NOTICES
INDEPENDENT REGULATORY REVIEW COMMISSION
Notice of Comments Issued
[42 Pa.B. 4674]
[Saturday, July 21, 2012]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final-form regulation must be submitted within 2 years of the close of the public comment period or it will be deemed withdrawn.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
Issued12-96 Department of Labor and Industry
Unemployment Compensation;
Active Search for Work
42 Pa.B. 2378 (May 5, 2012)06/04/12 07/05/12 16A-5321 State Board of Osteopathic Medicine
Physician Assistants and Respiratory Therapists
42 Pa.B. 2474 (May 12, 2012)
06/11/12 07/11/12 16A-4930 State Board of Medicine
Physician Assistants and Respiratory Therapists
42 Pa.B. 2469 (May 12, 2012)06/11/12 07/11/12
Department of Labor and Industry
Regulation #12-96 (IRRC #2939)
Unemployment Compensation; Active
Search for Work
July 5, 2012 We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the May 5, 2012 Pennsylvania Bulletin. Our comments are based on criteria in Section 5.2 of the Regulatory Review Act (RRA) (71 P. S. § 745.5b). Section 5.1(a) of the RRA (71 P. S. § 745.5a(a)) directs the Department of Labor and Industry (Department) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.
1. Determination of whether the regulation is in the public interest; Feasibility and reasonableness of the regulation; Implementation procedures; Clarity.
Preamble and the Regulatory Analysis Form (RAF)
Section 5.2 of the RRA (71 P. S. § 745.5b) directs the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) to determine whether a regulation is in the public interest. When making this determination, IRRC considers criteria such as feasibility and reasonableness of the regulation. To make that determination, IRRC must analyze the text of the Preamble and proposed regulation and the reasons for the new or amended language. IRRC also considers the information a promulgating agency is required to provide under Section 5(a) (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)) in the Regulatory Analysis Form (RAF).
The explanation of the regulation in the Preamble and the information in the RAF do not provide any corresponding data or specific information to quantify, justify or explain the imposition of the specific active search requirements that are being proposed. Without a detailed description of the regulation and its impact, it is difficult to determine whether the requirements in the rulemaking are reasonable or feasible.
In the final-form regulation submittal, the Preamble and the RAF should include a more detailed description of the basis for the amendments proposed in each section of the regulation. Additionally, we request that the Department provide data on the average number of weeks a claimant is unemployed and the typical number of positions applied for throughout this time period. We will review the Department's response as part of our determination of whether the final-form regulation is in the public interest.
2. Legislative comments.
On June 26, 2012, Representative William F. Keller, Democratic Chairman of the House Labor and Industry Committee, submitted comments on behalf of the Committee's Democratic members that address the following:
• The department cannot enforce work search requirements against claimants for any weeks prior to the date that approved regulations are published in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
• The department must ensure claimants will receive detailed instructions of the work search registration process as well as confirmation of completed registration.
• The requirement to retain work search records for two-years after an initial claim for benefits and make them available for audits by the department is excessive.
• The requirement for claimants to submit a minimum number of job applications to employers each week is arbitrary, exceeds the intent of the law, and may be counterproductive for claimants and employers.
• The two-tiered system of work search requirements which increases requirements based on benefit weeks may be confusing and exceeds the work search requirement intended by the law.
• The regulations fail to include several waivers or exemptions, inducing those for claimants seeking work in industries or occupations in which resumes are not commonly used, for situations where compliance with work search requirements would be oppressive or inconsistent with the intent of the law, and for certain claimants who are notified of a work recall date.
• The regulations fail to identify a process by which claimants may obtain allowable waivers or exemptions.
• The regulations should allow for leniency to claimants who are limited in work opportunities due to a disability or other special circumstances.
• Good cause exceptions should be provided where failure to comply with the regulations is not willful or through no fault of the claimant's.
We will review the Department's responses to these issues in our determination of whether the final-form regulation is in the public interest.
3. Timetables for compliance.
It is difficult to determine the expected dates of compliance for this regulation. According to the Preamble, this proposed rulemaking will ''affect claimants who file an application for UC [unemployment compensation] benefits that take effect on or after January 1, 2012.'' Both Community Legal Services, Inc. (CLS) and Representative Keller challenge this implementation date, and point out that a regulation is not effective until it has been properly promulgated through the regulatory review process.
We recognize that January 1, 2012 is the date the corresponding provisions of Act 6 of 2011 (Act) became effective. However, it is unclear whether application of this date to the regulation will result in a change in compliance for existing claimants who already are receiving compensation. The Preamble does not clarify whether these claimants will be required to completely overhaul their existing job searches or even whether they will need to re-apply for unemployment. In addition, there is no explanation of how the Department will notify them of potential changes to their eligibility. Unless the Department can explain the need for imposing these eligibility requirements retroactively, we recommend that the regulation only apply to claimants who file an application for unemployment compensation subsequent to the effective date of the final-form regulation.
4. Section 65.11 (c)—Weekly requirements.—Reasonableness; Implementation procedures; Clarity.
Subsection (c)(2)
Subsection (c)(2) requires a claimant to create a record of weekly work search activities, and this record must contain ''the information required by the Department.'' According to the Department, this ''information'' is contained in a Department form. To improve clarity, we recommend that the final-form regulation reference this form and identify how claimants can access the form.
Subsection (c)(3)
Subsection (c)(3) requires the claimant to maintain the weekly work search record for two years. The Department should explain why this timeframe is appropriate.
Subsection (c)(4)
Subsection (c)(4) requires a claimant to ''produce the record for the Department's review at the times and in a format and manner as required by the Department.'' The Department should clarify in the regulation under what circumstances, and in what format, it would request the weekly work search record.
5. Section 65.11 (d)—Weekly work search activities.—Consistency with the intent of the General Assembly; Consistency with the statute; Feasibility and reasonableness of the regulation; Implementation procedures; Clarity.
Benefit year
Subsections (d)(1) and (2) contain specific search requirements that coincide with consecutive weeks of the benefit year. Why does the regulation base search requirements on the consecutive weeks of the benefit year and not the consecutive number of weeks the claimant has actually been unemployed? The Department should clarify this issue.
Subsection (d)(1)
Subsection (d)(1) establishes the weekly work search activities for claimants ''during each week from the third consecutive week of the benefit year through the eighth consecutive week of the benefit year.'' Subsection (d)(1)(ii) permits the claimant to limit his search during the third through the eighth consecutive week to positions that would ''provide employment and wages similar to those the claimant had prior to his unemployment . . .'' We address three areas of concern.
First, it is unclear how this 5-week timeframe affords all claimants, regardless of their profession, sufficient time to search for a job within their field before the additional search requirements of Subsection (d)(2) are required. Neither the Preamble nor the RAF establishes the reasonableness of this timeframe. Therefore, the Department should explain how it determined this timeframe is appropriate. We request that the Department include as part of its explanation, corresponding data that indicates the average amount of time it takes claimants to find jobs within their fields.
Second, the Pennsylvania Chamber of Business and Industry (Chamber) contends that the term ''similar'' in Subsection (d)(1)(ii) is ambiguous. We acknowledge that the word ''similar'' is used in the Act. See 43 P. S. § 801(b)(1)(iii). However, the regulation does not clarify how the Department will implement this provision of the Act. Therefore, we recommend the Department explain how claimants can determine whether potential employment and wages qualify under this regulation as ''similar'' to those received prior to unemployment.
Finally, Subsection (d)(1)(ii) also permits claimants to limit their search to positions: ''within a 45 minute commuting distance or a commuting distance that is generally accepted in the claimant's labor market, whichever is greater.'' Similar language is included in the Act. See 43 P. S. § 801(b)(1)(iii). However, why did the Department expand upon the provisions contained in the Act by adding the phrase ''whichever is greater?'' The Department should also explain how a claimant can conclude what commuting distance is ''generally accepted'' in a particular field.
Subsection (d)(2)
Subsection (d)(2) establishes the weekly work search activities for claimants who are unemployed after the eighth consecutive week.
Subsection (d)(2)(i) requires these claimants to apply weekly for three positions that would result in ''suitable employment.'' Suitable work is not limited to positions held prior to unemployment, but encompasses ''all work which the employee is capable of performing.'' See 43 P. S. § 753 (t). Suitability is based on, among other things, ''the length of time [the claimant] has been unemployed and the reasons therefore, the prospect of obtaining local work in his customary occupation, his previous earnings . . .'' See 43 P. S. § 753 (t). The Department should explain how it determined that nine weeks is the appropriate benchmark for expanding the job search requirements. The Department should provide as part of its explanation corresponding data that establishes the number of weeks a claimant normally is unemployed when they begin to apply for jobs outside of their chosen line of work.
Subsection (d)(2)(ii) prohibits claimants from limiting their weekly searches to similar positions held prior to unemployment if doing so would result in the claimant applying for less than three jobs. Should a claimant exhaust all potential employment options for similar work prior to the ninth week, this subsection does not provide credit to claimants for these past searches. If claimants cannot apply prior searches to comply with this subsection, are they unfairly penalized for their efforts to find jobs within their field? Representative Keller indicates in his comments that such a result does not reflect the intent of the legislature when it enacted the Act.
In its comments, CLS also suggests that implementation of the regulation may result in unreasonable and impractical consequences for certain types of claimants. For example, CLS asserts that a union employee who cannot find three positions to apply for within their field, may have to search for non-union jobs, which could bar the claimant from further employment within the union. The final-form regulation should clarify how such situations would be addressed under this regulation.
6. Section 65.11 (e)—Alternative requirements.—Consistency with statute; Implementation procedures; Clarity.
Subsection (e) lists the exceptions to the active search requirement. This subsection does not contain the provisions of the Act granting waivers for ''oppressive or inconsistent . . .'' search requirements. See 43 P. S. § 801 (b)(6). We recommend that the final-form regulation include or cross-reference this statutory waiver. We also recommend that the final-form regulation include criteria the Department will use to implement this provision.
Subsection (e)(1)(ii) permits as an alternative to the weekly job search requirements, that a claimant can actively participate in ''a program or activity approved by the Department as an acceptable work search alternative.'' We recommend that the final-form regulation identify the types of programs or activities the Department would find to be acceptable work search alternatives and where claimants can find a list of such work search alternatives.
7. Section 65.11 (h)—Definitions.—Clarity.
Subsection (h) contains definitions for terms used in the regulation. According to Section 1.7 (a) of the Pennsylvania Code and Bulletin Style Manual, definitions should be placed near the beginning of a chapter. To improve clarity, we recommend that in the final-form regulation, Subsection (h) be moved to the beginning of Section 65.11.
8. Miscellaneous clarity.
Statutory citations
The proposed regulation includes certain provisions contained in the Act, but excludes others. Both CLS and Representative Keller raise similar concerns. We ask the Department to explain the reason for this inconsistency. In addition, to improve clarity, we recommend that the Department include cross-references to the relevant sections of the Act in the final-form regulation, including:
Subsection: Cross-Reference to: • § 65.11(b) 43 P. S. § 801(b)(1)(ii) • § 65.11(d)(1)(ii) 43 P. S. § 801(b)(1)(iii) • § 65.11 (e) 43 P. S. § 801(b)(6) • § 65.11 (e)(4) 43 P. S. § 801(b)(3) • § 65.11 (f) 43 P. S. § 801(b)(5) References to the Law and Purdon's citations
Many sections of this regulation reference both a particular section of the Pennsylvania Unemployment Compensation Law (Law) and the corresponding Purdon's citation. For example, Section 65.11 (d)(2)(i) references ''section 4(t) of the law (43 P.S § 753(t)).'' Other sections of this regulation only reference a particular section of the Law. For consistency, the Department should add the appropriate Purdon's citations to the following sections of the final-form regulation:
• § 65.11(e)(2)
• § 65.11(f)(1)(i)
• § 65.11 (f)(2)
• § 65.11 (f)(2)(ii)
• § 65.11 (h)
Subsection (d)(3)
When applying for a position, Subsection (d)(3) states, in part, ''. . . a claimant may apply for a position by expressing an interest in employment . . .'' (Emphasis added.) The phrase ''by expressing an interest in employment'' is vague and appears to be redundant. We recommend the Department delete this phrase in the final-form regulation.
State Board of Osteopathic Medicine
Regulation #16A-5321 (IRRC #2941)
Physician Assistants and Respiratory Therapists
July 11, 2012 We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the May 12, 2012 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 State Board of Osteopathic Medicine (Board) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.
1. Consistency with the statute; Implementation procedures.
This proposed regulation implements changes made by Act 56 of 2004 and Act 46 of 2008 (Act 46) to the Osteopathic Medical Practice Act (Act). State Board of Medicine Proposed Regulation #16A-4930 seeks to implement identical changes made by Act 45 of 2008 to the Medical Practice Act of 1985. The ''Note'' section of the Act includes the following language from Act 46: ''the State Board of Osteopathic Medicine and the State Board of Medicine shall jointly promulgate regulations . . .'' We ask the Board to explain how filing two separate regulations from each individual board is consistent with conditions imposed by Act 46.
LICENSURE OF PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS AND REGISTRATION OF SUPERVISING PHYSICIANS 2. Section 25.163.—Approval and effect of licensure and biennial renewal of physician assistants and registration of supervising physicians.—Implementation procedures; Clarity.
This section establishes the process for approval and biennial renewal of licensure for physician assistants. We raise two issues.
First, Subsection (c) requires physician assistants to maintain national certification by ''completing current recertification mechanisms available to the profession and recognized by the Board.'' The final-form regulation should identify the recertification mechanisms recognized by the Board. Alternatively, the final-form regulation should identify how a physician assistant can access this information.
Second, Subsection (c) explains the types of national certifications recognized by the Board. The Board should clarify where it will publish recognition of an organization's certification of physician assistants.
SUBCHAPTER K. RESPIRATORY THERAPISTS 3. Section 25.506.—Temporary permits.—Need; Clarity.
Subsection (a)
This subsection lists the criteria that must be satisfied for an applicant to receive a temporary permit. Subsection (a)(3) states that a temporary permit is issued to an applicant ''who is recognized as a credentialed respiratory therapist . . .'' (Emphasis added.) Would a ''credentialed'' respiratory therapist already have a license to practice? If so, what would be the need for these applicants to obtain a temporary permit? The Board should clarify this issue.
Subsection (b)
The House Professional Licensure Committee suggests that the existing reference to ''CRTT'' in Subsection (b) be replaced with ''credentialing examination'' since ''CRTT'' has been deleted in other provisions of the proposed regulation. We agree and recommend the Board replace this term in the final-form regulation.
4. Section 25.507.—Criteria for licensure as a respiratory therapist.—Implementation procedures; Clarity.
This section establishes the criteria necessary for licensure as a respiratory therapist. Subsection (1)(i) requires applicants to pass the ''credentialing examination'' approved by the National Board for Respiratory Care (NBRC). The PA Society for Respiratory Care, Inc. recommends that the term ''credentialing examination'' be replaced with ''entry level credentialing examination'' to identify the specific examination required by NBRC. We agree that this term is broad and recommend the Board clarify the specific examination necessary for licensure as a respiratory therapist.
5. Section 25.509a.—Requirement of continuing education.—Fiscal impact; Reasonableness; Clarity.
Subsection (a)
In accordance with Act 46, Subsection (a) increases the minimum hours of continuing education an applicant for license renewal or reactivation is required to complete from 20 to 30 hours within each two year licensure period. See 63 P. S. § 271.10b(f)(2). However, the Regulatory Analysis Form (RAF) provided by the Board states that this regulation will impose no additional costs on the regulated community. (RAF #14.) It is unclear how additional costs will not occur as a result of this increase to the continuing education requirements. We ask the Board to quantify this potential cost increase in the RAF submitted with the final-form regulation.
Additionally, existing language in Subsection (a)(1) prohibits respiratory therapists from obtaining more than 10 hours of continuing education credit through various forms of ''non-traditional education.'' According to the Preamble, the Board considered adjusting this limitation, but instead chose to leave the limitation as is in the proposed regulation. However, similar language was deleted from State Board of Medicine Proposed Regulation #16A-4930. See 49 Pa. Code § 18.309a(a)(3). The Board should explain the reason for this inconsistency.
6. Section 25.509b.—Approved educational programs.—Clarity.
This section describes the methods by which respiratory therapists can apply academic coursework to their continuing education credits. Subsection (c) describes the courses that cannot be used for continuing education credit, including ''practice building.'' This term is vague, and we recommend the final-form regulation include a definition for this term.
7. Miscellaneous clarity issues.
Order of the Preamble
The Preamble explains the proposed amendments to the provisions concerning respiratory therapists first and then explains the amendments to the provisions concerning physician assistants. In the regulation, however, the sections concerning physician assistants occur before the sections on respiratory therapists. To improve clarity, we recommend that the Preamble follow the order of the provisions contained in the final-form regulation.
References to the Act and Purdon's citations
Many sections of this regulation reference both a particular section of the Act and the corresponding Purdon's citation. For example, Subsection 25.164(a) references ''section 10(g.3) of the act (63 P.S § 271.10(g.3)).'' Other sections of this regulation only reference a particular section of the Act. For consistency, the Board should add the appropriate Purdon's citations to the following sections of the final-form regulation:
• § 25.164(c)
• § 25.164(d)
• § 25.201(a)
• § 25.505(b)
State Board of Medicine Regulation
#16A-4930 (IRRC #2942)
Physician Assistants and Respiratory Therapists
July 11, 2012 We submit for your consideration the following comments on the proposed rulemaking published in the May 12, 2012 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 State Board of Medicine (Board) to respond to all comments received from us or any other source.
1. Consistency with the statute; Implementation procedures.
This proposed regulation implements changes made by Act 45 of 2008 (Act 45) to the Medical Practice Act of 1985 (Act). The State Board of Osteopathic Medicine Proposed Regulation #16A-5321 seeks to implement identical changes made by Act 56 of 2004 and Act 46 of 2008 to the Osteopathic Medical Practice Act. Act 45 states that: ''the State Board of Medicine and the State Board of Osteopathic Medicine shall jointly promulgate regulations. . . .'' 63 P. S. § 422.8a. We ask the Board to explain how filing two separate regulations from each individual board is consistent with conditions imposed by Act 45.
LICENSURE OF PHYSICIAN ASSISTANTS AND REGISTRATION OF SUPERVISING PHYSICIANS 2. Section 18.145.—Biennial registration requirements; renewal of physician assistant license.—Implementation procedures; Clarity.
This section establishes the process for approval and biennial renewal of licensure for physician assistants. We raise two issues.
First, existing language in Subsection (c) requires physician assistants to maintain national certification by ''completing current recertification mechanisms available to the profession and recognized by the Board.'' The final-form regulation should identify the recertification mechanisms recognized by the Board. Alternatively, the final-form regulation should identify how a physician assistant can access this information.
Second, Subsection (c) explains the types of national certifications recognized by the Board. The Board should clarify where it will publish recognition of an organization's certification of physician assistants.
SUBCHAPTER F. RESPIRATORY THERAPISTS 3. Section 18.306.—Temporary permits.—Need; Clarity.
Subsection (a)
This subsection lists the criteria that must be satisfied for an applicant to receive a temporary permit. Subsection (a)(3) states that a temporary permit is issued to an applicant ''who is recognized as a credentialed respiratory therapist . . .'' (Emphasis added.) Would a ''credentialed'' respiratory therapist already have a license to practice? If so, what would be the need for these applicants to obtain a temporary permit? The Board should clarify this issue.
Subsection (b)
The House Professional Licensure Committee suggests that the existing reference to ''CRTT'' in Subsection (b) be replaced with ''credentialing examination'' since ''CRTT'' has been deleted in other provisions of the proposed regulation. We agree and recommend the Board replace this term in the final-form regulation.
4. Section 18.307.—Criteria for licensure as a respiratory therapist.—Implementation procedures; Clarity.
This section establishes the criteria necessary for licensure as a respiratory therapist. Subsection (1)(i) requires applicants to pass the ''credentialing examination'' approved by the National Board for Respiratory Care (NBRC). The PA Society for Respiratory Care, Inc. recommends that the term ''credentialing examination'' be replaced with ''entry level credentialing examination'' to identify the specific examination required by NBRC. We agree that this term is broad and recommend the Board clarify the specific examination necessary for licensure as a respiratory therapist.
5. Section 18.309a.—Requirement of continuing education.—Fiscal impact; Reasonableness; Clarity.
Subsection (a)
In accordance with Act 45, Subsection (a) increases the minimum hours of continuing education an applicant for license renewal or reactivation is required to complete from 20 to 30 hours within each two year licensure period. See 63 P. S. § 422.36a(f)(2). The Regulatory Analysis Form (RAF) provided by the Board states that this regulation will impose no additional costs on the regulated community. (RAF #14.) However, several comments from the regulated community assert this statutory increase in hours will impose additional costs for respiratory therapists seeking license renewal. We ask the Board to review these comments, and quantify this potential cost increase in the RAF submitted with the final-form regulation.
Additionally, the Preamble notes that the Board chose to delete language from Subsection (a)(3) that prohibits respiratory therapists from obtaining more than 10 hours of continuing education credit through various forms of ''non-traditional education.'' However, similar language was not deleted in State Board of Osteopathic Medicine Proposed Regulation #16A-5321.
See 49 Pa. Code § 25.509a(a)(1). The Board should explain the reason for this inconsistency.
6. Section 18.309b.—Approved educational courses.—Clarity.
This section describes the methods by which respiratory therapists can apply academic coursework to their continuing education credits. Subsection (c) describes the courses that cannot be used for continuing education credit, including ''practice building.'' This term is vague, and we recommend the final-form regulation include a definition for this term.
7. Miscellaneous clarity issues.
Order of the Preamble
The Preamble explains the amendments to the sections on respiratory therapists first and then explains the amendments to the provisions concerning physician assistants. In the regulation, however, the sections concerning physician assistants occur before the sections on respiratory therapists. To improve clarity, we recommend that the Preamble follow the order of the provisions contained in the final-form regulation.
References to the Act and Purdon's citations
Many sections of this regulation reference both a particular section of the Act 45 and the corresponding Purdon's citation. For example, Subsection 18.146(a) references ''section 36(f) of the act (63 P.S § 422.36(f)).'' Other sections of this regulation only reference a particular section of the Act. For consistency, the Board should add the appropriate Purdon's citations to the following sections of the final-form regulation:
• § 18.146(c)
• § 18.146(d)
• § 18.305(b)
SILVAN B. LUTKEWITTE, III,
Chairperson
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 12-1391. Filed for public inspection July 20, 2012, 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.
