FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS 347

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 4, FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2013 

# Subtitle 37 HEALTH SERVICES COST REVIEW COM MISSION

10.37.12 Cross

- Subsidization

Authority: Health

- General Article, §§19

- 207 , 19

- 212 , and 19

- 216, Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [12

- 330

- F] On February 6, 2013, the Health Services Cost Revie w Commission adopted amendments to Regulations .02 and .03 under COMAR 10.37.12 Cross

- Subsidization . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 39:25 Md. R. 1625

— 1626 (December 14, 2012), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 4, 2013.

J OHN M. COLMERS Chairman Health Services Cost Review Commission



# Subtitle 54 SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN

(WIC) 10.54.03 Retail Food and Pharmacy Vendors

Authority: Health

- General Article, §18

- 107(a), Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [12

- 283

- F] On February 11, 2013, the Secretary of Health and Me ntal Hygiene adopted amendments to Regulations .04

, .09

- 1

, .10

, .11

, .13

— .16 , and .19 under COMAR 10.54.03 Retail Food and Pharmacy Vendors . This action, which was proposed for adoption in 39:21 Md. R. 1393

— 1397 (October 19, 2012), has been adopted as
prop osed. Effective Date: March 4, 2013.

JOSHUA M. SHARFSTEIN, M.D. Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene


# Title 14 INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Subtitle 25 MARYLAND S TADIUM

AUTHORITY

Notice of Final Action [12

- 344

- F] On February 5, 2013, the Maryland Stadium Authority adopted: (1) Amendments to Regulation .01 under COMAR 14.25.01 General ; and (2) New Regulation .19 under COMAR 14.25.02 Prohibited Activities

. This action, which was proposed for adoption in 39:25 Md. R. 1627

— 1628 (December 14, 2012), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 4, 2013.

MICHAEL J. FRENZ Executive Director Maryland Stadium Authority


# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.34 Low Emission s 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 [12

- 328

- F

- I] On February 6, 2013, 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 39:24 Md. R. 1587

— 1590 (November 30, 2012), has been adopted as proposed. Effective Date: March 4, 2013.
ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Environm ent


# Title 27 CRITICAL AREA COMMISSION FOR THE CHESAPEAKE AND ATLANTIC COASTAL BAYS

Subtitle 01 CRITERIA FOR LOCAL CRITICAL AREA PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

27.01.12 Variances

Authority: Natural Resources Article, §8

- 1806 , Annotated Code of Maryland

Notice of Final Action [12

- 313

- F] On February 6, 2013, the Criti cal Area Commission for the Chesapeake and Atlantic Coastal Bays adopted the repeal of existing Regulation .01 and new Regulations .01

— .07 under COMAR 27.01.12 Variances . This action, which was proposed for adoption inEMERGENCY ACTION ON REGULATIONS 19

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 1, FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 2013 ( 2 ) Determine whether the a pplicant is eligible to receive a grant, and the proposed technology and installation meets the requirements the Clean Energy Grant Program Manager has established for grant eligibility. B. Evaluating Innovative Clean Energy Conversion Technologies and Systems

. ( 1 ) The Administration may consider applications for innovative clean energy conversion technologies or systems from eligible applicants. ( 2 ) The Administration shall establish a process to fully develop all information required to determine whether a particu lar technology or system qualifies for a Clean Energy Grant. ( 3 ) If the grant amount is not fixed by the Administration as set forth in the Notice of Grant Opportunity and the Administration determines the proposed clean energy conversion technology or
sy stem is eligible for a variable grant award, the Administration may determine the amount of the grant by considering such factors as installed capacity, energy production, the need to meet the State ‘ s Renewable Portfolio Standards through alternative means , and any other factors the Administration determines to be relevant. ( 4 ) The Administration ‘ s determination shall be in writing and set forth the factors and reasons why the Administration deems the proposal eligible. (5) Should the Administration determi ne that a proposal is ineligible for award, it will make its determination in writing and set forth the factors and reasons why it deems the proposal ineligible. ( 6 ) The Administration may specify additional categories of innovative technologies and system s by publishing notice of its determination on its website and in the Maryland Register. C. If it approves the application, the Administration shall notify the Applicant in writing and process the grant for payment in accordance with applicable accounting and payment requirements. D. If a grant is disapproved in whole or in part, the Administration shall notify the Applicant in writing, giving the reasons for its decision. E. Administrative Reconsideration

. ( 1 ) An Applicant that has been denied a grant in whole or in part, may request reconsideration of the Administration within 15 days of the date of the letter notifying the Applicant of the disapproval of the application. ( 2 ) The Applicant shall provide new information or change of circumstances that was not known or could not have reasonably been known when the application was submitted and considered by MEA to address the reasons for the Administration ‘ s decision in writing. ( 3 ) The Administration may request additional documentation or other proof, incl uding technical specifications or other documentation to support the Applicant ‘ s request for reconsideration. ( 4 ) The Administration may require the Applicant to amend its request to meet the Administration ‘ s requirements. ( 5 ) The Administration may consid er the information provided by the Applicant and any other information it determines is technically relevant to the determination of eligibility in making its final decision. ( 6 ) The Administration shall notify the Applicant of its final decision on the el igibility of the person, business or government or the proposed technology.
.10 Program Administration

. A. The Director may delegate to any other official or employee of the Administration or Program the authority to make determinations concerning whether a proposed technology or system qualifies for a Clean Energy Grants and whether an Applicant is eligible for a Clean Energy Grant. B. The Administration may enter into contracts with third parties to evaluate proposed technologies if necessary to make a de termination that a technology qualifies for a Clean Energy Grant. C. The Administration may alter the Clean Energy Grant Program incentive levels as deemed necessary to make the Program more effective. D. The Administration may suspend the Clean Energy Gra nt Program should demand exceed the Fund ‘ s resources. .11 Applicant Responsibilities. A. Grant applicants and recipients shall provide all information the Administration deems is necessary to process or evaluate the grant or the performance of the technol ogy or system receiving a Clean Energy Grant in a timely manner. B. Grant applicants and recipients may not knowingly make or cause to be made any false statement or report in any document required to be furnished to the Administration for the purpose of influencing any action by the Administration on any application or for the purpose of influencing any action of the Administration affecting any grant already provided. C. Grant applicants and recipients will allow Administration representatives direct ac cess to Clean Energy Conversion Technologies and Systems for which the applicants are requesting or have received Clean Energy Grants for the purposes of verifying all claims and representations. D. Failure to comply with § B of this regulation is subject to penalties and fines as set forth in State Government Article, § 9

- 20B

11 , Annotated Code of Maryland.

ABIGAIL ROSS HOPPER Director 

# Title 26 DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY 26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program

Authority: Environment Article, §§1

- 404, 2

- 102, 2

- 103, and 2

- 301, Annotated

Code of Maryland; Ch.111 and 112, Acts of 2007

Notice of Em ergency Action

[12

- 328

- E

- I] The Joint Committee on Administrative, Executive, and Legislative Review has granted emergency status to amendments to Regulation .02 under COMAR 26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program

. Emergency status began: December 31, 201 2. Emergency status expires: June 19, 2013.

Editor ‘ s Note: The text of this document will not be printed here because it appeared as a Notice of Proposed Action in 39 : 24 Md. R. 1587

— 1590 ( November 30, 2012 ), referenced as [ 12

- 328

- P

- I ].

ROBERT M. SUMMER S, Ph.D. Secretary of the EnvironmentPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1587

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 39, ISSUE 24, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2012 (6) A source that requests a limitation on emissions to preclude applicability of major source regulations, and is not c overed by §B(7) or (8) of this regulation

— $1,500; [ (6) ] (7) A s ource that demonstrates compliance with COMAR 26.11.15 using a dispersion model other than a screening model, and is not covered by [ §B(7) ] §B (8) of this regulation

— $5,000; or [ (7) ] (8) [ PS D or NSR source, or a toxic source applying for ] A source applying for a PSD approval, an NSR approval (including a Plantwide Applicability Limit (PAL) permit), or a special permit under COMAR 26.11.15

— $20,000 each

.
.19 Fee Schedule: Title V Permit or a State Permit to Operate. A. [ The owner or operator of a source that is required to obtain, and have in current effect, a permit issued under Title V of the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§7661

— 7661f, including a Part 70 permit, or a State permit to operate, shall pay an annual fee consisting of a base fee of $200 plus an emission

- based fee for each ton of regulated emissions from all installations at the plant or facility. ] Annual Fees. (1) The owner or operator of a source that is required to obtain, and have in current effect, a permit issued under Title V of the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §§7661

— 7661f, including a Part 70 permit, shall pay an annual fee consisting of a base fee of $5,000 plus an emission

- b ased fee for each ton of regulated emissions from all installations at the plant or facility. (2) The owner or operator of a Synthetic minor source that is required to obtain, and have in current effect, a State permit to operate, shall pay an annual fee c onsisting of a base fee of $1,000, plus an emission

- based fee for each ton of regulated emissions from all installations at the plant or facility. (3) The owner or operator of all other sources required to obtain, and have in current effect, a State permit to operate, shall pay an annual fee consisting of a base fee of $500, plus an emission

based fee for each ton of regulated emissions from all installations at the plant or facility. B.

— E. (text unchanged)

ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. Secretary of the Envir onment


# Subtitle 11 AIR QUALITY

26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program

Authority: Authority: Environment Article, §§1

- 404, 2

- 102, 2

- 103, [ and ] 2

- 301, 2

- 1102, and 2

- 1103, Annotated Code of Maryland [ ; Ch.111 and 112, Acts of 2007 ]
Notice of Proposed Action [12

- 328

- P

- I] The Secretary of the Environment proposes to amend Regulation .02 under COMAR 26.11.34 Low Emissions Vehicle Program

.

Statement of Purpose The purpose of this action is to update Maryland ‘ s Cl ean Car regulations to reflect the changes made to the California Low Emissions Vehicle Program (i.e., Cal LEV or Clean Car Program) since the last update in 2010. These amendments will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a r evision to Maryland ‘ s State Implementation Plan (SIP). Background The Maryland Clean Cars Act of 2007 required the Department of the Environment (MDE) to adopt regulations implementing the Cal LEV Program in Maryland. MDE ‘ s implementing regulations adopt ed, through incorporation by reference, the applicable California regulations. The Cal LEV program is a dynamic, changing program in which many of the relevant California regulations are routinely reviewed and updated. To continue to implement California ‘ s standards, Maryland must remain consistent with their regulations; hence when California updates its regulations, MDE must reflect these changes by amending COMAR 26.11.34.02. This action incorporates changes made by California to the applicable regulatio ns incorporated by reference into the Maryland program. This proposed action adopts the new Cal LEV III amendments, also known as the Advanced Clean Cars Program. The Cal LEV III amendments include proposed changes to the LEV II, Greenhouse Gas (GHG), and Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) standards. The new LEV III program regulates criteria pollutants, and requires that all new 2015 and subsequent model year vehicles transferred (including titled and registered) in the State of Maryland be certified to meet the new California emission standards. The LEV III standards will be phased in from 2015

- 2025, and significantly reduces criteria pollutants from motor vehicles. The new GHG emission standard will phase

- in from 2017

- 2025, and develops a  ̳ footprint ‘ curve to

e stablish GHG targets for vehicle models based on their size. Proposed changes to the ZEV regulation aim to simplify the program, as well as increase requirements for the deployment of ZEV vehicles starting in 2018. Due to this California action, Maryland a nd the other states that have adopted the California standards must change their regulations to allow the automobile manufacturers this compliance path. This proposed action is the administrative action necessary to remain consistent with the California pr ogram.

Requirements of the Regulations The individual regulatory changes can be grouped into the following major areas: (1) Low Emission Vehicle (LEV) III Standards This amendment sets new, ever more stringent, standards for criteria pollutants, reducing fleet wide average emissions so that vehicles will produce 75% less smog

- forming pollution than the average new car sold today, by 2025. The new regulation removes the individual Non

- Methane Organic Gas (NMOG) and Nitrogen Oxides (NO x ) standards, and repl aces them with a combined NMOG and NO x emission standards. The combined standard provides manufacturers with greater flexibility in developing their own internal compliance strategies. The amendment also increases the emission system durability warranty re quirements to 150,000 miles, in order to ensure vehicles maintain their low emissions for the life of the vehicle, as well as provide more stringent evaporative emission standards for personal cars, light

- duty, and medium

- duty vehicles. (2) Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Program The ZEV program can be seen as the technology

- forcing piece of the Cal LEV III Program, designed to spur commercialization of zero emission vehicles. The changes in this amendment provide compliance flexibility in the near term. CARB has removed credit expirations, lowered the requirements from intermediate volume manufacturers, and extended the  ̳ travel provision ‘ that allows eligible ZEVs placed in any 177 state to count towards the ZEV requirements in all states through 2017. Beginni ng with model year 2018, the amendments are intended to reflect the growing role that plug

- in hybrid and electric vehicles will have in achieving future air quality improvement goals. These amendments increase the requirements for ZEV deployment starting i n 2018 and beyond, whilePROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

1588

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 39, ISSUE 24, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2012 simplifying the program by removing commercialized technologies, like clean conventional, and traditional hybrids, from compliance options. Also included is an Alternative Compliance Path that manufacturers can choose to ease their burden of compliance in 177 states, by reducing the requirements in later years, if ZEVs are placed in the 177 states in the earlier years. Compliance is eased as well by creating a west and east regional pool for manufacturer ‘ s to meet the 177 state ‘ s re quirements. This will provide flexibility to manufacturers to place ZEVs where the market is better prepared. (3) Greenhouse Gas Emission Standards The GHG standards expand on the current emission standards set for MY 2009

- 2016 vehicles. The new amendments phase

- in for MY 2016

- 2025. The new standards establish a  ̳ footprint ‘ curve, for each model year, for reducing GHG emissions from vehicles based on their size. This will allow manufacturers to have flexibility in determining how their fleet will meet the n ew requirements.

Affected Sources These amendments apply to automobile manufacturers that produce new motor vehicles for sale in Maryland. All vehicle types that have a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 14,000 pounds are affected.
Comparison to Fed eral 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 applicab le federal standard: There is a corresponding federal standard to this proposed action, and the proposed action is more stringent. Maryland Proposed Regulations: COMAR 26.11.34 Federal Tier 2 Motor Vehicle Emissions Standards 65 FR 6698 (Feb. 10, 2000) Th ese regulations are more restrictive than the federal Tier 2 motor vehicle emissions standards insofar as they require more stringent NMOG and NO x emissions standards. (2) Benefit to the public health, safety or welfare, or the environment: The Advanced Cl ean Car Program will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), nitrogen oxides (NO x ), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and air toxics (benzene, 1,3

- butadiene and acetaldehyde). Greenhouse gases are the primary pollutants that cause global warming. Mary land, and the Chesapeake Bay, are particularly vulnerable to the effects of global warming. Major concerns include a rise in coastal waters, loss of aquatic life and potential for extreme weather conditions. NO x emissions adversely impact the Chesapeake Ba y and are also major contributors to the State ‘ s ozone and fine particulate pollution. VOCs are also linked to Maryland ‘ s ozone pollution. Air toxics emissions can have a variety of negative effects on public health. (3) Analysis of additional burden or co st on the regulated
person: Maryland consumers should expect to pay more to purchase these cleaner vehicles due to the emissions control technology that will be required to meet these standards. California has estimated that average new vehicle purchase co sts will increase by $1,900 when fully implemented in 2025. However, these initial costs are expected to be offset by savings of up to $6,000 from reduced fuel costs, resulting in a net savings to consumers of about $4,000 over the life of the vehicle. (4 ) Justification for the need for more restrictive standards: The Advanced Clean Car Program will reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG), nitrogen oxides (NO x ), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and air toxics (benzene, 1,3

- butadiene and acetaldehyde). Greenhouse gases are the primary pollutants that cause global warming. Maryland, and the Chesapeake Bay, are particularly vulnerable to the effects of global warming. Major concerns include a rise in coastal waters, loss of aquatic life (impacts to oyster s, crabs and the bay ecosystem) and potential of extreme weather conditions. GHG emissions contribute significantly to global warming. Maryland ‘ s challenges to meeting the federal health standards for ozone and fine particles are amongst the toughest in t he country. Much of Maryland still remains in ozone nonattainment, even after implementation of many federal and state programs that are already reducing motor vehicle emissions. The emission reductions from the Advanced Clean Cars Program will be very imp ortant to our efforts to attain and maintain these standards. Mobile sources are the number one contributor to air toxics in major cities like Baltimore and Washington. While existing programs are gradually reducing exposure to these pollutants, the deepe r and quicker reductions under the Advanced Clean Cars Program will bring healthier air to Maryland ‘ s citizen ‘ s sooner. The Maryland Clean Cars Act of 2007 required the Maryland Department of the Environment (MDE) to adopt regulations implementing the Cali fornia Clean Car Program in Maryland. Maryland ‘ s implementing regulations adopted, through incorporation by reference, the applicable California regulations. The Cal LEV program is a dynamic, changing program in which many of the relevant California regula tions are continuously updated. The adoption of the Cal LEV III Amendments represents a significant change in the program. To fully realize the benefits and retain California ‘ s standards, Maryland must remain consistent with their regulations, since Califo rnia has updated its regulations, Maryland must reflect these changes by amending our regulations.

Estimate of Economic Impact I. Summary of Economic Impact. The economic impact on automobile manufacturers is expected to result in price increases for

new motor vehicles, while leading to reduced operating costs for consumers. The greatest cost increase will be due to the ZEV program credit requirements. However, many changes to the ZEV program are designed to ease the burden of increased vehicle requirement s. These changes remove expiration dates for credits, reduce credit requirements for Intermediate Volume Manufacturers, and extend the  ̳ Travel Provision. ‘ The  ̳ Travel Provision ‘ allows eligible ZEVs that are placed in Section 177 states to be partially

cou nted towards compliance with California ‘ s ZEV requirements (as if they were placed in California). Additionally, vehicles placed in California can be partially counted towards Section 177 state ‘ s ZEV requirements. This provision gives manufacturers additio nal time to continue to advance ZEV technology and develop the network needed to encourage adoption. These amendments will have no economic impact on the Department. They also will have no impact on the Motor Vehicle Administration ‘ s registration, data man agement, and dealer oversight activities related to this program.
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: NONEPROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 1589

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 39, ISSUE 24, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2012 Benefit (+) Cost (

- ) Magnitude

D. On regulated industries or trade groups: (

- ) Minimal
E. On other industries or trade groups: (

- ) Minimal F. Direct and indirect effects on public: (1) Cost to consumers (

- ) Minimal (2) Health/ Environment al Benefits (+) Indeterminabl e III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from Section II.) D. Implementation of this program in Maryland is not expected to significantly impact manufacturers ‘ production as necessary modifications will hav e to occur in order to comply with these requirements in California and the other 177 states, regardless. Manufacturer costs are expected to be distributed among all vehicles in all states. E. Other industries and trade groups could expect to experience i ncreased expenditures for the purchase of new vehicles when the amendments take effect. The exact increase in expenditures is dependent on several variables including when the new vehicles are purchased and the numbers and types of new vehicles purchased. These increased purchase costs are expected to be offset by reduced operating costs, ultimately resulting in a net savings over the lifetime of the vehicles. F(1). The public will be directly impacted by this program due to the expected increase in the pu rchase of new vehicles. These increased purchase costs are expected to be offset by reduced operating costs, ultimately resulting in a net savings over the lifetime of the vehicles. F(2). Indirectly, the implementation of this program will benefit the pub lic by helping to improve Maryland ‘ s air quality and will result in fewer negative health effects on the general public from air pollution.

Economic Impact on Small Businesses The proposed action has minimal or no economic impact on small businesses.
Impa ct on Individuals with Disabilities The proposed action has an impact on individuals with disabilities as follows: Changes to the program have the potential to result in an increase in the volume of Zero Emission Vehicles that have an impact on individuals with disabilities. These vehicles produce very little sound (i.e., are extremely quiet) in some operating modes and pose an increased safety risk to all but especially to individuals with visual impairments. This important safety concern is being addresse d in separate actions underway at both the state and federal levels involving a variety of interested, affected stakeholders to craft a national (and even global) solution to this important safety issue. In addition, this action will have a positive impact on individuals with disabilities involving respiratory problems by reducing air pollutants that contribute to disease.

Opportunity for Public Comment The Department of the Environment will hold a public hearing on the proposed action on January 3, 2013 at 10 a.m. at the Department of the Environment, 1800 Washington Boulevard, 1st Floor Aeris Conference Room, 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 emailed to drabin@mde.state.md.us. Comments must be received not later than January 3, 2013, o r 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: 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 shoul d 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, Anno tated Code of Maryland, the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 13 Motor Vehicles, Division 3 Air Resources Board, 2012 Update

, ha s 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 th is document are filed in special public depositories located throughout the State. A list of these depositories was published in 39:2 Md. R. 10 4 (January 27, 2012), and is available online at www.dsd.state.md.us. Th is document may also be inspected at the office of the Division of State Documents, 16 Francis Street, Annapolis, Maryland 21401.

.02 Incorporation by Reference. A. In this chapter, the following documents are incorporated by reference. B. Documents Incorporated. (1) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 1, §1900 Definitions, as effective [ April 17, 2009 ] August 7,2012

. (2) Title 13, Califor nia Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1960.1 Exhaust Emissions Standards and Test Procedures

- 1981 through 2006 Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective [ March 26, 2004 ] August 7, 2012

. (3) (text u nchanged). (4) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1961 Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures

- 2004 [ and Subsequent ] through 2019 Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective [ April 1, 2010 ] August 7, 2012

. (5) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1961.1 Greenhouse Gas Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures

- 2009 [ and Subsequent ] through 2016 Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective [ April 1, 2010 ] August 7, 2012

. (6) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1961.2 Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures

- 2015 and Subsequent Mod el Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective August 7, 2012.PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS

1590

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 39, ISSUE 24, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2012 (7) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1961.3 Greenhouse Gas Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures

- 2017 an d Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective August 7, 2012. [ (6) ] ( 8) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1962 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 2005 through 2008 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective February 13, 2010. [ (7) ] ( 9) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1962.1 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 2009 [ and Subsequent ] through 2017 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective [ February 13, 2010 ] August 7, 2012

. (10) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1962.2 Zero

- Emission Vehicle Standards for 2018 and Subsequent Model Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, as effective August 7, 2012. [ (8) ] (11) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1962. [ 2 ] 3 Electric Vehicle Charging Requirements, as effective [ April 17, 2009 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (9) ] (12) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1965 Emission Control [ and ] , Smog Index , and Environmental Performance Labels

- 1979 and Subsequent Model

- Year Motor Vehicles, as effective [ June 16, 2008 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (10) ] (13) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1968.2 Malfunction and Diagnostic System Requirements

- 2004 and Subsequent Model

- Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles and Engines, as effective [ June 17, 2010 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (11) ] (14) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1968.5 Enforcement of Malfuncti on and Diagnostic System Requirements for 2004 and Subsequent Model

- Year Passenger Cars, Light

- Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles and Engines, as effective [ November 9, 2007 ] August 7,2012

. [ (12) ] (15)

─ [ (13) ] (16) (text unchanged) [ (14) ] (17) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1976 Standards and Test Procedures for Motor Vehicle Fuel Evaporative Emissions, as effective [ February 13, 2010 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (15) ] (18) (text unchanged) [ (16) ] (19) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 2, §1978 Standards and Test Procedures for Vehicle Refueling Emissions, as effective [ February 13, 2010 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (17) ] (20)

─ [ (19) ] (22) (text unchanged) [ (20) ] (23) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 6, §2037 Defects Warranty Requirements for 1990 and Subsequent Model Passenger Cars, Light

Duty Trucks, Medium

- Duty Vehicles, and Motor Vehicle Engines Used in Such Vehicles, as effective [ November 9, 2007 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (21) ] (24) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 1, Article 6, §2038 Performance Warranty Requirements for 1990 and Subsequent Model Pas senger Cars, Light

Duty Trucks, and Medium

- Duty Vehicles, and Motor Vehicles Engines Used in Such Vehicles, as effective [ November 9, 2007 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (22) ] (25)

─ [ (24) ] (27) (text unchanged) [ (25) ] (28) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 1, §2062 Assembly

- Line Test Procedures

- 1998 and Subsequent Model Years, as effective [ November 27, 1999 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (26) ] (29)

─ [ 31 ] (34) (text unchanged) [ (32) ] (35) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 2.1, §2112 Definitions, undated, as effective [ August 16, 2009 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (33) ] ( 36)

─ [ (59) ] (62) (text unchanged) [ (60) ] (63) Tit le 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 2.3, §2139 Testing, as effective [ August 16, 2009 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (61) ] (64) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 2.3, §2140 Notificati on and Use of Test Results, as effective [ August 21, 2002 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (62) ] (65)

─ [ (65) ] (68) (text unchanged) [ (66) ] (69) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 2.4, §2145 Field Information Report, as effective [ November 27, 1999 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (67) ] (70) (text unchanged) [ (68) ] (71) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 2, Article 2.4, §2147 Demonstration of Compliance with Emission Standards, as effective [ August 16, 2009 ] August 7, 2012

. [ (69) ] (72)

─ [ 75 ] (78) (text unchanged) [ (76) ] (79) Title 13, Californ ia Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, Chapter 4.4, §2235 Requirements, as effective [ September 17, 1991 ] August 7, 2012

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