on a 30 process operating day basis.

.05 Visible Emission Standards. A. The owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions which exceed the visibility standards in §B of this regulation. B. Visibility Standards. (1) In Areas I, II, V, and VI a person may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions from any installation or building, other than water in an uncombined form, which is greater than 20 percent opacity. (2) In Areas III and IV a person may not cause or permit the discharge of emissions from any installation or building, other than water in an uncombined form, which is visible to human observers. (3) Compliance with the visibility standards of §B(1) and (2) of this regulation shall be demonstrated by a visible emission observation using Method 9 of 40 CFR Part 60. C. Visible Emission Monitoring Requirements for Cement Kilns. The owner or operator of a cement kiln at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall either: (1) Use a COM in accordance with the requirements of COMAR 26.11.01.10; or (2) Use a PM continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS) to establish a site-specific operating parameter limit for continuous visible emission compliance determinations in accordance with Regulation .04C of this chapter. D. Visible Emission monitoring requirements for clinker coolers. On or after September 1, 2016, the owner or operator of a clinker cooler at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall either: (1) Use a COM in accordance with the requirements of COMAR 26.11.01.10; or (2) Use a PM continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS) to establish a site-specific operating parameter limit for continuous visible emission compliance determinations in accordance with Regulation .04C(1)

— (5) of this chapter.
.06 Sulfur Compounds. A. Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 ). (1) Areas I, II, V, and VI. In Areas I, II, V, and VI, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions into the atmosphere with an SO 2 concentration greater than 2,000 ppm for sources constructed before January 17, 1972, or 500 ppm for sources constructed on or after January 17, 1972. (2) Areas III and IV. In Areas III and IV, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions into the atmosphere with an SO 2 concentration greater than 2,000 ppm for sources constructed before February 21, 1971, or 500 ppm for sources constructed on or after February 21, 1971. B. Sulfuric Acid and Sulfur Trioxide. (1) Areas I, II, V, and VI. In Areas I, II, V, and VI, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions of sulfuric acid, sulfur trioxide, or any combination of them, in excess of 70 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid, for any source constructed before January 17, 1972, or 35 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid, for any source constructed on or after January 17, 1972. (2) Areas III and IV. In Areas III and IV, an owner or operator of a cement manufacturing installation may not cause emissions of sulfuric acid, sulfur trioxide, or any combination of them, in excess of 70 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid for any source constructed before February 21, 1971, or 35 milligrams per cubic meter reported as sulfuric acid for any source constructed on or after February 21, 1971. C. All calculations of emissions for §§A and B of this regulation shall be adjusted to standard conditions and 7 percent oxygen.
.07 Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ). A. A person who owns or operates a cement kiln at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall meet the following applicable NO x emission standards: (1) For long dry kilns, maximum emissions of 5.1 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced; and

(2) For pre-calciner kilns, maximum emissions of 2.8 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced. B. On and after April 1, 2017, the requirements in §A of this regulation no longer apply and cement kilns shall meet the applicable NO x emission standards in §C of this regulation. C. On and after April 1, 2017, a person who owns or operates a cement kiln at a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall meet the following applicable NO x emission standards: (1) For long dry kilns, maximum emissions of 3.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced; and (2) For pre-calciner kilns, maximum emissions of 2.4 pounds of NO x per ton of clinker produced. D. Compliance with the emission standards in §§A and C of this regulation shall be demonstrated as a 30-day rolling average.

.08 NO x Continuous Emission Monitoring Requirements. A. The owner or operator of a Portland cement manufacturing plant shall: (1) Continuously monitor NO x emissions with a continuous emissions monitor (CEM) system in accordance with COMAR 26.11.01.11B(1) and (4) and C; (2) Collect NO x emissions data that was obtained pursuant to §A(1) of this regulation; andPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 625

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 17, 2015 (3) Submit emissions data collected pursuant to §A(2) of this regulation to the Department as specified under COMAR 26.11.01.11E(2). B. The NO x emissions data collected pursuant to §A(2) of this regulation shall be used to demonstrate compliance with the applicable NO x emission rate in Regulation .07 of this chapter.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.29 [NO x 

## Reduction Requirements for NonElectric Generating Units] Control of NO x 

## Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, and 2-301

— 2-303, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Proposed Action [15-109-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to repeal existing Regulations .01

— .05 and adopt new Regulations .01

— .05 under COMAR 26.11.29 Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to maintain and consolidate NO x emission requirements for internal combustion engines used to compress natural gas located at natural gas pipeline compression stations. These NO x emission requirements were established under the NO x SIP Call for affected nontrading sources. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan.
Background In order to consolidate NO x emission requirements for internal combustion engines used to compress natural gas located at natural gas pipeline compression stations, the Department proposes to repeal the existing chapter 29 and replace it. The new chapter 29, titled Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations, requires the affected facilities to continue to meet the maximum hourly NO x emission limits and the NO x emission concentration requirements. There are no additional requirements established at this time.

Sources Affected and Location This action affects one facility in Garrett County with two engines and one facility in Howard County with over five engines. Both facilities are currently in compliance with all the requirements.
Requirements This action proposes to repeal existing chapter 29 titled “NO x Reduction Requirements for Non- Electric Generating Units”. The Department proposes new regulations .01

— .05 under COMAR 26.11.29 now titled “Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations” which will keep the existing NO x emission standards for internal combustion engines located at natural gas pipeline compression stations from the repealed regulation.05 under chapter 29. This action further clarifies the monitoring, compliance demonstration and record keeping requirements for internal combustion engines located at natural gas pipeline compression stations. There are no additional requirements resulting from this action. Expected Emission Reductions There are no expected emission reductions from this action.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on May 19, 2015 at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or email to Randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than May 19, 2015, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/reqco mments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Adminis tration offices; and • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department’s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537

- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.
.01 Definitions. A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated. B. Terms Defined. (1) “ Natural gas pipeline compression station ” means a main line natural gas transmission station, consisting of one or more internal combustion engines, used to compress natural gas, thereby sustaining flow of natural gas through the pipeline. (2) “ Parametric optimization ” means the adjustment of an internal combustion engine, such as adjustment of the air-to-fuel ratio, that maximizes engine efficiency and minimizes emissions.
.02 Applicability and General Requirements. A. Applicability. This chapter applies to stationary internal combustion engines used to compress natural gas located at natural gas pipeline compression stations. B. NOx Emission Limits. A person who owns or operates a stationary internal combustion engine to which this chapter applies shall perform either parametric optimization or engine rebuild to meet the following NO x emission limits: (1) Facilities with five or fewer internal combustion engines shall meet a combined maximum hourly emission limit of 300 pounds per hour or less.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 884

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, IS SUE 14, FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2015 

# Subtitle 18 LARGE FAMILY CHILD CARE HOMES

Notice of Final Action [15-094-F] On June 26, 2015, the State Superintendent of Schools adopted: (1) Regulations .02

— .05 under COMAR 13A.18.02 Registration Application and Maintenance ; (2) Regulations .03

— .06 under COMAR 13A.18.03 Management and Administration ; (3) Regulation .03 under COMAR 13A.18.05 Home Environment and Equipment ; (4) Regulations .02 and .05

— .07 under COMAR 13A.18.06 Provider and Staff Requirements ; (5) Regulation .01 under COMAR 13A.18.08 Child Supervision ; (6) Regulation .01 under COMAR 13A.18.09 Program Requirements ; and (7) Regulation .01 under COMAR 13A.18.12 Nutrition

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:6 Md. R. 535

— 539 (March 20, 2015), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.
Attorney General’s Certification In accordan ce with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: At 13A.18.02.03A(3), change “.02B(2)(b)” to read “.02C(2)(b); at 13A.18.02.04A(2), ch ange “.02B(1)” to read “.02C(1)”; and at 13A.18.02.05B(2)(d), change “.02B(2)(a)” to read “.02C(2)(a)”. The changes are nonsubstantive and were made to clarify the authority for the regulations and to ensure that cross-references were correct.


## 13A.18.02 Registration Application and

Maintenance

Authority: Family Law Article, §§5-501, 5-505, 5-550

— 5-557.1, and 5-560

— 5-563; Human Services Article, §1-202; State Government Article, §10-617; Annotated Code of Maryland Agency Note: Federal Statutory Reference

— Americans with Disabilities Act

of 1990 (42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq.); Pro-Children Act of 1994 (20 U.S.C. §6081 et seq.)
.03 Continuing Registration. A. Application for Continuing Registration. To obtain a continuing registration, a provider shall submit to the office before expiration of the initial registration: (1)

— (2) (proposed text unchanged) (3) A medical evaluation that meets the requirements of Regulation [[ .02B(2)(b) ]] .02C(2)(b) of this chapter for: (a)

— (c) (proposed text unchanged) (4)

— (6) (proposed text unchanged) B. (proposed text unchanged)
.04 Provisional Status and Conditional Registration. A. Provisional Status. (1) (proposed text unchanged) (2) An initial registration may not be approved if the office has not yet received evidence that the ap plicant and, as applicable, each individual specified in Regulation [[ .02B(1) ]] .02C(1) and (2)(a) of this chapter has successfully passed a federal and State criminal background check and a review of child and adult abuse and neglect records. (3)

— (4) (proposed text unchanged) B. (proposed text unchanged)
.05 Resumption of Service. A. (proposed text unchanged) B. The application to resume service shall meet all initial registration application requirements, except that: (1) (proposed text unchanged) (2) The office may accept as applicable to the new application the: (a)

— (c) (proposed text unchanged) (d) Results of the original child and adult abuse and neglect clearances conducted pursuant to Regulation [[ .02B(2)(a) ]] .02C(2)(a) of this chapter, if the clearances were completed within 12 months of the application; and (e) (proposed text unchanged)
LILLIAN M. LOWERY, Ed.D. State Superintendent of Schools


# Title 14 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Subtitle 09 WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION 14.09.04 Legal Representation and Fees

Authority: Labor and Employment Article, §§9-309 and 9-731, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-107-F] On June 25, 2015, the Workers’ Compensation Commission adopted amendments to Regulation .03 under COMAR 14.09.04.03 Legal Representation and Fees . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:7 Md. R. 573

— 574 (April 3, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.

R. KARL AUMANN Chairman


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

Notice of Final Action [15-115-F] On June 23, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted: (1) Amendments to Regulation .10 under COMAR 26.11.01 General Administrative Provisions ; (2) Amendments to Regulation .08 under COMAR 26.11.09 Control of Fuel-Burning Equipment, Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, and Certain Fuel-Burning Installations ; and (3) New Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.30 Control of Portland Cement Manufacturing Plants

.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 885

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 14, FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2015 This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:8 Md. R. 621

— 625 (April 17, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment 

# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.29 Control of NO x 

## Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, and 2-301

— 2-303, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-109-F] On June 23, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted the repeal of existing Regulations .01

— .05 and new Regulations .01

— .05 under COMAR 26.11.29 Control of NO x Emissions from Natural Gas Pipeline Compression Stations . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:8 Md. R. 625

— 626 (April 17, 2015), has been adopted with the nonsubstantive changes shown below. Effective Date: July 20, 2015.
Attorney General’s Certification In accordan ce with State Government Article, §10-113, Annotated Code of Maryland, the Attorney General certifies that the following changes do not differ substantively from the proposed text. The nature of the changes and the basis for this conclusion are as follows: Regulation .03A(2): The added text is to clarify that the report is required annually; therefore there is no change to the intent or impact of the regulation.
.03 Monitoring Requirements. A. A person who owns or operates a stationary internal combustion engine subject to Regulation .02C of this chapter shall: (1) (proposed text unchanged) (2) On or before May 1, 2002, and every year thereafter, collect NO x emissions data that was obtained pursuant to §A(1) of this regulation; and (3) (proposed text unchanged) B. (proposed text unchanged)

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the EnvironmentPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 490

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 2014 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.13 Control of Gasoline and Volatile

Organic Compound Storage and Handling

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [14-108-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulations .04 and .05 under COMAR 26.11.13 Control of Gasoline and Volatile Organic Compound Storage and Handling

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to provide an alternative equivalent vapor recovery method for the transfer of high vapor pressure materials and to amend incorrect references. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan.

Background COMAR 26.11.13.04 establishes requirements for the use of automatic disconnections for the transfer of gasoline and VOCs with a total vapor pressure greater than 1.5 psia. Automatic disconnections are typically referred to in the industry as dry disconnects. Affected sources in Maryland do use dry disconnects on transfer equipment used for the handling of gasoline and fuel grade ethanol products (which have vapor pressures of greater than 1.5 psia). These products are typically transported in tank trucks meeting the U.S. Department of Transportation (US DOT) specifications as a MC306 or MC406 type cargo tank. The fuel industry has adopted the use of dry disconnect fittings for loading and unloading hose applications. Affected sources are limited to using dry disconnects on these products to accommodate the tank truck connection fittings on the MC306/406 cargo tanks. The handling of other flammable liquids in tank trucks is not so clearly defined for the loading connections. These products are handled in US DOT MC407 cargo tanks. The motor carrier and chemical industries do not have an industry standard for the hose connections and trailer fittings beyond regulated safety venting devices. Sources that transfer fuels and liquids do not operate the motor carrier fleets or direct or coordinate the tank truck set up or maintenance. As such affected sources are required to have a high degree of flexibility as to the product and vapor return connections necessary to safely transfer the ordered product. The daily variation for tank truck connection type and size make the development of a standard transfer hose connection challenging. Many motor carriers use a variation of a cam lock “ quick connector ” type fitting to allow them to meet the end receiver transfer connections. Affected sources in Maryland maintain an inventory of the most commonly used connections to meet daily operating conditions. Affected sources in Maryland typ ically only transfer one product with a vapor pressure greater than 1.5 psia at a Baltimore facility. This product is hexane, for which typically approximately 1.5 million gallons are transferred annually. This product is transferred using vapor balance, which has an estimated combined capture and control efficiency of 98.7 percent using EPA AP-42 factors. The total volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions associated with this transfer are estimated as approximately 114 pounds. This transfer quantity equates to approximately 53 tank cars of material, and approximately 215 truckloads of material. The tank trucks that are used to transport this material are not equipped with fittings that will accommodate dry disconnects. Because these tank trucks are not owned or operated by transfer facilities, it is outside of affected sources control to equip the tank trucks with such fittings.

Sources Affected and Location The amendments affect the TRANSFLO Terminal Services, Inc. facility located in Baltimore City.

Requirements The amendments provide an alternative equivalent vapor recovery method for the transfer of high vapor pressure materials that must be approved by the Department and the EPA.

Expected Emissions Reductions Minimal emission reductions from existing sources in Maryland are expected as a result of adopting the proposed amendments. Air quality emission benefits will continue to be maintained with the help of custom procedures in place as an alternative to the use of dry disconnects for the transfer of high vapor pressure materials. The affected facility has developed a custom transloading operation for high vapor pressure materials such as hexane that involves an elevated platform, vapor balance and a “ fail-closed ” configuration which turns off the pump and ceases flow should there be a leaking connection, valve, or hose. Liquid pump(s) are used to empty the hoses upon completion of the transfer operation which minimizes releases to the environment (i.e., spills and evaporation).
Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on June 3, 2014 at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Randy Mosier, Chief, Regulation Development Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or emailed to randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than June 3, 2014, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’ s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Ad ministration; • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury;PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 491

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISS UE 8, FRIDAY, APRIL 18, 2014 • All local air quality control offices; and • Local health departments in those counties not having separate air quality control offices. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department ’ s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.
.04 Loading Operations. A. Bulk Gasoline Terminals. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) (3) Test Procedures. (a) Testing for leak-tight conditions, as required in §A(1)(b)(ii) of this regulation, shall be conducted as prescribed in Method 1008 of the Department ’ s Technical Memorandum 91-01,

“ Test Methods and Equipment Specifications for Stationary Sources ” [ ( ] January 1991 [ ) ] , as amended through Supplement 3 (October 1, 1997), which is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.04C. (b) The test procedures to determine mass emission rate compliance as required in §A(1)(a) of this regulation, shall be as prescribed in Method 1009 of the Department ’ s Technical Memorandum 91-01, “ Test Methods and Equipment Specifications for Stationary Sources ” [ ( ] January 1991 [ ) ] , as amended through Supplement 3 (October 1, 1997), which is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.04C. B.

— D. (text unchanged) E. Alternative Complian ce Procedures. In lieu of satisfying the requirements of §D(1) of this regulation, a person may instead utilize: (a) An overhead loading rack installation which transfers VOC other than gasoline having a TVP of 1.5 psia (10.3 kilonewtons/square meter) from railro ad tank car to tank trucks, or vice versa, using drip pans and other spill control equipment to limit the release of any product during post loading disconnections and any one of the following control practices or combination thereof: (i) Walking the hose clear of fluids; (ii) Running a pump to clear the line of fluids; or (iii) Application of inert gas to clear the line of fluids; or (b) An alternative equivalent vapor containment method approved by the Department and the EPA as a revision to the Maryland State Implementation Plan.

.05 Gasoline Leaks from Tank Trucks. A. (text unchanged) B. Method of Compliance. A person who owns or operates a gasoline tank truck subject to this regulation shall: 

### (1) (text unchanged) (2) Use the certification test procedures as prescribed in Method 1007 of the Department’s Technical Memorandum 91 -01, “Test Methods and Equipment Specifications for Stationary Sources” [ ( ] January 1991 [ ) ] , as amended through Supplement 3 (October 1, 1997), which is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.04C; and 

### (3) (text unchanged) C. Determination of Compliance. (1) (text unchanged) (2) The Department may at any time monitor gasoline tank trucks for leak-tight conditions using the procedures described in Method 1008 of the Department’s Technical Memorandum 91 -01, “Test Methods and Equipment Specifications for Stationary Sources”, January 1991, as amended through Supplement 3 (October 1, 1997), which is incorporated by reference in COMAR 26.11.01.04C. 

### D. (text unchanged)
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environment


# Title 33 STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

Subtitle 10 VOTING SYSTEMS

— SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS AND PROCEDURES

33.10.02 AccuVote-TS

Authority: Election Law Article, §§2-102(b)(4), 2-202(b), 9-102(b) and (i), 11-308, and 11-403(a)(1), Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [14-103-P] The State Board of Elections proposes to amend Regulation .07 under COMAR 33.10.02 AccuVote-TS. This action was considered by the State Board of Elections at its February 27, 2014, meeting, notice of which was given in accordance with State Government Article, §10-506(c), Annotated Code of Maryland.
Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to clarify the procedure for determining the voting unit allocation to include the State Administrator with consultation with the local boards.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.
Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment Comments may be sent to Erin Perrone, Administrative Assistant, State Board of Elections, P.O. Box 6486, Annapolis, MD 21401- 0486, or call 410-269-2845, or email to erin.perrone@maryland.gov, or fax to 410-974-2019. Comments will be accepted through May 19, 2014. A public hearing has not been scheduled.
.07 Number of Voting Units; Privacy Booths. A. Number of Voting Units Required. (1) For a regularly scheduled primary or general election, the [ local board shall provide each polling place with: (a) The greater of: (i) One voting unit for each 200 registered voters assigned to a precinct, plus an additional voting unit for every fractional part of that number; or (ii) Two voting units; and (b) At least one voting unit with accessible voting equipment ] State Administrator, in consultation with the local boards, shall determine the number of voting units assigned to each precinct.FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS

800

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 41, ISSUE 14, FRIDAY, JULY 11, 2014



# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION 26.08.05 Certification of State Water Quality Laboratories

Authority: Environment Article, Title 9, Subtitle 10, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [14-081-F-I] On June 12, 2014, the Secretary of the Environment adopted the repeal of existing Regulations .01

— .16 and new Regulations .01

— .18 under COMAR 26.08.05 Certification of State Water Quality Laboratories . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 41:7 Md. R. 435

—

441 (April 4, 2014), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: July 21, 2014.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.13 Control of Gasoline and Volatile Organic Compound Storage and Handling

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2-

303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [14-108-F] On June 18, 2014, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to Regulations .04 and .05 under COMAR 26.11.13 Control of Gasoline and Volatile Organic Compound Storage and Handling . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 41:8 Md. R. 490

—

491 (April 18, 2014), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: July 21, 2014.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the EnvironmentPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 848

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 13, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2015 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from

Specific Processes

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-148-P] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulation .26 and adopt new Regulation .26-1 under COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to adopt the requirements of the EPA ’ s Control Techniques Guidelines (CTG) for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing. The new regulation COMAR 26.11.19.26-1, Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing, adopts the requirements of the EPA ’ s CTG for this category. EPA develops CTGs as guidance on control requirements for various source categories. States can follow the CTGs or adopt more restrictive standards. MDE proposes to adopt new volatile organic compound (VOC) limits, standards for application methods, and work practice requirements which are consistent with the most recent CTG recommendations applicable to fiberglass boat manufacturing. The new regulation affects manufacturers of fiberglass boats. COMAR 26.11.19.26 Control of Volatile Organic Compounds from Reinforced Plastic Manufacturing is amended to exempt fiberglass boat manufacturing. This amendment and new regulation will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a revision to Maryland ’ s State Implementation Plan (SIP).

Background The EPA first published an assessment of VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing in 1990. This assessment evaluated VOC emissions from fiberglass boat manufacturing and potential control options. The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Boat Manufacturing, 40 CFR part 63, subpart VVVV (2001 NESHAP) were promulgated in 2001. Emission standards under the 2001 NESHAP were for or ganic hazar dous air pollutants (HAPs) based on low-HAP resins and gel coats and low-emitting resin application technology. In July 2008, the EPA published a new CTG for Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Materials. The CTG was developed based on the 1990 VOC assessment, the 2001 NESHAP, existing state VOC emission reducti on approaches such as California, and in consideration of informati on obtained since the issuance of the 2001 NESHAP.

Requirements Resins containing styrene and gel coats containing both styrene and methyl methacrylate (MMA) are the main contributors of VOC emissions at fiberglass boat manufacturing facilities. The proposed standards are designed to reduce VOC emissions during fiberglass boat manufacturing operations. Not all the VOCs in the materials used are emitted to the atmosphere, as some of the VOCs are used in cross linking reactions of polymers and are retained in the finished material. Thus, an overall reduction of VOC content in production materials reduces potential emissi ons from extraneous VOCs during the manufacturing process. Cleaning activities other than surface preparation also occur at facilities engaged in fiberglass boat manufacturing. Cleaning materials are used to remove residue or other unwanted materials from equipment related to manufacturing operations such as molds and prototypes, as well as the cleaning of application equipment, transfer lines and other ancillary e quipment. These cleaning materials are typically mixtures of VOC containing solvents. The proposed regulation includes emission control requirements for cleaning materials consistent with those in the CTG.

Expected Emissions Reductions The proposed regulation sets standards for fiberglass boat manufacturing operations. Emissions of VOCs from fiberglass boat manufacturing operations are expected to be reduced by approximately forty percent nationally. Maryland only has one known source that may, on occasion, assemble fiberglass boats from premanufactured hulls and decks. Therefore Maryland VOC emission benefits will be negligible. The coatings industry already has products available to meet VOC standards contained in the CTG and proposed regulation. The maximum benefit from VOC reductions will be provided during the ozone season when VOCs readily combine with NO x to form the pollutant ground level ozone.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact I. Summary of Economic Impact. The proposed new regulation adopts the requirements of the CTG for fiberglass boat manufacturing. EPA estimated the economic impact of this regulation on a national level at a cost effectiveness approximately $ 4,200/ton of VOC controlled. The standards and requirements of the CTG have already been implemented in other states and as a result cost of production of compliant materials has come down from initial phase of implementation. As the CTGs are implemented nationally, the costs of compliant materials are expe cted to be reduced further. Due to the limited number of affected sources, the economic impact in MD will be minimal.
Revenue (R+/R-)

II. Types of Economic Impact. Expenditure (E+/E-) Magnitude

A. On issuing agency: NONE B. On other State agencies: NONE C. On local governments: NONE

Benefit (+) Cost (-) Magnitude

D. On regulated industries or trade
groups: (-) Minimal
E. On other industries or trade
groups: NONE
F. Direct and indirect effects on public: NONE III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from Section II.) D. Minimal impact on affected sources.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 849

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 13, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2015 Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on July 28, 2015 at 10:00 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or emailed to randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received not later than July 28, 2015, or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’ s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration Off ice in Baltimore; and • The regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department ’ s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.
.26 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Reinforced Plastic Manufacturing. A. Applicability. (1)

— (2) (text unchanged) (3) The requirements in this regulation do not apply to any fiberglass boat manufacturing facility as defined in Regulation .26- 1B(5) of this chapter. B.

— D. (text unchanged)
.26-1 Control of Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing. A. Applicability. (1) This regulation applies to any fiberglass boat manufacturing facility where the total actual VOC emissions, before add-on controls, from all fiberglass boat manufacturing is 15 pounds or more per day as determined on a monthly average. (2) VOC emissions from polyester resins, tooling resins and gel coats, ancillary parts production, touch-up, clean-up, and repair are to be included in determining VOC emissions pursuant to §(A)(1) of this regulation. B. Definitions. In this regulation, the following terms have the meanings indicated: (1) Atomized Resin Application. (a) “ Atomized resin application ” means a resin application technology in which the resin leaves the application equipment and breaks into droplets or an aerosol as it travels from the application equipment to the surface of the part. (b) “ Atomized resin application ” includes, but is not limited to, resin spray guns and resin chopper spray guns. (2) Clear Gel Coat. (a) “ Clear gel coat ” means a gel coat that is clear or translucent such that underlying colors are visible. (b) “ Clear gel coat ” does not include tooling gel coats used to build or repair molds. (3) Closed Molding. (a) “ Closed molding ” means any molding process that has the following characteristics: (i) Pressure is used to distribute the resin through the reinforcing fabric placed between two mold surfaces to either saturate the fabric or fill the mold cavity; and (ii) Clamping pressure, fluid pressure, atmospheric pressure, or vacuum pressure are applied either alone or in combination. (b) “ Closed molding ” includes, but is not limited to, compression molding with sheet molding compound, infusion molding, resin injection molding (RIM), vacuum assisted resin transfer molding (VARTM), resin transfer molding (RTM), and vacuum assisted compression molding. (c) “ Closed molding ” does not include: (i) Processes in which a closed mold is used only to compact saturated fabric or remove air or excess resin from the fabric (such as in vacuum bagging); or (ii) Open molding steps such as application of a gel coat or skin coat layer by conventional open molding prior to a closed molding process. (4) “ Fiberglass boat ” means any type of vessel, other than a seaplane, that can be used for transportation on the water, in which either the hull or deck is built from a composite material consisting of a polyester resin or other thermosetting resin matrix reinforced with fiberglass (glass fibers), inert fi ller or other reinforcing materials such as fibers of carbon or aramid. (5) Fiberglass Boat Manufacturing Facility. (a) “ Fiberglass boat manufacturing facility ” means a facility that manufactures hulls or decks of fiberglass boats, assembles fiberglass boats from premanufactured hulls and decks, or builds molds to make hulls or decks of fiberglass boats. (b) “ Fiberglass boat manufacturing facility ” does not include a facility which: (i) Manufactures ancillary parts for fiberglass boats (such as hatches, seats, or lockers) or boat trailers; and (ii) Does not manufacture hulls or decks of fiberglass boats, assemble fiberglass boats from premanufactured hulls and decks, or build molds for fiberglass boat hulls or decks. (6) “ Filled resin ” means a resin to which an inert material has been added to change viscosity, density, shrinkage, or other physical properties. (7) “ Gel coat ” means a thermosetting resin surface coating containing styrene (Chemical Abstract Service (CAS No. 100

– 42

– 5) or methyl methacrylate (CAS No. 80

– 62

– 6) that: (a) Provides a cosmetic enhancement or improves resistance to degradation from exposure to the elements; (b) Does not contain any reinforcing fibers; and (c) Is applied directly to mold surfaces or to a finished laminate. (8) “ Mold ” means the cavity or surface into or on which gel coat, resin, and fibers are placed and from which finished fiberglass parts take their form. (9) “ Monomer ” means a low molecular weight organic compound that reacts with itself or other similar compounds to produce a polymer such as a polyester or vinylester resin. (10) Nonatomized Resin Application. (a) “ Nonatomized resin application ” means any application technology in which the resin is not broken into droplets or an aerosol as it travels from the appli cation equipment to the surface of the part. (b) “ Nonatomized resin application ” includes, but is not limited to, flowcoaters, chopper flowcoaters, pressure fed resinPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 850

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 13, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2015 rollers, resin impregnators, and hand application by paint brush or paint roller. (11) “ Non-monomer ” means any low molecular weight organic compound that does not react with itself or other similar compounds to produce a polymer and is assumed to be emitted fully as a VOC into the atmosphere. (12) “ Non-VOC cleanup material ” means a material that: (a) Is used to clean products, tools, process equipment, and other equipment used in the manufacture of fiberglass boats; and (b) Either contains less than 5 percent VOC by weight or has a VOC composite vapor pressure of no more than 0.5 millimeters of mercury at 68 degrees Fahrenheit. (13) Open Molding and Gel Coat Operations. (a) “ Open molding and gel coat operation ” means any process in which the reinforcing fibers and resin are placed in the mold and are open to the surrounding air while the reinforcing fibers are saturated with resin. (b) “ Open molding and gel coat operation ” includes operations in which a vacuum bag or similar cover is used to compress an uncured laminate to remove air bubbles or excess resin, or to achieve a bond between a core material and a laminate. (14) Pigmented Gel Coat. (a) “ Pigmented gel coat ” means an opaque gel coat. (b) “ Pigmented gel coat ” does not include tooling gel coats used to build or repair molds. (15) Production Resin. (a) “ Production resin ” means any resin used to manufacture parts for sale. (b) “ Production resin ” does not include tooling resins used to build or repair molds, or assembly adhesives. (16) “ Pure, 100-percent, vinylester resin used for skin coats ” means resins containing only vinylester resin and does not include any resin containing blends of vinylester and polyester resins. (17) “ Resin and gel coat mixing operation ” means any operation in which a resin or gel coat is combined with additives that include, but are not limited to, fillers, promoters, or catalysts, and includes operations making putties or polyputties used to assemble parts of fiberglass boats and to fill gaps between parts. (18) “ Skin coat ” means a layer of resin and fibers applied over a gel coat to protect the gel coat from being deformed by an additional laminate layer or layers. (19) “ Tooling ” means the production of molding tools such as shapes, matrixes, molds, or other instruments and utensils that are used during manufacturing of fiberglass boats. (20) “ Tooling resin ” means, for the purposes of §C(1) of this regulation, the resin used to build or repair molds (also known as tools) or prototypes (also known as plugs) from which molds will be made. (21) “ Tooling gel coat ” means, for the purposes of §C(1) of this regulation, the gel coat used to build or repair molds (also known as tools) or prototypes (also known as plugs) from which molds will be made. (22) “ Total VOC Content (percent by weight) ” means the sum of the monomer content (percent by weight) determined according to§D(1) of this regulation and of the weight percent of the nonmonomer VOC determined by §D(3) of this regulation. (23) Vacuum Bagging. (a) “ Vacuum bagging ” means any molding technique in which the reinforcing fabric is saturated with resin and then covered with a flexible sheet that is sealed to the edge of the mold and where a vacuum is applied under the sheet to compress the laminate, remove excess resin, or remove trapped air from the laminate during curing. (b) “ Vacuum bagging ” does not include closed molding. (24) “ Vinylester resin ” means a thermosetting resin containing esters of acrylic or methacrylic acids and having double-bond and ester linkage sites only at the ends of the resin molecules. C. Requirements. (1) A person who owns or operates a fiberglass boat manufacturing facility subject to this regulation shall: (a) Not cause or permit the discharge into the atmosphere of any VOC from resin and gel coat operations in excess of the following standards, except as provided in §C(3) of this regulation:

Operation Application Method Total Monomer Content (percent by

weight) Total VOC Content (percent by

weight)

Production resi n Atomized resin application (spray) 28 33

Production resin Nonatomized resin application 35 40

Pigmented gel

coat Atomized or nonatomized resin application 33 38

Clear gel coat Atomized or nonatomized resin application 48 53

Tooling resin Atomized resin application (spray) 30 35

Tooling resin Nonatomized resin application 39 44

Tooling gel

coat Atomized or nonatomized resin application 40 45

(b) Notwithstanding §C(3)(a) and (b) of this regulation, use nonatomizing resin application equipment when applying production resins (including skin coat resins) pursuant to §C(3)(a) of this regulation, and pure,100-percent vinylester resins pursuant to §C(3)(b) of this regulation. (c) Not cause or permit the discharge into the atmosphere of any VOC from any resin and gel coat mixing operation unless all mixing containers with a capacity equal to or greater than 208 liters (55 gallons), including those used for on-site mixing of putties and polyputties, have a cover with no visible gaps in place at all times except when material is being manually added to or removed from the container, or when mixing or pumping equipment is being placed in or removed from the container. (d) Only use non-VOC cleanup materials. (2) Alternative Co mpliance Option. In lieu of meeting the standards of §C(1)(a) of this regulation, a person who owns or operates a fiberglass boat manufacturing facility subject to this regulation may cause or permit the discharge into the atmosphere of any VOC from filled resinsprovided that such emissions do not exceed the following nonmonomer VOC content and as-applied monomer VOC emission ratesPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 851

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 13, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2015 calculated using the equation in §D(3) of this regulation: Type of Filled Resin Monomer Rate in kg Monomer VOC per Megagram of Filled

Resin as Applied Non-monomer VOC Content Limit of

Unfilled Resin

Production 46 5% Tooling 54 5% (3) Exemptions

. The standards in §C(1)(a) of this regulation do not apply to: (a) Production resins (including skin coat resins) that meet specifications for use in military ves sels or must be approved by the U.S. Coast Guard for use in the construction of lifeboats, rescue boats, and other life-saving appliances approved under 46 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter Q, or the construction of small passenger vessels as regulated by 46 CFR Chapter I, Subchapter T; (b) Pure, 100-percent vinylester resins used for skin coats where the total quantity of such resins used is less than or equal to 5 percent by weight of all resin used at a fiberglass boat manufacturing facility on a 12-month rolling average basis, as reported in §§E(5)

— (7) of this regulation; (c) Production and tooling resins, and pigmented, clear, and tooling gel coats, which are used for touch up and repair of parts or molds and which are used in quantities less than or equal to 1 percent by weight of all resin used at a fiberglass boat manufacturing facility on a 12-month rolling average basis, as reported in §E(1) of this regulation; (d) Resins used in closed molding; (e) Polyester resins used for tooling or touch-up and repair during a manufacturing process that is not fiberglass boat manufacturing; (f) Coatings applied to fiberglass boats; and (g) Adhesives used in the assembly of fiberglass boats. D. Test Methods and Compliance Procedures. (1) A person who owns or operates a fiberglass boat manufacturing facility subject to this regulation shall determine the monomer VOC content of any resin or gel coat applied at the facility using: (a) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 312-91, Determination of Percent Monomer in Polyester Resins, revised April 1996; or (b) Manufacturer ’ s formulation data. (2) In the event of a conflict between the monomer VOC content of any resin or gel coat indicated by the manufacturer ’ s formulation data and the results of a test using the method referenced in §D(1)(a) of this regulation, the test results shall be used for the purpose of determining compliance with this regulation. (3) A person meeting the alternative emission rates in §C(2) of this regulation shall compute the as-applied monomer VOC emission rate for the filled production resin or tooling resin, in kilograms monomer VOC per megagram of filled material, using the following equation: PV F = PV u times (100

– Filler pct)

100

Where PV F is the as-applied monomer VOC emission rate for the filled production resin or tooling resin, kilograms monomer VOC per megagram of filled material. PV u is the monomer VOC emission rate for the neat (unfilled) resin, before filler is added, as calculated using the formulas in the table in §D(4) of this regulation. Filler pct is the weight-percent of filler in the as-applied filled resin system. (4) The monomer VOC emission rate for the neat (unfilled) resin, before filler is added, PV u , shall be calculated using the formulas in the following table:

Monomer VOC Emission Rate Formulas for Open Molding and Gel Coat Operations Material Application Method Formula to Calculate the Monomer VOC Emission

Rate 1
Production resin or tooling resin Atomized resin application 0.014 x (Resin VOC%) 2.425 Atomized resin application, plus vacuum bagging with roll-out 0.01185 x (Resin VOC%) 2.425

Atomized resin application, plus vacuum bagging without roll-out 0.00945 x (Resin VOC%) 2.425

Nonatomized resin application 0.014 x (Resin VOC%) 2.425 Nonatomized resin application plus vacuum bagging with roll-out 0.0110 x (Resin VOC%) 2.275

Nonatomized resin application plus vacuum bagging without roll-out 0.0076 x (Resin VOC%) 2.275

Pigmented gel coat, clear gel coat, tooling gel coat All methods 0.445 x (Gel coat VOC%) 1.675

1 Where the resin VOC% is the monomer VOC content as supplied, expressed as a weight-percent value between 0 and 100 percent. (5) A person meeting the alternative emission rates in §C(2) shall demonstrate the as-applied non-monomer VOC content of resins and gel coats using the test method prescribed in COMAR 26.11.19.02D(1), and for this purpose, resins and gel coats shall be considered coatings . (6) For the purpose of demonstrating that a cleanup material is a non-VOC cleanup material, a person shall: (a) Perform a test using the method prescribed in COMAR 26.11.19.02D(1), where the cleanup material shall be considered a coating; and(b) Determine the composite vapor pressure of organiccompounds in a cleanup material usin g the calculation prescribed in COMAR 26.11.19.02E(3). E. Record Keeping. A person who owns or operates a fiberglass boat manufacturing facility subject to this regulation shall maintain for not less than 3 years, and shall make available to the Department upon request, records that provide the following information: (1) A description of each polyester or vinylester resin material used including: (a) The manufacturer ’ s name; (b) The type (e.g. production resin, production gel coat, tooling resin, tooling gel coat); (c) The amount of each of the polyester or vinylester resin materials used; (d) The weight (in percent) of monomer for each polyester resin materials and filler or fillers used;PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 852

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 13, FRIDAY, JUNE 26, 2015 (e) The weight percent of VOC that is not monomer or the total weight percent of the VOC content; and (f) The type of application method used with each resin; (2) On a quarterly basis, the total weight and the monomer content and VOC content of each polyester and vinylester resin material; (3) On a quarterly basis, the total weight and the monomer content and VOC content of each polyester and vinylester resin material used under the exemption of §C(3)(a), including a description or identification (military specifications, 46 CFR Subchapter Q, or 46 CFR subchapter T) of the exemption; (4) On a monthly basis, the total weight, monomer content, and VOC content of each polyester and vinylester resin material used for closed molding under the exemption of §C(3)(d); (5) On a monthly basis, the total weight, monomer content, and VOC content of each pure,100-percent vinylester resin used under the exemption of §C(3)(b); (6) On a monthly basis, the total weight of all resins used; (7) On a monthly basis, the total weight of pure, 100-percent vinylester resins used under the exemption of §C(3)(b) over the preceding 12 months divided by total weight of all resins used over the preceding 12 months; (8) On a daily basis, the total weight, monomer content, and VOC content of each resin used for touch up and repair of parts or molds under the exemption of §C(3)(c); (9) For filled resins for which compliance is demonstrated under alternative compliance option of §C(2) of this regulation: (a) The total weight and non-monomer VOC content of each polyester and vinylester resin material used; and (b) The monomer emission rate computed in accordance with §D(3) of this regulation in kg monomer VOC per megagram of filled resin as applied. (10) On a monthly basis, the total clean-up materials used.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment



# Subtitle 12 RADIATION MANAGEMENT

26.12.01 Radiation Protection

Authority: Environment Article, §§8-106, 8-301, and 8-304, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-169-P-I] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulation .01 under COMAR 26.12.01 Radiation Protection

. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to update COMAR 26.12.01.01, Incorporation by Reference, to include (a) one U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulation establishing additional security requirements for use and transport of risk significant quantities of radioactive material, (b) prohibition of use of a radiation machine prior to facility registration, and (c) miscellaneous corrections.
Comparison to Federal Standards There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, but the proposed action is not more restrictive or stringent.
Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact. Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.
Opportunity for Public Comment Comments may be sent to Michael D. Kurman, Regulations Coordinator, Radiological Health Program, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 750, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, or e-mail to michael.kurman@maryland.gov, or call 410-537-3208, or fax to 410- 537-3198. Comments will be accepted through July 27, 2015. A public hearing has not been scheduled. The proposed regulation may be viewed on the MDE Website at http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/Air/RadiologicalHealth/Regul ationsforControlofIonizingRadiation/Pages/Programs/AirPrograms/R adiological_Health/Regulations/index.aspx, or at official depository libraries throughout the State. A listing of these depository libraries is available at http://www.dsd.state.md.us/Depositories.aspx or call 410-974-2486 or 800-633-9657.

Editor ’ s Note on Incorporation by Reference Pursuant to State Government Article, §7-207, Annotated Code of Maryland, Regulations for the Control of Ionizing Radiation (1994), as amended by Supplements 1

— 26, has been declared a document generally available to the public and appropriate for incorporation by reference. For this reason, it will not be printed in the Maryland Register or the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR). Copies of this document are filed in special public depositories located throughout the State. A list of these depositories was published in 42:1 Md. R. 9 (January 9, 2015), and is available online at www.dsd.state.md.us. The document may also be inspected at the office of the Division of State Documents, 16 Francis Street, Annapolis, Maryland 21401.

.01 Incorporation by Reference. All provisions of the “ Regulations for the Control of Ionizing Radiation (1994) ” as amended by Supplement 1 through Supplement [ 25 ] 26 are incorporated by reference.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Title 30 MARYLAND INSTITUTE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES

SYSTEMS (MIEMSS)

Subtitle 01 GENERAL 30.01.02 Documents Incorporated by Reference

Authority: Education Article, §13-516, Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [15-134-P-I] The Maryland State Emergency Medical Services Board proposes to amend Regulation .01 under COMAR 30.01.02 Documents Incorporated by Reference . This action was considered and approved by the State Emergency Medical Services Board at itsFINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1229

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 42, ISSUE 19, FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 2015 

# Title 23 BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS

Subtitle 03 PUBLIC SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION

Notice of Final Action [15-152-F-I] On August 26, 2015, the Board of Public Works adopted: (1) Amendments to Regulations .05 and .06 under COMAR 23.03.02 Administration of the Public School Construction Program ; (2) Amendments to Regulation .02 under COMAR 23.03.05 Alternative Financing ; and (3) New Regulations .01

— .03 under a new chapter, COMAR 23.03.06 Relocatable Classroom Indoor Environmental Quality Standards

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:13 Md. R. 846

— 847 (June 26, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: September 28, 2015. SHEILA McDONALD Executive Secretary


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT

Subtitle 08 WATER POLLUTION

Notice of Final Action [15-194-F] On September 3, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to: (1) Regulation .01 under COMAR 26.08.03 Discharge Limitations ; and (2) Regulation .01 under COMAR 26.08.04 Permits

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:14 Md. R. 920

— 921 (July 10, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: September 28, 2015.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from

Specific Processes

Authority: Environment Article, §§1-101, 1-404, 2-101

— 2-103, 2-301

— 2- 303, 10-102, and 10-103, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-148-F] On September 3, 2015, the Secretary of the Environment adopted amendments to Regulation .26 and new Regulation .26-1 under COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from Specific Processes . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:13 Md. R. 848

— 852 (June 26, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: September 28, 2015.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Title 33 STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS

Subtitle 21 SPECIAL ELECTIONS BY MAIL 33.21.01 Definitions; General Provisions

Authority: Election Law Article, §§2-102, 9-501, and 9-506, Annotated Code of Maryland; 42 U.S.C. §1973ff-6

Notice of Final Action [15-177-F] On August 27, 2015, the State Board of Elections adopted new Regulations .01

— .03 under a new chapter, COMAR 33.21.01 Definitions; General Provisions , under a new subtitle, Subtitle 21 Special Elections by Mail . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:14 Md. R. 921

— 922 (July 10, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: September 28, 2015.

LINDA H. LAMONE State Administrator of Elections



# Subtitle 21 SPECIAL ELECTIONS BY MAIL 33.21.02 Request for Vote-by-Mail Ballot

Authority: Election Law Article, §§2-102(b)(4), 9-501, 9-502, and 9-506, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [15-178-F] On August 27, 2015, the State Board of Elections adopted new Regulations .01 and .02 under a new chapter, COMAR 33.21.02 Request for Vote-by-Mail Ballot , under a new subtitle, Subtitle 21 Special Elections by Mail . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 42:14 Md. R. 922 (July 10, 2015), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: September 28, 2015.

LINDA H. LAMONE State Administrator of ElectionsPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 217

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 H. Exceptions. (1) Exceptions shall be filed with the Board Secretary within 15 days after the date of the proposed decision. (2) Exceptions shall be in writing and contain a concise statement as to each portion of the judge ’ s determination to which exception is taken and the asserted basis for the exception. (3) A party that refers to any evidence produced at the hearing before the judge shall identify the specific evidence in the party ’ s exceptions. (4) A party shall not submit additional evidence for consideration by the Board of Trustees. (5) A party may file with the Board Secretary a copy of the transcript of the full hearing, at that party ’ s expense, at the time of filing the exceptions. (6) A copy of the exceptions shall be served on all parties to the proceedings, their representatives, and the Board Secretary. ]

.03 Judicial Review. A party who is aggrieved by a final decision of a judge is entitled to judicial review of the decision in accordance with State Government Article, §10-222, Annotated Code of Maryland.
.04 Adjustment in Allowance. The Retirement Agency shall adjust the allowance of a retiree who is subsequently granted an ordinary disability retirement or an accidental disability retirement retroactively to the effective date of retirement.
.05 Effect of Death Before Final Decision. If the applicant dies before the final decision on the applicant ’ s appeal for an ordinary disability retirement or an accidental disability retirement, or both, the claim shall terminate. Survivor benefits, if any, shall be paid in accordance with the selection made by the applicant for the retirement allowance granted and accepted before death.

R. DEAN KENDERDINE Executive Director


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY
26.11.39 Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings

Authority: Environmental Article, §§1-404, 2-103 and 2-301

— 2-303,

Annotated Code of Maryland Notice of Proposed Action [16-026-P- I] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to adopt new Regulations .01

— .08 under a new chapter, COMAR 26.11.39 Architectural and Industrial Maintenance (AIM) Coatings

.

Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to establish new volatile organic compound (VOC) content limits and standards for a variety of architectural and industrial maintenance (AIM) coatings made available for sale and use in Maryland. This action will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agenc y (EPA) for approval as part of Maryland’s State Implementation Plan (SIP).

Background In December 1999, the EPA informed Maryland and several other Northeastern and Mid-Atlantic states of the Ozone Transport Region (OTR) that their air quality plans did not provide for emission reductions sufficient to attain the 1997 ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) by 2005. In order to address shortfalls in achieving the 1997 ozone standard by 2005, Maryland promulgated several measures to achieve reductions of at least 13 tons per day of VOCs in the Baltimore Nonattainment Area. EPA stated that it would grant additional time to implement new measures if those states pursued regional strategies to control ozone and its precursors. In response to this EPA mandate, the Ozone Transport Commission (OTC) developed several VOC reduction measures that were formally supported by the OTC Commissioners in March 2001. One of the VOC reduction measures developed by a state-led workgroup was a model rule for AIM coatings, which was based upon existing rules developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). The model rule was developed to address VOC reduction needs in the OTR, and was based on an analysis and review of proposed coating limits and the availability of compliant coatings on the market. In 2004, the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) adopted COMAR 26.11.33 Architectural Coatings which established stringent VOC content limits for architectural and industrial coatings, established recordkeeping and container labeling requirements for manufactures of paints and coatings, and painting practices for the use and application of coatings. COMAR 26.11.33 is based on the model rule developed by the OTC. In 2011, the OTC developed the amended OTC model rule (AIM Phase II) in consultation with a state-led workgroup to replace the 2001 AIM model rule. Phase II of the AIM model rule was developed for states that need additional VOC emission reductions for the attainment or maintenance of federal ambient air quality standards. The new proposed regulations are based on the OTC Phase II model rule. These proposed regulations, COMAR 26.11.39, update the current version of COMAR 26.11.33 Architectural Coatings by lowering the VOC content limits, creating new categories of coatings, and improving definitions for many coating categories. COMAR 26.11.33 shall remain in effect until January 1, 2017. The Department will then formally repeal COMAR 26.11.33.

Sources Affected and Location This action applies to any person that manufacturers, blends, thins, supplies, sells, offers for sale, repackages for sale, or applies architectural and industrial maintenance coatings in Maryland. This includes manufacturers and distributors of architectural and industrial coatings that are made available for sale and use in Maryland, painting contractors and government agencies specifying coatings.

Requirements This action establishes the following VOC content limits and standards for architectural and industrial maintenance coatings: VOC Content Limits. All architectural and industrial coatings made available for sale and use in Maryland must meet specific VOC limits as specified in the regulation, minus water and exempt compounds.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 218

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 Container Labeling Requirements. Manufacturers of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings that are sold, distributed, or made available for use are required to prominently display the following product information on the coating container or on the label affixed to the container:

 The date the coating was manufactured, or a date code representing the date of manufacture (manufacturers must file an explanation of date codes with the Department);

 Thinning recommendations;

 VOC content; and

 Specific labeling notifications for the following:

 Faux finishing coatings,

 Industrial maintenance coatings,

 Rust preventive coatings,

 Specialty primers, sealers, and undercoaters,

 Non-flat

–

High gloss coatings,

 Reactive penetrating sealers,

 Reactive penetrating carbonate stone sealers,

 Stone consolidants,

 Wood coatings, and

 Zinc rich primers. Except for certain categories listed in Regulation .04H, the requirements in this proposed regulatory action are effective January 1, 2017. The specific categories of coatings listed in regulation .04H are new coating categories that were previously under the broader Industrial Maintenance Coating category. Beginning May 1, 2016, these specific categories shall be considered in compliance if the coating meets the applicable VOC limit and the other provisions of this proposed action.
Expected Emissions Reductions Based upon the OTC Model Rule for AIM Coatings, the proposed regulations have an estimated statewide VOC emissions reduction potential of 6 percent from the AIM coatings category of the current 2011 baseline emissions inventory. Based upon calculations and emissions estimates by the Department, Maryland’s 2018 projected emissions inventory indicates that VOC emissions from AIM coatings total 34 tons/day. The proposed regulations will reduce VOC emissions by 2.0 tons/day, through implementation of the coating limits and standards of these proposed regulations. Economic Impact on Affected Sources, the Department, other State Agencies, Local Government, other Industries or Trade Groups, the Public Businesses that supply resins, solvents, other ingredients and equipment to coating manufacturers may be potentially impacted by the new regulation. Companies

– which include home improvement retailers, painting contractors, government agencies, and consumers who distribute, sell or use architectural and industrial maintenance coatings also may be potentially impacted by the new regulation. The Department believes that the implementation dates will give manufacturers the needed time to reformulate coatings, make coatings compliant with the VOC content limits and standards in the regulation available to the public, and update labeling. As the AIM standards are implemented in other states, the costs of compliance are expected to be reduced. There will be no additional impact on the Department as a result of this regulation.

Comparison to Federal Standards In compliance with Executive Order 01.01.1996.03, this proposed regulation is more restrictive or stringent than corresponding federal standards as follows: (1) Regulation citation and manner in which it is more restrictive than the applicable federal standard: 40 CFR Part 59, Subpart D - National Volatile Organic Compound Emission Standards for Architectural Coatings (1998) establishes nationwide VOC content limits and standards fo r architectural coatings. The applicable VOC content limits and standards in the proposed regulations are more stringent than those in the federal regulations cited above. (2) Benefit to the public health, safety or welfare, or the environment: Ground level ozone is produced when VOC and nitrogen oxides (NOx) react in the presence of heat and sunlight. The reduction of VOC’s contributes to the reduced formation of ozone. The public will benefit from the reduced presence of ground level ozone and its adverse health effects. (3) Analysis of additional burden or cost on the regulated
person: Businesses that supply resins, solvents, other ingredients and equipment to coating manufacturers may be potentially impacted by the new regulation. Companies, which include home improvement retailers, painting contractors, government agencies, and consumers who distribute, sell or use architectural and industrial maintenance coatings also may be potentially impacted by the new regulation. The Department believes that the implementation dates will give manufacturers the needed time to reformulate coatings, make coatings compliant with the VOC content limits and standards in the regulation available to the public, and update labeling. As the AIM standards are implemented in other states, the costs of compliance are expected to be reduced. (4) Justification for the need for more restrictive standards: The federal Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7401 et seq. requires EPA to establish health-based NAAQS to protect people with an “adequate margin of safety.” States are responsible for developing enforceable SIPs to meet the standards. This regulation is proposed pursuant to Maryland’s obligation under the Clean Air Act to attain and maintain the ozone NAAQS. The proposed regulations will be submitted to EPA as part of the Maryland SIP.

Estimate of Economic Impact I. Summary of Economic Impact. The Department believes that the implementation dates will give manufacturers the needed time to reformulate coatings, make coatings compliant with the VOC content limits and standards in the regulation available to the public, and update labeling. As the AIM standards are implemented in other states, the costs of compliance are expected to be reduced. There is no small business in Maryland that has been identified to incur substantial economic impact as a result of the proposed action. Small businesses that purchase and use architectural and industrial maintenance coatings are likely to meet the standards at minimum
cost. There is no expected impact to the Department, State or local government agencies as a result of this action.
Revenue (R+/R

- ) II. Types of Economic Impact. Expenditure (E+/E

- ) Magnitude

A. On issuing agency: NONE B. On other State agencies: NONE C. On local gov ernments: NONEPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 219

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 Benefit (+) Cost (

- ) Magnitude

D. On regulated industries or trade groups: (

- ) Minimal
E. On other industries or trade groups: NONE
F. Direct and indirect effects on public: NONE III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impac t Letter and Number from Section II.) D. Businesses that supply resins, solvents, other ingredients and equipment to coating manufacturers may be potentially impacted by the new regulation. Companies, which include: home improvement retailers, painting co ntractors, government agencies, and consumers who distribute, sell or use architectural and industrial maintenance coatings also may be potentially impacted by the new regulation. The Department believes that the implementation dates will give manufacturer s the needed time to both reformulate coatings and make coatings compliant with the VOC content limits and standards in the regulation available to the public. As the AIM standards are implemented in other states, the costs of compliance are expected to be reduced. California already requires the compliance limits of this proposed regulation.

Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses. Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.

Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on February 22, 2016 at 10:00 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Conference Rooms, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to attend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Mr. Randy Mosier, Chief of the Regulation Division, Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or email to randy.mosier@maryland.gov. Comments must be received no later than February 22, 2016 or be submitted at the hearing. For more information, call Randy Mosier at (410) 537-4488. Copies of the proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: • The Department of the Environment’s website at: http://www.mde.state.md.us/programs/regulations/air/Pages/req comments.aspx • The Air and Radiation Management Administration; and • Regional offices of the Department in Cumberland and Salisbury. Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contact the Department’s Fair Practices Office at (410) 537

- 3964. TTY users may contact the Department through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735-2258.

Editor ’ s Note on Incorporation by Reference Pursuant to State Government Article, §7-207, Annotated Code of Maryland, the following have been declared documents generally available to the public and appropriate for incorporation by reference: (1) ASTM Test Method E119- 08, “Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials”. (2) ASTM Test Method D523-89(1999), “ Standard Test Method for Specular Gloss ”

. (3) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 318-95, “ Determination of Weight Percent Elemental Metal in Coatings by X-Ray Diffraction ” , (Approved July 1996) SCAQMD

“ Laboratory Methods of Analysis for Enforcement Samples ”

. (4) ASTM Test Method D1613-06, “ Standard Test Method for Acidity in Volatile Solvents and Chemical Intermediates Used in Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Products ”

. (5) ASTM D3960- 05 “ Standard Practice for Determining Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of Paints and Related Coatings ”

. (6) Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Method 43, “ Determination of Volatile Methylsiloxanes in Solvent Based Coatings, Inks and Related Materials, ” BAAQMD Manual of Procedures, Volume III, adopted November 6, 1996. (7) BAAQMD Method 41 “ Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds in Solvent Based Coatings and Related Materials Containing Parachlorobenzotrifluoride, ” BAAQMD Manual of Procedures, Volume III, adopted December 20, 1995. (8) South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 303-91 “ Determination of Exempt Compounds (Revised 1993) ” , SCAQMD Laboratory Methods of Analysis for Enforcement Samples. (9) SCAQMD Method 304-91 “ Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Various Materials (Revised 1996) ” , SCAQMD

“ Laboratory Methods of Analysis for Enforcement Samples ”

. (10) ASTM D4082-02 “ Standard Test Method for Effects of Gamma Radiation on Coatings for Use in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants ”

. (11) ASTM D3912-95(2001) “ Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants ”

. (12) ASTM D7088-04, “ Standard Practice for Resistance to Hydrostatic Pressure for Coatings Used in Below Grade Applications Applied to Masonry ”

. (13) ASTM D4585-99, “ Standard Practice for Testing Water Resistance of Coatings Using Controlled Condensation ”

. (14) ASTM D3359-02, “ Standard Test Methods for Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test ”

. (15) ASTM D3363-05, “ Standard Test Method for Film Hardness by Pencil Test ”

. (16) ASTM D4060-07, “ Standard Test Methods for Abrasion Resistance of Organic Coatings by the Taber Abraser ”

. (17) ASTM D714-02e1, “ Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree of Blistering of Paints ”

. (18) ASTM C836-06, “ Standard Specification for High Solids Content, Cold Liquid-Applied Elastomeric Waterproofing Membrane for Use with Separate Wearing Course ”

. (19) ASTM D3273-00, “ Standard Test Method for Resistance to Growth of Mold on the Surface of Interior Coatings in an Environmental Chamber ”

. (20) ASTM D3274-95, “ Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree of Surface Disfigurement of Paint Films by Microbial (Fungal or Algal) Growth or Soil and Dirt Accumulation ”

. (21) ASTM C67-07, “ Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile ”

. (22) ASTM C97-02, “ Standard Test Methods for Absorption and Bulk Specific Gravity of Dimension Stone ”

. (23) ASTM C140-06, “ Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Concrete Masonry Units and Related Units ”

. (24) ASTM E96/E96M-05, “ Standard Test Method for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials ”

. (25) National Cooperative Highway Research Report 244 (1981),

“ Concrete Sealers for the Protection of Bridge Structures ”

. (26) ASTM E2167-01, “ Standard Guide for Selection and Use of Stone Consolidants ”

.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 220

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 For this reason, they will not be printed in the Maryland Register or the Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR). Copies of these documents are filed in special public depositories located throughout the State. A list of these depositories was published in 43:1 Md. R. 10 (January 8, 2016), and is available online at www.dsd.state.md.us. These documents may also be inspected at the office of the Division of State Documents, 16 Francis Street, Annapolis, Maryland 21401.

.01 Applicability and Exemptions. A. Except as provided in §B of this regulation, this chapter applies to a person who: (1) Supplies, sells, offers for sale, or manufactures an architectural coating for use within the State; or (2) Uses or applies an architectural coating within the State. B. This chapter does not apply to the following products: (1) Any architectural coating that is supplied, sold, offered for sale or manufactured for: (a) Use outside of the State; or (b) Shipment to other manufacturers for reformulation or repackaging. (2) Any aerosol coating product; or (3) An architectural coating that is sold in a container with a volume of 1 liter (1.057 quart) or less, including kits of containers of different colors, types, or categories of coatings and two component products. C. The exemption in §B(3) of this regulation does not include: (1) Bundling of containers 1 liter or less, which are sold together as a unit; or (2) Coatings with packaging or marketing which implies that multiple containers 1 liter or less be combined into one container. D. The exemption in §B(3) of this regulation includes multiple containers of 1 liter or less that are packaged and shipped together, but are sold individually. E. Except as provided in Regulation .04H of this chapter, this chapter is effective on January 1, 2017.

.02 Test Methods

—

Incorporation by Reference. A. In this chapter, the following documents are incorporated by reference. B. Documents Incorporated.(1) Fire-Resistance Rating. The fire-resistance rating of a fireresistive coating shall be determined by ASTM Test Method E119-08,

“ Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of Building Construction and Materials ”

. (2) Gloss Determination. The gloss of a coating shall be determined by ASTM Test Method D523-89(1999), “ St andard Test Method for Specular Gloss ”

. (3) Metal Content of Coatings. The metallic content of a coating shall be determined by South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 318-95, “ Determination of Weight Percent Elemental Metal in Coatings by X-Ray Diffraction ”

, (Approved July 1996) SCAQMD “ Laboratory Methods of Analysis for Enforcement Samples ”

. (4) Acid Content of Coatings. The acid content of a coating shall be determined by ASTM Test Method D1613-06, “ Standard Test Method for Acidity in Volatile Solvents and Chemical Intermediates Used in Paint, Varnish, Lacquer, and Related Products ”

. (5) Exempt Compounds

— Siloxanes. Exempt compounds that are cyclic, branched, or linear, completely methylated siloxanes, shall be analyzed as exempt compounds by methods referenced in ASTM D3960-05 “ Standard Practice for Determining Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of Paints and Related Coatings ” or Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) Method 43, “ Determination of Volatile Methylsiloxanes in Solvent Based Coatings, Inks and Related Materials, ” BAAQMD Manual of Procedures, Volume III, adopted November 6, 1996. (6) Exempt Compounds

— Parachlorobenzotrifluoride (PCBTF). The exempt compound parachlorobenzotrifluoride, shall be analyzed by methods referenced in ASTM D3960-05 “ Standard Practice for Determining Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of Paints and Related Coatings ” or BAAQMD Method 41

“ Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds in Solvent Based Coatings and Related Materials Containing Parachlorobenzotrifluoride, ” BAAQMD Manual of Procedures, Volume III, adopted December 20, 1995. (7) Exempt Compounds. The content of compounds exempt under U.S. EPA Method 24 shall be analyzed by methods referenced in ASTM D3960- 05 “ Standard Practice for Determining Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) Content of Paints and Related Coatings ” or South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) Method 303 -91 “ Determination of Exempt Compounds (Revised 1993) ”

, SCAQMD Laboratory Methods of Analysis for Enforcement Samples. (8) VOC Content of Coatings. The VOC content of a coating shall be determined by U.S. EPA Method 24 as it exists in Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR Part 60, “ Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density, Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings ”

. (9) Alternative VOC Content of Coatings. The VOC content of coatings may be analyzed by either U.S. EPA Method 24 as it exists in Appendix A-7 of 40 CFR Part 60, “ Determination of Volatile Matter Content, Water Content, Density, Volume Solids, and Weight Solids of Surface Coatings ” or SCAQMD Method 304- 91

“ Determination of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) in Various Materials (Revised 1996) ” , SCAQMD “ Laboratory Methods of Analysis for Enforcement Samples ”

. (10) Methacrylate Traffic Marking Coatings. The VOC content of methacrylate multicomponent coatings used as traffic marking coatings shall be analyzed by the procedures in 40 CFR Part 59, Subpart D, Appendix A, “ Determination of Volatile Matter Content of Methacrylate Multicomponent Coatings Used as Traffic Marking Coatings ”

. (11) Radiation Resistance

— Nuclear Coatings. The radiation resistance of a nuclear coating shall be determined by ASTM D4082- 02 “ Standard Test Method for Effects of Gamma Radiation on Coatings for Use in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants ” (12) Chemical Resistance

— Nuclear Coatings. The chemical resistance of nuclear coatings shall be determined by ASTM D3912- 95(2001) “ Standard Test Method for Chemical Resistance of Coatings Used in Light-Water Nuclear Power Plants ”

. (13) Hydrostatic Pressure for Basement Specialty Coatings. The hydrostatic pressure resistance for basement specialty coatings shall be analyzed using ASTM D7088-04, “ Standard Practice for Resistance to Hydrostatic Pressure for Coatings Used in Below Grade Applications Applied to Masonry ”

. (14) Tub and Tile refinishing Coating Adhesion. The adhesion of tub and tile coating shall be determined by ASTM D4585-99,

“ Standard Practice for Testing Water Resistance of Coatings Using Controlled Condensation ” and ASTM D3359-02, “ Standard Test Methods for Measuring Adhesion by Tape Test ”

. (15) Tub and Tile Refinish Coating Hardness. The hardness of tub and tile refinish coating shall be determined by ASTM D3363-05,

“ Standard Test Method for Film Hardness by Pencil Test ”

. (16) Tub and Tile Refinish Coating Abrasion Resistance. Abrasion resistance of tub and tile refinish coating shall be analyzed by ASTM D4060-07, “ Standard Test Methods for Abrasion Resistance of Organic Coatings by the Taber Abraser ”

. (17) Tub and Tile Refinish Coating Water Resistance. Water resistance of tub and tile refinish coatings shall be determined by ASTM D4585-99, “ Standard Practice for Testing Water ResistancePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 221

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 of Coatings Using Controlled Condensation ” and ASTM D714-02e1,

“ Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree of Blistering of Paints ”

. (18) Waterproofing Membrane. Waterproofing membrane shall be tested by ASTM C836-06, “ Standard Specification for High Solids Content, Cold Liquid-Applied Elastomeric Waterproofing Membrane for Use with Separate Wearing Course ”

. (19) Mold and Mildew Growth for Basement Specialty Coatings. Mold and mildew growth resistance for basement specialty coatings shall be determined by ASTM D3273-00, “ Standard Test Method for Resistance to Growth of Mold on the Surface of Interior Coatings in an Environmental Chamber ” and ASTM D3274 -95,

“ Standard Test Method for Evaluating Degree of Surface Disfigurement of Paint Films by Microbial (Fungal or Algal) Growth or Soil and Dirt Accumulation ”

. (20) Reactive Penetrating Sealer Water Repellency. Reactive penetrating sealer water repellency shall be analyzed by ASTM C67- 07, “ Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Brick and Structural Clay Tile ” ; or ASTM C97-02, “ Standard Test Methods for Absorption and Bulk Specific Gravity of Dimension Stone ” ; or ASTM C140-06, “ Standard Test Methods for Sampling and Testing Concrete Masonry Units and Related Units ”

. (21) Reactive Penetrating Sealer Water Vapor Transmission. Reactive penetrating sealer water vapor transmission shall be analyzed ASTM E96/E96M-05, “ Standard Test Method for Water Vapor Transmission of Materials ”

. (22) Reactive Penetrating Sealer - Chloride Screening Applications. Reactive penetrating sealers shall be analyzed by National Cooperative Highway Research Report 244 (1981),

“ Concrete Sealers for the Protection of Bridge Structures ”

. (23) Stone Consolidants. Stone consolidants shall be tested using ASTM E2167-01, “ Standard Guide for Selection and Use of Stone Consolidants ”

.

. 03 Definitions. A. In this chapter, the following terms have the meanings indicated. B. Terms Defined. (1) “ Adhesive ” means a chemical substance that is applied for the purpose of bonding two surfaces together other than by mechanical means. (2) ” Aerosol coating product ” means a pressurized coating product containing pigments or resins that: (a) Dispenses product ingredients by means of a propellant; and (b) Is packaged in a disposable can for handheld application, or for use in specialized equipment for ground traffic/marking applications. (3) “ Aluminum roof coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated exclusively for application to roofs and containing at least 84 grams of elemental aluminum pigment per liter of coating (at least 0.7 pounds per gallon). (4) Appurtenance. (a) “ Appurtenance ” means an accessory to a stationary structure that is coated at the site of installation, whether installed or detached. (b) “ Appurtenance ” includes: (i) Bathroom and kitchen fixtures; (ii) Cabinets; (iii) Concrete forms; (iv) Doors; (v) Elevators; (vi) Fences; (vii) Hand railings; (viii) Heating equipment, air conditioning equipment, and other fixed mechanical equipment or stationary tools;

(ix) Lampposts; (x) Partitions; (xi) Pipes and piping systems; (xii) Rain gutters and downspouts; (xiii) Stairways; (xiv) Fixed ladders; (xv) Catwalks and fire escapes; and (xvi) Window screens. (5) Architectural Coating. (a) “ Architectural coating ” means a coating to be applied

to: (i) Stationary structures or their appurtenances at the site of installation;

(ii) Portable buildings at the site of installation; (iii) Pavements; or (iv) Curbs. (b) “ Architectural coating ” does not include:(i) Coatings applied in shop applications or to nonstationary structures such as airplanes, ships, boats, railcars, or automobiles; or

(ii) Adhesives. (6) “ Basement specialty coating ” means a clear or opaque coating that: (a) Is labeled and formulated for application to concrete and masonry surfaces to provide a hydrostatic seal for basements and other below-grade surfaces; (b) Is capable of withstanding at least 10 psi of hydrostatic
pressure; (c) Is resistant to mold and mildew growth; and (d) Achieves a microbial growth rating of 8 or more. (7) “ Bituminous roof coating ” means a coating that: (a) Incorporates bitumens; (b) Is labeled and formulated exclusively for roofing; and (c) Is intended for the primary purpose of preventing water penetration. (8) “ Bituminous roof primer ” means a primer that: (a) Incorporates bitumens; (b) Is labeled and formulated exclusively for roofing; and (c) Is intended for one of the following purposes: (i) Preparing a weathered or aged surface; or (ii) Improving the adhesion of subsequent surfacing components. (9) “ Bond breaker ” means a coating labeled and formulated for application between layers of concrete to prevent a freshly poured top layer of concrete from bonding to the layer over which it is poured. (10) “ Calcimine recoater ” means a flat solvent borne coatingformulated and recommended specifically for recoating calciminepainted ceilings and other calcimine-painted substrates. (11) Coating. (a) “ Coating ” means a material applied onto or impregnated into a substrate for protective, decorative, or functional
purposes. (b) “ Coating ” includes paints, varnishes, sealers, and stains. (12) “ Colorant ” means a concentrated pigment dispersion in water, solvent, or binder that is added to an architectural coating to produce a desired color. (13) “ Concrete curing compound ” means a coating labeled and formulated for application to freshly poured concrete to perfor m one or more of the following functions: (a) Retard the evaporation of water; orPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 222

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 (b) Harden or dustproof the surface of freshly poured

concrete. (14) “ Concrete/masonry sealer ” means a clear or opaque coating that is labeled and formulated primarily for application to concrete and masonry surfaces to perform one or more of the following functions: (a) Prevent penetration of water; (b) Provide resistance against abrasion, alkalis, acids, mildew, staining, or ultraviolet light; or (c) Harden or dustproof the surface of aged or cured

concrete. (15) “ Concrete surface retarder ” means a mixture of retarding ingredients such as extender pigments, primary pigments, resin, and solvent that interact chemically with the cement to prevent hardening on the surface where the retarder is applied, allowing the retarded mix of cement and sand at the surface to be washed away to create an exposed aggregate finish. (16) Conjugated oil varnish. (a) “ Conjugated oil varnish ” means a clear or semitransparent wood coating that:

(i) Is labeled as such; (ii) Is based on a natural occurring conjugated vegetable oil (tung oil) and modified with other natural or synthetic resins, with a minimum of 50 percent of the resins solids consisting of conjugated oil; (iii) Is supplied as a single component that penetrates and seals the wood;

(iv) Results in film formation due to polymerization of the oil; and (v) Contains small amounts of pigment to control the final gloss or sheen. (b) “ Conjugated oil varnish ” does not include lacquers or shellacs. (17) “ Conversion varnish ” means a clear acid curing coating with an alkyd, or other resin blended with amino resins that: (a) Is supplied as a single component or two-component product designed for professional application to wood flooring to produce a hard, durable, clear finish; and (b) Results in a film formation from an acid-catalyzed condensation reaction, affecting a transetherification of the reactive ethers of the amino resins. (18) “ Driveway sealer ” means a coating labeled and formulated for application to worn asphalt driveway surfaces to perform one or more of the following functions: (a) Fill cracks; (b) Seal the surface to provide protection; or (c) Restore or preserve the appearance. (19) “ Dry fog coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated only for spray application such that overspray droplets dry before subsequent contact with incidental surfaces in the vicinity of the surface coating activity. (20) “ Exempt compound ” means a compound identified as exempt under the definition of volatile organic compound (VOC) under COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53). (21) “ Faux finishing coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated to meet one or more of the following criteria: (a) A glaze or textured coating used to create artistic effects, including: (i) Dirt;

(ii) Suede; (iii) Old age; (iv) Smoke damage; (v) Simulated marble; and (vi) Wood grain; (b) A decorative coating used to create a metallic, iridescent, or pearlescent appearance that contains at least 48 grams of pearlescent mica pigment or other iridescent pigment per liter of coating as applied (at least 0.4 pounds per gallon); (c) A decorative coating used to create a metallic appearance that contains less than 48 grams of elemental metallic pigment per liter of coating as applied (less than 0.4 pounds per gallon); (d) A decorative coating used to create a metallic appearance that:

(i) Contains greater than 48 grams of elemental metallic pigment per liter of coating as applied (greater than 0.4 pounds per gallon); or (ii) Requires a clear topcoat to prevent the degradation of the finish under normal use conditions. (e) A clear topcoat sold and used solely as part of a faux finishing coating system to seal and protect a faux finishing coating that meets one or more of the requirements in §B(21)(a)

— (d) of this regulation. (22) Fire-Resistive Coating. (a) “ Fire-resistive coating ” means a coating that has been labeled and formulated to protect structural integrity by increasing the fire endurance of interior or exterior structural materials. (b) “ Fire-resistive coating ” includes sprayed fire resistive materials and intumescent fire coatings that are used to bring structural materials into compliance with federal, state, and local building code requirements. (23) “ Flat coating ” means a coating that is not defined under any other definition in this regulation and that registers a gloss of less than 15 on an 85-degree meter or less than 5 on a 60-degree

meter. (24) “ Floor coating ” means an opaque coating that is labeled and formulated for application to flooring such as decks, porches, steps, garage floors and other horizontal surfaces that may be subjected to foot traffic. (25) “ Form-release coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated for application to a form to prevent freshly poured concrete from bonding to the form. (26) Graphic Arts Coating (Sign Paint). (a) “ Graphic arts coating (sign paint) ” means a coating labeled and formulated for hand-application, using brush, airbrush, or roller techniques to one or more of the following:

(i) Indoor and outdoor signs; and (ii)Murals. (b) “ Graphic arts coating (sign paint) ” includes letter enamels, poster colors, copy blockers, and bulletin enamels. (c) “ Graphic arts coating (sign paint) ” does not include coatings applied to structural components. (27) “ High-temperature coating ” means a high performance coating labeled and formulated for application to substrates exposed continuously or intermittently to temperatures above 204°C (400°F). (28) “ Impacted immersion coating ” means a high performance maintenance coating that is: (a) Formulated and recommended for application to steel structures subject to immersion in turbulent, debris-laden water; and (b) Specifically resistant to high-energy impact damage caused by floating ice or debris. (29) Industrial Maintenance Coating. (a) “ Industrial maintenance coating ” means a high performance architectural coating formulated for application to substrates exposed to one or more of the following extreme environmental conditions:

(i) Immersion in water, wastewater, chemical solutions (aqueous and non-aqueous solutions), or chronic exposures of interior surfaces to moisture condensation;PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 223

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 (ii) Acute or chronic exposure to corrosive, caustic, or acidic agents, or to chemicals, chemical fumes, or chemical mixtures or solutions;

(iii) Frequent exposure to temperatures above 121°C (250°F) (iv) Frequent and heavy abrasion, including mechanical wear and scrubbing with industrial solvents, cleansers, or scouring agents; or (v) Exterior exposure of metal structures and structural components. (b) ” Industrial maintenance coating includes primers, sealers, undercoaters, intermediate coats, and topcoats. (30) “ Low-solids coating ” means a coating containing 0.12 kilogram or less of solids per liter (1 pound or less of solids per gallon) of coating material as recommended for application by the manufacturer. (31) “ Magnesite cement coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated for application to magnesite cement decking to protect the magnesite cement substrate from erosion by water. (32) “ Mastic texture coating ” means a coating: (a) Labeled and formulated to cover holes and minor cracks and to conceal surface irregularities; and (b) Applied in a single coat of at least 10 mils (0.010 inch) dry film thickness. (33) “ Metallic pigmented coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated to provide a metallic appearance that contains at least 48 grams of elemental metallic pigment (excluding zinc) per liter of coating as applied (0.4 pounds per gallon). (34) “ Multi-color coating ”

means a coating that is: (a ) Packaged in a single container; and (b) Labeled and formulated to exhibit more than one color when applied in a single coat. (35) “ Non-flat coating ” means a coating that: (a) Is not defined under any other definition in this regulation; and (b) Registers a gloss of 15 or greater on an 85-degree meter and 5 or greater on a 60-degree meter. (36) “ Non-flat

— high gloss coating ” means a non-flat coating that registers a gloss of 70 or greater on a 60-degree meter. (37) “ Nuclear coating ”

means a protective coating that: (a) Is formulated and recommended to seal porous surfaces that otherwise would be subject to intrusion by radioactive materials; (b) Is resistant to long-term (service life) cumulative radiation exposure; (c) Is relatively easy to decontaminate; and (d) Is resistant to various chemicals to which the coatings are likely to be exposed. (38) “ Post-consumer coating ” means finished coatings generated by a business or consumer that have served their intended end uses, and are recovered from or otherwise diverted from the waste stream for the purpose of recycling. (39) “ Pre-treatment wash primer ” means a primer that: (a) Contains a minimum of 0.5 percent acid, by weight; and (b) Is labeled and formulated for application directly to bare metal surfaces to provide corrosion resistance and promote adhesion of subsequent topcoats. (40) “ Primer, sealer, and undercoater ” means a coating labeled and formulated for one or more of the following purposes: (a) To provide a firm bond between the substrate and subsequent coatings; (b) To prevent subsequent coatings from being absorbed by the substrate; (c) To prevent harm to subsequent coatings by materials in the substrate; (d) To provide a smooth surface for the subsequent application of coatings; (e) To provide a clear finish coat to seal the substrate; or (f) To block materials from penetrating into or leaching out of a substrate. (41) Reactive penetrating sealer. (a) “ Reactive penetrating sealer ” means a clear or pigmented coating that is labeled and formulated for application to above-grade concrete and masonry substrates to provide protection from water and waterborne contaminants, including:

(i) Alkalis; (ii) Acids; and (iii) Salts. (b) “ Reactive penetrating sealers ” meet the following criteria: (i) Penetrate into concrete and masonry substrates and chemically react to form covalent bonds with naturally occurring minerals in the substrate;

(ii) Line the pores of concrete and masonry substrates with a hydrophobic coating, but do not form a surface film;

(iii) Improve water repellency at least 80 percent after application on a concrete or masonry substrate as verified on standardized test specimens; and

(iv) Do not reduce the water vapor transmission rate by more than 2 percent after application on a concrete or masonry substrate. (c) “ Reactive penetrating sealers ” labeled and formulated for vehicular traffic surface chloride screening applications shall meet the performance criteria listed in the National Cooperative Highway Research Report 244 (1981). (42) Reactive Penetrating Carbonate Stone Sealer. (a) “ Reactive penetrating carbonate stone sealer ” means a clear or pigmented coating that is labeled and formulated for application to above-grade carbonate stone substrates to provide protection from water and waterborne contaminants, including:

(i) Alkalis; (ii) Acids; and (iii) Salts. (b) “ Reactive penetrating sealers ” meet the following criteria: (i) Penetrate into carbonate stone substrates and chemically reacts to form covalent bonds with naturally occurring minerals in the substrate;

(ii) Line the pores of carbonate stone substrates with a hydrophobic coating, but do not form a surface film;

(iii) Improve water repellency at least 80 percent after application on a carbonate stone substrate; and

(iv) Do not reduce the water vapor transmission rate by more than 10 percent after application on a carbonate stone substrate. (43) “ Recycled coating ” means an architectural coating formulated so that it contains a minimum of 50 percent by volume post-consumer coating, with a maximum of 50 percent secondary industrial materials or virgin materials. (44) ” Roof coating ” means a non-bituminous coating labeled and formulated for application to roofs for the primary purpose of preventing water penetration, reflecting ultraviolet light, or reflecting solar radiation. (45) Rust Preventive Coating. (a) “ Rust preventive coating ” means a coating formulated to prevent the corrosion of metal surfaces for one or more of the following applications:

(i) Direct- to -metal coating; or (ii) Coating intended for application over rusty, previously coated surfaces.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 224

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 (b) “ Rust preventive coating ” does not include: (i) Coatings that are required to be applied as a topcoat over a primer; or

(ii) Coatings that are intended for use on wood or any other nonmetallic surface. (46) “ Secondary industrial materials ” means products or byproducts of the paint manufacturing process that are of known composition and have economic value but can no longer be used for their intended purpose. (47) “ Shellac ” means a clear or opaque coating formulated solely with the resinous secretions of the Lac beetle (Laciffer lacca), and formulated to dry by evaporation without a chemical reaction. (48) “ Shop application ” means application of a coating to a product or a component of a product in or on the premises of a factory or a shop as part of a manufacturing, production, or repairing process (e.g. original equipment manufacturing coatings). (49) “ Specialty primer, sealer, and undercoater ” means a coating that is formulated for application to a substrate to block water-soluble stains resulting from: (a) Fire damage; (b) Smoke damage; or (c) Water damage. (50) “ Stain ” means a semi-transparent, or opaque coating labeled and formulated to change the color of a surface, but not conceal the grain pattern or texture. (51) “ Stone consolidant ” means a coating that: (a) Is labeled and formulated for application to stone substrates to repair structures that have been damaged by weathering or other decay mechanisms; and (b) Penetrates into stone substrates to create bonds between particles and consolidate deteriorated material. (52) Swimming Pool Coating. (a) “ Swimming pool coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated to coat the interior of swimming pools and to resist swimming pool chemicals. (b) “ Swimming pool coating ” includes coatings used for swimming pool repair and maintenance. (53) “ Thermoplastic rubber coating and mastic ” means a coating or mastic that: (a) Is formulated and recommended for application to roofing or other structural surfaces; and (b) Incorporates no less than 40 percent by weight of thermoplastic rubbers in the total resin solids. (54) “ Tint base ” means colorant which is added to an architectural coating. (55) “ Traffic marking coating ” means a coating labeled and formulated for marking and striping streets, highways, or other traffic surfaces such as curbs, berms, driveways, parking lots, sidewalks, and airport runways. (56) “ Tub and tile refinish coating ” means a clear or opaque coating that: (a) Is labeled and formulated exclusively for refinishing the surface of a bathtub, shower, sink, or countertop; (b) Has a scratch hardness of 3H or harder and a gouge hardness of 4H or harder that is determined on bonderite 1000; (c) Has a weight loss of 20 milligrams or less after 1000 cycles determined with CD-17 wheels on bonderite 1000; (d) Withstands 1000 hours or more of exposure with few or no #8 blisters that is determined on unscribed borderite; and (e) Has an adhesion rating of 4B or better after 24 hours of recovery that is determined on inscribed bonderite. (57) “ VOC actual ” means the weight of VOC per volume of coating, including water and exempt compounds. (58) VOC Content. (a) “ VOC content ” means the weight of VOC per volume of coating and is VOC regulatory for all coatings except those in the low solids category. (b) “ VOC content ” includes the following: (i) The VOCs emitted during curing if the coating contains silanes, siloxanes, or other ingredients that generate ethanol or other VOCs during the curing process; and

(ii) The maximum amount of thinning solvent recommended by the manufacturer. (59) “ VOC regulatory ” means the weight of VOC per volume of coating, less the volume of water and exempt compounds. (60) Waterproofing Membrane. (a) “ Waterproofing membrane ” means a clear or opaque coating that is labeled and formulated for application to concrete and masonry surfaces to provide a seamless waterproofing membrane that prevents any penetration of liquid water into the substrate. (b) “ Waterproofing membrane ” is intended for one or more of the following waterproofing applications:

(i) Below-grade surfaces; (ii) Between concrete slabs; (iii) Inside tunnels; (iv) Inside concrete planners; or (v) Under flooring materials. (c) “ Waterproofing membrane ” is applied in a single coat of at least 25 mils (at least 0.025 inch) dry film thickness. (d) “ Waterproofing membrane ” does not include topcoats that are included in the concrete masonry sealer category. (61) Wood Coatings. (a) “ Wood coatings ” means coatings labeled and formulated for application to wood substrates only. (b) “ Wood coatings ” includes the following clear and semitransparent coatings:

(i) Lacquers; (ii) Varnishes; (iii) Sanding sealers; (iv) Penetrating oils; (v) Clear stains; (vi) Wood conditioners used as undercoats; and (vii) Wood sealers used as topcoats. (c) “ Wood coatings ” also includes the following opaque wood coatings:

(i) Opaque lacquers; (ii) Opaque sanding sealers; and (iii) Opaque lacquer undercoaters. (d) “ Wood coatings ”

does not include the following: (i) Clear sealers that are labeled and formulated for use on concrete/masonry surfaces; or

(ii) Coatings intended for substrates other than wood. (62) “ Wood preservative ” means a coating that: (a) Is labeled and formulated to protect exposed wood from decay or insect attack; and (b) Registered with both the U.S. EPA under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (7 U.S.C. §136 et seq.) and with the State. (63) Wood Substrate. (a) “ Wood substrate ” means a substrate made of wood, particleboard, plywood, medium density fiberboard, rattan, wicker, bamboo, or composite products with exposed wood grain. (b) “ Wood substrate ” does not include items comprised of simulated wood. (64) “ Zinc-rich primer ” means a coating that: (a) Contains at least 65 percent metallic zinc powder or zinc dust by weight of total solids; andPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 225

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 (b) Is formulated for application to metal substrates to provide a firm bond between the substrate and subsequent applications of coatings.
.04 General Requirements and Standards. A. VOC Content Limits. (1) Except as provided in this regulation, a person may not manufacture, blend, repackage for sale, supply, sell, offer for sale, or apply within the State an architectural coating with a VOC content in excess of the corresponding limit specified in Regulation .05 of this chapter. (2) Limits are expressed as VOC content, thinned to the manufacturer ’ s maximum thinning recommendation, excluding any colorant added to tint bases. B. Most Restrictive VOC Limit. If anywhere on the container of an architectural coating, label or sticker affixed to the container, or in any sales, advertising, or technical literature supplied by a manufacturer or anyone acting on behalf of a manufacturer, any representation is made that indicates that the coating meets the definition of or is recommended for use for more than one of the coating categories listed in Regulation .05 of this chapter, then the most restrictive VOC content limit applies. C. The provisions of §B of this regulation do not apply to the following coating categories: (1) Aluminum roof coatings; (2) Bituminous roof primers; (3) High-temperature coatings; (4) Industrial maintenance coatings; (5) Low-solids coatings; (6) Metallic pigmented coatings; (7) Pretreatment wash primers; (8) Shellacs; (9) Specialty primers, sealers, and undercoaters; (10) Wood coatings; (11) Wood preservatives; (12) Zinc-rich primers (13) Calcimine recoaters; (14) Impacted immersion coatings; (15) Nuclear coatings; (16) Thermoplastic rubber coatings and mastic; and (17) Concrete surface retarders. D. Sell-Through of Coatings. (1) A coating manufactured before the effective date of January 1, 2017, that complied with the standards in effect at the time the coating was manufactured may be sold, supplied, or offered for sale

unt il January 1, 2020. (2) A coating that complies with the standards in effect in this State at the time of manufacture may be applied at any time. (3) The provisions of this section do not apply to a coating that does not display a date or date code representing the date of manufacture. (4) Notwithstanding §D(2), a person may not apply any rust preventative coating manufactured before January 1, 2017 for industrial use, unless such a rust preventative coating complies with the industrial maintenance coating limit specified in Regulation .05 of this chapter. E. Painting Practices. (1) All architectural coating containers used to apply the contents therein to a surface by pouring, siphoning, brushing, rolling, padding, ragging, or other means, shall be closed when not in use. (2) Architectural coatings containers include, but are not limited to drums, buckets, cans, pails, trays, or other application containers. (3) Containers of any VOC-containing materials used for thinning and cleanup shall also be closed when not in use. F. Thinning. A person may not apply any architectural coating if the coating is thinned to exceed the applicable VOC limit specified in Table 1 of Regulation .05 of this chapter. G. Coatings Not Listed in Regulation .05. A coating that does not meet the definitions for the specialty coatings categories listed in Regulation .05 of this chapter is subject to the VOC content limit for either a flat, non-flat, or non-flat high gloss coating based on its gloss as determined in Regulation .02B(2) of this chapter. H. New Coatings Categories. Beginning May 1, 2016, the following new coatings categories shall be considered in compliance if the coating meets the applicable VOC limit specified in Table 1 of Regulation .05 of this chapter and the other provisions of this chapter: (1)Aluminum roof coatings; (2) Basement specialty coatings; (3) Concrete/masonry sealers; (4) Conjugated oil varnish; (5) Driveway sealers; (6) Reactive penetrating sealer; (7)) Reactive penetrating carbonate stone sealers; (8) Stone consolidant; (9) Tub and tile refinishing coating; (10) Waterproofing membranes; (11) Wood coatings; and (12) Zinc-rich primers.

.05 VOC Content Limits.

Table 1. VOC Content Limits for Architectural and Industrial Maintenance Coatings.

Coating Catego ry VOC Content Limit (grams per liter) Flat coatings 50 Non

- flat coatings 100 Non

- flat

— high gloss coatings 150 Specialty coatings: Aluminum roof coatings 450 Basement specialty coatings 400 Bituminous roof coatings 270 Bituminous roof primers 350 Bond breakers 350 Calcimine recoater 475 Concrete curing compounds 350 Concrete/masonry sealers 100 Concrete surface retarders 780 Conjugated oil varnish 450 Conversion varnish 725 Driveway sealers 50 Dry fog coatings 150 Faux finishing coatings 350 Fire

- resistive coatings 350 Floor coatings 100 Form

- release coatings 250 Graphic arts coatings (Sign paints) 500 High

- temperature coatings 420 Impacted immersion coatings 780 Industrial maintenance coatings 250 Low

- solids coatings 120 Magnesit e cement coatings 450 Mastic texture coatings 100 Metallic pigmented coatings 500 Multi

- color coatings 250 Nuclear coatings 450PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 226

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 Pre

- treatment wash primers 420 Primers, sealers, and undercoaters 100 Reactive penetrating sealers 350 Reactive penetrat ing carbonate stone sealers 500

Recycled coatings 250 Roof coatings 250 Rust preventative coatings 250 Shellacs: Clear 730 Opaque 550 Specialty primers, sealers, and undercoaters 100

Stains 250 Stone consolidant 450 Swimming pool coatings 340 T hermoplastic rubber coatings and mastic 550 Traffic marking coatings 100 Tub and tile refinish coatings 420 Waterproofing membranes 250 Wood coatings 275 Wood preservatives 350 Zinc

- rich primers 340
.06 Container Labeling Requirements. A. A person who manufactures an architectural coating subject to this chapter shall display the information listed in this regulation on the coating container or container label in which the coating is sold or distributed. B. Date Code. (1) The date the coating was manufactured, or a date code representing the date of manufacture, shall be indicated on the label, lid, or bottom of the container. (2) If the manufacturer uses a date code for a coating, the manufacturer shall file an explanation of each code with the Department. C. Thinning Recommendations. (1) A statement of the manufacturer ’ s recommendation regarding thinning of the coating shall be indicated on the label or lid of the container. (2) This requirement does not apply to the thinning of architectural coatings with water. (3) If thinning of the coating before use is not necessary, the recommendation shall specify that the coating is to be applied without thinning. D. VOC Content. (1) A container of a coating subject to this chapter shall display one of the following values in grams of VOC per liter of coating: (a) Maximum VOC content as determined from all potential product formulations; (b) VOC content as determined from actual formulation data; or (c) VOC content as determined using the procedures specified in Regulation .08 of this chapter. (2) If the manufacturer does not recommend thinning, the container shall display the VOC content, as supplied. (3) If the manufacturer recommends thinning, the container shall display the VOC content including the maximum amount of thinning solvent recommended by the manufacturer. (4) If the coating is a multi-component product, the container shall display the VOC content as mixed or catalyzed. (5) If the coating contains silanes, siloxanes, or other ingredient that generate ethanol or other VOCs during the curing process, the VOC content shall include the VOCs emitted during curing. (6) The VOC content shall be determined using the procedures in Regulation .08 of this chapter. E. Faux Finishing Coatings. The labels of all clear topcoat faux finishing coatings shall prominently display the statement “ This product can only be sold or used as part of a Faux Finishing coating system. ” F. Industrial Maintenance Coatings. A manufacturer of an industrial maintenance coating shall prominently display at least one of the following statements: (1) “ For industrial use only ” ; (2) “ For professional use only ” ; (3) “ Not for residential use ” ; or (4) “ Not intended for residential use ”

. G. Rust Preventive Coatings. The labels of a rust preventive coating shall prominently display the statement “ For Metal Substrates Only ”

. H. Specialty Primers, Sealers, and Undercoaters. The label of a specialty primer, sealer, or undercoater shall, as applicable, prominently display one or more of the following descriptions: (1) “ For blocking stains ” ; (2) “ For fire-damaged substrates ” ; (3) “ For smoke-damaged substrates ” ; or (4) “ For water-damaged substrates ” ; I. Non-Flat

— High-Gloss Coatings. The label of a non-flat

— highgloss coating shall prominently display the words “ High Gloss ”

. J. Reactive Penetrating Sealers. The labels of all reactive penetrating sealers shall prominently display the statement “ Reactive Penetrating Sealer ”

. K. Reactive Penetrating Carbonate Stone Sealers. The labels of all reactive penetrating carbonate stone sealers shall prominently display the statement “ Reactive Penetrating Carbonate Stone Sealers ”

. L. Stone Consolidants. The labels of all stone consolidants shall prominently display the statement “ Stone Consolidants

— For Professional Use Only ”

. M. Wood Coatings. The labels of all wood coatings shall prominently display the statement “ For Wood Substrates Only ”

. N. Zinc Rich Primers. The labels of all zinc rich primers shall prominently display one or more of the following statements: (1) “ For professional use only ” ; (2) “ For industrial use only ” ; (3) “ Not for residential use ” ; or (4) “ Not intended for residential use ”

. .07 Reporting Requirements. A person who manufactures a coating subject to this chapter shall provide within 180 days of written request, data concerning the distribution and sales of architectural coatings, including: A. The name and mailing address of the manufacturer; B. The name, address, and telephone number of a contact person; C. The name of the coating product as it appears on the label; D. The application coating category; E. A description whether the product is marketed for interior or exterior use or both; F. The number of gallons sold in the State in containers greater than 1 liter and equal to or less than 1 liter; G. The VOC actual content and VOC regulatory content in grams per liter. (1) If thinning is recommended, list the VOC actual content and VOC regulatory content after maximum recommended thinning. (2) If containers less than 1 liter have a different VOC content than containers greater than 1 liter, list separately.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

### 227

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 43, ISSUE 2, FRIDAY, JANUARY 22, 2016 (3) If the coating is a multi-component product, provide the VOC content as mixed or catalyzed. H. The names and CAS numbers of the VOC constituents in the product; I. The names and CAS numbers of any compounds in the product specifically exempted from the VOC definition under COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53); J. A description whether the product is marketed as solventborne, waterborne, or 100 percent solids; K. A description of resin or binder in the product; L. A description whether the coating is a single-component or multi-component product; M. The density of the product in pounds per gallon; N. The percent by weight of solids, all volatile materials, water, and any compounds in the product specifically exempted from the VOC definition under COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53); and O. The percent by volume of solids, water, and any compounds in the product specifically exempted from the VOC definition under COMAR 26.11.01.01B(53).
.08 Compliance Procedures. A. Calculation of VOC Content. (1) For the purpose of determining compliance with the VOC content limits in Table 1 of Regulation .05 of this chapter, the VOC content of a coating shall be determined using the following procedures, as applicable: (a) With the exception of low solids coatings, determine the VOC content (regulatory) in grams of VOC per liter of coating thinned to the manufacturer ’ s maximum recommendation, excluding the volume of any water and exempt compounds using the following equation: VOC Regulatory = (Ws - Ww - Wec) / (Vm - Vw - Vec) Where: VOC Regulatory = grams of VOC per liter of coating; Ws = weight of volatiles, in grams; Ww = weight of water, in grams; Wec = weight of exempt compounds, in grams; Vm = volume of coating, in liters; Vw = volume of water, in liters; and Vec = volume of exempt compounds, in liters. ( b) For low solids coatings, determine the VOC content (actual) in units of grams of VOC per liter of coating thinned to the manufacturer ’ s maximum recommendation, including the volume of any water and exempt compounds using the following equation: VOC Actual = (Ws - Ww - Wec) / (Vm) Where: VOC Actual = the VOC content of a low solids coating, in grams per liter of coating; Ws = weight of volatile, in grams; Ww = weight of water, in gra ms; Wec = weight of exempt compounds, in grams; and Vm = volume of coating, in liters. (2) The VOC content of a tint base shall be determined without colorant that is added after the tint base is manufactured. (3) If the manufacturer does not recommend thinning, the VOC content shall be calculated for the product as supplied. (4) If the manufacturer recommends thinning, the VOC content shall be calculated including the maximum amount of thinning solvent recommended by manufacturer. (5) If the coating is a multi-component product, the VOC content shall be calculated as mixed or catalyzed. (6) If the coating contains silanes, siloxanes, or other ingredients that generate ethanol or other VOCs during the curing process, the VOC content shall include the VOCs emitted during curing. B. VOC Content of Coatings. (1) Except as provided in §C of this regulation, a person shall determine the VOC content of a coating using one of the test methods listed in Regulation .02 of this chapter, or an alternative method approved by the Department. (2) If there are any inconsistencies between the results of EPA Method 24 test and any other means for determining VOC content, the EPA Method 24 test results will govern. (3) The exempt compounds content shall be determined by one of the test methods listed in Regulation .02 of the chapter, as applicable. C. Methacrylate Traffic Coating Markings. Analysis of methacrylate multicomponent coatings used as traffic marking coatings shall be conducted according to a modification of U.S. EPA Method 24 (40 CFR 59, subpart D, Appendix A). This method has not been approved for methacrylate multicomponent coatings used for other purposes than as traffic marking coatings or for other classes of multicomponent coatings.

BENJAMIN H. GRUMBLES Secretary of the Environment


# Title 30 MARYLAND INSTITUTE FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES SYSTEMS (MIEMSS)

Su btitle 02 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES PROVIDERS

30.02.02 Licensure and Certification

Authority: Education Article, §13-516, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Proposed Action

[ 16 -048-P ] The State Emergency Medical Services Board proposes to amend Regulation .05 under COMAR 30.02.02 Licensure and Certification . This action was considered and approved by the State Emergency Medical Services Board at its regular meeting on December 8, 2015.
Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to clarify examination and reexamination procedures and time frames for individuals seeking licensure or certification as EMS providers in Maryland.

Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.

Estimate of Economic Impact The proposed action has no economic impact.

Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impact on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has no impact on individuals with disabilities.