Subchapter 2. PROCEDURES FOR NOTIFICATION
AND DETERMINATION OF THE NEED FOR, AND
FOR THE PROCUREMENT AND APPOINTMENT
OF, INTERPRETERS
Sec.
201. Notices to be Provided Concerning Right to an Interpreter.
202. Persons to Notify Court Concerning Need for Interpreters.
203. Procurement of Certified or Otherwise Qualified Interpreters.
204. Determination of Need for Interpreter.
205. Appointment of Interpreters.
206. Replacement or Removal of Interpreter.§ 201. Notices to be Provided Concerning Right to an Interpreter.
(a) District Court Administrators, presiding judicial officers, judicial staff, and filing offices must ensure that a Notice of Language Rights is provided to named parties and witnesses for all judicial proceedings.
(b) Every hearing notice or subpoena for any judicial proceeding must include a Notice of Language Rights. This notice shall inform the recipient of the right to a court-appointed interpreter at no cost and the process for requesting one.
(c) Information concerning language rights and services available must be conspicuously displayed on posters, cards, and brochures throughout court facilities, posted on court websites, and provided to the public, justice partners, legal aid agencies, and community-based organizations.
Comment The Notice of Language Rights created pursuant to the Language Access Plan for the UJS provides contact information for the language access coordinator (LAC) for each judicial district and informs limited English proficient and deaf or hard of hearing individuals that they may contact the LAC to arrange for an interpreter.
Source The provisions of this § 201 amended November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7415. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (349436) to (349438).
§ 202. Persons to Notify Court Concerning Need for Interpreters.
(a) The following persons shall give notice to the court when a person has limited English proficiency or is deaf or hard of hearing and requires an interpreter for any judicial proceeding:
(1) For a principal party in interest in a judicial proceeding, either the principal party in interest or his or her attorney, without delay.
(2) For a witness in a judicial proceeding, the party that intends to call the person as a witness as soon as is practicable after learning of the need for an interpreter.
(3) For a crime victim whose presence is anticipated at a judicial proceeding, the affiant, law enforcement officer, or the attorney for the Commonwealth, as soon as is practicable after learning of the need.
(b) Any other person with knowledge that a principal party in interest, witness, or crime victim will require an interpreter may give notice of the need for an interpreter.
(c) Notice to the court pursuant to this section may be made to the presiding judicial officer, the language access coordinator (LAC), or, for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, the Americans with Disabilities (ADA) coordinator, for the judicial district in which the proceeding will be held, or the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee, and should contain the information required in subsection (d)(2).
(d) Form and content of notice.—
(1) Notice form.—The notice of need for an interpreter should be given on the form provided by the Court Administrator, if practicable. If notice by way of said form is not practicable, written or oral notice may be given, provided it contains the information set forth in paragraph (2).
(2) Content of notice.—The notice of need for an interpreter, whether on the form specified in paragraph (1) or otherwise, must contain, at a minimum, the following information:
(i) party and case identifying information; and
(ii) for a person with limited English proficiency, the language spoken (specifying any particular dialect or regional version) and the country of origin; or
(iii) for a person who is deaf or hard of hearing, the type of sign language or method of communication used, the country of origin (if a foreign sign language is used to communicate), and any other information that will help identify the person’s preferred means of communication.
Comment This section is intended to clarify those persons who are required to provide notice to the court of the need for an interpreter for an LEP or deaf or hard of hearing person. In addition, subsection (b) provides that any person may provide notice of the need for an interpreter when they have knowledge that someone appearing in a judicial proceeding is limited English proficient (LEP) or deaf or hard of hearing.
Subsection (a) requires that notice be given without delay or as soon as practicable after learning of the need. The fact that no specific time limit is given is in recognition of the fact that situations may arise in which significant advance notice is not feasible. Nevertheless, the party responsible for giving notice under these regulations or anyone aware of the need must notify the presiding judicial officer or Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee as soon as the need for an interpreter is known so as to avoid unnecessary delay.
Subsection (d)(1) makes clear that notice on the form provided by the Court Administrator is the preferred method of providing notice of need for an interpreter. If use of the Court Administrator’s form is not practicable, other written or oral notice is acceptable, provided it conveys the information set forth in subsection (d)(2). The request form can be found on the Interpreter Program page of the UJS website, http://www.pacourts.us.
Source The provisions of this § 202 amended November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7415. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (349438).
§ 203. Procurement of Certified or Otherwise Qualified Interpreters.
(a) Once the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee is made aware of the need for an interpreter, he or she shall procure a certified interpreter in the manner provided by the guidelines established by the Court Administrator for the appointment of certified interpreters.
(b) If the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee cannot procure a certified interpreter in the manner set forth in subsection (a), he or she shall procure an otherwise qualified interpreter in the manner provided by the guidelines established by the Court Administrator for the appointment of otherwise qualified interpreters.
(c) Courts shall utilize existing mechanisms available in statewide case management systems and shall develop mechanisms in conjunction with their filing offices to track the need for an interpreter throughout the life cycle of a case.
Comment The regulations do not require that only one person be designated by the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator to handle requests for interpreters. For example, in addition to the LAC, the designee for common pleas interpreter requests may be the District Court Administrator, while for cases in the magisterial district courts, the deputy or assistant court administrator may be designated. A complete list of LACs is available on the Language Access & Interpreter Program page of the UJS website, http://www.pacourts.us.
In the case of a deaf or hard of hearing juror, the District Court Administrator or his or her designee should follow the judicial district’s existing policies pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § § 12101 et seq., to ensure proper accommodation of a deaf or hard of hearing juror. Juror summonses and/or questionnaires should advise prospective jurors to give notice of need for an accommodation prior to the date they report for jury duty.
Subsection (a) requires the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee to follow the Court Administrator’s guidelines for appointing a certified interpreter and to make the necessary arrangements to secure the interpreter’s services for the judicial proceeding if one is found. If a certified interpreter cannot be found, subsection (b) requires the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee to obtain an otherwise qualified interpreter in the manner provided in the Court Administrator’s guidelines. In procuring either a certified or otherwise qualified interpreter, and when the person requiring the interpreter is a person with limited English proficiency, the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee may obtain the services of an interpreter to interpret remotely subject to the limitations of § 104. In the event that neither a certified nor an otherwise qualified interpreter can be procured, the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee shall contact the AOPC for guidance.
The requirement in subsection (c) comes from the Language Access Plan for the Unified Judicial System (UJS-LAP), available at http://www.pacourts.us. UJS-LAP at 31, ‘‘Documentation of Language Needs.’’
Source The provisions of this § 203 amended November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7415. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (349438) to (349440).
§ 204. Determination of Need for Interpreter.
(a) Proceedings to determine need for an interpreter.—Ordinarily, the presiding judicial officer must appoint an interpreter after notice of need for an interpreter is given or a request for an interpreter is made. If, after considering the notice of need, the presiding judicial officer requires additional information in order to make the determination that the person is limited English proficient or deaf or hard of hearing, or of the appropriate language or means of communication with the interpreter, he or she may request any additional filings from the parties or conduct any proceedings he or she deems necessary including, but not limited to, conducting the voir dire for determination of need for an interpreter for persons with limited English proficiency or who are deaf or hard of hearing established by the Court Administrator. If the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee requires additional information, he or she may request additional information and may request that the presiding judicial officer conduct proceedings to determine the need for an interpreter.
(b) If, during the course of the judicial proceeding, and without regard to whether notice of need for an interpreter was given, the presiding judicial officer determines that a principal party in interest is a person with limited English proficiency or that a principal party in interest, witness, direct victim, or juror is deaf or hard of hearing and is in need of an interpreter, he or she shall give notice to the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee as provided in § 202(d) (relating to persons to notify court concerning need for interpreters).
Comment Presiding judicial officers, the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator, or the designees of the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator taking action under this section must do so in compliance with the non-discrimination provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d, and the regulations promulgated thereunder, 28 C.F.R. § § 42.101 et seq., as well as the stated purpose of 42 Pa.C.S. Ch. 44 (relating to court interpreters). See 42 Pa.C.S. § 4401 (relating to legislative findings and declaration).
Presiding judicial officers, the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator, or the designees of the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator taking action under this section must also take care not to ask questions that would violate Rules 250 through 252 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Judicial Administration or the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), 42 U.S.C. § § 12101 et seq. Specifically, persons with disabilities need not submit documentation to establish proof of their disability. Furthermore, in compliance with the ADA’s provisions on effective communication, judicial district ADA coordinators and judges must give primary consideration to the means of communication requested by the deaf or hard of hearing court user when making arrangements to accommodate that individual. For example, judges may ask a deaf or hard of hearing litigant whether they use American Sign Language, need a Certified Deaf Interpreter, or prefer CART (Communication Access Realtime Translation) in order to participate effectively in the proceeding.
Persons who request language access services should be provided with them. Subsection (a) covers the exceptional circumstance when the person notified of need for an interpreter may require additional information. This subsection permits a presiding judicial officer to acquire additional information in order to make the determination of need by way of supplemental filings, hearings, and any other means typically within the presiding judicial officer’s power in handling the particular judicial proceeding. In the case of persons with limited English proficiency, the voir dire established by the Court Administrator should be used for assessing the level of English proficiency of the individual in question. The Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator may request additional information but is not empowered to conduct any proceedings to gather information.
Subsection (b) is intended to clarify that even if notice of the need for an interpreter is not given by one of the individuals required to give notice under § 202(a), the presiding judicial officer may sua sponte determine the need for an interpreter and thereby start the appointment process if he or she deems it appropriate to do so under these regulations.
Source The provisions of this § 204 added November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7415. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (349440) to (349441).
§ 205. Appointment of Interpreters.
(a) Appointment of a certified interpreter.—The presiding judicial officer shall appoint the certified interpreter procured pursuant to § 203(a) (relating to procurement of certified interpreters) unless a certified interpreter is unavailable.
(b) Appointment of an otherwise qualified interpreter.—
(1) An otherwise qualified interpreter shall be appointed by the presiding judicial officer if the presiding judicial officer determines that the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee made a good faith effort to procure a certified interpreter and a certified interpreter was not available and that the otherwise qualified interpreter was properly procured pursuant to § 203(b). Otherwise qualified interpreters should also be chosen, if available, from the roster. In making the foregoing determinations, the presiding judicial officer shall consider the efforts made by the Appellate Court Prothonotary/District Court Administrator or his or her designee and whether these efforts complied with the requirements of § 203.
(i) Persons with limited English proficiency.—
Prior to the appointment of the otherwise qualified interpreter for a person with limited English proficiency, the presiding judicial officer shall determine the interpreter’s qualifications by:
(A) verifying that the otherwise qualified interpreter is listed in the interpreter roster published by the Court Administrator. This can be accomplished in a number of ways, including but not limited to asking the interpreter to present their Interpreter Certification Program card issued by AOPC. Where the interpreter is on the roster, steps (B) and (C) below are not necessary.
(B) conducting the voir dire for qualifying interpreters for persons with limited English proficiency; and
(C) ascertaining that the otherwise qualified interpreter has read, understands, and agrees to abide by the Rules of Professional Conduct for Judiciary Interpreters. See Schedule F of these regulations.
(ii) Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing.—
Prior to the appointment of the otherwise qualified interpreter for a person who is deaf or hard of hearing, the presiding judicial officer shall determine the interpreter’s qualifications by:
(A) conducting the voir dire for qualifying interpreters for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing recommended by the Court Administrator;
(B) verifying that the otherwise qualified interpreter is certified by the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) or Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID), by asking to see the interpreter’s membership card;
(C) ascertaining that the otherwise qualified interpreter has read, understands, and agrees to abide by the NAD-RID code of professional conduct, and the Rules of Professional Conduct for Judiciary Interpreters established by the Court Administrator;
(D) verifying that the otherwise qualified interpreter is listed in the interpreter roster published by the Court Administrator by asking them to present their Interpreter Certification Program card issued by AOPC; and
(E) verifying that the otherwise qualified interpreter has complied with the requirements of the Sign Language Interpreter and Transliterator State Registration Act, 63 P.S. § § 1725.1 et seq., and is registered with the Office for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ODHH) within the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry.
(2) In ascertaining whether an individual is able to interpret and should be appointed as an otherwise qualified interpreter, the presiding judicial officer shall follow the guidelines established by the Court Administrator for the appointment of otherwise qualified interpreters for persons with limited English proficiency or for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing and these regulations.
(c) Additional interpreter(s).—After consideration of the type and length of the judicial proceeding and the number of persons requiring interpreters involved, the presiding judicial officer may appoint, as provided for in subsections (a) and (b), an additional interpreter or provide for additional interpretation in a manner deemed appropriate by the presiding judicial officer. The presiding judicial officer should appoint a team of interpreters in the following circumstances: where a bench trial, jury trial, or other judicial proceeding is expected to last longer than two hours; in capital cases; in cases involving complex subject matter and expert witnesses; or whenever three or more persons need the services of the interpreter and there is no simultaneous remote interpreting equipment available in the courtroom. In making this determination, the presiding judicial officer shall follow the guidelines established by the Court Administrator for the appointment of additional interpreters for persons with limited English proficiency or who are deaf or hard of hearing.
(d) Interpreter for immediate family.—The presiding judicial officer may appoint, as provided in subsections (a) and (b), an interpreter or provide for additional interpretation, as provided in subsection (c), for an immediate family member of a principal party in interest.
(e) Persons who are not to be appointed as interpreters.—Under no circumstances should the presiding judicial officer appoint a family member of the person with limited English proficiency or who is deaf or hard of hearing, a witness, party, or other persons who may have an interest in the outcome of a judicial proceeding or those who may be perceived to have an interest in the outcome (e.g., police officers, sheriff’s deputies, constables, lawyers in the case, advocates assisting the parties, etc.) to act as an interpreter for that person.
Comment Subsection (a) authorizes the presiding judicial officer to appoint a certified interpreter after the steps outlined in § § 202, 203, and 204 have been taken. If the judicial proceeding is conducted in a court of record, the formal appointment of either a certified interpreter or an otherwise qualified interpreter should always be done on the record at the first appearance of the interpreter at the proceeding.
Subsection (c) recommends the appointment of a team of interpreters if the judicial proceeding is a trial, is likely to be more than two hours in duration, or, in the case of a deaf or hard of hearing person, whenever the limitations and particularities of the person’s form of communication require it (such as when the deaf or hard of hearing person is a foreign national who does not communicate in any of the forms of sign language spoken in this country). In addition, judicial officers should be aware that accuracy of interpretation can decline substantially after 30 minutes of continuous interpretation and should provide the interpreter with regular breaks accordingly.
Source The provisions of this § 205 added November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7415.
§ 206. Replacement or Removal of Interpreter.
(a) The presiding judicial officer shall dismiss an interpreter and obtain the services of another interpreter in accordance with this chapter if the interpreter:
(1) fails to follow the standards prescribed by law, by the Rules of Professional Conduct for Judiciary Interpreters established by the Court Administrator, or the NAD-RID code of professional conduct or any other professional organization regulating the interpreter, by engaging in conduct such as, but not limited to:
(i) knowingly and willfully making false, misleading, or incomplete interpretation while serving in an official capacity;
(ii) knowingly and willfully disclosing confidential or privileged information obtained while serving in an official capacity;
(iii) failing to reveal potential conflicts of interest;
(iv) misrepresenting his or her credentials; or
(v) failing to appear as scheduled without good cause.
(2) is unable to effectively communicate with the presiding judicial officer or the person with limited English proficiency or who is deaf or hard of hearing, including where the interpreter self-reports such inability.
(b) In the event a presiding judicial officer removes an interpreter for the grounds specified in subsection (a)(1), he or she shall notify the Court Administrator.
Comment Subsection (b) requires that a presiding judicial officer inform the Court Administrator whenever an interpreter has to be removed for failing to follow standards prescribed by law or the Rules of Professional Conduct for Judiciary Interpreters established by the Court Administrator, the NAD-RID code of professional conduct, or any other professional organization regulating the interpreter. This mandatory reporting requirement allows the Court Administrator to enforce the applicable standards and Rules of Professional Conduct for Judiciary Interpreters. In addition to reporting violations resulting in removal of a court interpreter, the presiding judicial officer is encouraged to report any other suspected violations of legal standards, the Rules of Professional Conduct for Judiciary Interpreters, failure to follow Interpreter Certification Program guidelines, the Sign Language Interpreter and Transliterator State Registration Act, 63 P.S. § § 1725.1 et seq., and the standards of the Department of Labor and Industry’s Office of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (ODHH), even if the suspected violations are not sufficient to cause the presiding judicial officer to remove the interpreter.
Source The provisions of this § 206 renumbered from § 204 and amended November 22, 2021, effective January 1, 2022, 51 Pa.B. 7415. Immediately preceding text appears at serial pages (349440) to (349441)
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 Code 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.
