NOTICES
Notice of Comments Issued
[29 Pa.B. 2934] Section 5(g) of the Regulatory Review Act (act) (71 P. S. § 745.5(g)) provides that the designated standing committees may issue comments within 20 days of the close of the public comment period, and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (Commission) may issue comments within 10 days of the close of the committee comment period. The Commission comments are based upon the criteria contained in Section 5a(h) and (i) of the Act (75 P. S. § 745.5a(h) and (i)).
The Commission has issued comments on the following proposed regulations. The agency must consider these comments in preparing the final-form regulations. The final-form regulations must be submitted by the dates indicated.
Final-Form Submission
Reg No. Agency/Title Issued Deadline
19-3 Department of Corrections
Motivational Boot Camps5/20/99 4/19/01 29 Pa.B. 1513 (March 20, 1999) 19-4 Department of Corrections
County Correctional Institutions5/20/99 4/19/01 29 Pa.B. 1504 (March 20, 1999) 2-115 Department of Agriculture
Sustainable Agricultural Programs5/20/99 4/19/01 29 Pa.B. 1496 (March 20, 1999)
Department of Corrections Regulation No. 19-3
Motivational Boot Camps
May 20, 1999 We have reviewed these proposed regulations from the Department of Corrections (Department) and submit for consideration the following objections and recommendations. Section 5.1(h) and (i) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(h) and (i)) specify the criteria the Commission must employ to determine whether a regulation is in the public interest. In applying these criteria, our Comments address issues that relate to clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulations.
1. Section 93.301. Selection criteria--Clarity.
Subsection (a) contains a list of criteria the selection committee will consider when reviewing an inmate's application for placement in a motivational boot camp (boot camp). Section 6(c) of the Motivational Boot Camp Act (act) (61 P. S. § 1126(c)) requires applicants to sign a memorandum of understanding in which they agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the boot camp. The Department should add ''Submittal of a signed memorandum of understanding as required by Section 6 of the Motivational Boot Camp Act (61 P. S. § 1126(c))'' to the list of criteria reviewed by the selection committee.
Subsection (b) states that an inmate will not be guaranteed acceptance into a motivational boot camp even if the inmate is likely to successfully graduate from the boot camp. However, the proposed regulation does not contain the criteria for successful completion of a boot camp program. It is our understanding that these criteria are contained in the Inmate Handbook which is provided to all inmates who apply for boot camp participation. To improve the clarity of the regulation, the Department should add a new subsection which includes the criteria for successful completion of a boot camp program.
2. Section 93.302. Selection committee--Clarity.
Subsection (a) contains a reference to the ''Department of Corrections.'' The complete title of the Department is also used in §§ 93.301(a) and 93.303(a) and (b). However, the term ''Department'' is also used in the regulation. For consistency, the Department should add a new section to the regulation entitled ''Definitions,'' include the definition of ''Department'' in the new section and use ''Department'' throughout the regulation.
Subsection (a) also refers to each ''diagnostic and classification center.'' Section 4(c) of the act (61 P. S. § 1124(c)) references this term, but does not define it. To improve the clarity of the regulation, the Department should include a definition of ''diagnostic and classification center'' in a new ''Definitions'' section of the regulation.
3. Section 93.304. Supervision/organizational structure--Clarity.
Subsection (b) provides that no more than 50 inmates are permitted in a platoon. The regulation does not, however, specify how many commanders or drill sergeants are required per platoon. We request the Department explain how it determines the required number of commanders or drill sergeants per platoon.
4. Section 93.305. Curriculum--Clarity.
This section lists the curriculum for inmates in a boot camp. Paragraph (8) lists ''Ventilation therapy.'' This term is found in the definition of ''motivational boot camp'' in section 3 of the act (61 P. S. § 1123); however, it is not defined. The Department should include a definition of this term in a new ''Definitions'' section of the regulation.
5. Section 93.306. Inmate discipline--Clarity.
Subsection (b).
Subsection (b) provides the following:
(b) Serious rule infractions may result in an inmate's expulsion from a motivational boot camp. (Emphasis added.)
It is unclear what are considered ''serious rule infractions.'' It is our understanding that ''serious rule infractions'' are Class I Category A--D misconduct charges which are listed in the Department's Statement of Policy entitled ''Inmate Disciplinary and Restricted Housing Procedures (DC-ADM 801)'' (Policy Statement 801). However, a policy statement only provides guidance to an agency; it is not a binding norm. Therefore, if the Department intends to enforce the provisions in subsection (b), ''serious rule infractions'' should be specified in the regulation.
Subsection (c).
Subsection (c) states the following:
(c) Minor rule infractions will be dealt with according to a three-tiered approach. (Emphasis added.)
It is unclear what are considered ''minor rule infractions.'' It is our understanding that ''minor rule infractions'' are Class II misconduct charges as listed in Policy Statement 801. As discussed in relation to subsection (b), if the Department intends to enforce the provisions in subsection (c), ''minor rule infractions'' should be specified in the regulation.
Also, it is unclear what the Department means by a ''three-tiered approach.'' We understand that the three-tiered approach is described in detail in the Inmate Handbook. To improve the clarity of the regulation, the ''three-tiered approach'' should be specified in the regulation.
Subsection (d).
Subsection (d) provides the following:
(d) Inmates can be suspended or removed from a motivational boot camp for reasons other than violations of disciplinary rules.
This provision is vague because it does not specify the other reasons for suspension or removal from a boot camp. In the final-form regulations, the Department should include a list of reasons for potential suspension or removal from a boot camp. For example, the Department could structure subsection (d) as follows:
(d) Inmates may be suspended or removed from a motivational boot camp for any of the following reasons:
(1) Violations of disciplinary rules.
(2) . . .
(3) . . .
6. Section 93.307. Staff training--Clarity.
This section requires staff who work directly with inmates to undergo at least 4 weeks of intensive training. This provision is unclear for several reasons. First, the regulation should list the subjects that must be addressed during the training and specify that the training will be provided by the Department or a Department-approved provider. The regulation should specify when the training must be completed after a staff person is hired. Finally, the regulation should also specify the limitations imposed on a staff person's duties if training does not start immediately upon hiring the staff person. The Department should clarify these issues in the final-form regulations.
Department of Corrections Regulation No. 19-4
County Correctional Institutions
May 20, 1999 We have reviewed these proposed regulations from the Department of Corrections (Department) and submit for consideration the following objections and recommendations. Subsections 5.1(h) and (i) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(h) and (i)) specify the criteria the Commission must employ to determine whether a regulation is in the public interest. In applying these criteria, our Comments address issues that relate to need for the regulation, duplication of existing regulations, reasonableness and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulations.
1. Recommended guidelines--Need for the regulation and Clarity.
Sections 95.220, 95.221(b), 95.222(b) and 95.226(b) set forth recommended guidelines which are not mandatory. It is not clear why recommended guidelines are needed in regulation, since the Department does not intend to enforce them.
A regulation has the force of law and is binding on the agency and anyone affected by the regulation. An announcement that provides guidance to regulated entities, but does not constitute a binding norm, is not a regulation. The recommended guidelines would be appropriate as a statement of policy or as a guidance document, but not as a regulation.
The Department should identify the recommended guidelines which it intends to enforce as binding norms and include those as minimum requirements in the regulation. Recommended guidelines which are not mandatory should be deleted from the regulation. More specific comment is included with the comments on §§ 95.220, 95.221(b), 95.222(b) and 95.226(b).
2. Written local policy--Clarity.
The terms ''written local policy'' and ''local policy'' are used repeatedly in the regulation. However, these terms are not defined or used consistently in the regulation. We understand that because of differences in facilities and prisoners there is a need for written policies which are specific to each institution. For clarity, the Department should define one of the terms and use that term throughout the regulation.
The regulation is also not clear on the significance of the written local policy. The Department should state in the regulation how the written local policy for each institution will be reviewed and enforced by the Department.
3. Section 95.220. Purpose--Clarity.
Recommended guidelines
The phrase ''and recommended guidelines, which are not mandatory'' should be deleted from § 95.220.
Scope of the regulation
The last two sentences of § 95.220 describe waivers of the regulations for counties which are accredited by other bodies. These waivers describe the scope of the regulation rather than the purpose. The Department should delete these sentences from § 95.220 and add them to a new section which states the scope of the regulation.
American Correctional Association accreditation
The waiver for counties achieving American Correctional Association accreditation states this ''chapter'' will be waived in its entirety. Since the rulemaking is limited to Subchapter B, the Department should clarify whether the waiver applies to other subchapters within Chapter 95, or just to Subchapter B.
National Commission on Correctional Healthcare accreditation
For counties achieving National Commission on Correctional Healthcare accreditation, the Department is waiving ''regulations pertaining to medical and health services.'' It is not clear which specific regulations will be waived. The Department should specify in the regulation which medical and health service regulations will be waived.
4. Section 95.221. Personnel--Need and Clarity.
Subsection (a)(1)
It is not clear why subsection (a)(1) is needed or how it can be fulfilled as a minimum personnel requirement. The Department should explain the need for subsection (a)(1), and how it would be enforced, or delete it.
Subsection (a)(2)--(4)
We have four concerns with the training requirements in subsection (a)(2)--(4). First, subsection (a)(2) requires all personnel to have ''a course of training'' before being assigned duties. Subsection (3) requires full-time personnel to receive training within 12 months of assuming duties. Subsection (4) allows part-time personnel to work who have not completed training. The regulation is not clear regarding whether these are different types of training programs. The Department should amend the personnel training requirements in subsection (a)(2)--(4) to specify the type and amount of training required before each category of personnel can be assigned duties.
Second, subsection (a)(3) does not require any supervision of full-time personnel who have not completed a training program. Whereas, subsection (a)(4) requires close supervisory direction of part-time personnel who have not completed a training program. Both part-time and full-time personnel may perform the same duties and encounter the same situations. Consequently, the regulation should clearly state the supervision requirement for full-time and part-time personnel who have not completed training programs.
Third, subsection (a)(4) allows the part-time personnel who have not completed training to work under ''close supervisory direction.'' The regulation does not specify what training the person providing ''close supervisory direction'' must have. The Department should specify that the person providing supervision must have completed their training.
Finally, full-time personnel must complete training within 12 months of assuming their duties. There is no commensurate time requirement for part-time personnel in subsection (a)(4). We recognize that part-time personnel will spend less time in the prisons than full-time personnel. However, both part-time and full-time personnel may perform the same duties and encounter the same situations. The Department should specify in subsection (a)(4) when part-time personnel training is required to be completed.
Subsection (a)(3)
Subsection (a)(3) contains a reference to the ''Department of Corrections (Department).'' Since ''Department'' is used throughout the regulation, the Department should add a new section to the regulation entitled ''Definitions'' and include the definition of ''Department'' in the new section.
Subsection (b) Recommended guidelines
The paragraphs in subsection (b) contain vague standards such as ''careful selection,'' ''adequate to attract and retain competent and professional men and women,'' ''in a professional manner,'' and ''good physical condition.'' If the Department includes any of the paragraphs in subsection (b) as minimum requirements, the Department should amend those paragraphs for clarity; and explain why the paragraph is needed (that is, elevated from not mandatory to mandatory); how the standard would be determined; and how the paragraph would be enforced.
5. Section 95.222. Admission--Duplication of existing regulations and Clarity.
Subsection (a) Minimum requirements
The Department's intent in the last sentence of paragraph (2) is not clear. As drafted, a written verification of treatment from a medical doctor would be required with all admissions. Verification of treatment would only be needed for new inmates who may require medical attention that cannot be provided at the prison. The Department should revise this paragraph to require verification of treatment only where it is necessary or explain the need for verification of treatment for all admissions.
Subsection (a)(3)
We have three clarity concerns with subsection (a)(3). First, the paragraph begins with the phrase ''intake procedures.'' The Department should use the term ''admission procedures'' to be consistent with the title of § 95.222.
Second, subsection (a)(3) states the procedures ''should be described'' in local policy. This language gives the impression that compliance with this paragraph may be optional. The Department should change the word ''should'' to the word ''shall.'' To improve clarity, the Department should also change ''described'' to ''specified.''
Third, the concluding phrase ''developed from recognized professional standards'' is vague. The Department should either delete this phrase or directly reference the required standards.
Subsection (a)(4)
The beginning of subsection (a)(4) is confusing because it requires basic personal information for admissions, but the list of information is conditioned on ''the event of a transfer.'' It does not appear that the information required for a transfer differs from the information required for an admission. Therefore, the Department should delete the phrase ''In the event of a transfer'' and directly specify the information required to be obtained upon admission.
Some of the subparagraphs under subsection (a)(4) lack clarity as follows:
* Subparagraph (iii) should specify what address of the inmate is sought, such as previous address or prison address.
* Subparagraph (iv) should specify the information needed to satisfy the requirement for the description of the inmate, such as ''a description of the inmate including height, weight, eye color,. . .''
* Subparagraph (xii) should be combined with subparagraph (vii) and should specify what facts are required.
Subsection (a)(5)
Subsection (a)(5) duplicates existing requirements in §§ 95.223 and 95.224(3). The Department should delete subsection (a)(5), or explain why it is needed.
Subsection (a)(6)
Subsection (a)(6) should be written in clear language. It may be clearer if it stated ''Written local policy shall specify how an inmate can notify a relative of the inmate's location.''
Subsection (b) Recommended guidelines
The paragraphs in subsection (b) contain vague standards such as ''coincide with prevailing laws and statutes,'' ''conducted in a professional fashion,'' and ''serious wounds.'' A minimum requirement also should use the word ''shall'' rather than ''should.'' If the Department includes any of the paragraphs in subsection (b) as minimum requirements, the Department should amend those paragraphs for clarity; and explain why the paragraph is needed (that is, elevated from not mandatory to mandatory); how the standard would be determined; and how the paragraph would be enforced.
Subsection (b)(1)
Subsection (b)(1) is a recommended guideline for strip searches. It is directly related to subsection (a)(3) in regard to contraband searches. If the Department chooses to make subsection (b)(1) a minimum requirement, we have five concerns with this paragraph. First, the search is described as an ''unclothed search'' and as a ''strip search.'' For clarity, the Department should use one term or the other consistently in the regulation.
Second, the second sentence regarding laws and statutes is vague. The Department should either state the specific laws and statutes governing strip searches, or delete this sentence.
Third, the requirement that a strip search be ''conducted in a professional fashion'' lacks clarity. Conducting a search in a professional fashion could be widely interpreted. The Department should specify in the regulation the standards a strip search must meet.
Fourth, the Department is deleting the requirement that a strip search be conducted in an area where the prisoner is in view of only those officers in charge of the search. Why is this requirement no longer needed?
Finally, subsection (b)(1) requires the strip search to be ''supervised'' by staff of the same sex. Why isn't it required that the search be ''conducted and supervised'' by staff of the same sex?
6. Section 95.225. Classification--Need and Clarity.
Subsection (a)(1)
We have identified a typographical error in subsection (a) as printed in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. There are two paragraphs labeled ''(1).'' This error should be corrected in the final-form regulation.
Subsection (a)(2)
Subsection (a)(2) provides the following:
(2) In keeping with recognized professional standards, this plan shall establish categories based on the degree of security risk and need for supervision and specify how the classification process is accomplished, what process of appeals exist, the review mechanism utilized and explicit procedures for reclassification.
We have several concerns related to the clarity of this provision. First, the phrase ''In keeping with professional standards,'' is vague because it does not identify the specific standards or require compliance with those standards. This phrase should be deleted or clarified.
Second, since this section of the regulation refers to classification of prisoners, the word ''categories'' should be changed to ''classifications.''
Finally, this paragraph includes several items that are required in the classification plan. To improve the clarity of the regulation, we suggest the Department include these items as a list of new subparagraphs under subsection (a)(2).
Existing subsection (a)(1)--(3)
The Department is proposing to delete these paragraphs which address jail security, inmate welfare, and community protection. It is not clear that these subjects are adequately addressed in the new proposed subsection (a). We request the Department explain why it is proposing to delete these provisions.
7. Section 95.226. Housing--Need and Clarity.
Subsection (a)(1)
This paragraph states the following:
Decisions involving housing segregation or removal and transfer of seriously ill inmates shall be in keeping with existing laws and National standards.
To improve the clarity of this provision, the Department should include citations to the applicable laws and standards. Also, the Department should define ''seriously ill.''
Subsection (a)(2)
The word ''possible'' is unnecessary. The Department should delete ''possible.''
Subsection (a)(4)
This paragraph contains a general reference to requirements of the Department of Health. To improve the clarity of the regulation, the Department should cite the specific requirements that apply.
In addition, paragraph (4) lists items to consider in determining housing adequacy. A further list appears in paragraphs (4)(i)--(iv). To improve the clarity of the regulation, these lists should be combined into a single list.
Subsection (b)--Recommended guidelines
It appears the recommended guidelines in subsection (b) are duplicative of the minimum requirements in subsection (a). Consequently, subsection (b) should be deleted in the final-form regulations.
8. Section 95.228. Clothing--Need and Clarity.
The Department is deleting existing subsection (b)(2) relating to changing and washing clothing to maintain hygiene. It does not appear that this provision is addressed elsewhere in the proposed regulation. Therefore, we request the Department explain why it is deleting subsection (b)(2).
9. Section 95.231. Personal hygiene--Need, Reasonableness and Clarity.
Paragraph (1) requires inmates to maintain ''proper hygiene standards.'' We question the need for this vague requirement. Other sections of the regulation contain specific requirements related to bathing and clothing. Why is this additional requirement necessary?
10. Section 95.232. Medical and health services--Reasonableness and Clarity.
Paragraph (1)
This paragraph requires that an inmate receive ''a health care screening performed and recorded by a person with health care training within 24 hours of admission.'' We have two concerns related to the clarity of this provision. First, it is unclear what is included in the health care screening. The final-form regulations should specify the components of the screening.
Second, it is unclear what level of training is required to comply with the requirement that the person conducting the screening have ''health care training.'' The final-form regulations should specify the components of the required training.
Paragraph (2)
This paragraph requires an inmate who is not in good health to be assessed by a ''health care professional'' within 24 hours of admission. It is unclear what the required credentials are for the ''health care professional.'' For example, is a registered nurse, physician's assistant, or physician required to perform the screening? The Department should specify these requirements in the final-form regulations.
Paragraph (5)
This subsection and paragraph (6) use the term ''health provider/authority,'' but the term is not defined in the regulation. We request the Department explain the difference between a ''health provider'' and a ''health authority'' and define these terms in the final-form regulations.
Paragraph (5) also provides that ''This authority shall have sole province on matters involving medical judgement.'' Paragraph (9) requires ''A written plan shall outline management of treatment by appropriate credentialed professionals.'' It is unclear if, or how, these two provisions are interrelated. We request the Department explain the meaning of these provisions.
Paragraph (6)
This paragraph requires the following:
(6) Written local policy shall provide that the health provider/authority report on the health care delivery system in writing and review findings with prison administrators on a routine basis.
We have two concerns related to the clarity of this provision. First, it is unclear what information is to be contained in the report. The final-form regulations should specify the subjects to be included in the report.
Second, it is unclear how often a report must be submitted. ''On a routine basis'' is vague. The Department should specify if the report is due annually, monthly, or at some other interval.
Paragraph (7)
This paragraph requires an annual documented review of a prison's health care delivery system. It is unclear how this requirement differs from the report required by paragraph (6). We request that the Department clarify the distinction between paragraphs (6) and (7) in the final-form regulations.
In addition, this provision is vague because it does not specify who is responsible for conducting the annual review. Furthermore, the regulation does not identify who is responsible for evaluating the annual review and implementing changes as necessary in the prison's health care procedures and program. The Department needs to clarify these issues in the final-form regulation.
Paragraph (9)
Paragraph (9) requires written local policy to outline mental health care treatment by ''appropriate credentialed professionals.'' It is unclear what credentials would meet the Department's standard of ''appropriate credentialed professionals.'' The Department should clarify this standard in the final-form regulations.
Paragraphs (9) and (10)
Paragraph (9) requires that a written plan ''specify management of treatment by appropriate credentialed professionals.'' Paragraph (10) requires that a written plan ''outline management of treatment.'' It is unclear what the Department means by ''specify management'' and ''outline management of treatment.'' We note that paragraph (5) gives the health provider/authority ''sole province on matters involving medical judgement.'' We request the Department clarify the intent of paragraphs (9) and (10) and explain how these provisions are consistent with paragraph (5).
Paragraph (11)
This paragraph references ''existing Federal and State laws'' relating to pharmaceuticals. To improve the clarity of the regulation, the Department should include citations for the specific laws it is referencing.
11. Section 95.234. Inmate mail privileges--Clarity.
Subsection (a)(1)(iv) permits an inmate's mail to be restricted for valid ''penological reasons.'' To improve the clarity of the regulation, the Department should include specific reasons an inmate would be restricted or prohibited from sending or receiving mail.
12. Section 95.236. Access to legal resources--Reasonableness and Clarity.
Subsection (a)(1) permits inmates to have access to ''adequate legal resources'' to enable them to exercise their right of access to the courts. Subsection (a)(2) gives county wardens the discretion to determine the type of legal resources that shall be made available. If access to the courts is a right of all inmates, we question the reasonableness of giving county wardens the discretion to determine the type of legal resource to be made available. The result of granting such broad discretion to county wardens will be inconsistent availability of legal resources throughout the county prisons. The Department should specify what type of legal resources should be made available.
13. Section 95.238. Recreation--Reasonableness and Clarity.
Paragraph (2)
This paragraph requires that inmates have at least 1 hour of access to ''out of cell activity'' daily. The existing regulation requires 2 hours of ''physical exercise in the open, weather permitting.'' In the case of inclement weather, 2 hours of daily exercise are required indoors. It is unclear why the Department has reduced the time period from 2 hours to 1 hour. It is also unclear if ''out of cell activity'' refers to exercise or to any activity out of the inmate's cell, such as reading in the library. We request the Department clarify these points in the final-form regulations.
Paragraph (4)
This paragraph provides the following:
Inmates under disciplinary status (segregation), shall receive 1 hour of outdoor activity 5 days a week, weather permitting. (Emphasis added.)
It is unclear why ''(segregation)'' appears after ''disciplinary status.'' If this provision applies only to inmates in segregation, the Department should delete ''disciplinary status'' and replace it with ''segregation.''
14. Section 95.239. Commissary--Clarity.
Paragraph (2) refers to generally accepted accounting ''procedures.'' To improve clarity and to be consistent with standard accounting terminology, we suggest the Department replace ''procedures'' with ''principles.''
15. Section 95.240. Inmate Disciplinary procedures--Reasonableness.
The Department is proposing to delete existing paragraphs (10) and (11) which address conditions for prisoners in segregation. It is unclear why the Department is deleting these paragraphs, since these provisions are not included elsewhere in the proposed regulation. We request the Department explain the reasonableness of deleting paragraphs (10) and (11).
Department of Agriculture Regulation No. 2-115
Sustainable Agriculture Programs
May 20, 1999 We have reviewed these proposed regulations from the Department of Agriculture (Agriculture) and submit for consideration the following objections and recommendations. Sections 5.1(h) and (i) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(h) and (i)) specify the criteria the Commission must employ to determine whether a regulation is in the public interest. In applying these criteria, our Comments address issues that relate to consistency, reasonableness, need and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulations.
1. Section 130c.2. Definitions--Consistency, Need and Clarity.
Executive Director
The regulation's definition of the term ''Executive Director'' paraphrases the duties of the Executive Director in section 5 of the Sustainable Agriculture Act (Act 129) (3 P. S. § 2105). However, the regulatory definition is inconsistent with Act 129. Section 5(1) of Act 129 states that the Executive Director will ''evaluate loan and grant applications submitted to the board (Board of Sustainable Agriculture).'' The definition in § 130c.2 limits the Executive Director to evaluating loan applications and fails to mention grant applications. This inconsistency with Act 129 should be corrected.
Additionally, substantive provisions of section 5 of Act 129 pertaining to the Executive Director are included in the definitions section of the regulation. The duties of the Executive Director would be more appropriately placed in a new section after § 130c.4 in the substantive portions of the regulation.
Nonprofit Educational Institution
The statutory and regulatory definitions of ''nonprofit educational institution'' are virtually identical. In addition, the definition's provisions are reiterated as eligibility qualifications in § 130c.37(e). There is no need to repeat statutory provisions in two different places in the regulation. The regulation should reference the statutory definition.
Pesticide
Section 130c.2 contains a definition of ''pesticide'' which includes herbicides and insecticides. However, the substantive provisions of the regulation use the terms herbicides and insecticides, not the term ''pesticide.'' The terms ''herbicides'' and ''insecticides'' are also used in Act 129 (3 P. S. § 2110(b)(6)). Why has Agriculture included a definition of a term not used in the regulation and Act 129? The term ''pesticide'' should be deleted or the terms ''herbicides'' and ''insecticides'' in the regulation should be replaced by ''pesticide.''
Sustainable Agriculture
The statutory and regulatory definitions for ''sustainable agriculture'' are also practically identical. Hence, there is no need to include the entire definition verbatim in the regulation. Again, a reference to the statutory definition is sufficient.
2. Section 130c.5. Notice of disposition of application--Clarity.
This section contains references to §§ 130.16 and 130.36. The references should be to §§ 130c.16 and 130c.36.
3. Sections 130c.15 and 130c.35. Submission of application--Implementation Procedures, Reasonableness and Clarity.
Although applications for loans or grants are to be submitted on forms prepared by the Board, the regulation does not inform potential applicants how to obtain the appropriate forms. These two sections should contain this information.
4. Sections 130c.16 and 130c.36. Processing of application--Reasonableness and Clarity.
Sections 130c.16 and 130c.36 contain filing deadlines for applicants. However, they fail to reference the 90-day period for Board action on applications as prescribed by § 130c.5. Both sections should include a reference to § 130c.5.
In addition, §§ 130c.16 and 130c.36 contain the following language:
If the Executive Director determines the application is incomplete or inaccurate, final processing of the application may be discontinued or additional data may be requested.
These sections do not provide clear direction as to whether applicants will be notified when their applications are incomplete or inaccurate. However, the same sections require applicants to respond to requests for additional data within 30 days. These sections should state that the Executive Director will notify applicants when their applications are determined to be incomplete or inaccurate. The notice should list the application's deficiencies and inform the applicant that he has 30 days to respond.
JOHN R. MCGINLEY, Jr.,
Chairperson
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 99-910. Filed for public inspection June 4, 1999, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
