Notice of Comments Issued [29 Pa.B. 5778] Section 5(g) of the Regulatory Review 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 (71 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 regulation. The final-form regulations must be submitted by the dates indicated.
Final-Form Submission Reg. No. Agency/Title Issued Deadline 52-10 PA Human Relations
Commission
Housing
Accommodations/
Commercial Property10/22/99 9/22/01 (29 Pa.B. 3895 (July 24, 1999)) 16A-567 State Real Estate
Commission
Disclosure Summary10/22/99 9/20/01 (29 Pa.B. 4451 (August 21, 1999)) 16-20 Department of State
Schedule of Civil
Penalties10/22/99 9/20/01 (29 Pa.B. 4437 (August 21, 1999)) 52-11 PA Human Relations
Commission
Housing
Accommodations/
Commercial Property10/22/99 9/20/01 (29 Pa.B. 4443 (August 21, 1999)) 16A-556 State Board of
Accountancy
Peer Review10/22/99 9/20/01 (29 Pa.B. 4448 (August 21, 1999)) The Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission Regulation No. 52-10 Housing Accommodations/Commercial Property October 22, 1999 We have reviewed this proposed regulation from the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) 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 in determining whether a regulation is in the public interest. In applying these criteria, our Comments address issues that relate to consistency with statute, reasonableness, need and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulation.
1. Section 45.171. Race/Color/National Origin.--Reasonableness and Clarity.
Paragraph (3) states that it is unlawful to advertise ''[L]andmarks or organizational locations which are indicative of a particular nationality or race, unless all of the landmarks in the area are noted.'' Does this section prohibit a reference to a property located in an area recognized as a community landmark, for example, ''Chinatown'' or ''Little Italy?'' The PHRC should clarify this in the final-form rulemaking.
Also, can ethnic terms be used to describe a property's unique features (for example, Oriental garden, Kosher restaurant)? For clarity, the final-form regulation should specify whether this type of description is prohibited.
The term ''code words'' in Paragraph (4) is vague. We understand that ''code words'' are local terms, phrases and euphemisms that describe specific neighborhoods which are primarily populated by a certain ethnic group. The PHRC should define or explain this term within this section.
2. Section 45.172. Familial status/age.--Clarity.
There appears to be a typographical error in subsection (a)(3). The word ''The'' which appears before ''listing'' should be deleted.
3. Section 45.181. List.--Need and Clarity.
This section describes the purpose and general scope of the list of words to be avoided in housing advertisements. The language contained in this section is nonregulatory in that it provides guidance rather than regulatory requirements. The PHRC should revise this section to be written in the form of regulatory requirements. Alternatively, the PHRC could move the purpose description language to § 45.161. Purpose.
4. Section 45.182. Words to be avoided.--Clarity.
Subsection (a) contains the statement: ''The list is neither intended nor reasonably able to be all inclusive.'' This sentence repeats information included in § 45.181 and should be deleted.
Also, the explanatory language after ''Retired persons, retirees'' and ''Senior'' is confusing. To improve clarity, this language should mirror the structure of the explanatory language that follows the word ''Adult.''
5. Section 45.191. Advertisements.--Clarity.
It is our understanding that advertisements in Pennsylvania newspapers for property located out-of-State are covered under this rulemaking. If so, the regulation should be clarified by adding a provision that the requirements of this chapter apply regardless of where the property is located.
6. Section 45.192. Affirmative defenses.--Clarity.
The term ''housing advertiser'' should be replaced with ''advertiser,'' since this is the defined term.
Paragraph (2) provides that it is an affirmative defense that a housing advertiser has complied with a written advisory of the Commission concerning what constitutes appropriate housing advertisements. A provision should be added outlining the process by which an advisory is requested and received, including any applicable time frame.
7. Section 45.193. Good faith efforts.--Clarity.
Paragraph (1) references the housing for older persons exemption. To improve clarity, the PHRC should include a cross-reference to the Federal Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C.A. § 3607(b)).
Paragraph (3) provides that an advertiser will be deemed to have acted in good faith if the advertiser produces a written Commission advisory that the language complained of is legal. As noted in Comment #6, a provision should be added outlining or referencing the process by which an advisory is requested and received, including any applicable time frame.
8. Obsolete provisions in existing regulation.--Consistency with Statute.
Act 34 of 1997 nullified §§ 45.8(a) (relating to advertisements) and 45.13(f) (relating to exemptions) of the existing PHRC regulations. Why were those two sections not deleted in the proposed rulemaking? For consistency with the Act 34 amendments, the PHRC should delete both sections in the final-form regulation.
State Real Estate Commission Regulation No. 16A-567 Disclosure Summary October 22, 1999 We have reviewed this proposed regulation from the State Real Estate Commission (SREC) and submit for consideration the following objections and recommendations. Subsections 5.1(h) and 5.1(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 with the statute, fiscal impact, reasonableness, need and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulation.
1. Subsection 35.336(a). Disclosure summary.--Consistency with statute, Need, Reasonableness and Clarity.
This regulation consists of one section divided into three subsections. Subsection (a) is the largest of the three. It contains the required contents for the disclosure summary that is entitled ''Consumer Notice'' (Notice). The following paragraphs address concerns or questions with the language of subsection (a) and the Notice.
First sentence of subsection (a)
The first sentence of the subsection states that the Notice is required to match the form provided by the regulation. However, the regulation contains no directives for legibility. Other agencies set specific minimum standards in regulations for public notices including typeset size. This proposed regulation should include specific minimum standards for typeset size and format.
Terminology of Notice
Section 608 of the Real Estate Licensing and Registration Act as amended by Act 112 of 1998 (act) (63 P. S. § 455.608) relating to information to be given at an initial interview, uses the term ''broker.'' However, the Notice uses ''licensee,'' ''salesperson'' and ''broker.'' The term could encompass more than a broker or salesperson according to section 301 of the act. Since neither the act nor the regulation defines ''licensee,'' this regulation should include a definition of ''licensee'' for the Notice.
Second paragraph of Notice
The House Professional Licensure Committee (House Committee) and Pennsylvania Association of Realtors (PAR) suggested changes in the second paragraph of the Notice. This paragraph's statement is required by subsection 608(2) of the act. The use of the language suggested by the House Committee and PAR would improve the clarity of the Notice.
First, third, sixth and eighth bulleted paragraphs of Notice
The bullet points in the third paragraph of the Notice are based upon section 606.1 of the act. These bullets should more closely track the act. The following are four examples:
The first bullet states that the licensee shall exercise reasonable professional skill and care. It should also include language from section 606.1(a)(1) of the act that states a licensee must exercise reasonable professional skill and care ''which meets the practice standards required by the act [Real Estate Licensing and Registration Act].''
The third bullet should mirror the act by specifying that the waiver must be in writing. It should also reference counteroffers.
The sixth bullet states that licensees should disclose all conflicts of interest and financial interest ''in a timely manner.'' However, section 606.1(a)(13) of the act requires that these disclosures be made when the licensee first recommends a purchase, or first learns that the consumer will purchase a service in which the licensee or an affiliated licensee has a financial interest. Instead of using ''in a timely manner,'' the Notice should use the specific language of the act.
The eighth bullet should more closely track section 606.1(a)(11) of the act. It should specify that the licensee must provide assistance with document preparation and advice on compliance with real estate laws.
Descriptions of different ''Agency'' relationships
Under the descriptions of the four different types of agency relationships, the Notice does not include language from the act relating to exceptions to the licensee's obligation to seek additional offers, properties for purchase, or buyers for the property. These exceptions are found in sections 606.2(2), 606.3(2), 606.4(b)(3) and 606.5(b)(2) of the act. The SREC should include these exceptions in the Notice.
Dual Agency
In the first paragraph under the heading ''Dual Agency,'' the first sentence mirrors the act by indicating that dual agency requires the written consent of all parties involved. However, the second sentence is confusing. It states that if dual agency should occur in a consumer's transaction, the consumer will be informed. The SREC should delete the second sentence.
Designated Agency
Under ''Designated Agency,'' the Notice provides that ''. . .licensees in the company who are not designated may represent another party and should not be provided with any confidential information'' (emphasis added). The use of the term ''should'' implies that the employing broker can decide whether to give a licensee, who is representing another party, confidential information. If this is the intent, we request the SREC explain when it would be appropriate to divulge confidential information. If this is not the SREC's intent, the term ''should'' should be replaced with ''shall.''
Other Information About Real Estate Transactions
This section of the Notice lists items that are negotiable and are addressed in an agreement or disclosure statement with the licensee. There are two concerns.
First, the first sentence states that the following are negotiable. However, the following three bulleted sentences end with the phrase ''are negotiable.'' This repetition is unnecessary.
Second, the fourth bullet point addresses the broker's cooperation with other brokers. To be consistent with section 608(6) of the act, it should include a broker's sharing of fees.
Acknowledgement
Under the word ''Acknowledgement,'' the Notice includes space for the consumer's signature. The House Committee and PAR suggest that the Notice also include space for the printed name, address and telephone number of the consumer. The Notice should include space for printing the consumer's name. However, what is the need for adding lines for the consumer's address and telephone number?
2. Section 35.336(b). Disclosure summary.--Implementation procedure and Clarity.
There are two concerns with subsection (b). First, the subsection directs licensees to provide the Notice to all consumers at the initial interview. Yet, the regulation contains no definition of ''initial interview.'' This subsection should reference the statutory definition of ''initial interview'' in section 608 of the act.
Second, subsection (b) should provide that if consumers opt not to sign, licensees shall note the refusal on the records that they retain as required by subsection (c).
3. Section 35.336(c). Disclosure summary.--Fiscal impact, Reasonableness and Need.
Subsection (c) requires licensees to retain the Notice signed by the consumer. Retention and storage of documents is an expense. The SREC should review and explain the need for retaining these documents. If retention is necessary, then the regulation should set a retention period.
Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs Regulation No. 16-20 Schedule of Civil Penalties October 22, 1999 We have reviewed this proposed regulation from the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs (BPOA) 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 consistency with existing regulations and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulation.
1. Section 43b.3. Procedures.--Consistency with existing regulations and Clarity.
Subsection 43b.3(b)(1) in the existing regulation refers to schedules of civil penalties under §§ 43b.4--43b.9. This reference should be amended to include the additional schedules proposed in this regulation.
2. Section 43b.7. Schedule of civil penalties--pharmacists and pharmacies.--Consistency with existing regulations and Clarity.
The House Professional Licensure Committee commented on an inconsistency between the violations described in the proposed regulation and existing regulation 49 Pa. Code § 27.15. Existing subsection 27.15(a) requires a pharmacy to be in a clean and orderly condition and in good repair. Existing subsection 27.15(b) states that a pharmacy must comply with State and local health and sanitation statutes. However, the proposed regulation's description of violations is not consistent with the existing subsections. The description of violations in this regulation should be set forth in the same manner as the existing regulation.
3. Section 43b.12a. Schedule of civil penalties--auctioneers, apprentice auctioneers, auction house and auction companies.--Clarity.
In the ''Penalties'' column, the word ''action'' is missing after the word ''formal.'' The phrase ''formal action'' should be used to be consistent with other penalties in the regulation.
4. Section 43b.13a. Schedule of civil penalties--engineers, land surveyors and geologists.--Clarity.
The wording of the ''Title/Description'' for violation under 63 P. S. § 150(b) is unclear. It does not clearly state that the violation is for misrepresentation on a sign, advertisement, letterhead or card. The description is also unclear because it uses four subparagraphs for identical penalties. The description could be consolidated and clearly establish that the violation is for representing oneself to be an engineer, land surveyor or geologist on a sign, advertisement, letterhead or card, without being licensed or registered.
Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission Regulation No. 52-11 Housing Accommodations/Commercial Property October 22, 1999 We have reviewed this proposed regulation from the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (PHRC) 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 in determining whether a regulation is in the public interest. In applying these criteria, our Comments address issues that relate to reasonableness and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulation.
1. Section 45.301. Purpose.--Clarity.
This section includes, verbatim, the statutory language from 43 P. S. § 955(h)(5). Is it necessary to include the entire statutory text of the subsection in this section? The PHRC should consider, instead, cross-referencing 43 P. S. § 955(h)(5).
2. Section 45.302. Initial procedure.--Reasonableness and Clarity.
Paragraphs (1) and (2)
In paragraphs (1) and (2), ''advertisements shall be forwarded to,'' and ''Commission Citation Forms shall be completed by'' the ''appropriate housing staff(s).'' The process described in these paragraphs does not need to be codified. This information would be more appropriately included in the PHRC's internal operations manual.
Paragraph (1) requires, when possible, ''information regarding the advertisement's publication.'' What does this information include? The PHRC should clearly state what information is needed.
Paragraph (3)
How long after the PHRC becomes aware of an advertisement will a copy of the citation be sent to the parties cited in paragraph (3)? For clarity, the PHRC should specify a time frame within which it will respond by sending a copy of the citation to the affected party.
What is the ''appropriate penalty'' included in subsection (3)(iii)? For clarity, the PHRC should cross-reference the ''Schedule of civil penalties'' in § 45.307 in this paragraph.
Paragraphs (3) and (4)
What is the difference between ''service of the citation'' in paragraph (4) and the paragraph (3) reference to citations being ''sent''? For improved clarity, both paragraphs should reference service of the citation. Also, 1 Pa. Code § 33.34 should be cross-referenced to reflect that the date of service is the date of mailing.
Paragraph (5)
Paragraph (5) states: ''[F]ailure to pay a civil penalty could result in. . .other disciplinary actions against licensees. . . .'' For clarity, the PHRC should cross-reference where these other actions, including court proceedings, that are deemed appropriate disciplinary actions in this paragraph, are found. Further, will the final regulation specify the additional penalties that would result from a failure to pay the civil penalty required in paragraph (5)?
3. Section 45.303. Administrative procedures.--Clarity.
Subsections (a) and (b)
Subsection (a) provides that all responses to citations shall be recorded in the ''appropriate data base.'' Subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2) require the PHRC to process and forward checks when violations are admitted and other violations are denied. This information is more appropriately placed in an internal operations manual.
Subsections (c) and (d)
Subsection (c)(1) states ''[T]he fact shall be noted in the record.'' Subsection (d)(1) states ''[T]he record shall note the denial.'' Is there a reason why these two sentences are written differently? If not, the PHRC should consider parallel construction for these two sentences.
We also question the use of the terms ''citation officer'' in this section and ''hearing officer'' in § 45.308 (relating to the Citation form). It is our understanding that these two positions are identical. For clarity and consistency, the PHRC should define one of these terms in this subsection, and use that defined term consistently throughout the regulation.
Subsection (f)
What are the ''appropriate PHRC regulations/requirements''? Is ''requirement'' another term for ''regulation?'' If so, it should be deleted.
Are there ''appropriate'' regulations beyond those found in this rulemaking? If so, they should be explained or cross-referenced.
Subsection (g)
Subsection (g) provides that all payments made as a result of a violation will be forwarded to the Department of Revenue. Once again, we question whether this information would be more appropriately included in an internal operations manual.
4. Section 45.304. Hearing.--Clarity.
Will hearings under this section and the section on appeals (§ 45.305) be administered in accordance with 16 Pa. Code Chapter 42 of the PHRC's Special Rules of Administrative Practice and Procedure? It is our understanding that they will be. Applicable rules should be included and cross-referenced in the final-form regulation.
Subsection (a)(5) provides that following a hearing, the citation officer may ''order other appropriate equitable relief as authorized by the act.'' The final-form regulation should explain what this means, including appropriate cross-references to other applicable provisions.
Subsection (b) states: ''[O]rders affirming two or more violations shall be referred to appropriate licensing or regulating agencies for action as they deem appropriate.'' The final-form regulation should include a provision that the party who is the subject of those referrals will be provided with a copy of all referral notices.
5. Section 45.305. Appeals.--Clarity.
As noted in Comment No. 4, all rules applicable to this section should be identified and cross-referenced in the final-form regulation. This section should also clarify the nature of the appeal hearing (that is, is it a hearing de novo or a reconsideration?). Finally, it should specify the extent to which additional evidence may be considered.
6. Section 45.307. Schedule of civil penalties.--Clarity.
This section provides that if an unlawful advertisement is placed again in a newspaper or other publication, or is not withdrawn reasonably upon service of citation, it may be cited a second time. The clarity of the first clause would be improved if it included a reference to ''following receipt of a citation'' after the word ''publication.''
In subsection (b), the PHRC should further explain what it means by ''formal process.'' Does it mean a formal complaint procedure? If so, this section should include a citation to the PHRC's Chapter 42 procedural rules.
Similarly, the phrase ''to impose a maximum penalty on a multiple basis'' in subsection (b)(1) should be clarified. Section 9.3 of Act 34 of 1997 (43 P. S. § 959.3) states: ''[A]ny such penalty shall not exceed the sum of five hundred dollars ($500).'' Given this limitation, subsection (b)(1) should clearly indicate that it applies to multiple offenses, not multiple penalties which may exceed $500 for one offense.
7. Section 45.308. Form.--Clarity.
The instructions accompanying the form provide that all hearings are held in Harrisburg at the PHRC's conference room. We understand it is the PHRC's intent to hold hearings at the PHRC's offices in or nearest to the region where the transgression occurred or the alleged violator is located. If the PHRC plans to hold hearings regionally, the final-form regulation and the Citation form instructions should be amended accordingly.
Additionally, the following inconsistencies on the ''Citation'' form should be corrected:
1) The instructions refer to a hearing before a ''hearing officer.'' Use either ''citation officer'' or ''hearing officer'' consistently throughout the regulation (see Comment No. 3).
2) The word ''too'' in the verification language should be changed to ''to.''
3) Under ''Notice of Rights and Obligations,'' subsection 2(b)(i) includes the language ''at the address listed specified above.'' Either the word ''listed'' or the word ''specified'' should be deleted.
State Board of Accountancy Regulation No. 16A-556 Peer Review October 22, 1999 We have reviewed this proposed regulation from the State Board of Accountancy (Board) 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 statutory authority, legislative intent, reasonableness and clarity. We recommend that these Comments be carefully considered as you prepare the final-form regulation.
1. Section 11.81. Definitions.--Clarity.
The body of the regulation uses the acronym ''AICPA.'' However, this acronym is not defined. For clarity, the Board should define the acronym ''AICPA.''
2. Section 11.82. Effective dates for peer review compliance; proof of compliance or exemption.--Statutory authority, Legislative intent, Reasonableness and Clarity.
Peer review effective dates
Subsections (a) and (b) of the regulation require a firm to complete a peer review before the license biennium that begins May 1 of 2000, or May 1, 2004, for firms that have not accepted or performed any audit engagements. The House Professional Licensure Committee commented that the dates set forth for peer review are in conflict with the statutory language and legislative intent behind the Act.
Sections 8.2(f) and 8.8(c) of the Act state a license may not be issued to a firm after April 30, 2000 unless the applicant complies with section 8.9 Peer Review. These sections of the Act do not directly require a peer review, but rather require compliance with section 8.9.
Section 8.9(l)(2) of the Act states the following:
This section shall not become applicable to firms and no firm shall be required to undergo a peer review under this section until May 1, 2000, except that this section shall not become applicable until May 1, 2004 to a firm that has not accepted or performed any audit engagements during the period May 1, 1998, through April 30, 2004 (emphasis added).
Until May 1, 2000, every firm is in compliance with section 8.9 of the Act, regardless of whether it has had a peer review or not. Likewise, prior to May 1, 2004, firms that have not accepted or performed any audit engagements are also in compliance. The Board should amend the deadlines for peer review to comply with section 8.9(l)(2) of the Act.
Subsection (b)
Subsection (b) makes a distinction between a ''review engagement'' and an ''audit engagement.'' It is unclear what specific characteristics distinguish the two from each other. For clarity, the Board should define these terms.
Subsection (d)
Subsection (d) addresses a firm claiming an exemption from peer review under section 8.9(g) of the Act. The regulation requires a firm to submit ''information that substantiates its entitlement to an exemption.'' To improve clarity, the Board should specify the type of documentation required by this subsection.
The second sentence in subsection (d) addresses the special case of a multistate firm that claims an exemption based on previously having undergone a peer review in another state or jurisdiction. To improve clarity, this provision should be contained in a new subsection (e).
In addition, section 8.9(a) of the Act provides an exemption for a firm ''that meets one of the exemptions in subsection (g)'' (emphasis added). However, section 8.9(g) states ''a firm shall be exempt from the requirement to undergo peer review if all of the following apply:...'' (emphasis added). How will the Board reconcile these two contradicting provisions in the Act? If the Board will require a firm to meet one of the exemptions in section 8.9(g) of the Act, subsection (d) should be revised to reflect the Board's intent.
Subsection (d)(2) requires ''A statement that the firm's internal inspection or monitoring procedures require that the firm's personnel from an out-of-State office perform an inspection of the firm's Pennsylvania offices at least once every 3 years.'' Is an internal inspection the equivalent of a peer review? If it is, we request the Board explain how an inspection by an out-of-State office of the same firm constitutes an independent peer review as required by the Act.
3. Section 11.83. Administering organizations for peer review; firm membership not required.--Clarity.
Administering organization
This section lists organizations that are qualified to administer peer review programs. However, the function of the administering organization in the peer review is unclear. We request the Board explain the role of the administering organization.
It is also unclear whether an administering organization, other than those listed in subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2), can obtain Board approval. We request the Board add the process for approving other administering organizations in the final regulation.
Subsection (a)
Subsection (a)(2) provides that State societies and institutes that participate in the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) Peer Review Program are deemed qualified to administer peer review programs. Why is this provision limited to ''State'' societies and institutes?
Subsection (b)
This subsection states ''A firm that is subject to peer review is not required to become a member of the AICPA or any other administering organization.'' It is our understanding that this provision is intended to prohibit an administering organization from requiring membership as a precondition for conducting the review or attesting to the firm's professional standards and practices. The Board should clarify its intent in the final regulation.
4. Section 11.85. Qualifications of peer reviewers.--Clarity.
Peer reviewers
This section addresses the qualifications of peer reviewers. However, it does not specify how these qualifications would be administered or reviewed by the Board. The Board should explain how it determines whether a prospective peer reviewer is qualified.
Subsections (b) and (c)
These subsections allow a licensed public accountant or a sole practitioner who ''otherwise satisfies the requirements of subsection (a)'' to serve as a peer reviewer. Subsection (a) requires the peer reviewer to meet the qualifications contained in the AICPA's ''Standards for Performing and Reporting on Peer Reviews.'' It is unclear how an individual could otherwise satisfy the requirements of subsection (a). We request the Board clarify the intent of subsections (b) and (c).
Also, the term ''sole practitioner'' is not defined in the Act or the proposed regulation. To improve clarity, the Board should define this term in the final regulation.
JOHN R. MCGINLEY, Jr.,
Chairperson[Pa.B. Doc. No. 99-1884. Filed for public inspection November 5, 1999, 9:00 a.m.]
