FINAL ACTION ON REGULATIONS

347

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

Subtitle 37 HEALTH SERVICES COST 

REVIEW COMMISSION

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 Review 

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.

JOHN 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 Mental 

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 

proposed. 

Effective Date: March 4, 2013.

JOSHUA M. SHARFSTEIN, M.D.

Secretary of Health and Mental Hygiene

Title 14 

INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

Subtitle 25 MARYLAND STADIUM 

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 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

[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 Environment

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 Critical 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 in 
EMERGENCY ACTION ON REGULATIONS

19

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 1, FRIDAY, JANUARY 11, 2013

(2) Determine whether the applicant 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 particular 

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 

system 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 determine 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 systems 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, including 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 consider 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 eligibility 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 

determination 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 Grant 

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 technology 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 access 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, §9-20B11, 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 Emergency 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, 2012. 

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. SUMMERS, Ph.D.

Secretary of the Environment
PROPOSED 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 covered by 

§B(7) or (8) of this regulation — $1,500;

[(6)] (7) A source 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) [PSD 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-based 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 consisting 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 emissionbased 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 Environment

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 Clean 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 revision 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 

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 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 

regulations 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 

establish 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 and 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 program. 

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 (NOx) standards, and replaces them with a combined NMOG 

and NOx 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 requirements 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. Beginning 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 in 2018 and beyond, while 
PROPOSED 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 requirements. 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 new 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 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:

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) 

These regulations are more restrictive than the federal Tier 2 

motor vehicle emissions standards insofar as they require more 

stringent NMOG and NOx emissions standards.

(2) Benefit to the public health, safety or welfare, or the 

environment:

The Advanced Clean Car Program will reduce emissions of 

greenhouse gases (GHG), nitrogen oxides (NOx), 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 and 

potential for extreme weather conditions. NOx emissions adversely 

impact the Chesapeake Bay 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 cost 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 costs 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 (NOx), 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 oysters, 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 the 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 important 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 deeper 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 California 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 regulations 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 California 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 

requirements. 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 

counted 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 additional 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 management, 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: NONE
PROPOSED 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/ 

Environmental Benefits (+) Indeterminable

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 have 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 

increased 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 purchase 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 public 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.

Impact 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 addressed 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, 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: 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. 

Editor‘s Note on Incorporation by Reference

Pursuant to State Government Article, §7-207, Annotated Code of 

Maryland, the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 13 Motor 

Vehicles, Division 3 Air Resources Board, 2012 Update, 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 39:2 Md. R. 104 (January 27, 2012), and is 

available online at www.dsd.state.md.us. This 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, California 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 unchanged). 

(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 Model 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 and 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, LightDuty 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 

Malfunction 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, LightDuty 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 Passenger Cars, LightDuty 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) Title 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 Notification 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, California 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