The Department sought comments from the local health departments in Utah, as well as local and national restaurant associations, and food safety manager training providers located in Utah. The Department received no comments in opposition to a continuation of Rule R392-101. Two individuals from one local health department (Davis County Health Department) provided comments, asking the Department to consider a revision of select regulatory requirements as summarized: 1) Section R392-101-3 uses an outdated term ("potentially hazardous food"). To be consistent with Rule R392-100, this term should be replaced with the term "Time/Temperature Control for Safety Food". 2) This rule should require an examinee to demonstrate knowledge that bare hand contact is prohibited with ready-to-eat food. 3) This rule should require an examinee to demonstrate knowledge in the practice of using time as a public health control. 4) This rule should state the authority of a local health officer to deny, revoke, or suspend a food safety manager certificate for specific conditions stated in the rule. 5) Subsection R392-101-4(2) is too vague. This rule should clearly specify the process of instructor certification. 6) The regulatory provisions under Section R392-101-7 are confusing and unclear. The various local health departments are implementing the requirements in many different ways, which is causing confusion and complaints from food safety managers. 7) The rule exemptions listed in this rule are not as comprehensive as the exemptions listed in Section 26-15a-10, nor does this rule make reference to that statutory provision.