The pavement maintenance industry faces one of its most significant legislative challenges in recent memory as Maryland House Bill 77 advances through the state legislature. This proposed legislation would ban coal tar and liquid pavement (LP) based sealers across the entire state, threatening products that represented 85% of all sealer applied to parking lots and driveways in Maryland between 2019 and 2020. For contractors, material suppliers, and property owners who rely on these proven pavement preservation solutions, understanding the implications of this bill is essential. The stakes are high, and the outcome could set a precedent for similar legislation in other states. Why Construction Professionals Take Pride in the Paving industry is precisely why the fight against HB 77 matters so deeply to those who have built their livelihoods around delivering durable, high-quality pavement surfaces.
Understanding Maryland HB 77 and Its Proposed Sealant Ban
Maryland HB 77 targets what the legislation describes as high polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) pavement sealants. In practice, this means a ban on coal tar based sealers and liquid pavement (LP) based sealers, which together dominate the pavement maintenance market. The bill has already passed the Maryland House of Representatives and now moves to the state Senate for consideration.
Products That Would Be Banned
The proposed ban specifically targets several commercially available pavement sealer products. Contractors who use any of the following materials would face restrictions on their use within the state:
- SealMaster LP Sealer a widely used liquid pavement formulation for asphalt preservation
- Neyra Force a high performance coal tar emulsion sealer
- SealMaster Coal Tar a refined coal tar emulsion trusted by contractors for decades
- Neyra Tarconite a coal tar based sealer with aggregate additives for enhanced durability
The Legislative Path So Far
The bill has passed the House and now sits before the Senate where committee hearings will determine its fate. The Pavement Coatings Technology Council (PCTC) reports that the legislation represents an existential threat to sealcoating businesses in the state.
Why Coal Tar and LP Sealers Dominate the Market
Understanding why these products command 85% of the Maryland market requires looking at their performance and cost effectiveness. Coal tar pavement sealer has been safely manufactured and applied on asphalt parking lots for over 50 years. Its dominance reflects real world performance advantages that alternatives have struggled to match.
Performance Benefits of Coal Tar Based Sealers
- Superior resistance to gasoline, oil, and chemical spills coal tar sealers form a dense, impermeable barrier that resists petroleum based stains better than many alternatives
- Extended pavement life properly applied sealcoating can extend asphalt pavement life by 30% to 50% by protecting against UV degradation and oxidation
- Cost effectiveness at roughly $0.15 to $0.30 per square foot applied, coal tar sealers offer the best value for property owners managing large parking areas
- Proven track record with over five decades of widespread use and continuous refinement
The Economic Impact of a Ban on Small Businesses
The Maryland pavement maintenance industry has mobilized contractors to sign petitions demonstrating how many jobs this ban would eliminate. Sealcoating is a labor intensive industry that supports small businesses across the state, from family owned sealcoating companies to material distributors and equipment suppliers.
Anne LeHuray, PCTC advisor, has emphasized that the Honesty and Transparency in Asphalt Maintenance How Social Media is reshaping contractor customer relationships is critical to countering misinformation about sealant safety. Contractors who have built their reputations on delivering quality pavement preservation now face the prospect of losing their primary toolset.
| Stakeholder Group | Potential Impact of HB 77 Ban | Estimated Jobs Affected (Maryland) |
|---|---|---|
| Sealcoating Contractors | Loss of primary revenue source, forced transition to untested alternatives | 800-1,200 direct jobs |
| Material Distributors | Inventory write-offs, supply chain disruption, reduced product lines | 200-400 jobs |
| Equipment Suppliers | Reduced demand for application equipment and replacement parts | 100-200 jobs |
| Property Owners | Higher pavement maintenance costs with shorter protection cycles | N/A (cost impact only) |
| Municipal Agencies | Reduced pavement life on public lots, increased maintenance budgets | N/A (budget impact) |
The Science Behind the Safety Debate
The push to ban coal tar pavement sealers rests on claims about PAH content and environmental runoff. However, industry advocates argue these concerns are not supported by a balanced assessment of real world conditions and that the benefits of properly applied sealcoating outweigh the theoretical risks.
Key Scientific Considerations
- PAH exposure context coal tar sealers contain PAHs, but so do many other common environmental sources including vehicle exhaust, tire wear particles, and asphalt itself. The incremental contribution of properly applied sealcoating to total environmental PAH load is small relative to these other sources.
- Sealant formulation improvements modern coal tar sealers are refined products with significantly lower PAH content than historical formulations. The industry has invested in product stewardship to reduce environmental impact while maintaining performance.
- Alternative product limitations asphalt emulsion based sealers, the primary alternative to coal tar products, typically require more frequent reapplication and provide less resistance to petroleum stains. Property owners face higher lifecycle costs with these alternatives.
- Proper application practices when applied according to manufacturer specifications, coal tar sealers cure to form a stable surface layer that does not leach significant quantities of PAHs into the environment under normal conditions.
Comparing Environmental Risk Perspectives
Environmental advocacy groups have driven much of the legislative momentum behind HB 77, citing studies that measure PAH concentrations in sediment near sealed parking lots. Industry counterarguments focus on several methodological limitations of these studies:
- Many studies do not isolate sealcoating contributions from other urban PAH sources such as roadway runoff and atmospheric deposition
- Laboratory leaching tests often use conditions that do not replicate field conditions where sealers cure and bind to the pavement surface
- The risk assessment framework rarely accounts for the pavement preservation benefits that reduce the frequency of full depth asphalt replacement, a process with its own significant environmental footprint
- Alternatives promoted as environmentally preferable may have their own unstudied environmental impacts when assessed across the full product lifecycle
What Contractors Can Do to Protect Their Industry
PCTC has been working with SealMaster franchisee Tom Decker in Maryland to coordinate the industry response. The organization is calling on contractors, suppliers, and property owners to take action while the bill is still under Senate consideration.
Immediate Actions for Industry Professionals
- Contact Maryland state senators especially those on the committee reviewing HB 77. Personal calls and emails from constituents carry significant weight with elected officials. PCTC advises asking committee members to oppose the sealant ban based on its economic impact on small businesses.
- Educate local officials about the real world performance and safety record of coal tar and LP sealers. Many legislators have limited familiarity with pavement maintenance products and rely on information provided by advocacy groups. Contractors can fill this knowledge gap with firsthand experience.
- Share economic impact data with lawmakers showing how many jobs depend on the sealcoating industry in Maryland. The petition organized by the Maryland pavement maintenance industry aims to demonstrate the breadth of opposition and the scale of potential job losses.
- Engage with national industry associations PCTC and other organizations track similar legislative efforts in other states. A ban in Maryland could encourage similar proposals elsewhere, making national coordination essential.
Contractors who have attended industry events to sharpen their business practices should consider how Maximizing Value At Pavement Maintenance Trade Shows Lessons from the National Pavement Expo can help them build the relationships and knowledge base needed for effective advocacy. Trade shows provide networking opportunities with industry peers facing similar regulatory challenges across different states.
Building a Long Term Advocacy Strategy
Beyond the immediate fight against HB 77, the pavement maintenance industry needs a sustained approach to regulatory engagement:
- Develop industry wide environmental data proactive research on sealant safety and environmental impact conducted to rigorous scientific standards gives the industry credible data to present in legislative hearings
- Create model legislation working with sympathetic lawmakers to draft alternative regulatory approaches that address environmental concerns without eliminating effective pavement preservation tools
- Invest in product innovation continuing development of lower PAH formulations and improved application methods that maintain performance while addressing environmental concerns
- Build coalitions with property owner associations, municipal public works departments, and other stakeholders who benefit from affordable pavement maintenance
What a Maryland Ban Could Mean for the National Industry
The outcome of Maryland HB 77 carries implications far beyond the state’s borders. Several other states and municipalities have considered or enacted restrictions on coal tar pavement sealers over the past decade, including Washington, Minnesota, the District of Columbia, and various local jurisdictions in California, Texas, and Wisconsin.
The Precedent Setting Risk
A statewide ban in Maryland would be the most significant legislative victory for sealant opponents to date. While previous restrictions have been limited to municipalities or counties, a state level ban would signal that the regulatory landscape is shifting against coal tar products. This could accelerate similar efforts in other states and embolden local governments that have hesitated to act independently.
Market Adaptation and Alternative Products
If HB 77 becomes law, Maryland contractors would need to adapt rapidly to a market without coal tar or LP sealers. The available alternatives include asphalt emulsion based sealers, acrylic sealers, and newer hybrid formulations. Each comes with different performance characteristics, cost structures, and application requirements.
The transition would not be seamless. Contractors would need training, different application equipment, and new quality control procedures. Property owners would face higher costs for shorter protection cycles, and overall pavement preservation quality could decline during the transition period. The Construction Equipment Maintenance Programs a Complete Guide to preventive maintenance and fleet reliability underscores how important it is for contractors to maintain their equipment properly, something that becomes more critical when switching to new product formulations that may require different application techniques and equipment calibration.
The Bottom Line for Contractors
Maryland HB 77 represents both a challenge and a call to action for the pavement maintenance industry. The bill’s progress through the state legislature demonstrates the power of organized advocacy whether from environmental groups pushing for bans or from industry stakeholders fighting to preserve their livelihoods. The contractors, suppliers, and industry organizations that engage most effectively in the legislative process will shape the outcome not just in Maryland but potentially nationwide.
PCTC urges all industry professionals to contact Maryland senators, sign petitions, and educate elected officials about the real world impact of this legislation. As Anne LeHuray stated, the bill is an existential threat to sealcoat businesses in Maryland. The industry response will determine whether that threat becomes reality or whether common sense and science based regulation prevails.
Coal tar pavement sealer has served the industry safely for over 50 years. Contractors who take pride in their work and their materials have every reason to defend their right to continue using products that deliver the best available protection for asphalt pavements. The fight against HB 77 is a fight for the future of pavement maintenance itself.