PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

1986 

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2013

(m) Refinishing of motor vehicles subject to COMAR 

26.11.19.23; 

(n) Marine vessel coating subject to COMAR 26.11.19.27; 

and

(o) Pleasure craft coating subject to COMAR 26.11.19.27-1.

(3) This regulation does not apply to repair or touch-up 

coatings when applied using a hand-held, pressurized, non-refillable 

container which expels coatings from the container in a finely divided 

spray when a valve on the container is depressed. 

 (4) The emission standards in §D and application methods of 

§E of this regulation do not apply to application of the following 

coatings to the surface of any metal part or product which will be 

assembled with other metal, wood, fabric, plastic, or glass parts: 

(a) Stencil coatings; 

(b) Safety-indicating coatings; 

(c) Magnetic data storage disk coatings; and 

(d) Electric-insulating and thermal-conducting coatings. 

(5) The emission standards in §D and application methods of 

§E of this regulation do not apply to plastic extruded onto metal to 

form a coating on any metal part or product which will be assembled 

with other metal, wood, fabric, plastic, or glass parts. 

D. Emission Standards. 

(1) A person subject to this regulation may not exceed the 

applicable VOC emission standards of the following table when 

applying a metal furniture coating: 

Coating Type Baked Air-Dried

Lbs/gal Kg/l Lbs/gal Kg/l

General, one-component 2.3 0.275 2.3 0.275

General, multi-component 2.3 0.275 2.8 0.340

Extreme performance 3.0 0.360 3.5 0.420

Metallic 3.5 0.420 3.5 0.420

Pretreatment 3.5 0.420 3.5 0.420

Solar absorbent 3.0 0.360 3.5 0.420

Extreme high gloss 3.0 0.360 2.8 0.340

(2) A person subject to this regulation may not exceed the 

applicable VOC emission standards of the following table when

applying a metal parts and products coating: 

Coating Type Baked Air-Dried

Lbs/gal Kg/l Lbs/gal Kg/l

General, one component 2.3 0.275 2.8 0.340

General, multi-component 2.3 0.275 2.8 0.340

Adhesion promoter 4.0 0.479 4.0 0.479

Prefabricated

architectural one 

component and multicomponent

2.3 0.280 3.5 0.420

Military specification 2.3 0.280 2.8 0.340

Extreme high-gloss; 

extreme performance; 

heat-resistant; high 

performance 

architectural; repair 

coating; solar absorbent; 

or touch up coating

3.0 0.360 3.5 0.420

Camouflage, electricinsulating varnish; 

etching filler; high 

temperature; metallic; 

mold-seal; pan backing; 

pretreatment; silicone 

release and vacuummetalizing

3.5 0.420 3.5 0.420

E. Application Methods. 

(1) Except as provided in §E(2), a person subject to the 

requirements of this regulation shall use the following application 

methods: 

(a) Electrostatic application; 

(b) HVLP spray; 

(c) Flow coat; 

(d) Roller coat; 

(e) Dip coat including electrodeposition; 

(f) Brush coat; or 

(g) A coating application method capable of achieving a 

transfer efficiency equivalent to or better than the efficiency achieved 

by HVLP spraying. 

(2) The application requirements of §E(1) do not apply to the 

following coating operations: 

(a) Repair coatings; 

(b) Touch-up coatings; 

(c) Coatings applied to create a textured finish; or 

(d) Robotic application of heavy-duty engine coatings. 

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 Proposed Action 

[13-347-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 COMAR 26.11.34.02 

Incorporation by Reference to reflect the changes made to the 

California regulations since their last update. 

These amendments will be submitted to the U.S. Environmental 

Implementation Plan (SIP). 

Background 

Vehicles sold in the United States must be certified under one of 

two certification programs: the federal program (Tier 2) or the 

California program (the Clean Car Program). Section 177 of the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 provides states the ability to 

adopt the California program in lieu of the federal program as long as 

the adopted state program is identical to the California program and 

the state allows two model years lead time from adoption to 

implementation. 

The Maryland Clean Cars Act of 2007 required the Maryland 

Department of the Environment (MDE) to adopt regulations 

implementing the California Clean Car Program (also referred to as 

the California Low Emissions Vehicle Program-CAL LEV) in 

incorporation by reference, the applicable California regulations. The 
PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

1987 

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2013 

Cal LEV program is a dynamic, changing program in which many of 

the relevant California regulations are continuously updated. To 

their regulations, hence when California updates its regulations, 

Maryland must reflect these changes by amending our regulations. 

The proposed changes are in effect in California as well as some 

of the other states that have adopted the CALEV program. 

Essentially, the changes in this proposed action are merely updates to 

existing test procedures and provisions and will have minimal, if any, 

impact on the cost or implementation of the program in Maryland. 

Sources Affected and Location 

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. 

Requirements 

necessary since many of the California regulations that are 

incorporated into the Maryland regulation have been updated. These 

individual regulatory changes can be grouped into 2 areas: 

-substantive changes to the heavy-duty on-board 

diagnostics (HD-OBD) and OBD II standards. 

standard. 

These changes are described in greater detail in the Technical 

Support Document for this action. The most significant change is to 

GHG standards by complying with the new federal standards for the 

2017-2025 Model Years. This action is similar to that taken 

previously when California allowed compliance with the current 

federal GHG standards to satisfy compliance with the CAL LEV II 

Standard in model year (MY) 2012 thru 2016. 

Expected Emissions Reductions 

The OBD related changes to the regulations will not impact the 

with the 

National GHG program to satisfy compliance with the California 

impact on the benefits. The emissions impact is expected to be 

insignificant since the National GHG program was developed in 

coordination with California and was designed to minimize 

differences in program requirements that ultimately impact the 

emissions benefits. Once the National program takes effect 

nationwide, all vehicles sold in the country will produce fewer GHG 

emissions, not just those sold in California and the other Clean Car 

states. Any benefit loss associated with this dual compliance 

mechanism will likely be recovered as these national vehicles travel 

through Maryland and enter the fleet through other means (used car 

sales, resident relocations, etc.). 

Comparison to Federal Standards 

There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action. 

Estimate of Economic Impact 

I. Summary of Economic Impact. The California Advanced 

Clean Cars Program was adopted in 2012, prior to the establishment 

of the 2017-2025 Model Year federal greenhouse gas (GHG) 

program. Therefore, these amendments are effectively an 

administrative action that will harmonize the federal and California 

greenhouse gas programs, resulting in minimal, or no economic 

impact on the automobile manufacturers, dealers, and the public. 

These changes provide manufacturers greater flexibility in complying 

with these standards and was a change desired by the vehicle 

manufacturers. The administrative changes to the MD/HD OBD also 

have no direct or indirect effect on the public. 

These amendments will have no economic impact on the 

Department. They also will have no impact on the Motor Vehicle 

ht 

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 

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:

(1) Cost to consumers (+) Minimal

(2) Health/environmental 

benefits (+) Indeterminable

III. Assumptions. (Identified by Impact Letter and Number from 

Section II.)

D. The changes to the GHG component will help manufacturers 

meet the more stringent requirements. The GHG changes provide 

lations, for 

MY 2017-2025, through meeting the National GHG standards; much 

like the current regulation allows MY 2012-2016 compliance through 

meeting the National program. This will help streamline the reporting 

requirements for manufacturers and reduce the regulatory burden for 

them.

F(1). There will be minimal economic impact to consumers. 

Manufacturers will now be allowed to produce one vehicle that will 

meet both the California and federal GHG standards. This will reduce 

the burden on manufacturers to comply with the GHG standard in 

Maryland, preserving the ability of Maryland citizens to purchase the 

vehicles they desire.

F(2). The emissions impact is expected to be insignificant since 

the National GHG program was developed in coordination with 

California and was designed to minimize differences in program 

requirements that ultimately impact the emissions benefits. Some 

benefit could be expected in the future from reduced GHG emissions 

from non-Cal LEV cars entering the fleet.

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 
PROPOSED ACTION ON REGULATIONS 

1988 

MARYLAND REGISTER, VOLUME 40, ISSUE 23, FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2013

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 emailed 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. 

 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, December 31, 2102 

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 40:1 Md. R. 9 (January 11, 2013), 

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. 

.02 Incorporation by Reference. 

A. (text unchanged) 

B. Documents Incorporated. 

(1) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, 

Chapter 1, Article 1, §1900 Definitions, as effective [August 7,2012]

December 31, 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 [August 7, 2012] December 

31, 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 through 2019 Model Passenger Cars, Light-Duty 

Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles, as effective [August 7, 2012]

December 31, 2012. 

(5) (text unchanged) 

(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, LightDuty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles, as effective [August 7, 

2012] December 31, 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] December 31, 2012. 

(8) (text unchanged) 

(9) Title 13, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 3, 

Chapter 1, Article 2, §1962.1 Zero-Emission Vehicle Standards for 

2009 through 2017 Model Year Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, 

and Medium-Duty Vehicles, as effective [August 7, 2012] December 

31, 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]

December 31, 2012. 

(11) (12) (text unchanged) 

(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 [August 7, 2012] July 31, 2013. 

(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 ModelYear Passenger Cars, Light-Duty Trucks, and Medium-Duty Vehicles 

and Engines, as effective [August 7,2012] July 31, 2013. 

(15) (16) (text unchanged) 

(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 [August 7, 

2012] December 31, 2012. 

(18) (79) (text unchanged) 

ROBERT M. SUMMERS, Ph.D. 

Secretary of the Environment 

Title 36 

MARYLAND STATE 

LOTTERY AND GAMING 

CONTROL AGENCY 

Notice of Proposed Action 

[13-361-P]

The Maryland State Lottery and Gaming Control Agency proposes 

to amend: 

(1) Regulations .02, .03, and .06 under COMAR 36.01.03 

Voluntary Exclusion and Responsible Gaming; and 

(2) Regulations .01 and .02 under COMAR 36.03.06 

Enforcement of Voluntary Exclusion Program.

This action was considered at the Maryland State Lottery and 

Gaming Control Commission open meeting held on August 22, 2013, 

notice of which was given pursuant to State Government Article, 

§10-506(c), Annotated Code of Maryland. 

Statement of Purpose 

The purpose of this action is to update the regulations of the State 

Lottery and Gaming Control Agency to incorporate provisions that 

better define and refine the requirements for VLT and Table Games 

operation and better conform to the Agency's functions for expanded 

gambling. 

Comparison to Federal Standards 

There is no corresponding federal standard to this proposed action.