RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 49--PROFESSIONAL AND VOCATIONAL STANDARDS
STATE BOARD OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE
[49 PA. CODE CH. 25]
Renewal Fees
[26 Pa.B. 3832] The State Board of Osteopathic Medicine (Board) amends § 25.231 (relating to schedule of fees) by raising the biennial renewal fee for osteopathic physicians for the licensure period which commences November 1, 1996, as set forth at 26 Pa.B. 591 (February 10, 1996).
Comment
Following publication of proposed rulemaking, the Board did not receive any comment from members of the public. The Board received comments from the House Committee on Professional Licensure (House Committee) on March 19, 1996, and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) on April 10, 1996. Both the House Committee and IRRC requested additional information pertaining to Board expenditures for the biennial cycles 1991-93 and 1993-95.
The House Committee noted that legal office and law enforcement expenses dropped, when considered as a percentage of total Board expenses, from the biennial cycle of FY 1991-93 to FY 1993-95. The House Committee further noted that while the number of disciplinary cases closed increased from 66 in the fiscal year ending 1988 to 97 in the fiscal year ending 1995, hearing expenses dropped by $3,115.66 from the biennial cycle 1991-93 to 1993-1995. The House Committee asked how the Board's increased disciplinary activity related to legal office and law enforcement expenses and hearing expense costs.
Spending in legal office and law enforcement dropped as a percentage of total Board expenses. However, spending within both legal and law enforcement rose by about 13% between 1991-93 and 1993-95. During the biennial cycle 1993-95 the Board recorded nine license suspensions and revocations, the highest level of such actions throughout the last four biennial cycles. The number of disciplinary actions taken during 1993-95 would have been even greater if it were not for the fire of June 16, 1994, in Board headquarters. Because of the fire legal and law enforcement staff had to spend much of their time reconstructing cases as opposed to investigating and prosecuting new cases. The reduction in costs associated with hearing expenses reflects an increase in the number of cases in which disciplinary action was imposed by means of consent agreements.
Both the House Committee and IRRC noted that the costs for Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs (BPOA) administration increased from $25,270 in 1991-93 to $66,877 in 1993-95 and costs for central support services went from $20,750 to $39,100. The House Committee and IRRC requested further information associated with these two cost centers.
The Board operates within its own accounting structure (See, 26 Pa.B. 591). When expenditures exceed the level of appropriations, the excess expenditure is rolled over into the next fiscal year and is recorded as that succeeding year's expenditure. The increase in spending for BPOA administration between FY1991-93 and FY1993-95 is due to the rollover of approximately $25,000 in Board expenses.
The increase in costs for central support services is due mainly to the reclassification of expenses attributable to the Office of Operations and Contract Management, one of the components of the central supporting services cost center. During the 1994-95 fiscal year 14 positions were transferred from BPOA appropriations to the general government operations appropriations. The movement of these positions eliminated direct personnel expenses charged to BPOA. Because these positions directly affect all Department program areas, the total payroll expenses were prorated to each of these areas by increasing the administrative reimbursement. Therefore all boards and commissions experienced increases in their administrative reimbursement expense mainly due to the transfer of these positions.
The House Committee noted that test administration expenses declined from $5,122.75 in the biennial cycle 1991-93 to $1,699.19 in the 1993-95 cycle. The Committee further noted that the most recent rulemaking of the Board pertaining to the Osteopathic Manipulative Therapy (OMT) examination required all fees to be submitted directly to the professional testing organization under a new contract, with neither revenue nor expenses accruing to the Board. The House Committee requested the Board to identify test administration costs which constituted Board expenses and were associated with biennial renewal fees.
Prior to the implementation of the new contract, the OMT examination had been administered by the Board. Certain expenses, such as travel, accrued in connection with that examination. Also, the contract with the American Registry of Radiologic Technologists (ARRT) for the radiology examination generated test administration expenses. This contract was formulated differently than most BPOA contracts at the request of ARRT. Under this contract, the BPOA collected all examination revenues from applicants and paid ARRT for its administrative costs. Because the BPOA made payments to ARRT, expense figures appeared in the test administration cost center.
Finally, IRRC questioned why Board administration costs rose from $120,200.58 in biennial cycle 1991-93 to $153,547.39 in 1993-95.
The increase is due to three factors. First, the implementation of legislatively mandated continuing medical education requirements for the 1994 renewal required multiple mailings to the licensee population to keep them informed of proposed rulemaking pertaining to continuing education. Second, the amendments to the Osteopathic Medical Practice Act (OMPA) pertaining to the certification and registration of respiratory care practitioners necessitated mass mailings to applicants to inform them of licensure requirements. (See, sections 10.1(c) and 10.2 of the OMPA (63 P. S. §§ 271.10a(c) and 271.10b) and 26 Pa.B. 757 (February 24, 1996)). Additionally, overtime costs accrued on several occasions in order to process all applications. Third, contractual pay and longevity increases for Board staff amounted to about 10% during the 1993-95 cycle.
Statutory Authority
Section 13.1(a) of the OMPA (63 P. S. § 271.13a(a)) requires the Board to establish fees by regulation. The same provision requires the Board to increase fees to meet or exceed projected expenditures if the revenues raised by fees, fines and civil penalties are not sufficient to meet expenditures.
Fiscal Impact
The amendment will increase the biennial renewal fee for osteopathic physicians in this Commonwealth, but should have no other fiscal impact on the private sector, the general public or political subdivisions.
Paperwork Requirements
The amendment will require the Board to alter some of its forms to reflect the new biennial renewal fees; however, the amendment should not create additional paperwork for the private sector.
Regulatory Review
Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)), the Board submitted a copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking, published at 26 Pa.B. 591, to IRRC and the House Committee on Professional Licensure and the Senate Committee on Professional Licensure and Consumer Protection.
In compliance with section 5(b.1) of the Regulatory Review Act, the Board provided IRRC and the Committees with a copy of all comments received as well as other documentation.
This final-form regulation was approved by the House Committee on June 26, 1996, and approved by the Senate Committee on June 25, 1996. IRRC met on July 3, 1996, and approved the amendment in accordance with section 5(c) of the Regulatory Review Act.
Contact Person
Interested persons are invited to submit questions regarding this regulation to Gina Bittner, Administrative Assistant, State Board of Osteopathic Medicine, P. O. Box 2649, Harrisburg, PA 17105-2649, (717) 783-4848.
Findings
The Board finds that:
(1) Public notice of intention to adopt an amendment at 49 Pa. Code Chapter 25, was given under sections 201 and 202 of the act of July 31, 1968 (P. L. 769, No. 240) (45 P. S. §§ 1201 and 1202) and the regulations promulgated under those sections at 1 Pa. Code §§ 7.1 and 7.2.
(2) The regulations of the Board are necessary for the administration of the OMPA (63 P. S. §§ 271.1--271.18).
Order
The Board therefore orders that:
(a) The regulations of the Board, 49 Pa. Code Chapter 25, are amended by amending § 25.231 to read as set forth at 26 Pa.B. 591 (February 10, 1996).
(b) The Board shall submit a copy of 26 Pa.B. 591 to the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Attorney General for approval as to legality as required by law.
(c) The Board shall certify this order and 26 Pa.B. 591 and shall deposit them with the Legislative Reference Bureau as required by law.
(d) The regulations shall take effect immediately upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
SILVIA M. FERRETTI, D.O.,
Chairperson(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission relating to this document, see 26 Pa.B. 3492 (July 20, 1996).)
Fiscal Note: Fiscal Note 16A-536 remains valid for the final adoption of the subject regulation.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 96-1296. Filed for public inspection August 9, 1996, 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.
