TITLE 1. ADMINISTRATION

DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES

Fast-Track Regulation

Title of Regulation: 1VAC30-30. Survey Standards for the Inspection of Child Care Centers for the Presence of Asbestos (repealing 1VAC30-30-10 through 1VAC30-30-120:2).

Statutory Authority: § 2.2-1102 of the Code of Virginia.

Public Hearing Information: No public hearing is currently scheduled.

Public Comment Deadline: July 16, 2025.

Effective Date: August 1, 2025.

Agency Contact: Kimberly Freiberger, Policy Planning Specialist III, Department of General Services, 1100 Bank Street, Suite 420, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone (804) 205-3861, or email kimberly.freiberger@dgs.virginia.gov.

Basis: Section 2.2-1102 of the Code of Virginia provides the legal authority for the Department of General Services to repeal the regulation.

Purpose: Repealing these standards will not have any negative impact on public health, safety, and welfare. Although the department no longer has the authority to promulgate these regulations, under § 32.1-126.1 of the Code of Virginia, the Superintendent of Public Instruction ensures that child day centers follow the appropriate asbestos inspection standards. Accordingly, the current level of protection for public health, safety, and welfare of Virginians will remain the same after the repeal of these standards.

Rationale for Fast-Track Rulemaking Process: Because the department no longer has authority to promulgate these regulations, the department expects the repeal of this chapter to be noncontroversial and appropriate for a fast-track rulemaking action.

Substance: The amendments repeal Survey Standards for the Inspection of Child Care Centers for the Presence of Asbestos (1VAC30-30).

Issues: There are no known disadvantages to the amendments for businesses, citizens, or the Commonwealth. The primary advantage for the Commonwealth is a reduction in regulatory requirements.

Department of Planning and Budget Economic Impact Analysis:

The Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) has analyzed the economic impact of this proposed regulation in accordance with § 2.2-4007.04 of the Code of Virginia and Executive Order 19. The analysis presented represents DPB's best estimate of the potential economic impacts as of the date of this analysis.¹

Summary of the Proposed Amendments to Regulation. The Department of General Services (DGS) proposes to repeal asbestos survey standards for child care centers as it lacks statutory authority to regulate such buildings.

Background. According to DGS, there was a growing public awareness of the link between the inhalation of asbestos fibers and various diseases such as asbestosis, mesothelioma, lung and other cancers in 1987. As a result of these concerns, the General Assembly enacted Chapter 534 of the 1985 Acts of Assembly that directed DGS to develop standards for the inspection of public schools buildings of all types to identify asbestos. This was expanded in 1988 by Chapter 723 of the 1988 Acts of Assembly to include buildings of all types, and it was pursuant to that mandate that Survey Standards for the Inspection of Child Care Centers for the Presence of Asbestos (1VAC30-30) was adopted in January 1989. However, Chapter 660 of the 1993 Acts of Assembly narrowed DGS authority by amending the text to only include standards for the inspection of state-owned and local education agency buildings of all types. Essentially, the 1993 legislation removed DGS authority for this regulation. However, the regulation has been inadvertently left in the Virginia Administrative Code for over 30 years. DGS now proposes to repeal this obsolete regulation in this action.

Estimated Benefits and Costs. Since the proposal would repeal this regulation that has been obsolete for over 30 years, no significant economic impact is expected other than eliminating a potential source of confusion for the readers of this regulation.

Businesses and Other Entities Affected. The proposed repeal of this obsolete regulation may benefit readers by eliminating a potential source of confusion. No entity appears to be disproportionately affected. The Code of Virginia requires DPB to assess whether an adverse impact may result from the proposed regulation.² An adverse impact is indicated if there is any increase in net cost or reduction in net benefit for any entity, even if the benefits exceed the costs for all entities combined.³ The proposal does not increase costs or reduce benefits for any entity. Thus, no adverse impact is indicated.

Small Businesses⁴ Affected.⁵ The proposed repeal does not adversely affect small businesses.

Localities⁶ Affected.⁷ The proposal does not introduce costs for localities, nor does it affect any locality disproportionately.

Projected Impact on Employment. The proposed repeal of this regulation does not affect total employment.

Effects on the Use and Value of Private Property. No effects on the use and value of private property nor on real estate development costs are expected.

_____________________________

¹ Section 2.2-4007.04 of the Code of Virginia requires that such economic impact analyses determine the public benefits and costs of the proposed amendments. Further the analysis should include but not be limited to: (1) the projected number of businesses or other entities to whom the proposed regulatory action would apply, (2) the identity of any localities and types of businesses or other entities particularly affected, (3) the projected number of persons and employment positions to be affected, (4) the projected costs to affected businesses or entities to implement or comply with the regulation, and (5) the impact on the use and value of private property.

² Pursuant to § 2.2-4007.04 D: In the event this economic impact analysis reveals that the proposed regulation would have an adverse economic impact on businesses or would impose a significant adverse economic impact on a locality, business, or entity particularly affected, the Department of Planning and Budget shall advise the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules, the House Committee on Appropriations, and the Senate Committee on Finance. Statute does not define "adverse impact," state whether only Virginia entities should be considered, nor indicate whether an adverse impact results from regulatory requirements mandated by legislation.

³ Statute does not define "adverse impact," state whether only Virginia entities should be considered, nor indicate whether an adverse impact results from regulatory requirements mandated by legislation. As a result, DPB has adopted a definition of adverse impact that assesses changes in net costs and benefits for each affected Virginia entity that directly results from discretionary changes to the regulation.

⁴ Pursuant to § 2.2-4007.04, small business is defined as "a business entity, including its affiliates, that (i) is independently owned and operated and (ii) employs fewer than 500 full-time employees or has gross annual sales of less than $6 million."

⁵ If the proposed regulatory action may have an adverse effect on small businesses, § 2.2-4007.04 requires that such economic impact analyses include: (1) an identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the proposed regulation, (2) the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for small businesses to comply with the proposed regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparing required reports and other documents, (3) a statement of the probable effect of the proposed regulation on affected small businesses, and (4) a description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed regulation. Additionally, pursuant to § 2.2-4007.1 of the Code of Virginia, if there is a finding that a proposed regulation may have an adverse impact on small business, the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules shall be notified.

⁶ "Locality" can refer to either local governments or the locations in the Commonwealth where the activities relevant to the regulatory change are most likely to occur.

⁷ Section 2.2-4007.04 defines "particularly affected" as bearing disproportionate material impact.

Agency Response to Economic Impact Analysis: The Department of General Services concurs with the economic impact analysis prepared by the Department of Planning and Budget.

Summary:

The amendments repeal Survey Standards for the Inspection of Child Care Centers for the Presence of Asbestos (1VAC30-30). Chapter 660 of the 1993 Acts of Assembly amended § 2.1-526.14 of the Code of Virginia narrowing Department of General Services (DGS) authority to promulgate standards for the inspection of state-owned and local education agency buildings of all types and removing DGS authority to promulgate the survey standards for inspection of buildings for non-state-owned buildings, including child day centers. Since DGS no longer has authority to issue regulations of standards for inspection of buildings that are non-state-owned, the department has determined that 1VAC30-30 should be repealed.