1522 FINALACTION ON REGULATIONS


### Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 61 1.08 Control ofincinerators 

# /

Authority: EnvironmentArticle, 1*1-101, 1-404, 2-101 _2-103,/ 2-301

— 2-303, 2-406, 10-102, and 10-103, A notated Code ofMaryland 

# /

Notice ofFinalAction [05-123-Fl 2005, the Secretary ofthe :nta to Regulations .01, Regulation .07, and 6.11.08 Control of

proposed for ado

10, 2005), has

LP. PHILBRICK the Environment



### Subtitle 1 1/iR QUALITY 26.11.09 Control o% FLl-Burning Equipment, Stationary Intertál Conustlon EngInes, and Certain FueI-B#ning lnstIlatlons

Authority Envirop1ontArticle, **i-io\ 1-404, 2-101

—2-103, 2-O1

— 2.303, 10-102, ana\0-1O3, 

# / Annotated Code ofMaryld 

# / Notice ofFinalActlo 

## / [05-124-Fl On Augit 23, 2005, the Secretary of th Environment adopted %mendments to Regulation .01 un4er COMAR 26.11.0(Control ofFuel-BurningEquipme4t, Station ary liØernal Combustion Engines, and Ceiain Fuel Burxji4ng Installations. This action, which was\proposed forØdoption in 32:12 Md. R. 1068— 1069 (June 10 2005), habeen adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: September 12, 2005. KENDLP. PHILBR K Secretary ofthe Environm



### Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.10 Control of Iron and Steel Production Installations

Authority: EnvironmentArticle, *41-101. 1-104, 2-101

—2-103, 2-301 —2-303, 10-102, and 10-103,

Annotated Code ofMaryland Notice ofFinalAction 05-125-FI On August 23, 2005, the Secretary of the Environment adopted new Regulation .05.1 under COMAR 26.11.10 Control of Iron and Steel Production Installations. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 32:12 Md. R. 1069

— 1070 (June 10, 2005), has been adopted as proposed.

Effective Date: September 12, 2005. KENDL P. PHILBRICK Secretary ofthe Environment

On August 23, adopted amendme to 26.11.19 VolatjI6 Organic Processes. action, whichwas 32:12 MçfrR. 1070—1071 (June adoptVas proposed.

3ffectlve Date: September 12, 2005.



# Title 31 / \MARYLAND INSURANCE

# / \ ADMINISTRATION 

# /
Subtitle 1”O\HEALTH INSURANCE

— 

### (IENERAL \Notice ofFinalAction 105-146-Fl OnAugust 11, 20, the Insurance mmissioner:

(1) Amended Realations .03,.

, .09 and .11 and re pealed Regulations .1>

— .21 u er COMAE 31.10,05 Minimum Standards r Med are Supplement Poli cies; and (2) Amended Regulatio .02

— .04, .06

— .09-1, .11

— .16, .19, and .22, recodified ation .23 to be Regulation .24, amended andrecodifi Re ation .24tobeRegulation .25, and adopted new egula on .23 under COMAE 31.10.06 Standards f Medic SupplementPolicies.

This action, whic was propose or adoption In 32:13 Md. R. 1163

— 121 (June 24, 2005), fts been adoptedwith the nonsubstanti changes shown belo.

Effective D e: January 1, 2006.
torney General’s Certiflcan In accor ance with State Government Ariçle, §10-113, Annotat Code ofMaryland, theAttorney Geneçal certifies that t following changes do not differ substant\vely from the p posed text. The nature ofthe changes and tle basis for is conclusion are as follows: OMAR 31i0.06.13G: An incorrectcross reference iected. 11, On Aui adopted repeal under action, which 1066

— 1068 posed.

Effective Date: 

### 19 

### Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

a 32:12 Md. R.
n adopted as pro

### Volatile Organic Compoun Processes

DOS. Article, 4*1-101,

—2-303, 10-102, and Code of1 2-103,

KENDL P. Secretary ofthe



# $

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 32, ISSUE 18 FRIDAY, SEPTEM8ER 2, 2005PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1069

yone needing special accommodations at the pub• he g should contact the Department’s Fair Practice

- $!ce at 410) 537-3964. TTY users may contact the epart

tent th ugh the Maryland Relay Service at 00-735- 258. .01 Definition

A. (text unchan d) B. Terms Defined.

(1)

— (3-2) (text un anged) (4) “Interruptible gas e e” means a gas service ne gotiated between the user a utility company under the jurisdiction ofthe Maryl lic Service Commission in which the utility comp y reserve e rightupondetermin ing thatgas supplie re inadequate normal distribution: (a) [to] 7b terruptthe gas supp afternotification;
or (b) [t 7b limit the gas supply by a matic inter ruption.

— (10) (textunchanged) KENI)L P. PHILB CK Secretary ofthe Environme t



### Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.10 Control of Iron and Steel Production Installations

Authority: EnvironmentArticle, 1-101, 1-404, 2-101

—2-103, 2-301

—2-303, 10-102, and 10-103,

Annotated Code ofMaryland
Notice ofProposedAction [05-125-Pi The Secretary ofthe Environment proposes to adopt new Regulation .05-1 under COMAR 26.11.10 Control ofIron and Steel Production Installations.
StatementofPurpose The purpose ofthis action is to reestablish a carbon mon oxide standard forbasic oxygen furnaces (BOFs) located at steel mills. Affected sources must demonstrate that the car bon monoxide concentration in the gas stream does not ex ceed 1 percent. Affected sources arerequiredto demonstrate compliance by conducting an initial stack test and addi tional stacktests every 21/2 years. Background

Carbon monoxide (CO) is generated in relatively large quantities in BOFs located at steel mills. BOFs contain hot metal from the blast furnace and scrap metal which is heated with oxygen to produce molten metal. The molten metal is ultimately cast into steel slabs. The BOFs are equippedwith agas collection system orhoods that exhaust the gases into a water scrubber system. The water scrub bers are used primarily for control ofparticulate matter.

COMAR 26. 11.10.05-1 Control ofCarbon Monoxide Emis sions from Iron and Steel Installations, proposed at 31:6 Md. R. 530

— 531 (March 19, 2004), would have required a person who operates a blast fI.irnace, grey iron cupola, or BOF to burn the gas with excess oxygen at not less than 1,300°F for at least 0.3 seconds in a direct flame after burner. That proposal was withdrawn in 32:6 Md. R. 637 (March 18, 2005) because: (1) blast furnace gas is not con trolledbut is used as fuel in on site fuel burning equipment; ‘2) there are no grey iron cupolas located at steel mills and cupolas not located at steel mills are subject to the carbon monoxide emissions requirements in COMAR 26.11.06; and (3) carbonmonoxide emissions fromBOFs are notcontrolled in that manner. When the furnaces are operating, the flames extend into the hood and incinerate the carbon mon oxide before itis exhausted through the scrubbers. Affected Sources

The only BOFs in Maryland are located at the Sparrows Point facility which was previously operated by Bethlehem Steel and is now operated by International Steel Group (ISG). The BOF facility consists oftwo furnaces and four water scrubbers eachdischarging through a separate stack. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) emission factor and stacktests at other facilities, in cineration ofcarbon monoxide in the furnace hoods is 99 percent efficient. Comparison to Federal Standards There is no corresponding federal standard to this pro posed action.

Estimate ofEconomic Impact

I. Summary ofEconomic Impact. The affected source must perform an initial stack test at a cost of $25,000 to demonstrate compliancewith the 1 percentcarbon monoxide concentration stan dard ha the effluent gases. Thereafter, the source must repeat the test every 2’/2 years consistentwith the source’s permit to operate requirements.

D. On regulatedindustries or trade groups:

B. On otherindustries ortrade groups:

F. Direct and indirect effects on public: Revenue (R+/R-) Expenditure (E÷IE—) Magnitude NONE NONE NONE Benefit (+)

Cost(—) Magnitude

Ifl. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from Section II.)

D. The BOF hooding was designed to effectively incinerate the carbon monoxide. Therefore the 1 percent concentration standard shouldbe metwithoutany signifcant equipment modification. The final effluent, afterthe scrubbers, is discharged through fourstacks which are equipped with portholes for stack testing. The affected source is required to perform tests to demonstrate compliance. A stack test for carbon monoxide will cost approximately $25,000.
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 an impact on individuals with disabilities as follows:

This action will have a positive impact on individuals with disabilities involvingrespiratory problems by reducing airpollutants that contributeto disease. Opportunity forPublic Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on July 13, 2005 at 10 am. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington U. Types of Economic Impact.

A. Onissuing agency: B. On otherState agencies: C. Onlocalgovernments:

$25,000 (firstyear) (.—)

NONE
NONE

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 32, ISSUE 12 FRIDAY, JUNE 10, 20051070 PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS
Boulevard, 1st Floor Aqua Conference Room, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720. Interested persons are invited to at tend and express their views. Comments may be sent to Deborah Rabin, Regulations Coordinator,Air and Radiation Management Administration, Department ofthe Environ ment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, Suite 730, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-1720, or call (410) 537-3240, or faxto (410) 537-4223, or email to drabin@mde.state.md.us. Comments mustbe received not laterthanJuly 13, 2005, orbe submit ted at the hearing. For more information, call Deborah Rabin at (410) 537-3240.

Copies ofthe proposed action and supporting documents are available for review at the following locations: the Air and RadiationManagementMministration; regionaloffices ofthe Department in Cumberland and Salisbury; all local air quality control offices; and local health departments in those counties not having separate air quality control of fices.

Anyone needing special accommodations at the public hearing should contactthe Department’s Fair Practices Of fice at (410) 537-3964. TTY users may contact the Depart ment through the Maryland Relay Service at 1-800-735- 2258. .05-1 Control ofCarbon Monoxide Emissions fromBa sic OxygenFurnaces. A. Emission Standard. Aperson who owns or operates a basic oxygen furnace may not cause orallow carbon monox ide emissions in the exhaustgases to exceed 1 percentby vol ume ofthe totalexhaustgases discharged into the air.

B. TestingRequirements. (1) Stack tests shall be performed using the EPA Test Method 10 oran alternative testmethodapprovedby the De partmentandtheEPA. (2) An initial stack test shall beperformed on or before May 1, 2006. (3) Additional stack tests shall be performed not later than 21/2years aftertheprevious test. Upon request, the spe cific dates on which each additional test is to be performed may be adjustedby theDepartment so thatthe testingisper formed consistent with the schedules for other testing at the facility.

C. DeterminationofCompliance.

(1) In order to determine the total carbon monoxide be ing dischargedfrom the basic oxygenfurnaces, tests shall be performed simultaneously at each stack through which the gases from the basic oxygenfurnaces are exhausted. (2) Each test, withaduration ofatleast 1 hour, shall be considered a testrun. (3) Compliance with the 1 percent standard shall be de termined as the average ofthree testruns. KENDL P. PHILBRICK Secretary ofthe Environment 

### Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 2.11.19 Volatile Organic Compounds from S\peciflc Processes (

uthoty: EnonmentAcle, §1-1O1, 1-404, 2-101

—2-103,

# /

2-301

— 2-303, 10-102, and 10-103, / Annotated Code ofMaryland
Notice ofProposedAction [05-126-PI The Sec tary of the Environment proposes t amend Regulation. 7 under COMAR 26.11.19 Volatile Organic Compound from Specific Processes.
Statement ofPurpose The purpose o this actionis toreinstatethe equirements for nonnutrition and specialtyyeast install tions because those installation are required to meet Ce in operational requirements to m mize volatile organic ompound (VOC) emissions. Thereq ements forthese ins liations were in advertently omitted the last set ofam dments. The pro posed action also cl fies that the 98 ercent compliance demonstrationforthe •stingVOC e ssion standards is a 12-monthrolling avera

This action will be su tted to t e U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency (EPA) s a revi&on to the State Imple mentation Plan. Background

COMAR 26.11.19.17 conta s equirements for the con trol ofVOC emissions from so es thatmanufacture yeast. In 2004theregulationwas am dedto clarifyrequirements for sources that manufactur oth nutritional yeast and specialty yeast. Generally, t e endment provided more flexibility for sources tha coul manufacture specialt yeast and meet VOC emi ion st dards that were devel oped for the lower emitti g nutriti al yeast. The amend ment also included cha ges that w re necessary so that Maryland’s regulation as consistent th the EPA’s maxi mum achievable contr I technology ( CT) standards for nutritional yeast. Wh n the regulation as amended, how ever, it unintention y removed VOC re uirements for in stallations such as ure culture and yeasing installations that are neithern ritionalyeast nor speciltyyeastinstal lations.

The 2004 am dment required sources t demonstrate that the stand ds in §C(2) were met at least 8 percent of the time for e ch 12-month period. The projosed action clarifies that e demonstration requires a conIliance de termination or each month after the first year bcause the 98 percent mpliance demonstration is a rolling 42-month period. Affected ources and Emission Reduction

There e twoyeast manufacturers in Maryland: L aifre Yeast Q6rporation and American Yeast Corporation. saf fre Yest operates eight relatively large fermenters nd man 9 factures both nutritional and specialty yeast. ‘lçhe company has replaced some ofits nutritional yeastbatchVs wit,i specialty yeast products. American Yeast operates sIx sraller fermenters and manufactures only nutritiona Y/ast.

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOL. 32, ISSUE 12 FRIDAY, JUNE 10, 2005