In Commonwealth v. Dorian, 503 Pa. 116, 468 A.2d 1091 (1983), the Supreme Court considered the imposition of a new sentence to run concurrent with the time remaining on a prior sentence. Denying a motion to modify the inmate's sentence, the Supreme Court explained: "the Parole Act is quite clear that a parole violator convicted and sentenced to prison for another offense must serve his or her back time and the new sentence in consecutive order." Id. at 117, 468 A.2d at 1092 (quoting Commonwealth v. Zuber, 466 Pa. 453, 457, 353 A.2d 441, 443 (1976)).