NOTICES
INDEPENDENT REGULATORY REVIEW COMMISSION
Notice of Comments Issued
[49 Pa.B. 3273]
[Saturday, June 22, 2019]Section 5(g) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P.S. § 745.5(g)) provides that the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (Commission) may issue comments within 30 days of the close of the public comment period. The Commission comments are based upon the criteria contained in section 5.2 of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P.S. § 745.5b).
The Commission has issued comments on the following proposed regulations. The agency must consider these comments in preparing the final-form regulation. The final-form regulation must be submitted within 2 years of the close of the public comment period or it will be deemed withdrawn.
Reg. No. Agency/Title Close of the Public
Comment PeriodIRRC Comments Issued 7-548 Environmental Quality Board
Water Quality Standards; Class A
Stream Redesignations
49 Pa.B. 1367 (March 23, 2019)5/7/19 6/6/19 104-1 Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board
Board Rules and Regulations
49 Pa.B. 1657 (April 6, 2019)
5/7/19 6/6/19
Environmental Quality Board Regulation # 7-548 (IRRC # 3226)
Water Quality Standards; Class A Stream Redesignations
June 6, 2019 We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the March 23, 2019 Pennsylvania Bulletin. Our comments are based on criteria in Section 5.2 of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P.S. § 745.5b). Section 5.1(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P.S. § 745.5a(a)) directs the Environmental Quality Board (EQB) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.
Whether the regulation is supported by acceptable data; Economic or fiscal impact.
This proposed rulemaking will update designated uses for streams that qualify as High Quality (HQ)-Cold Water Fishes (CWF) waters, based on species-specific biomass for Class A Wild Trout set by the Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission (PFBC). EQB states that Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) staff conducted an independent review of the trout biomass data in PFBC fishery management reports for relevant streams to ensure that the HQ conditions were met. The proposal affects 42 stream segments totaling 204 stream miles.
A document prepared by DEP's Division of Water Quality Standards that was submitted with this proposal states that while DEP generally followed PFBC requested stream reach delineations, ''adjustments were made in some instances based on land use, confluence of tributaries or considerations based on electronic mapping limitations.''
PFBC submitted comments suggesting that the zone for recommended designated use for seven streams be amended from Main Stem to Basin. They also suggest that the Basin designation be applied to entire reaches of two streams instead of just the streams themselves. It is our understanding that adopting the recommendations of the PFBC would increase the number of stream miles affected by the proposal.
We ask EQB to review the comments of the PFBC to determine if the suggestions are supported by acceptable data and to provide an explanation of why it will either adopt or not adopt the suggested amendments. If changes are made, we ask EQB to update the number of stream miles that will be affected and also to quantify any potential economic or fiscal impact that may result.
Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board
Regulation # 104-1 (IRRC # 3229)
Board Rules and Regulations
June 6, 2019 We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the April 6, 2019 Pennsylvania Bulletin. Our comments are based on criteria in Section 5.2 of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P.S. § 745.5b). Section 5.1(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P.S. § 745.5a(a)) directs the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (Board) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.
1. Section 91.2. Appearances.—Consistency with statutes.
Subsection (a) will allow an attorney or other representative, when filing an entry of appearance, to agree to service of letters and orders from the Board by e-mail. Section 10 of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Act and section 1606 of the Public Employe Relations Act specify how the Board may serve documents:
Complaints, orders[,] and other process and papers of the board, its members or agent may be served, either personally or by registered mail or by telegraph or by leaving a copy thereof at the principal office or place of business of the person required to be served.43 P.S. § 211.10 and 43 P.S. § 1101.1606.
The proposed regulation appears to conflict with the statutory requirements for the Board to serve documents in person, by registered mail, or by leaving a copy at an office or place of business. We ask the Board to explain in the preamble to the final-form regulation how service by e-mail is consistent with these statutes.
2. Section 93.12. Service and filing of papers.—Implementation procedures.
Subsection (b)(2) will allow parties to submit certain filings with the Board by e-mail. This paragraph requires the party to accept responsibility for attaching documents in the proper format, readability of files and disruptions in electronic transmissions. Further, the party must accept ''the risk that the e-mailed document may not be properly received or timely filed.'' We have two concerns. First, if an e-mailed document is not properly received, will the Board allow a party to resubmit the document? Will the Board allow a party to resubmit filings that are not properly received on the last day of a time limit for filing? Second, what does the Board consider ''timely filed'' when a party submits documents by e-mail? We ask the Board to clarify in the preamble to the final-form regulation how it intends to implement e-mail filings by parties.
This comment also applies to § 95.42(c)(2) (relating to filing of papers).
3. Miscellaneous clarity.
• The preamble states that §§ 93.12(b)(2) and 95.42(c)(2) ''add the option of agreeing to e-mail service of letters and orders from the Board.'' These paragraphs address methods of filing with the Board. These citations should be updated in the preamble to the final-form regulation.
• Section 95.98(a)(1) (relating to decisions of the Board) requires a party to file an original and four copies of a statement of exceptions to a hearing examiner decision. Requirements for an original and copies throughout the regulations are proposed to be deleted. Why wasn't the requirement in this paragraph deleted?
GEORGE D. BEDWICK,
Chairperson
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 19-940. Filed for public inspection June 21, 2019, 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.
