NOTICES

INDEPENDENT REGULATORY REVIEW COMMISSION

Notice of Comments Issued

[38 Pa.B. 5093]
[Saturday, September 13, 2008]

   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. § 645.5b).

   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final-form regulation must be submitted within 2 years of the close of the public comment period or it will be deemed withdrawn.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 Period	IRRC Comments Issued
125-88	Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board Slot Machine Testing and Control; Possession of Slot    Machines; Accounting and Internal Controls; and    Commencement of Slot Operations 38 Pa.B. 3507 (June 28, 2008)	7/28/08	8/27/08
125-89	Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board Employees; Slot Machine Licenses; and Accounting    and Internal Controls 38 Pa.B. 3505 (June 28, 2008)	7/28/08	8/27/08
18-411	Department of Transportation School Bus Drivers 38 Pa.B. 3503 (June 28, 2008)	7/28/08	8/27/08
18-410	Department of Transportation Physical and Mental Criteria, Including Vision    Standards Relating to the Licensing of Drivers 38 Pa.B. 3501 (June 28, 2008)	7/28/08	8/27/08

____

Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board
#125-88 (IRRC #2702)
Slot MachineTesting and Control; Possession of Slot Machines; Accounting and Internal Controls; and Commencement of Slot Operations

August 27, 2008

   We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the June 28, 2008, 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 Gaming Control Board (Board) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.

1.  Central Control Computer System.--Clarity.

   The term Central Control Computer System (CCCS) is used in Sections 461a.27 and 465.33. The term ''central control computer'' is defined in Section 401a.3 of the Board's regulations. However, the term CCCS is not defined. If there is a difference between the two terms, we recommend that the Board add the appropriate definition. If both terms mean the same thing, we recommend that the term CCCS be changed to ''central control computer.''

2.  Section 461a.27. RAM clear.--Clarity.

   What is meant by the term ''financial meters'' in Subsection (a)? We recommend that this term be defined.

3.  Section 465a.2. Internal control systems and audit protocols.--Clarity.

   Subsection (a)(8) requires a licensee to develop procedures ''to ensure compliance with section 1513 of the act (relating to political influence).'' We have two concerns. First, Paragraphs (i) and (ii) of this subsection are abbreviated paraphrases of Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1513 of the Act. We question the need for including Paragraphs (i) and (ii) in the proposal. Second, if the Board retains Paragraphs (i) and (ii), we suggest that they be written in a clearer and more detailed manner.

4.  Section 465a.8. Licensed facility.--Implementation procedures; Clarity.

   The signs licensees must display indicating the location of the Board's office in the licensed facility must be approved by the Board under Subsection (d)(8). The final-form regulation should provide more detail on how a licensee can obtain the necessary approval from the Board.

5.  Section 465a.33. Access to areas containing Central Control Computer System equipment.--Statutory authority; Fiscal impact; Implementation procedures; Reasonableness.

Subsection (a)(1)

   A commentator has noted that it would be costly to comply with Subsection (a)(1)(ii), which would require installation of a door that audibly signals the surveillance monitoring room when it is opened. The commentator recommended other procedures that could be used which would provide the necessary level of security. We encourage the Board to consider these less costly options when it develops the final-form regulation.

Subsection (a)(4)

   Under this subsection, the security departments of slot machine licensees are required to maintain a list of employees who have access to the CCCS area and that list must be approved by the Department of Revenue (Department). We have two concerns. First, what is the Board's statutory authority for imposing duties on the Department? Is the Department aware of this responsibility and does it have the procedures in place to review and approve the lists? Second, assuming that the Board can adequately address our first comment, we recommend that the final-form regulation provide more detail on how a licensee can obtain the necessary approval from the Department, or in the alternative, the Board.

Subsection (a)(5)

   This subsection addresses emergency access to the CCCS area. It states that in emergency situations, access can only be granted with a security escort and notification to the Department, the Bureau and the casino enforcement agents at the licensed facility. We question the need for the notification in a true emergency situation. For example, if a person in the CCCS area is in need of immediate medical attention, we believe it would not be practical to make the necessary notifications. We suggest that the Board revise or delete the notification requirement from the final-form regulation.

6.  Section 467a.1. Gaming floor plan.--Reasonableness; Need.

   According to the Board, Subsection (c) is being amended to clarify and streamline the process for approving requests for changes to the gaming floor. Some requests for changes will be required to be filed as a petition and will need approval by the Board. Other requests for changes could be submitted in writing and approved by the Executive Director. A commentator is concerned with a provision that would require the submittal of a petition and Board approval when a licensee wants to relocate two percent or more of the slot machines. They noted that expanding facilities and the potential implementation of new smoking regulations require flexibility regarding the location of slot machines. They believe that the two percent threshold will limit their ability to respond quickly to the needs of their customers. If this provision is retained in the final-form regulation, they ask that the percentage be increased. We agree that the two percent threshold could hamper a licensee's ability to operate in an efficient manner and ask the Board to consider a higher percentage threshold that would require the submittal of a petition and Board approval.

____

Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board
#125-89 (IRRC #2703)

Employees; Slot Machine Licenses; and Accounting and Internal Controls

August 27, 2008

   We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the June 28, 2008, 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 Gaming Control Board (Board) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.

1.  Section 465a.14. Security department minimum staffing.--Protection of public health, safety and welfare; Reasonableness.

   Subsection (b) currently prohibits off-duty law enforcement officers from acting as security on the gaming floor and in restricted areas of licensed facilities. Proposed amendments would prohibit the use of off-duty officers as security in any portion of a licensed facility. Washington Trotting Association (WTA) asserts that, ''These off-duty law enforcement officers are necessary to maintain a fully-staffed security force for the racing facility.'' WTA has requested that existing language be maintained so current off-duty officers providing security for the racing portion of its facility would not have to be terminated and the security personnel can remain at full force.

   We understand that the Board is attempting to eliminate any appearance of impropriety if one of the security officers becomes involved in an investigation in gaming areas of the licensed facility. However, we question whether off-duty law enforcement officers should be precluded from working in the non-gaming portions of licensed facilities.

2.  Miscellaneous clarity.

   New language in Sections 435a.3 and 435a.5 includes the term ''Slots Link'' in multiple locations. However, we note that the defined term is ''SLOTS Link.'' For consistency, the Board should use the defined term.

____

Department of Transportation
#18-411 (IRRC #2704)

School Bus Drivers

August 27, 2008

   We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the June 28, 2008, 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 Department of Transportation (Department) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.

1.  General--Fiscal impact.

   The Preamble states that the proposed regulation will not impose any additional costs on school bus drivers or others in the regulated community. However, a commentator indicated that there will be additional costs which may not be covered by health insurance. There also will be direct costs for those without health insurance. Examples include the cost of an appointment with a physician to review the results of the tests and the cost of the HbA1C test itself. The Department should provide examples of the costs associated with the administration of the HbA1C test and the other new requirements when it submits the final-form version of this regulation.

2.  Section 71.3. Physical examinations.--Protection of public health, safety and welfare; Reasonableness; Implementation procedures; Clarity.

Subsection (b) Requirements of physical examination.

   In Subsection (b)(4)(i), what are ''diabetic medications''? The final-form regulation should include a listing of specific types or examples of diabetic medications.

   Must drivers meet the requirements of Subsections (b)(4)(i)(A), (B), (C) and (D) before being granted a waiver? If so, then the final-form regulation should include the following language: ''a waiver may be granted to an individual requiring the use of diabetic medications, provided an individual meets all of the following:'' (Emphasis added.)

   Subsection (b)(4)(i)(A) requires that ''the individual's physician verifies in writing that there has been no incident of severe hypoglycemic reaction . . . and the individual has been free from insulin reaction resulting in loss of consciousness, attention or awareness . . . for the preceding 12 months . . . .'' Why did the Department reduce this period from two years to 12 months? The final-form regulation should clarify how application of this timeframe protects the health, safety and welfare of students and other passengers in school buses driven by individuals with these health concerns.

Subsection (b)(4)(i)(C) Forms

   Subsection (b)(4)(i)(C) refers to a ''form provided by the Department.'' The final-form regulation should provide more detail on this form, including its contents and whether it will be available on the Department's website. This same concern applies to the forms mentioned in the existing language in Subsections (b)(4)(i)(B) and (4)(v).

Subsection (b)(4)(i)(D) Self-monitoring

   This subsection lists various requirements for how bus drivers must demonstrate their ability to manage their diabetes. However, the proposed regulation does not explain what happens if a driver determines her or his levels are too high or too low while the driver is on duty. Hence, it is unclear how this provision will protect the driver and passengers. The final-form regulation should clarify how these requirements will be used to protect the students and other passengers who are in the driver's immediate care.

3.  Miscellaneous clarity.

   In the existing Subsection 71.3(b)(4)(v), what professions are included under the term ''other health care providers''? The final-form regulation should include a definition for this term.

   The final-form regulation should explain the difference between the following terms: ''treating physician,'' ''school transportation physician,'' and ''physician conducting the 6-month diabetic examination.'' What is the difference between the ''school transportation physician'' and the ''school transportation medical practitioner''? The latter term is defined in Section 71.2 of the existing regulation.

____

Department of Transportation
#18-410 (IRRC #2705)

Physical and Mental Criteria, Including Vision Standards Relating to the Licensing of Drivers

August 27, 2008

   We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the June 28, 2008, 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 Department of Transportation (Department) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.

1.  Section 83.2. Definitions.--Implementation procedures; Clarity.

Chiropractor

   This definition includes a cross-reference to the definition of chiropractor in § 1508.1 (b) (relating to Physical examinations) of the Vehicle Code. (75 Pa.C.S. § 1508.1 (b).) The final-form regulation should include a cross-reference to § 1518 (relating to Reports on mental or physical disabilities or disorders) of the Vehicle Code, which also defines this term. (75 Pa.C.S. § 1518.)

Provider

   The term ''provider'' is used in several places in the chapter. Who is included in this term? The final-form regulation should include a definition for this term.

2.  Section 83.5. Other physical and medical standards.--Implementation procedures; Clarity.

Subsection (a)(1)

   Subsection (a)(1) states that individuals shall submit results of a HbA1C and vision screening as outlined in the table in subparagraph (i). However, the table does not include information regarding results of the HbA1C or vision screening. The Department should explain why this information is not included in the table.

Subsection (a)(1)(i)

   Subparagraph (i) contains eligibility requirements for drivers with diabetes mellitus, which are arranged in a table. However, the regulation does not include an explanation for how to read the table or how it is to be used. For example, what are ''profile levels''? How are they determined? What is ''stabilized diabetes mellitus''? How is it determined? In addition, how much will these eligibility requirements cost an individual? The final-form regulation should address these issues and provide the information contained in the table in a manner that is easily understandable to readers.

ARTHUR COCCODRILLI,   
Chairperson

[Pa.B. Doc. No. 08-1677. Filed for public inspection September 12, 2008, 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.

---