Vol. 38 Iss. 4 - October 11, 2021



Initial Agency Notice

Title of Regulation: 18VAC30-21. Regulations Governing Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology.

Statutory Authority: § 54.1-2400 of the Code of Virginia.

Name of Petitioner: Rebecca Delbridge.

Nature of Petitioner's Request: To allow for supervision of assistants by speech-language pathologists via telepractice.

Agency Plan for Disposition of Request: The petition will be published on October 11, 2021, in the Virginia Register of Regulations and also posted on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall at to receive public comment ending November 10, 2021. Following receipt of all comments on the petition to amend regulations, the board will decide whether to make any changes to the regulatory language. This matter may be discussed at the board meeting on October 19, 2021, in the context of a periodic review of regulations. The petitioner will be informed of its decision.

Public Comment Deadline: November 10, 2021.

Agency Contact: Leslie L. Knachel, Executive Director, Board of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology, 9960 Mayland Drive, Suite 300, Richmond, VA 23233, telephone (804) 597-4130, or email

VA.R. Doc. No. PFR22-07; Filed September 9, 2021, 1:13 p.m.


Initial Agency Notice

Title of Regulation: 18VAC125-20. Regulations Governing the Practice of Psychology.

Statutory Authority: § 54.1-2400 of the Code of Virginia.

Name of Petitioner: Diana Rexach.

Nature of Petitioner's Request: To amend requirements for residency in school psychology to accept five years of experience working as a school-psychologist limited in lieu of 1,500 hours of a supervised residency.

Agency Plan for Disposition of Request: In accordance with Virginia law, the petition has been filed with the Virginia Registrar of Regulations for publication on October 11, 2021, with a request for comment to be received until November 11, 2021. The petition will also be posted for comment on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall at At the next meeting of the Board of Psychology after the comment period, which is scheduled for December 14, 2021, the board will consider the petition and any comment received to decide whether or not to initiate the rulemaking process. The board will inform the petitioner of its decision after the comment period is concluded and the board has made its decision.

Public Comment Deadline: November 11, 2021.

Agency Contact: Jaime Hoyle, Executive Director, Board of Psychology, 9960 Mayland Drive, Suite 300, Richmond, VA 23233, telephone (804) 367-4406, or email

VA.R. Doc. No. PFR22-09; Filed September 20, 2021, 1:21 p.m.

w –––––––––––––––––– w



Agency Decision

Title of Regulation: 24VAC35-30. VASAP Case Management Policy and Procedure Manual.

Statutory Authority: §§ 18.2-271.1 and 18.2-271.2 of the Code of Virginia.

Name of Petitioner: Cynthia Hites.

Nature of Petitioner's Request: "I, Cynthia Hites, a citizen of the Commonwealth of Virginia, pursuant to § 2.2-4007 of the Code of Virginia, do humbly submit this petition.

For years VASAP has been flying blind regarding the number of false positive interlock readings being suffered by their clients.

Unexplained instances of failed interlock readings have classically been attributed to a glitch, or malfunction in an individual device, instead of VASAP admitting the issue is systemic in nature.

Utilizing the electrochemical fuel cell as sensor technology for interlock devices means a very high number of failed readings are expected due to sources other than consumed ethanol (C2H6O). ASAP has chosen to adopt this vastly inferior technology and has also grossly misapplied it.

In order to evaluate the full scope of effects wrought by using the fuel cell, it is now imperative the VASAP agency strive to quantify how this choice impacts the efficacy of its Interlock Program.

Certain metrics need to be consistently and continually obtained for review in order to properly evaluate the VASAP IID program.

We need to know how may IIDs are installed, and how many failed readings (>.02) occur per device. Then, out of those fails, how many are deemed "violations," and of those "violations" the number of revocation hearings set, the number of clients denied due process by having their interlock time altered by ASAP, and the number of subsequent convictions.

It was estimated during a recent quarterly VASAP meeting that there are 200 failed IID readings per day. If this holds true, and if there are 7000 interlocks installed at any given time, then statistically, after 35 days, every single client has one failed reading; after 70 days that jumps to two failed readings per client, and these numbers are unacceptable.

A high number of failed interlock readings due to high BrAc would clearly be indicative of a failed program. Either the IID machines are detecting non-consumed ethanol at an unacceptably high rate, indicating systemic failure, or despite their installation, people in large numbers are deciding to attempt drunk driving, indicating systemic failure.

For VASAP to continue to neglect the obscenely high number of false positives and operate as if interlocks were reasonably accurate, would be irresponsible and highly suspect.

VASAP owes the citizens of Virginia a level of interlock accountability that, to this date, has not been realized. Without obtaining this empirical data, VASAP can continue to claim program integrity and assert purely anecdotal evidence that the interlock devices are accurate.

I would be very willing to wager that after the number of Virginia's false positives is ascertained, the interlock devices will lose all of their assumed credibility.

Employing any language the agency sees fit, I propose that the following amendment of interlock data acquisition be made to either 24VAC35-30-150, included in the annual VASAP Executive Summary, and/or included in an otherwise appropriate agency document, to be publicly disseminated on a yearly basis.

To be broken down by each individual ASAP, and by case worker, we need to know:

1) Number of IIDs installed

2) Number of failed IID readings per machine (per client).

Of all the interlock fails, further disseminated by:

(A) Number of men, and number of women

(B) Number of fails occurring upon rolling retest

(C) Number of those clients with readings deemed "violations."

a) Number of clients with "violations" being given the benefit of a revocation hearing.

b) Number of clients with "violations" being given additional interlock time without being afforded due process.

(D) Number of these revocation hearings resulting in conviction.

Keeping track of these statistics will serve a vital role in affirming program integrity.

Most humbly,

Cynthia Hites"

Agency Decision: Request denied.

Statement of Reason for Decision: The petitioner requested that 24VAC35-30-150 be amended to require the Commission on the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program (VASAP) to collect an extensive variety of ignition interlock data. The request included an exhaustive list of data currently uncollected. The overwhelming amount of data requested by the petitioner would require the use of extensive resources from multiple agencies to include the Commission on VASAP, local Alcohol Safety Action Program offices, the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles, and the courts. This will require the use of additional state tax dollars and extensive work by agencies that are already understaffed. Accordingly, the petition was denied.

Agency Contact: Richard L. Foy, Field Services Specialist, Commission on the Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program, 1111 East Main Street, Suite 801, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone (804) 786-5895, or email

VA.R. Doc. No. PFR21-32; Filed September 17, 2021, 1:13 p.m.