TITLE 31.NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION

Part 1. GENERAL LAND OFFICE

Chapter 13. LAND RESOURCES

Subchapter F. APPLICATION TO PURCHASE OR LEASE VACANT AND UNSURVEYED PUBLIC SCHOOL LAND

31 TAC §13.79, §13.81

The General Land Office adopts the repeal of §13.79 relating to the Appointment of Surveyor and §13.81 relating to the Disqualification of a Surveyor and simultaneously adopts new §13.79 relating to the Appointment of Surveyor and §13.81 relating to the Disqualification of a Surveyor. The proposed repeals and proposed new rules are adopted without changes to the proposed text published in the May 26, 2000, edition of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 4711).

Texas Natural Resources Code §51.178 relating to Appointment of Surveyor requires the General Land Office to promulgate rules setting out the qualifications and method of selection of surveyors. The rules must provide the greatest practicable opportunity for all qualified surveyors to obtain appointment. Also the rules must provide procedures for an interested party to move for the removal of an appointed surveyor on the grounds of bias, prejudice, or conflict of interest. The statute allows removal of an appointed surveyor only upon notice to the surveyor and all interested persons and after hearing. The repealed §13.79 and §13.81 did not fully explicate these statutory requirements and so the new §13.79 and §13.81 were necessary to comply with the specific direction in Texas Natural Resources Code §51.178.

The General Land Office adopts new §13.79 relating to Appointment of Surveyor. The purpose of the new §13.79 is to provide more detailed procedures for the appointments of surveyors. The new §13.79 lists the necessary qualifications of surveyors and requires notice to all qualified surveyors to ensure the greatest practicable opportunity for appointment. The General Land Office is adopting a new §13.79 because the previous §13.79 may have unnecessarily restricted appointments to those surveyors who have experience in the particular geographic area and who are located closest the alleged vacancy. These criteria may unduly limit the number of eligible surveyors for any particular appointment. The adopted new §13.79(a) follows the statutory requirements for eligibility: the surveyor must be a licensed state land surveyor or a county surveyor in the county where the claimed vacancy is located. The adopted new §13.79(b) details the new method for appointment. The statute mandates the greatest practicable opportunity for appointment and, to effectuate that command, the adopted new §13.79(b)(1) now requires the General Land Office to notify all currently licensed state land surveyors about the opportunities for appointment under the vacancy statute at least once a year. This subsection allows the Commissioner, in his discretion, to provide for wider dissemination of the notices of available appointment by utilizing the services of the Texas Board of Professional Land Surveying. Further, for each appointment, a specific notice and copy of the vacancy application shall be sent to all licensed state land surveyors and eligible county surveyors. Any potentially eligible surveyor may, at his option, withdraw his name from consideration for appointments, §13.79(b)(2). The factors listed at §13.79(b)(4) allow the Commissioner to consider a wider range of factors not tied to location of the surveyor and so provide greater opportunity for all eligible surveyors. The section lists possible bias, prejudice and conflict of interest as factor for consideration in an appointment. The General Land Office may be able to avoid future motions for removal of a surveyor by making this inquiry at an earlier stage of the vacancy proceeding.

Adopted new §13.81 relating to the Disqualification of a Surveyor provides details the procedures for seeking removal of an appointed surveyor because of bias, prejudice, or conflict of interest. The section also defines bias, prejudice and conflict of interest. The procedures provide time limits for seeking removal, §13.81(a); the form and contents of petitions for removal, §13.81(b)(1) and §13.81(b)(2) and §13.81(b)(3); and specific statements of fact to support an allegation of bias, prejudice or conflict of interest, §13.81(b)(4). The General Land Office is requiring affidavits of fact so that the seriousness of the removal petition may be properly evaluated at an early stage of the proceeding, §13.81(b)(4). Motions for removal of an appointed surveyor should not be filed routinely but only upon sufficient factual information. The stringency of §13.81(b) is necessary to avoid delay and unnecessary expense in the vacancy proceeding.

Sections 13.81(c) and §13.81(d) now contain additional procedural rules for notices and replies to petitions. The §13.81(d) reply requirements are designed to minimize the paperwork and to consolidate all challenges to a particular appointment in one proceeding. Thus §13.81(d)(2) now allows an interested person to urge additional grounds for removal instead of requiring a new petition and a separate proceeding. An interested person's failure to reply to a petition for removal does not have any adverse effect so unnecessary paperwork is eliminated, §13.81(d)(4). Section 13.81(d)(3) now allows the appointed surveyor to voluntarily renounce his appointment thereby eliminating the need for a hearing. In the event of such renunciation, the Commissioner begins the appointment process anew.

Adopted new §13.81(e), (f), (g) and (h) describe the legal nature of the hearing, limit the scope of the hearing to the facts alleged in affidavits, require a written decision, and limit re-opening of the issues raised in the petition for removal. These sections were designed to expedite the vacancy proceeding by disallowing collateral appeals, §13.81(h), and focus the hearing on only the statutory bases for removal of a surveyor, §13.81(f). Section 13.81(f) governs the scope of the hearing to remove an appointed surveyor. The scope is narrow because the questions raised should be narrow, i.e. is there sufficient evidence of bias, prejudice, or conflict of interest to warrant removal of an appointed surveyor? The hearing should not become a discovery device or a preview of issues related to the ultimate question, i.e. whether a vacancy exists. Similarly facts related to the surveyor's general competence or the quality of his work are not relevant to bias, prejudice or conflict of interest. Such issues can be raised as impeachment matters at the hearing on the merits of the vacancy application.

Section 13.81(h) clarifies that there is no appeal from the Commissioner's determination on the petition for removal. The statute does not provide for an appeal from a surveyor disqualification decision and a challenge to the decision can be raised in an appeal of the final vacancy determination. In Logan v. Armstrong , 694 S.W.2d 68, the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals, construing the previous vacancy statute, discussed the general rule of "final administrative order." The Court noted that unless an administrative order is final, there is no appeal; an order is final when it leaves nothing open for future disposition. At the time of a petition to remove an appointed surveyor, the vacancy proceeding is in its earliest stages. Under the current statutory scheme, the ultimate issue, inter alia , remains after the hearing on removal of a surveyor. Accordingly there is no appeal from the interlocutory order regarding the removal of a surveyor.

Adopted new §13.81(i), (j), and (k) define prejudice, bias and conflict of interest by listing the kinds of facts that may lead to removal of an appointed surveyor. The lists are not intended to encompass all possible situations so the rules allow the Commissioner to consider other relevant factors, e.g. §13.81(i)(3). The definition of "relative" used in §13.81(j)(3) is taken from the General Land Office Employee Handbook relating to nepotism. The conflict of interest section, §13.81(k) uses the term "significant" when referring to benefit and financial interest, e.g. §13.81(k)(1) and (2). The term "significant" was intentionally not defined so that the sound exercise of discretion, judgment and common sense are not inhibited. Adoption of a rigid percentage or dollar amount automatically constituting a conflict of interest may not be meaningful in the context of a specific vacancy and may permit an injustice considering the unique circumstances of a case. Similarly an objectively small percentage can be a significant amount of money in the context of a mineral interest. Therefore, the General Land Office will be flexible when evaluating whether the alleged interest or benefit is considered significant enough to constitute a conflict of interest.

Texas Natural Resources Code §51.178 is affected by these adopted new rules.

These rules are being adopted under Texas Natural Resources Code §51.178 which requires the Commissioner to promulgate rules setting out the qualifications and method of selection of surveyors and to provide for the greatest practicable opportunity for all qualified surveyors to obtain appointment and to provide the opportunity for an interested person to move for the removal of a surveyor. Agency counsel has reviewed these rules and has determined that the adoption of these rules is within the jurisdiction and the authority of the General Land Office.

No comments concerning the proposed repeal of these rules were received.

No comments concerning the adoption of the new rules were received.

The new rules are not subject to consistency review under the Texas Coastal Management Plan. Texas Natural Resources Code §33.2051 and §33.2051 list the state agency actions subject to consistency review and rules related to vacancy proceedings are not among those actions.

The repeals are adopted under the Natural Resources Code, §51.178 which provides the General Land Office with the authority to administer the selection and appointment of surveyors and the procedures for seeking removal of an appointed surveyor.

The repealed rules affect chapter 51 of the Texas Natural Resources Code.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 20, 2000.

TRD-200005006

Larry Soward

Chief Clerk

General Land Office

Effective date: August 9, 2000

Proposal publication date: May 26, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 305-9129


The new sections are adopted under the Natural Resources Code, §51.178 which provides the General Land Office with the authority to administer the selection and appointment of surveyors and the procedures for seeking removal of an appointed surveyor.

The adopted new rules affect chapter 51 of the Texas Natural Resources Code.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 20, 2000.

TRD-200005007

Larry Soward

Chief Clerk

General Land Office

Effective date: August 9, 2000

Proposal publication date: May 26, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 305-9129


Part 10.
TEXAS WATER DEVELOPMENT BOARD

Chapter 363. FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS

Subchapter F. STORAGE ACQUISITION AND STATE PARTICIPATION

31 TAC §363.613

The Texas Water Development Board (Board) adopts an amendment to 31 TAC §363.613 concerning administrative cost recovery fee for the state participation program without change to the proposed text as published in the June 2, 2000, issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 5281) and will not be republished.

The adopted amendment will raise the administrative cost recovery fee for the state participation program from 0.5% to 0.77% of the total participation in a project by the Board. The change is proposed in response to a review of the state participation fees by the State Auditor's Office in accordance with section 16.142 of the Water Code. The State Auditor's Office found that the existing fee of 0.5% appeared to be too low to recover all of the costs associated with administering the state participation program and needed to be reformulated to reflect all appropriate costs, including telephones, office space, travel and the potential extra costs associated with funding large projects. Accordingly, administrative costs were recalculated and an increased cost recovery fee of 0.77% is adopted.

No comments were received on the proposed amendment.

The amendment is adopted pursuant to Texas Water Code §6.101 which provides the Texas Water Development Board with the authority to adopt rules necessary to carry out the powers and duties in the Water Code and other laws of the State.

This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on July 19, 2000.

TRD-200004986

Suzanne Schwartz

General Counsel

Texas Water Development Board

Effective date: August 8, 2000

Proposal publication date: June 2, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 463-7981