TITLE 16.ECONOMIC REGULATION

Part 3. TEXAS ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE COMMISSION

Chapter 50. ALCOHOL AWARENESS AND EDUCATION

16 TAC §50.1

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.1 without changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000, edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2510).

The adopted amendments substitutes the word "employees" for the word "sellers" to more accurately conform the statement of purposes for subsequent rules to amendments to those rules contemporaneously adopted. The amendment particularly conforms the language of this rule to that of new §50.2(a)(4). The amendments also add a more accurate statement of the purposes underlying the commission's rules relating to server training programs.

There were no comments received regarding these amendments.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.1.Purpose.

The purpose of this subchapter is:

(1)

to establish the minimum substantive and procedural requirements for approval of seller training programs as authorized by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14;

(2)

to establish eligibility, requirements, and procedures for conducting seller training programs;

(3)

to establish eligibility, requirements, and procedures for certification of trainers and employees by the commission;

(4)

to establish requirements and procedures calculated to modify behavior of trainees; and

(5)

to establish requirements calculated to deter future violations of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code by the licensees or permittees.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003278

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: May 30, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.2

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.2 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000, edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2510-2511). This rule relates to definitions of terms used in the commission's rules regulating seller-server training programs in Texas. Amendments to §50.2(a)(2) and (a)(2)(B) were adopted solely to conform references to other statutes in the rule to recent changes in those statutes. Amendment to §50.2(a)(5) was adopted to conform the language of that provision with the new language of §50.2(a)(4).

Paragraph 50.2(a)(4) was amended to define "employee" rather than "seller or server." The definition was expanded so that immediate supervisors, as well as the actual servers of alcoholic beverages, are included within the scope of the commission's rules relating to seller-server training programs. The effect of this definition is that in order to obtain the defense to administrative prosecution and civil dram shop liability as provided in §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code, retail dealers of alcoholic beverages must secure training for both supervisors and servers.

Information before the commission indicates that the establishments most successful at avoiding sales to minors and intoxicated patrons are those in which a strong and informed commitment to avoid unlawful sales exists in both management and staff. One way to provoke this commitment is through participation in seller-server training programs. The commissioners, therefore, concluded that requiring supervisors and servers to attend training courses is a reasonable way to minimizing the number of unlawful sales of alcoholic beverages in the state.

The Texas Package Stores Association suggested that the rule should be amended to allow retailers to designate to the commission which employees should be considered "immediate supervisors" thereby avoiding disputes over which employees are appropriate subjects of training. The commission disagreed with this suggestion for two reasons. First, in the great majority of cases, there is little dispute about which employee qualifies as an "immediate supervisor." Therefore, the designation procedure suggested is an unnecessary complication to administration of the body of regulations. Second, under that procedure, it would be possible for retailers to designate as "immediate supervisors" employees who actually have little interaction with the provision of alcoholic beverages. The commission concluded that the best approach is to allow retailers to determine which employees are subject to server training rules, that determination being subject to challenge in contested case procedures.

Prior to publication of these proposed amendments, the commission informally published proposed amendments to interested parties. These proposals extended to definition of "employees" to all employees of a retailer. A number of trade associations objected to this proposal, pointing out that such a rule would require persons with no connection to the provision of alcoholic beverages to attend server training schools. The commission found these objections to be well taken and amended its definition to extend only to sellers and serves of alcoholic beverages and their immediate supervisors.

Paragraph (c) of the rule was adopted in order to give the industry, regulated schools and commission staff a reasonable time to become familiar with, and make accommodation for, the amendments to this rule.

The Alcoholic Beverage Training, Will Train Will Travel and TABSS/Metroplex Companies commented in favor of the rule.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.2.Definitions and Construction.

(a)

The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

(1)

Customer--A person, patron or member of an establishment where the certified trainee is an agent or employee. The term is not limited to persons who have been sold or served alcoholic beverages by an agent or employee of the establishment.

(2)

Intoxication--As that term is defined in the Texas Penal Code, §49.01, to wit:

(A)

not having the normal use of mental or physical faculties by reason of the introduction of alcohol, a controlled substance, a drug, or a combination of two or more of those substances into the body; or

(B)

having an alcohol concentration of 0.08 or more. (Alcohol concentration means: the number of grams of alcohol per 100 milliliters of blood; the number of grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath; or the number of grams of alcohol per 67 milliliters of urine.)

(3)

Program--Seller training program, as that term is used in the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14.

(4)

Employee--One who sells, serves, dispenses or delivers alcoholic beverages under the authority of a license or permit, including persons who immediately manage, direct, supervise, or control the sale or service of alcoholic beverages. Employee does not include officers of a corporate permittee/licensee who do not manage, direct, supervise or control the sale or service of alcoholic beverages.

(5)

Student or trainee An employee attending or participating in a seller training program.

(b)

Each word and term used in this chapter shall have the meaning given to it by:

(1)

a definition in this chapter; or

(2)

a definition in the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code; or

(3)

a definition in the Texas Penal Code, Titles 1, 2, or 3; or

(4)

the common dictionary definition.

(c)

The amendments to this rule adopted on April 24, 2000, shall become effective on September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003279

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.3

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.3 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000, edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2511-2514). This rule relates to the required content of seller-server training programs and the procedures for obtaining the approval of the commission for such programs.

Several provisions of the rule were amended to change the phrase "seller-server" to "employee." This was done in order to harmonize the language of this rule with the definition provided in §50.2(a)(4). Other provisions of the rule were added to allow various determinations previously made by the administrator to be made by the administrator or his/her designee. This amendment allows for more efficient and timely handling, by the commission staff, of the determinations in question. Paragraph (i)(4) of the rule was amended to reflect a more accurate reference to relevant provisions in the Texas Transportation Code. No comments were received about these amendments.

Paragraph (e) of the rule was amended to alter the text of the rule as originally published in the Texas Register. This amendment was adopted to remove restrictions limiting the kind of trade association that can provide server training to its members. The commission concluded that the restrictions removed from the rule were not necessary to further the public interest. No comments were received about this amendment.

Paragraph (h) was amended to change the required study, observation and practice teaching time for program trainers from eight to 12 hours. Several commenters agreed with this amendment, although one suggested that further definition should be given of the type of study required of trainers. The commission concluded this suggestion was unnecessary in that schools regulated by this rule may best determine what type of study best prepares its trainers to carry out the provisions of this chapter.

Paragraph (i) of the rule was altered to add various items to the content of server training courses, such as an explanation of the effects of alcohol poisoning, the social costs of alcohol abuse, the administrative sanctions that may be applied to retailers and their employees, methods of monitoring and intervening in cases of drink tampering. The requirement that schools offer instruction about alcoholism was omitted from the rule.

The commission determined that the study of alcoholism as a disease was not necessary to the primary goal of server training which is to teach members of the alcoholic beverage industry how to avoid unlawful sales and service to minors and intoxicated persons. Similarly, the items added to the required course content directly address problems faced by those engaged in selling or serving alcoholic beverages to consumers. Instruction about the social costs of alcohol abuse and the administrative sanctions that may be levied against retailers and their employees is calculated to promote ongoing commitment by trainees to avoid unlawful sales in their establishments.

Several commenters suggested that instruction about drink tampering was not productive. The commission disagreed. Drink tampering may happen between patrons of an establishment. Evidence of such activity may well become apparent to the employees of that establishment so that steps may be taken to avoid the dangerous consequences of this conduct.

One commenter suggested that the required course content be increased to include instruction regarding the law of driving while intoxicated and driving under the influence of alcohol by a minor. The commission disagreed with this suggestion because, beyond instruction about the statutory definition of intoxication, such topics are beyond the scope of server training courses. Comment was further made that instruction should be provided in several types of practices, designed to minimize unlawful sales, that may be employed by retailers. The commission found this unnecessary in as such instruction is frequently provided by server training schools. Further, individual retailers are in the best position to determine which internal policies best suit their business. Finally, a retailer's failure to adopt responsible policies may result in denial of the defense to administrative and civil liability under the terms of §50.10(d). The commission concluded that this provides incentive to retailers to develop responsible policies.

Paragraph (j) of the rule was amended to raise the fee for original applications for program approval to $1,000.00, with subsequent renewal fees being $500.00, from $250.00. Several commenters objected to this increase as too high, although several supported it as a method of excluding poorly equipped and prepared training providers. The commission concluded that the increase was necessary to recoup increased staff and overhead costs related to administering the server training program.

Finally, the commission added paragraph (o) to the rule. This amendment was not reflected in the proposed amendments as originally published in the Texas Register . This amendment was adopted to allow time for the members of the server training industry to learn of, and adapt to, changes in this rule.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.3.Application for Program Approval.

(a)

Application for program approval shall be made by the person, corporation or other entity who will administer and supervise the actual teaching of the program to Texas employees. The commission specifically finds that the training entity or school is an inseparable part of the seller training program. The integrity and ability of the people directly engaged in the administration, supervision and training of the curriculum to seller trainees are an integral part of the program contemplated by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14. Therefore, a curriculum, alone, is not eligible for approval.

(b)

Application for approval shall be made on forms provided by the commission.

(c)

No licensee or permittee, or his spouse, agent, servant, or employee, or any subsidiary or affiliate, may directly or indirectly conduct, sponsor, or support a seller training program approved under this chapter except as provided in the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14(c) and (d).

(d)

A licensee or permittee may be a member of an advisory board, but not the governing board of a nonprofit agency which sponsors a seller training program.

(e)

A bona fide state retail trade association qualified under this section may train personnel of its own regular membership and non-members of the retail alcoholic beverage industry. For the purposes of this subsection, package stores which hold local distributor's permits, and private clubs, shall be considered to be retailers. State retail trade associations may also train individual members of the general public. To qualify under this subsection a retail trade association must:

(1)

be an organization whose retail members employ at least 150 persons at anyone time during the calendar year who sell, serve, or prepare alcoholic beverages;

(2)

not be composed of more than 50% of the retail members of a particular retail chain;

(3)

not be composed of more than 50% of the trainable employees from a particular retail chain.

(f)

Persons engaged in the manufacturing or wholesaling of alcoholic beverages for national distribution may contribute to the development of a curriculum of seller training being developed for national use; provided, that any such contribution or involvement shall not be directly or indirectly tied to the actual offering of training to employees of any retailer, group of retailers, or the general public. Such involvement by an alcoholic beverage manufacturer shall be in a primarily noncommercial manner consistent with the spirit and intent of the provisions of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code and the rules of the commission prohibiting the tied-house and prohibiting the furnishing of things of value to a retailer of alcoholic beverages.

(g)

No licensee, permittee, or other person engaged in the manufacturing or wholesaling level of the alcoholic beverage industry, or any agent, servant, or employee of any of those, may directly or indirectly conduct or sponsor a seller training program for retail level employees or members of the general public.

(h)

Each application shall be accompanied by a full and complete copy of the curriculum, including a copy of all materials to be used therewith, including workbooks, videos, handouts, and examinations as required by the commission. The curriculum and other materials shall be indexed and labeled in detail to indicate the location of all of the requirements for program approval specified in this chapter. The amount of time allocated to cover each segment of the curriculum shall be specified with a minimum of 200 minutes of instruction required excluding breaks and the exam. Programs utilizing a different format from lecturing will be evaluated case by case. Each application shall also be accompanied by a trainer development program which includes a minimum of 12 hours of study time, 12 hours of observation and 12 hours of practice teaching in front of an audience. The initial trainer for a school-program may substitute the 12 hours of observation for an additional 12 hours of practice teaching (with or without a live audience).

(i)

The program shall include:

(1)

§50.2(a)(2) of this title (relating to the Definition of Intoxication);

(2)

the law pertaining to intoxicated persons. Each approved seller training program shall review and explain all provisions of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code pertaining to intoxicated persons and provisions of the Texas Penal Code pertaining to public intoxication and shall include a discussion of any significant court decisions or opinions of the attorney general of Texas which the administrator or administrator's designee may from time to time determine to be appropriate;

(3)

the law pertaining to minors. Each approved seller training program shall review and explain all provisions of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code relating to the sale or service of alcoholic beverages to minors, the provisions of the code relating to purchase, possession or consumption of alcoholic beverages by minors and the provisions of the code relating to a person making alcoholic beverages available to a minor or permitting a minor to possess or consume alcoholic beverages and shall include a discussion of any significant court decisions or opinions of the attorney general of Texas which the administrator or administrator's designee may from time to time determine to be appropriate;

(4)

the law pertaining to proper identification. Each approved seller training program shall review and explain the Texas laws pertaining to false, counterfeit, or deceptively similar identification documents including, specifically, the Texas Transportation Code, §§521.121, 521.123, 521.451, 521.453, 521.454, 521.456 and 521.461, and shall include a discussion of any significant court decisions or opinions of the attorney general of Texas which the administrator or administrator's designee may from time to time determine to be appropriate;

(5)

detection of intoxication.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall explain how to detect possible intoxication. It shall describe the common indicators including, but not limited to, slurred speech, mental confusion, impaired balance, impaired motor ability, bloodshot eyes, the smell of alcoholic beverages on the breath, dishevelment, nausea and signs of lost control of bladder or bowels. The program shall note that an intoxicated person may sometimes display none of the common indicators. It shall describe ways to detect an atypical intoxicated person through methods such as drink counting, conversations calculated to reveal emotional stability or common indicators which might not otherwise be manifest.

(B)

Students shall be made aware that serious illness can masquerade as intoxication. All students shall be instructed to recognize bracelet and necklace emblems of the Medic Alert Foundation and the significance of such identification;

(6)

monitoring customer behavior.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall describe techniques for monitoring customer behavior for the purpose of implementing timely intervention pursuant to paragraphs (10) and (11) of this subsection (relating to Intervention Pertaining to Minors; and Intervention Pertaining to Intoxication). It shall describe methods to obtain appropriate information in a commercially acceptable manner, including:

(i)

observing customer response during any conversations with the seller;

(ii)

observing customer interaction with third parties;

(iii)

observing the customer's initial mood and general conduct; and

(iv)

observing any change in any of the customer behavior previously mentioned.

(B)

Each program shall describe and explain typical warning signs that customer behavior may be degenerating toward illegal behavior. Such warning signs shall include:

(i)

the development of any indicator of intoxication other than the smell of alcoholic beverages on the breath;

(ii)

any continuing argument or physical confrontation with any person;

(iii)

any rapid or pronounced change in mood or emotional state such as excessive euphoria, sadness, confusion, excitability or aggressiveness.

(7)

physiology.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall include a basic explanation of how the human body reacts to the ingestion of beverage alcohol. It shall use simple language and concepts. It shall explain the effect of variables including body weight and type, gender, muscle/fat ratios, type and timing of food consumption, fatigue, and common diseases or disorders. It shall explain how alcohol can interact with many types of medicines and other drugs.

(B)

Each program shall include a basic discussion of the types and amounts of social costs caused by alcohol abuse.

(C)

Each program shall describe the Know Your Limits Chart developed by the Distilled Spirits Council of the United States, Inc., or a similar chart, and provide a copy of the chart.

(D)

Each program shall include information concerning alcohol poisoning as a danger.

(8)

detection of minors.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall explain techniques for determining if a customer is a minor. It shall explain the common signs of underage status including lack of physical maturity. It shall stress that most minors are mature in physical appearance before the age of 21, and that signs of physical maturity are not a reliable guide.

(B)

Each program shall describe and explain conduct and mannerisms which might raise a suspicion of status as a minor. It shall include:

(i)

a discussion of current fads and fashions in clothing, accessories, and grooming among minors;

(ii)

a description, based upon authoritative sources, of behavior patterns characteristic of minors;

(iii)

an explanation of how to look for suspicious behavior such as:

(I)

a group of young-appearing persons pooling their money and giving it to the oldest- appearing member;

(II)

a youthful appearing person waiting in the background away from the point of purchase or service while an adult obtains more than one serving; and

(III)

prior observation that a particular adult has purchased for a youthful appearing person.

(9)

identification.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall describe valid driver's licenses and identification certificates issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety.

(B)

Each approved seller training program shall explain how to detect invalid identification documents presented in an attempt to establish proof of adult status. This shall include counterfeit and altered official documents. It shall also include unofficial documents which are deceptively similar to official documents. Emphasis shall be placed on driver's licenses and identification cards issued by the state of Texas and other states. Each program shall describe the most common types of counterfeiting and alteration and shall describe warning signs such as erasures, cut-and-paste numerals, substandard or inconsistent graphics and substandard lamination.

(10)

intervention pertaining to minors.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall describe and explain techniques of intervention to prevent or terminate illegal sale, service, possession, or consumption regarding a minor.

(B)

Such techniques shall include, when appropriate to the circumstances:

(i)

ask for and carefully examine an identification card;

(ii)

removal of the alcoholic beverages in a non-aggressive manner from the reach or sight of the offender;

(iii)

an explanation that the demeanor of the employee should never be such that is likely to provoke violence;

(iv)

an explanation of the obligation to notify law enforcement authorities in the event that intervention attempts fail;

(v)

specific examples of words and conduct which may be used in an attempt to avoid or terminate illegal activity amicably.

(11)

intervention pertaining to intoxication.

(A)

Each approved seller training program shall explain effective techniques of intervention with persons who are intoxicated or who appear to be becoming intoxicated. This part of the program is of considerable importance to the public peace and safety and shall therefore receive due emphasis. The program may take into account the fact that permittees, licensees, and their employees will generally desire to avoid alienating a customer whenever possible. Therefore, the program shall describe specific language and conduct of the employee which is calculated to terminate or avoid illegal behavior of the customer as amicably as possible.

(B)

Such techniques shall include, when appropriate to the circumstances:

(i)

an explanation that the demeanor of the employee should never be such that is likely to provoke violence;

(ii)

removal of the alcoholic beverages in a non-aggressive manner from the reach or sight of the offender;

(iii)

specific examples of words and conduct which may be used in an attempt to avoid or terminate illegal activity amicably;

(iv)

an explanation of how to slow down service of alcoholic beverages;

(v)

a suggestion that food, snacks or alternative beverages be served and an explanation of the types of food most likely to slow or reduce intoxication.

(C)

The student shall be made aware that coffee and other caffeine-containing products do not reduce intoxication, but may misleadingly appear to do so.

(D)

The student shall be made aware of designated driver programs and shall be encouraged to provide such special services and courtesies to a designated driver as may be allowed by the student's employer.

(E)

The student shall be made aware of the obligation to notify law enforcement authorities in the event that intervention attempts fail.

(12)

sanctions for employee violations. Each approved seller training program shall explain the requirements of §50.9 of this chapter.

(13)

additional program content.

(A)

The administrator or administrator's designee is hereby delegated the authority to modify or add requirements for the content of approved seller training programs in addition to the requirements specified in this chapter.

(B)

Any approved seller training program may contain any additional material except material which the administrator or administrator's designee finds under the circumstances tends to be:

(i)

a substantial detraction from the effectiveness of the minimum program requirements; or

(ii)

a substantial detriment to the health, safety, or welfare of the general public or any segment thereof.

(C)

Approved programs are encouraged to exceed the minimum requirements of program content and to develop new methods and techniques designed to fulfill the intent of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14.

(D)

Approved programs may describe and explain how to monitor and intervene in cases of drink tampering:

(i)

describe the types and effects of drugs used in drink tampering;

(ii)

describe monitoring methods; and

(iii)

describe intervention methods.

(14)

appropriate testing of trainees in a form and manner adequate to demonstrate the effectiveness of the training program shall be required.

(j)

Each application for an original program approval shall be accompanied by a payment in the amount of $1,000. Each subsequent renewal of a program is $500.

(k)

Programs found to be acceptable under this chapter shall be approved in writing by the administrator or administrator's designee in such form as he may deem to be appropriate.

(l)

Approval shall be valid for a period of three years unless earlier revoked.

(m)

A person commits an offense under the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §101.61, if he falsely represents to any person that a program has been approved by the commission or administrator or administrator's designee, or misleads any person into believing that a program is approved by the commission or administrator or administrator's designee when, in fact, it is not.

(n)

The developer of a curriculum, or his authorized agent, may for marketing purposes in the normal course of business represent that the basic curriculum is part of a Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission approved program, provided such representation is, in fact, truthful.

(o)

The amendments to paragraphs (a), (e), (h), (i), (j), (k), (m) and (n) of this rule, adopted on April 24, 2000, shall become effective on September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003280

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.4

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.4 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000, edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2514-2515). This rule regulates the activities of schools authorized to provide training to members of the alcoholic beverage industry under §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and the rules of the commission.

Paragraph (a) of the rule was amended to allow schools to provide the agency with electronic, as well as written notification of scheduled class sessions. This amendment was made in order to allow for notification that is easier, faster and more economical for schools subject to the regulation.

Paragraph (b) of the rule was amended to add the requirement that class participants could not consume alcoholic beverages during the class sessions. Information before the commission indicated that, on occasion, participants in some previous class sessions had consumed alcoholic beverages. The commission concluded that this conduct is potentially disruptive and not conducive to focused learning during the class.

Although one commenter was in favor of this provision of the rule, another opposed it, pointing out that the rule would make school personnel enforcers rather than trainers. The commission disagreed with this comment on the belief that effective trainers can and should establish and maintain control of a classroom so as to ensure an environment free from distractions.

Prior to amendments, certificates of class completion were issued to trainees by the commission based on reports from schools. This system proved to create unnecessary delay between class attendance and certification. This delay was particularly inconvenient in light of the fact that many trainees require proof of certification in order to keep and maintain employment. To resolve this problem, paragraph (r) was adopted to allow the class trainer to issue certificates directly to students on successful completion of the training program.

In order to provide for direct issuance of certificates, paragraph (f) was added, requiring trainers to verify the identity of each class participant and paragraph (s) was added to establish procedures for the issuance of certificate forms to the schools; acceptable methods of payment for those forms and requirements for return of unused certificates.

Several commenters pointed out that this proposed system of certificate issuance presented risk of the fraudulent sale of certificates as has, in fact, happened in other government regulated training programs. The commission recognized that such risk would, in fact, exist. However, the possibility of fraudulently manufactured certificates exists, regardless of what system of certificate issuance is adopted. Further, the activity of the schools and the integrity of their records is subject to close monitoring and regulation by the commission. Thus, an appropriate enforcement mechanism exists to detect and sanction individuals or schools issuing false certificates. Finally, the benefits of efficiency and convenience provided by the system adopted outweigh the risk of fraud presented.

Finally, the commission adopted paragraph (t) in order to allow members of the industry, regulated schools and the commission staff to become familiar with, and prepared to accommodate, the changes adopted to this rule.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.4.Program Administration.

(a)

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission shall receive written notification, including electronic notification, from each school to schedule sessions. At least three-fourths of the session notices shall be received at least three business days prior to the session date for classes held each month. One-fourth of the session notices may be received less than three business days but no later than the next business day after the session is held. Schools which average four or less sessions per month may not exceed the one-fourth of the session notices being late over any fiscal year quarter, September through August. Said notice shall include the date, time, and location of each class and shall be received in the headquarters of the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, P.O. Box 13127, Austin, Texas 78711 or local field office on forms prescribed by the commission. The commission must be notified by phone or fax of session cancellations prior to the actual session date except when cancellation cannot be anticipated before the session's scheduled start. When cancellation cannot be anticipated, the commission must be notified by the tenth day of the month for each session cancelled during the previous month.

(b)

All training facilities shall meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and contain:

(1)

adequate seating facilities for all students;

(2)

appropriate space to ensure that visuals can be seen from all seating positions;

(3)

private space to limit distractions;

(4)

access to a restroom; and

(5)

alcoholic beverages cannot be consumed by anyone attending the class instruction sessions or breaks.

(c)

Sessions may be monitored unannounced to evaluate the program content, trainer presentation and the classroom environment.

(d)

Programs approved for licensees/permittees or hotel management companies shall be limited to employees of the said licensee, permittee, or hotel management company.

(e)

No class may exceed 50 trainees. Trainees who arrive more than 15 minutes after the start of the program session shall be denied admission to the session.

(f)

The identity of each trainee must be verified by the trainer.

(g)

The classroom presentation must be consistent with the approved program.

(h)

Discussion must be pertinent to responsible alcoholic beverage sale and service.

(i)

Each program session will be presented in a continuous block of instruction. While instruction may be interrupted for brief breaks, these should be limited in number and duration. The program must be presented in its entirety to each student in a language approved for use by the instructor.

(j)

Each trainee is to be tested immediately following the conclusion of instruction at the program session he or she attends. Testing of session participants at any other place or time is prohibited unless previously approved as a part of the program.

(k)

Each trainee must correctly answer at least 70% of the questions found on the test administered to him. Schools are encouraged to set higher completion standards. Trainees who receive failing scores may be immediately retested once. Otherwise, trainees must repeat the course in full.

(l)

All tests shall be administered on a closed book basis.

(m)

At the trainer's discretion the test may be offered in a language best understood by the trainee. Bilingual instructors may, in response to direct inquiries, clarify test questions using another language.

(n)

Each test must be maintained by the school for a period of at least four years and be made available to the commission upon request.

(o)

Reports of Seller Training shall be made by the training entity or school to the commission. Reports must be delivered or postmarked within 30 calendar days of the date on which the session was held upon forms prescribed and approved by the administrator or administrator's designee.

(p)

Each Report of Seller Training shall contain the certificate number, test score, name, social security number and date of birth of each student in that class who has successfully completed the training program and has passed the required test.

(q)

The certified trainer who actually conducted the program shall personally sign the Report of Seller Training verifying that each designated student has successfully completed the program approved by the commission on the date indicated and shall verify such other facts as the administrator or administrator's designee may from time to time direct.

(r)

The certified trainer who actually conducted or administered the program shall personally sign the certificate and verify that all information entered on the certificate is correct. The certificate shall be issued to the appropriate trainee only after successful completion of the seller training program. Failure to comply with this requirement is grounds for revoking or suspending approval of the trainer's certificate and seller training program administered by that school.

(s)

The certificates shall not be issued to a school by the commission until the commission has received advance remittance of $2.00 per certificate. Certificates shall be issued by the commission upon written request of a school on forms provided by the commission together with the proper remittance. The commission shall issue certificates to any approved school only in quantities of at least 50 certificates at one time. If larger quantities are requested, the same shall be issued only in multiples of 50; provided, however, that the administrator's designee is hereby empowered to authorize different multiples if necessary to conform with changes in the method of production of certificates.

(1)

Any payment under this subsection which is dishonored must immediately be replaced by a cashier's check, certified check or United States postal money order.

(2)

Any training entity or school which has two dishonored payments within a 12 month period must make subsequent payments of this fee by a cashier's check, certified check or United States postal money order until 12 months have elapsed since the last payment was dishonored.

(3)

No refunds will be made on voided certificates. Certificates can only be used by the school to which they were issued by the commission.

(4)

All seller training schools which have gone out of business shall surrender all unused certificates for a refund. This request shall be on a form prescribed and provided by the commission.

(5)

The copies of all certificates issued shall be kept for a period of four years.

(t)

The amendments to paragraphs (a), (b), (f), (o), (p), (q), (r) and (s) of this rule, adopted on April 24, 2000, shall become effective on September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003281

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.5

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.5 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2515-2517). The rule governs conditions under which sanctions may be imposed on schools providing training to members of the alcoholic beverage industry under §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and rules of the commission.

Paragraphs (a) and (b) of the rule were amended to allow the administrator or his/her designee to deny a school's application for program approval, or to cancel or suspend a prior approval if an agent of the program has, within the preceding three years, served a sentence resulting from a conviction or deferred disposition of, an offense involving the abuse of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances.

The commission concluded that the purpose of server training programs is to encourage temperance and responsibility in the consumption of alcoholic beverages and to provide trainees the knowledge, skills and motivation to do so. An individual who has demonstrably engaged in the behaviors this training is designed to prevent is apt to be a poor exemplar of the goals of the server training program generally and, consequently, a poor trainer. The commission received no comments about this aspect of the rule.

Paragraph (b) was amended to allow for revocation or suspension of program approval on violation by the program of any order entered by the administrator or his/her designee entered under this rule. This amendment allows the commission reasonable means of enforcing its orders of denial, suspension or revocation. The commission received no comments about this aspect of the rule.

Paragraph (e) was amended to allow schools 21 days, rather than the previous 10 days, to request a hearing on the commission's proposal to deny approval of, or cancel or suspend a program. The commission concluded that the new provision provided schools a more reasonable time to consider charges presented by the commission and the best response to be made to those charges. The commission received no comment about this amendment.

Paragraph (e) of the rule was amended to allow the administrator or his/her designee to sanction a violating school by imposition of a civil penalty in lieu of a suspension of the school's activities. The commission recognized that a number of schools regulated by this rule conduct training sessions on an irregular schedule. Thus, imposition of a period of suspension as a sanction does not necessarily operate as a deterrent to future behavior. Further, suspension of a school's program results, in specific instances, in denial of needed training for members of the alcoholic beverage industry. Thus, a suspension may sanction third parties not involved in the violation to which the sanction is addressed.

The adopted amendment requires the commission to consider stated factors in determining the amount of a civil penalty. These factors involve the size and, therefore, economic capacity of the program to be sanctioned, as well as the nature of the violation and the history of the program. These considerations inform the commission's assessment of an appropriate sanction for a particular violation and help impose sanctions that operate as a true deterrent to future violations.

The commission received several comments in support of this aspect of the rule.

Finally, the commission adopted paragraph (g) in order to provide the industry, regulated schools and commission staff a reasonable time to become familiar with, and prepare to accommodate, the amendments adopted.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.5.Denial, Revocation or Suspension of Program Approval.

(a)

The administrator or administrator's designee may deny approval of any program upon a finding that:

(1)

the program does not meet the minimum course requirements set out in this chapter; or

(2)

the Application for School-Program Certification is not correct or complete; or

(3)

any agent of the program has been convicted of or granted deferred disposition for, a felony, or a misdemeanor related to theft, fraud or the abuse of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances, and three years have not passed since the discharge of any sentence imposed as a result of the conviction or deferred disposition; or

(4)

any agent of a privately sponsored program or his/her spouse is an alcoholic beverage licensee or permittee; or

(5)

any agent of the program violates this chapter or the Alcoholic Beverage Code, 106.14.

(b)

The administrator or administrator's designee may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, revoke or suspend approval of any program upon a finding that:

(1)

the manner in which the program is being, or has been, administered has substantially impaired the effectiveness of the program; or

(2)

any agent of the program has made a false or misleading statement, report, or representation to the commission regarding the conduct or administration of the program; or

(3)

any agent of the program has been convicted of or granted deferred disposition for, a felony, or a misdemeanor related to theft, fraud or the abuse of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances and three years have not passed since the discharge of any sentence imposed as a result of the conviction or deferred disposition; or

(4)

the program has failed to make a timely report or has failed to communicate any information to the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission required by this chapter; or

(5)

any agent of a privately sponsored program or his/her spouse is an alcoholic beverage licensee or permittee; or

(6)

the program or any agent of the program has failed to timely pay any fees due under this chapter or the Alcoholic Beverage Code; or

(7)

the program or any agent of the program has made payment for any fees due under this chapter or the Alcoholic Beverage Code by personal or business check that was dishonored when presented for payment; or

(8)

any agent of the program violates this chapter or the Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14; or

(9)

violation of any order entered by the administrator or administrator's designee under this rule.

(c)

The entity administering the program has the right to request a hearing within 21 days after receipt of the notice of denial, revocation or suspension.

(d)

A person whose school-program certification is revoked under this section may not apply for another certificate under this chapter until one year has elapsed from the date of revocation.

(e)

The administrator or administrator's designee may assess a civil penalty in lieu of suspension of the program. The amount of the civil penalty shall be made with consideration of the following factors:

(1)

the number of trainee certifications issued by the program during the 12 months immediately preceding the violation for which the penalty is to be assessed;

(2)

the nature and severity of the violation for which the penalty is to be assessed;

(3)

any aggravating or ameliorating circumstances relating to the violation for which the penalty is to be assessed;

(4)

the record or past violations by the program or its agents.

(f)

Notice of denial, revocation or suspension shall be served at the main offices of the applicant or its registered agent for service either by certified mail or by personal service upon any adult agent or employee of the applicant at the said main offices.

(g)

The amendments to this rule adopted on April 24, 2000, take effect on September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003282

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.6

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.6 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2517). The rule governs the standards applicable to trainers working in server training programs operating under the authority of §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and rules of the commission.

Paragraph (d) of the rule was amended to require original applicants for trainer certification, applying after September 1, 2000, to pass a test administered by the commission as a condition of approval. Several commenters suggested that this amendment would work a fiscal hardship on trainers who might have to travel to the test site and on schools in that the requirement would make it more difficult for schools to hire trainers.

The commission disagreed with these comments on the belief that the success of an individual school and of the server training program in Texas, generally, rests in large part on the quality of instructors. In order to be effective, instructors should, at a minimum, possess a basic core of knowledge commonly shared by other members of the industry. Successful completion of a standardized examination is a reasonable and accepted way to insure this minimum competence. Further tests may be administered at the commission's offices throughout the state to minimize inconvenience to applicants.

Paragraph (h) of the rule was amended to require trainers to successfully complete 12 hours of continuing education in related courses or seminars every three year period. Paragraph (c) was amended to make this requirement a condition of certification renewal. This amendment was adopted because of the commission's belief that, like other professions, trainers subject to this rule must maintain current knowledge of changing information and techniques related to their field in order to be effective.

Several commenters objected to the expense caused by continuing education and suggested that the rule should further specify acceptable topics of such education. The commission concluded that the cost of continuing education was minimal in light of the benefit to be gained by a knowledgeable body of trainers. Further, the commission determined that the determination of what topics of continuing education best helps trainers in their work is a judgment best left to the schools and trainers, themselves, subject to the commission's general oversight exercised through informal advice, the application renewal process and contested administrative case litigation.

Paragraph (f) of the rule was amended to raise the application fee from $5.00 to $50.00. Several commenters objected to this as too much of an increase with a consequent fiscal hardship on trainers and schools. The commission determined that the increase was necessary in light of increased costs of processing applications, due primarily to test administration and notification of continuing education completion.

The commission adopted paragraph (i) in order to allow the industry, regulated trainers and commission staff a reasonable time to become familiar with, and prepared to accommodate the amendments to this rule. This amendment did not appear in the proposed rule as originally published.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.6.Application for Trainer Certification.

(a)

Only trainers holding currently valid certification under this section shall be eligible to teach an approved seller training program. This requirement is not intended to prohibit the use of an uncertified guest instructor who has special expertise in the field which he/she teaches. The certified trainer shall be present during guest instruction and shall remain responsible for training quality.

(b)

Application for trainer certification shall be made by the person to be certified on forms provided by the commission.

(c)

Each application shall include certification by an approved seller training program entity or school that the applicant is qualified and competent to teach that seller training program. The renewal applications shall include documentation of the required continuing education hours.

(d)

An original trainer applicant must have first successfully completed an examination administered by the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission, with a minimum correct score of 80%. Trainers who have been approved prior to September 1, 2000 shall be exempt from this initial testing requirement.

(e)

No licensee or permittee, or his spouse, agent, servant or employee may conduct a seller training program approved under this chapter except as provided in the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14(c) and (d).

(f)

Each application shall be accompanied by a payment in the amount of $50.

(g)

Trainers found to be acceptable under this chapter shall be approved in writing by the administrator or administrator's designee in such form as he may deem to be appropriate.

(h)

Approval shall be valid for a period of three years unless earlier revoked provided that the trainer has successfully completed a minimum of 12 clock hours of continuing education in related subject courses and/or seminars within the previous three years prior to renewal.

(i)

The amendments to paragraphs (d), (f), (g) and (h) of this rule, adopted on April 24, 2000, shall become effective on September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003283

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.7

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.7 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2517-2518). The rule relates to the denial, suspension or revocation of approval for individual trainers working in server training programs authorized under §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and the rules of the commission.

Paragraph (a) of the rule was amended to allow denial, revocation or suspension of the certification if a trainer has, within the previous three years, served a sentence resulting from a conviction or deferred adjudication arising from the abuse of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances. The commission adopted this amendment because the purpose of server training programs are to encourage temperate behavior and compliance with the law. In order to be effective as a trainer in such a program, individuals ought to be exemplars of such behavior. Therefore, persons with a demonstrated disregard for such laws are apt to be less effective as trainers.

One commenter suggested that the laws referenced in this amendment ought to be specified in the rule. The commission concluded this was unnecessary in that laws relating to alcohol and substance abuse are clearly identifiable by the terms of the laws themselves.

Paragraph (a) was also amended to allow denial, suspension or revocation of a trainer's certification if the trainer violates §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code, rules of the commission relating to server training or fails to take reasonable steps to prevent such violations in classrooms under his/her control. This amendment was passed in order to insure that trainers comply with the laws and rules of the commission and that trainers maintain classroom environments conducive to focused learning.

Paragraph (e) of the rule was amended to allow the administrator or his/her designee to sanction violating trainers by imposition of a civil fine in lieu of a suspension. The rule requires the amount of the civil penalty to be assessed by consideration of factors stated in the rule. Many trainers conduct classes according to an irregular schedule. Thus, imposition of a suspension as sanction does not necessarily have a deterrent effect on future conduct. Imposition of a civil fine, determined by reference to the factors stated in the rule, allows the form and extent of a sanction to be tailored to the circumstances of a particular case so that the punishment can be better calculated to have a deterrent effect on future conduct.

The commission adopted paragraph (f) in order to allow the industry, regulated trainers and the commission staff a reasonable time to become familiar with, and prepare to accommodate the amendments to this rule. This amendment did not appear in the proposed amendments as ordinally published in the Texas Register.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.41, is affected by this rule.

§50.7.Denial, Revocation or Suspension of Trainer Approval.

(a)

The administrator or administrator's designee may deny approval of, revoke, or suspend any trainer upon a finding that:

(1)

the applicant for a privately sponsored program or his/her spouse is an agent of an alcoholic beverage licensee or permittee; or

(2)

the Application for Trainer Certification is not correct or complete; or

(3)

the applicant has been convicted of or granted deferred disposition for, a felony, or a misdemeanor related to theft, fraud or the abuse of alcoholic beverages or controlled substances, and three years have not passed since the discharge of any sentence imposed as a result of the conviction or deferred disposition; or

(4)

the trainer has violated a provision of this chapter, §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code, or has failed to take reasonable steps to prevent such violations in classes or programs under his/her direction or control.

(b)

The administrator or administrator's designee may, after notice and opportunity for hearing, revoke approval of any trainer upon a finding that:

(1)

the seller training program entity no longer authorizes the trainer to teach their seller training program; or

(2)

the trainer no longer qualifies as a trainer under subsection (a) of this section.

(c)

The trainer has the right to request a hearing within 21 days after receipt of the notice of denial, revocation or suspension.

(d)

Notice of the denial, revocation or suspension of a trainer certificate or a copy of the revocation shall also be provided to the main offices of the seller training program or the registered agent.

(e)

The administrator or administrator's designee may assess a civil penalty in lieu of suspension of the trainer. The amount of the civil penalty shall be made with consideration of the following factors:

(1)

the number of trainee certifications issued by the program or the trainer during the 12 months immediately preceding the violation of which the penalty is to be assessed;

(2)

the nature and severity of the violation for which the penalty is to be assessed;

(3)

any aggravating or ameliorating circumstances relating to the violation for which the penalty is to be assessed;

(4)

the record of past violations by the trainer.

(f)

The amendments to this rule, adopted April 24, 2000, shall be effective September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003284

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.8

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts amendments to §50.8 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register, (25 TexReg 2518-2519). The rule relates to issuance of certificates to students successfully completing server training programs operating under the authority of §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and rules of the commission.

Under the prior rule, certificates for successful completion of training were issued by the commission on reports from the school. This system resulted in unnecessary delays between the time a student attended class and the time that student received proof of successful completion of the class. This delay was particularly inconvenient in light of the fact that many students require proof of class attendance for employment. Paragraph (a) of the rule was amended to allow schools to issue certifications directly to students on successful completion of the program, thereby, eliminating this delay.

Paragraph (c) was amended to raise the cost of replacement certificates from $2.00 to $5.00 in reflection of increased costs of processing requests for such certificates by commission staff.

Paragraph (d) was amended to omit unnecessary language and the statement that "social security numbers shall not be a public record." The amenability of social security numbers to public disclosure is determined by reference to the Texas Open Records Act and not by rule of the commission.

Paragraph (e) of the rule was added after initial publication in order for the industry, regulated schools and commission staff to become familiar with, and prepared to accommodate, the amendments to this rule.

These amendments are adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.8.Trainee Certification.

(a)

Upon successful completion of an approved seller training program, the trainer shall issue an official certificate to each trainee. All required information shall be completed on the certificate prior to issuance to the trainee for their possession.

(b)

Each certificate shall be valid for two years.

(c)

The commission shall require an additional $5.00 for each duplicate certificate issued by the commission. Schools shall not issue replacement certificates.

(d)

The commission shall maintain a list of currently certified seller trainees by name, social security number, and date of birth.

(e)

The amendments to paragraphs (a), (c) and (d) of this rule, adopted on April 24, 2000 shall become effective September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003285

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.9

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission repeals §50.9 as initially proposed in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 2519). The rule governed the conditions under which licensees and permittees could be exempt from certain types of administrative action.

This rule was repealed to allow for adoption of a new §50.9 adopted contemporaneously with this repeal. The repeal of this rule shall become effective on September 1, 2000.

No comments were received on the proposed repeal of §50.9.

This repeal is adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this action.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003286

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts a new §50.9 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 2519-2520). The rule governs the suspension or revocation of the certification of completion of server training issued to certain members of the alcoholic beverage industry.

Members of the retail tier of the alcoholic beverage industry may choose to require that their employees successfully complete a course of training by a school certified by the commission. Retailers who adopt this requirement are entitled to a defense from administrative and civil liability for unlawful sales made by their employees to minors or intoxicated persons, subject to the provisions of §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and §50.10 of the commission's rules.

The commission recognized that a number of unlawful sales of alcoholic beverages made in this state are made by servers who have attended server training. In general, the commission attributes this to two factors: the failure of the server to absorb the lessons of seller training and the failure of the server to assume the responsibilities that are part of providing alcoholic beverages to members of the public. The second factor is due, in part, to the fact that, under the prior rule, certified servers who violated the law could continue working in the alcoholic beverage industry without administrative consequence for either the server or the server's licensee/permittee employer.

The commission concluded that a reasonable way to address this problem is to require certified servers who violate the law to reattend server training, thereby increasing the likelihood that the lessons of that training will be absorbed by the server. The rule is drafted so that on the first unlawful sale, the server must be recertified within 30 days. If the server violates the law twice within 12 months, the server may not be recertified for 90 days and, on a third offense, within 12 months, the server may not be recertified for one year. The commission concluded that this escalating program of suspension will serve to motivate both the employee and the employing retailer to act carefully so as to avoid unlawful sales in that suspension of an employee's certification will jeopardize the employee's ability to work in the alcoholic beverage industry or the retailer's ability to claim the exemption from liability for unlawful sales.

The commission therefore concluded that adoption of this rule would serve to minimize the number of unlawful sales of alcoholic beverages to minors and intoxicated persons. The rule, therefore, furthers the interest of the public welfare, temperance and safety, and so lies within the regulatory authority of the commission pursuant to §1.02 and §5.31 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

The Alcoholic Beverage Certification Training Company, Texas A&M Center for Alcohol and Drug Education Studies, TABSS/Metroplex, the Dram Shop School and Alliance for Education Services commented in favor of adoption of the rule.

An earlier version of this rule, informally published to interested parties prior to publication in the Texas Register was crafted so as to require the supervisor of a violating employee to be recertified and, after a stated number of violations, to permanently bar recertification. The Texas Package Stores Association, Fiesta Mart, Inc. and the Texas Petroleum Marketer's and Convenience Stores Association objected to these provisions on various grounds. The commission concluded that these objections were well founded and the rule was modified accordingly.

The Texas Entertainment Association objected that revocation of or suspension of server's training certificates is beyond the legislative intent underlying §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and, therefore, beyond the authority of the commission to adopt as a rule. The commission disagreed with this contention. The legislature has expressed its intention that the commission "regulate every phase of the business of...selling...alcoholic beverages" and that the commission adopt such rules as are necessary to that responsibility. Further, these duties are to be undertaken with a view toward "protection of the welfare, health, peace, temperance and safety of the people of the state. Alcoholic Beverage Code, §§5.31, 1.03. For the reasons described above, the commission concluded that this rule furthers those ends.

Finally, the commission adopted paragraph (c) of this rule to allow a reasonable time for the industry, regulated servers and commission staff to become familiar with, and make accommodation for, the provisions of this rule. This paragraph did not appear in the text of the proposed rule as originally published.

This rule is adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.9.Revocation or Suspension of Trainee Certification.

(a)

The commission may revoke a trainee certification of an employee if it is found that:

(1)

the employee has committed a first offense of selling or serving an alcoholic beverage to a minor or intoxicated person and the employee has not been recertified. The employee must be recertified within 30 days. Recertification includes attending and passing an approved seller training program.

(2)

the employee has committed a second offense, within 12 months, of selling or serving an alcoholic beverage to a minor and/or intoxicated person. The employee cannot be recertified for a period of 90 days. Recertification includes attending and passing an approved seller training program.

(3)

the employee has committed a third offense, within 12 months, of selling or serving an alcoholic beverage to a minor and/or intoxicated person. The commission may revoke the seller-server certification for a period of one year.

(4)

the employee provided false identification consisting of, but not limited to, name, social security number, or birth date.

(5)

the employee did not successfully complete a seller training program.

(b)

The employee has the right to request a hearing within 21 days after the receipt of the notice of revocation or suspension.

(c)

This rule shall become effective September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003287

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.10

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts a new §50.10 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 2520). The rule governs the conditions under which licensees and permittees may claim exemption from civil and administrative liability for unlawful sales made to minors and intoxicated persons.

This rule is an amended and renumbered version of the commission's old §50.9, repealed contemporaneously with this adoption.

In order to claim exemption from liability for unlawful sales, licensees and permittees must satisfy the three criteria stated in §106.14(a) of the Alcoholic Beverage Code. Paragraph (a) of the rule requires retailers claiming the exemption to provide proof of entitlement by affidavit. The commission has found, through past practice, that this provides a quick and inexpensive method of determining the issue in most instances.

One statutory requirement for the exemption from liability is that the retailer require its employees to attend server training schools. The commission has determined that a reasonable consequence of requiring employees to attend such training is that the employees receive the training within 30 days of employment, absent good cause in individual cases. Paragraph (h) of the rule is adopted to further this requirement.

The third requirement for entitlement to the exemption from liability is that the retailer not "directly or indirectly" encourage violations of the law. Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14(a)(3). The commission has learned from its experience in contested cases, that such encouragement, where it exists, must usually be proved through circumstantial evidence. Repeated violations by employees of a retailer is some evidence from which a reasonable person could conclude that the retailer is in some way encouraging such violations. Paragraph (c) of the rule is adopted to allow such conclusion to be made, subject to rebutting evidence by the retailer.

The commission has concluded, based on its contested case and enforcement experience, that a retailer may indirectly encourage violations of law by its employees by failing to adopt and pursue certain responsible and prudent business practices. For example, failure to insure that employees maintain current server training certification so as to remain knowledgeable about new techniques and information in the field of responsible hospitality is a way to encourage violations of law by allowing service of alcoholic beverages by persons who are less capable than they might be. Similarly, failure to adopt policies and procedures designed to prevent unlawful sales and to communicate those polices in an understandable way to employees is calculated to encourage violations of law by producing a workforce without the commitment or tools to avoid unlawful sales. Paragraph (d) of the rule is adopted to allow these factors to be considered, in conjunction with rebutting evidence from the retailers, in the determination of whether the retailer is entitled to the exemption from liability.

The commission concluded that adoption of this rule would serve to encourage retailers to adopt responsible business practices and take other steps to prevent unlawful sales within their establishment, thereby, furthering the public interest in the general welfare, temperance and safety. This is a primary objective for which the commission is authorized to adopt rules under §1.03 and §5.31 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

The Texas Restaurant Association commented in favor of adoption of §50.10(d). The A&M Center for Alcohol and Drug Education Studies noted that the rule should require servers to attend training before beginning employment serving alcoholic beverages. The commission disagrees with this suggestion because such a rule would operate to impose often unpredictable delays between hiring and beginning work. This would create an economic hardship for most retailers. This hardship is unnecessary in that new employees are frequently subject to close supervision and instruction. This is more likely to be so in light of the fact that, should an employee make an unlawful sale prior to attending training, the retailer is not entitled to exemption from liability for that act.

The Texas Entertainment Association objected that the criteria of §50.10(d) would impair a retailer's ability to defend a civil suit brought under Chapter 2 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and was beyond the agency's authority of regulation. The commission disagreed with the comment believing for the reasons stated above, that adoption of this rule serves the public safety, temperance and welfare for which the commission is entitled to regulate.

In the version of the rule as originally published, paragraph (d)(3) of the rule allowed an inference that the retailer had encouraged violations of law by failing to maintain a signed acknowledgment, by each employee, that their employee had read and understood the retailer's policies regarding sales to minors and intoxicated persons. The Texas Package Stores Association, the Texas Restaurant Association and the Texas Petroleum Marketer's and Convenience Stores Association objected on the grounds that this provision might subject retailers to loss of the exemption from liability because of mere clerical error or oversight. The commission found this objection to be well taken and modified the rule accordingly.

The commission adopted paragraph (e) of the rule in order to allow regulated members of the industry and the commission staff a reasonable time to become familiar with, and make accommodation for, the provisions of the rule.

This rule is adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.10.Licensee/Permittee Exemption from Administrative Action.

(a)

The commission shall require each licensee/permittee who claims exemption from administrative action under the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, to produce evidence by affidavit indicating that the licensee/permittee met the three criteria outlined in §106.14(a).

(b)

The licensee/permittee shall not be deemed to require its employees to attend a commission approved seller-server training program unless employees are required to attend such program within 30 days of their initial employment and each employee's certification has not expired, been suspended or revoked. The administrator or administrator's designee may relax the requirements of this paragraph in individual cases for good cause shown by the licensee/permittee claiming exemption.

(c)

Proof by the commission that an employee or agent of a licensee/permittee sold, delivered or served alcoholic beverages to a minor or intoxicated person, or allowed consumption of same by a minor or intoxicated person, more than twice within a 12-month period, shall constitute prima facie evidence that the licensee/permittee has directly or indirectly encouraged violation of the relevant laws.

(d)

The following practices constitute prima facie evidence of indirect encouragement of law within the meaning of §106.14(a)(3) of the Alcoholic Beverage Code:

(1)

subject to the provisions of paragraph (b) above, the licensee/permittee fails to insure that all employees possess currently valid certificates of training issued and maintained in conformity with this chapter;

(2)

the licensee/permittee fails to adopt, and post within view of its employees, policies and procedures designed to prevent the sale, service or consumption of alcoholic beverages by or to minors and intoxicated persons, and that express a strong commitment by the licensee/permittee to prohibit such sales, service or consumption;

(3)

the licensee/permittee fails to insure that employees have read and understood the licensee/permittee's policies and procedures regarding sales, service or consumption of alcoholic beverages by or to minors or intoxicated persons.

(e)

This rule shall go into effect September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003288

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


16 TAC §50.11

The Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission adopts a new §50.11 with changes to the text as originally published in the March 24, 2000 edition of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 2520-2521). The rule states the conditions under which a retail member of the alcoholic beverage industry may be compelled to participate in a server training program operating under the authority of §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and rules of the commission.

Retail members of the alcoholic beverage industry may normally choose whether or not to participate in the server training authorized by §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code. However, information developed from the commission's enforcement activities indicates that those retailers whose employers receive server training are somewhat less likely to make unlawful sales of alcoholic beverages than those retailers whose employees do not receive such training. The commission, therefore, concluded that those retailers that do not receive such training, and that demonstrate a pattern of irresponsible operation, as described in paragraph (b) of the rule, present an ongoing threat to the public safety, temperance and welfare.

The commission is authorized to regulate in the public interest in such situations by virtue of §1.03 and §5.31 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code. The commission concluded that a reasonable response to the type of violating retailer described above is to allow the administrator or his/her designee the discretion to require such retailers to participate in a server training program until such time as the retailer achieves a sustained period of lawful operation.

The commission adopted paragraph (e) of the rule in order to provide the industry and commission staff a reasonable time to become familiar with, and make accommodation for, the terms of this rule.

The A&M Center for Alcohol and Drug Education, the Dram Shop School, the Alliance for Educational Services, Lone Star Certification and the Petroleum Marketer's and Convenience Stores Association commented in favor of adoption of this rule.

This rule is adopted under Alcoholic Beverage Code, §5.31 and §106.14, which provides the commission with the authority to prescribe and publish rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

Cross Reference: Alcoholic Beverage Code, §106.14, is affected by this rule.

§50.11.Mandatory Participation in Server Training.

(a)

This rule is adopted pursuant to the commission's authority to enact such rules as are necessary for the public health, peace, safety, temperance, and morals as this authority is expressed in §1.03 and §5.31 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

(b)

The administrator or administrator's designee may require by written order that specific licensees/permittees participate in a server training program as created and enacted by §106.14 of the Alcoholic Beverage Code and the provisions of this chapter. Such requirement may be imposed on licensees/permittees that:

(1)

have violated a provision of the code or rules relating to the sale, service, dispensing or delivery of alcoholic beverages to a minor or intoxicated person more than once in a twelve month period; or

(2)

has been found, by administrative order or court of competent jurisdiction, to have engaged in conduct directly or indirectly encouraging violations of law within the meaning of §106.14(a)(3) of the Alcoholic Beverage Code.

(c)

An order issued under this rule shall remain in effect until such time as the licensee/permittee has established 24 continuous months of operation from the date of the last violation without violation of a provision of the code or rules relating to the sale, service, dispensing or delivery of alcoholic beverages to a minor or intoxicated person.

(d)

A licensee/permittee shall, on request, be granted a hearing prior to the issuance of an order authorized by this rule.

(e)

This rule shall go into effect September 1, 2000.

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 May 10, 2000.

TRD-200003289

Doyne Bailey

Administrator

Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 24, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 206-3204


Part 8. TEXAS RACING COMMISSION

Chapter 303. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Subchapter D. TEXAS-BRED INCENTIVE PROGRAMS

2. PROGRAMS FOR HORSES

16 TAC §303.92

The Texas Racing Commission adopts an amendment to §303.92 concerning the rules for the Texas Bred Incentive Program for thoroughbred horses. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposed text published in the March 10, 2000 issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 1931) and the text will not be republished. The amendment was presented to the Commission as a petition for rulemaking under 16 Texas Administrative Code §307.33 by the Texas Thoroughbred Association.

According to the petition, the amendment is necessary to provide for the orderly and constitutional administration of the awards program. The amendment to subsection (c) requires the participants in the awards program to notify the Texas Thoroughbred Association in writing of any changes in payee identity or addresses. The amendment adding subsection (d) provides for disciplinary proceedings relating to misconduct by participants in the accreditation program. The proposed proceedings provide for notice and an opportunity to be heard, consistent with the constitutional requirements for due process.

No comments were received regarding the adoption of this amendment.

The amendment is adopted under the Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e, §3.02, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for conducting racing with wagering and for administering the Texas Racing Act; §6.08, which authorizes the Commission to adopt rules relating to the accounting, audit and distribution of all amounts set aside for the Texas Bred Incentive Programs; and §9.01, which authorizes the Commission to approve and adopt rules developed by the breed registries.

The amendment implements Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e.

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 May 8, 2000.

TRD-200003240

Paula C. Flowerday

Executive Secretary

Texas Racing Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 10, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 490-4032


Chapter 309. RACETRACK LICENSES AND OPERATIONS

Subchapter C. HORSE RACETRACKS

1. RACETRACKS

16 TAC §309.202

The Texas Racing Commission adopts an amendment to §309.202 concerning the specifications for a horse racetrack. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposed text published in the March 10, 2000 issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 1932) and the text will not be republished. The amendment was presented to the Commission as a petition for rulemaking under 16 Texas Administrative Code §307.33 by the Texas Horsemen's Partnership, LLP, the organization recognized by the Commission to represent horse owners and trainers.

According to the petition, the amendment is necessary to provide increased racing opportunities for owners and trainers of all breeds. The amendments to subsections (a), (b), (c), and (d) make changes to the track length requirements and provide for a back chute for all racetracks in order to ensure access to all breeds of horses and accommodate races of the length and distance commonly run by breeds other than quarter horses.

Oral comments supporting the amendment were received from a representative of the Jockey Guild, who stated the amendment would require a larger racetrack that would be safer for jockeys. Oral and written comments supporting the amendment were received from the Texas Thoroughbred Association, who stated the amendment would provide more racing opportunities for thoroughbreds at popular distances. Oral and written comments supporting the amendment were received from Retama Park, who stated the amendment would help all horsemen find races of desired distances and help the racetracks provide those races. Written comment supporting the amendment was received from Austin Jockey Club, Ltd., which stated providing races of the most desired distances will help promote quality racing in Texas.

Written comments opposing the amendment were received from Manor Downs, an existing Class 2 horse racetrack regarding the adoption of this amendment. The commenter opposed the amendment because the track would be required to acquire additional real property to be able to comply with the larger track requirements. The commenter requested that the amendment have no retroactive application to existing racing facilities. The Commission disagrees with the comments in that the Texas Racing Act, V.T.C.S. Article 179e, §6.06(e), permits the Commission to condition the continued holding of a racetrack license on compliance with Commission rules as amended. Commission Rule 16 Texas Administrative Code §309.1(c) conditions the continued holding of a racetrack license on compliance with Commission rules as amended. The amendment will provide not only safer racetracks, but also racetracks that will afford racing opportunities to more horses and more horse owners, thereby permitting more citizens to obtain the benefits of Texas pari-mutuel racing. To accommodate the circumstances of existing racing facilities which do not comply with the rule as amended, the Commission has established an effective date of the amendment of June 1, 2001.

The amendment is adopted under the Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e, §3.02, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for conducting racing with wagering and for administering the Texas Racing Act; §6.06, which authorizes the Commission to adopt rules on all matters relating to the operation of racetracks.

The amendment implements Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e.

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 May 8, 2000.

TRD-200003241

Paula C. Flowerday

Executive Secretary

Texas Racing Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 10, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 490-4032


Subchapter D. GREYHOUND RACETRACKS

1. FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT

16 TAC §309.309

The Texas Racing Commission adopts an amendment to §309.309 concerning lockout kennels. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposed text published in the March 10, 2000 issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 1933) and the text will not be republished.

The amendment is necessary to ensure the greyhounds racing at Texas racetracks will be in a safe environment. The amendment to subsection (b) changes the specifications for the crates in the lockout kennel to improve the safety and prevent injury to the greyhounds.

No comments were received regarding the proposal.

The amendment is adopted under the Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e, §3.02, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for conducting racing with wagering and for administering the Texas Racing Act; §6.06, which authorizes the Commission to adopt rules on all matters relating to the operation of racetracks.

The amendment implements Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e.

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 May 8, 2000.

TRD-200003242

Paula C. Flowerday

Executive Secretary

Texas Racing Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 10, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 490-4032


2. OPERATIONS

16 TAC §309.361

The Texas Racing Commission adopts the repeal of §309.361, concerning kennel accounts. The repeal is adopted without changes to the proposal published in the February 11, 2000, issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 1018).

The rule established a process for paying purses at greyhound racetracks. The rule was originally adopted at a time when all greyhound racetracks in Texas conducted live races year round. Currently, one greyhound racetrack conducts live races for only a portion of the year, but generates purse money from simulcasting year round. To establish a procedure to address this new circumstance, §309.361 is repealed and replaced by a new §309.361, the adoption of which is also published in this section of the Texas Register .

No comments were received regarding the proposal.

The repeal is adopted under the Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e, §3.02, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for conducting racing with wagering and for administering the Texas Racing Act; §6.06, which authorizes the Commission to adopt rules on all matters relating to the operation of racetracks.

The repeal implements Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e.

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 May 8, 2000.

TRD-200003243

Paula C. Flowerday

Executive Secretary

Texas Racing Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: February 11, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 490-4032


The Texas Racing Commission adopts new §309.361, concerning greyhound purse and kennel accounts. The new rule is adopted without changes to the proposal published in the February 11, 2000, issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 1018) and will not be republished.

The new rule is adopted to ensure a clear system exists for accounting for all purse funds generated at greyhound racetracks. The new rule establishes a process for accounting and safeguarding money earned by an association from simulcast wagering during a period when the greyhound racetrack is not holding a live race meet. It also establishes a process to ensure the proper and timely payment of purses at greyhound racetracks during its live meet. The new rule also allows for input from the designated greyhound association.

No comments were received regarding the proposal.

The new rule is adopted under the Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e, §3.02, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for conducting racing with wagering and for administering the Texas Racing Act; §6.06, which authorizes the Commission to adopt rules on all matters relating to the operation of racetracks.

The new rule implements Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e.

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 May 8, 2000.

TRD-200003244

Paula C. Flowerday

Executive Secretary

Texas Racing Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: February 11, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 490-4032


Chapter 313.
OFFICIALS AND RULES OF HORSE RACING

Subchapter D. RUNNING OF THE RACE

1. JOCKEYS

16 TAC §313.409

The Texas Racing Commission adopts an amendment to §313.409, concerning jockey mount fees. The amendment is adopted without changes to the proposal published in the March 10, 2000, issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 1934) and will not be republished.

The amendment is adopted to ensure jockeys are paid fairly for their services. The amendment was presented to the Commission as a petition for rulemaking under 16 Tex. Admin. Code §307.33 by the Jockey Guild. The amendment to subsection (c) increases one minimum payment for a third-place finishing jockey and the minimum payment for losing jockeys in all races with purses of $2,000 or more.

Oral comments were received by the Texas Horsemen's Partnership, LLP in support of the proposal. The commenter stated the rule was consistent with similar rules in other racing jurisdictions.

The amendment is adopted under the Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e, §3.02, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules for conducting racing with wagering and for administering the Texas Racing Act; §6.06, which authorizes the Commission to adopt rules on all matters relating to the operation of racetracks.

The amendment implements Texas Civil Statutes, Article 179e.

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 May 8, 2000.

TRD-200003245

Paula C. Flowerday

Executive Secretary

Texas Racing Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 10, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 490-4032


Part 9. TEXAS LOTTERY COMMISSION

Chapter 401. ADMINISTRATION OF THE STATE LOTTERY ACT

Subchapter D. LOTTERY GAME RULES

16 TAC §401.305

The Texas Lottery Commission adopts amendments to 16 TAC §401.305, concerning "Lotto Texas" on-line game rule, without changes to the proposed text as published in the March 31, 2000 issue of the Texas Register (25 TexReg 2740).

The amendments change the way Lotto Texas is played by adding four additional balls, changing the direct prize category percentages for each of the prize categories, increasing the guaranteed fourth prize amount from $3.00 to $5.00, increasing the prize pool from 50% to 55%, and increasing the odds of winning. See Figure: 16 TAC §401.305(e)(1). The amendments also clarify that a retailer may enter the number selections via the terminal keyboard if a player is unable to complete a playslip and that the prize reserve fund may be used only for the Lotto Texas game. Other amendments are "clean up" changes to eliminate obsolete language or typographical errors.

Lotto Texas sales have continued to decline. The amendments that change the way Lotto Texas is played by adding additional balls, changing the direct prize categories, increasing the guaranteed fourth prize amount from $3.00 to $5.00, increasing the prize pool from 50% to 55%, and increasing the odds of winning are intended not only to stop the decline in sales but also to increase sales. Lotto Texas sales are jackpot driven. This means that the higher the jackpot, the higher the sales are. Currently, player research indicates Lotto players want higher jackpots. Since Lotto Texas jackpots have not reached these higher levels in recent years, players are buying fewer tickets and, as a result, sales have declined. Also, Lotto Texas is experiencing "jackpot indifference syndrome". When a jackpot plateau is hit, sales traditionally are a little bit lower the next time at the same jackpot level. For example, years ago, a jackpot of $4 million, $7 million, or $10 million was a significant jackpot. Today, a jackpot has to reach $40 million or $50 million in some states, and, in other states, $100 million to experience an exponential lift in sales.

Additionally, Texas border states, New Mexico and Louisiana, participate in a multi-state game that is designed to have mega-jackpots. As a result, Texans cross the borders to play the multi-state games, especially when the jackpots are high. The amendment to increase the number of balls from 50 to 54 is intended to increase the jackpot amounts which will be comparable to these jackpot amounts in the multi-state games with the expectation that players will play Lotto Texas rather than travel to play the multi-state games.

The amendments also increase the guaranteed fourth prize amount from $3.00 to $5.00. Currently, the greatest numbers of Lotto Texas winners are the ones that match 3 of 6 balls. Player research indicates that players want more than $3.00 at the lower prize level. Increasing the guaranteed amount from $3.00 to $5.00 is in response to player requests.

Additionally, the amendments increase the prize pool from 50% to 55%. Increasing the prize pool is a benefit for the players because an additional 5% of sales will be available to pay prizes to players. Further, the combined effects of increasing the prize pool and increasing the number of balls will increase sales, and, as a result, additional revenue will be transferred to the state.

The amendments also change the direct prize category percentages for each of the prize categories. Increasing the direct prize categories for each of the prize categories will have the following effect. Based on an annual projection of 52 weeks, 104 draws, overall sales projected for Lotto Texas are $736 million. Today, the trend is approximately $570 million. The overall sales increase is approximately $166 million. On a tier-by-tier basis, on Match 6 (6 of 6), 29 winners are expected annually. The average expected jackpot prize, on a 25 year payout basis, is $19 million. Currently, the expected jackpot prize is $11 million but $9 million is the actual average jackpot amount. Currently, on a Match 5 (5 of 6), the payout is approximately $1,500. By increasing the direct prize category percentages, the payout on a Match 5 will be approximately $2,500. On a Match 4 (4 of 6), the increase is from $100 to $105. Finally, the Match 3 (3 of 6) amount increases from $3.00 to $5.00.

The changes to the Lotto Texas matrix also benefit the retailers. The Texas Lottery anticipates an additional $8 million in sales commissions to the retailers based upon the projected sales. The Texas Lottery also anticipates an added benefit to the retailers will be an increase in store traffic on Wednesdays and Saturdays as a result of higher jackpots. In the past, when Lotto Texas jackpots were high, retailers experienced an increase in store traffic on draw days.

At the time the amendments were proposed, the Texas Lottery was aware of recent experience by Florida in connection with changing Florida's Lotto matrix. The information from Florida was helpful to the Texas Lottery because it provided the Texas Lottery with recent information on the impact of a Lotto matrix change which involved adding additional balls. In October 1999, Florida changed its matrix from a 6 of 49 to 6 of 53. From an odds perspective, the change in Florida is similar to the change in Texas. As of March 2000, Florida experienced a 26% increase in sales and a 29% increase in the jackpot amount. Additional information indicates that Florida projected reaching $100 million in incremental sales over a period of a year. However, Florida reached $98 million in four months. The Texas Lottery is aware that at the time Florida changed its matrix it also increased its number of draws per week from one to two. While the increase in sales, to some extent, is because of the increase in draws per week, it appears that the primary reason for the increase in Florida Lotto sales is the matrix change.

During the comment period, the Commission received written comments as well as oral comments. Oral comments were received at the April 13, 2000 Commission meeting and the April 19, 2000 public rulemaking comment hearing. The Commission received comments against the adoption of the amendments as well as comments for the adoption of the amendments.

Groups or associations that are against the adoption of the amendments are: IBS Lotto Group, Texand Corporation, APC Holdings, IAH Airport Lotto Players, Bolls Distributing Co., Houston Woods & Waters Lotto Pool, Lotto Report, Arbor House, Century Business Equipment, Investors & Individuals, Hajoca Corporation, Courtesy Mart, The Garland Economic Development Partnership, #22557 7-11, #3 Mini Mart, #4036 Vista, #572 E-Z Mart, 108 Sprint 24, 122 Carnival #228909, 185 DS, 255 Diamond Shamrock, 3 Way Gro, 4 Way Kwik, 405 Albertson 78 Hwy, 591 EZ Mart, 5H, 60359 Exxon, 67 Express, 69911 Exxon, 7 Days Groceries, 7-11, 7-11 414, 7-11 #26906, 7-11 #27374, 7-Eleven, 936 DS, A & A Stop Shop, A & L One Stop, A&J Fairmont Texaco, A1 Liquor, Absolute Liquor, Ace 505, Ace Pawn, Adams, Air Cash, Al's Food Mart, Al's Mobil, Albertsons, Albertsons #4264, Ale, Ali's Food Mart, Allsup's #321, Allsups, Am Food Mart, ARD's, Arians, Atascosa Groc, Auto Marine Parts, Aycock Oil Co. Inc., B Parm Mart, B&B Drive In, B&J's Wholesale, Bandara Ice House, Bandera Rd Texaco, Bargain Liquor #107556, Bay City One Stop, Bayside Groceries, Benny's, Big, Big Bear Bev, Big D, Big Dia. #14, Big Diamond #1007, Bill's, Bingo Convenience 114832, Bookoor, Bottle Shop, Brahma Express, Broadway, Buddy's, Burk's Food Mart, C Mart, C. Mart 308, C.M. Grocery, Capt's, Cash King, Chevron, Cig for Less, Circle 7, Circle B, Circle S, Circle Z, CJ Texaco, C-Mart, Coastal, Coastal Mart, Inc 3850, Conoco, Conoco #43048, Cool's Liquor #1, Corner Stop, Country Store, Countryside, Cowart Store, Cowboy Q. Stop, Crossroad Mkt., Curve Drive, D & D Country Food Store, D & DS, D&E Appliances, D. Shamrock, Daily Quick, Dalworth, Dambras, Dana Co's, Delaware Food Mart, Diamond Dougs, Diamond Mini Mart, Diamond Mini Mart #172, Diamond Mini Mart 121, Diamond Shamrock, Diamond Shamrock #91, Diamond W, Dick's Food, Dickinson Conoco, Discount, DLS 991, Don's & Ben's, Don's Food, Don's Handy Mart, Dons & Bens, Dons & Bens 4494, DS 1366, DubyDeli, Dyess, Eagleton's Gro., Eastex Exxon, Easy Stop, El Barrio Food Mart, ES Mart, Etter Grocery, Everday 5239, Everyday, Everyday #523, Express #1, Express Lane #1, Exxon, Exxon Express Market, EZ Food Store 117436, EZ Mart, EZ Mart #208, EZ Mart #320, EZ Mart 120, E-Z Mart 276, E-Z Mart 546, E-Z Shop, EZT Food, Fiesta TX, Fina, Fina Mart, Fina Popeyes, Five Points, Flentge Drug, Food King, Food Playa, Gabriel, Gas & Go #1, Gas Go, Gas-N-Go, Glad Mart, Good Time Store #46, Goodoil #3, Grab All, Greenville Travel, H&M, Hackney Food, Hada Enterprises, Handi Plus #43, Handi Stop #12, Handi Stop #28, Handiplus, Happy Grocery, Hard Stop, HEB 230, Hill Brothers Food, Hill Country Stop, Hitchcock, Holfmann, Hop N Shop #25, Insta-Cash, Insti Cash, J & H Main Stop, J & J, Jack's Grocery, Jalisco Grocery, Jamarove Food, James Food Mart, Jamies Food Store, Jess Orr's Store, J-N-B Quinn Shop, Joe's Finamart, Johnny Quick, JP's Qwik Stop, JP's Super Stop, Junior's #4, K&S Drive Inn #103928, KC Oil #7, Kens Food Mart, King's, Kings Liquor, KK's, Kmart, Korner Grocery, Kountry Food #4, Kroger, Kroger #604, Kroger 109, Kroger 214, Kroger 337, Kroger 344, Kroger 996, KW Shell, Kwik Pantry, Kwik Stop, Kwik Stop #5, Kwik Way #1, La Familia Mkt, Laikes Big Store, Lake Hills Ice House, Landing Liq., Last Drop Liquids, Libby's Market, Liquor Max, Lucky Food, Lucky Liquor, Lucky Mart, M & M, M & R Liquors VII, M&G, Mae's, Magic Mart, Market Plan 134, Marshall Grocery Store, Mc Carl Texaco, Memorial City Shell, Merlin Mart, Metro Mart, Miller Hardware, Mini Mart, Mini Mart #12, Mini Mart #5, Mini Mart 10, Mini Mart 102, Mini Mart 103, Minyard, Mobil, Mr. A. Beer, Mr. G. Foodstore, Mr. J's, Mr. Joe Food Store, Mr. Mercury, MS, Ms Express, MS Express #1013, Navigation Exxon, Neals, New Angels, New Lawrence, Nick's #2, Nick's Grocery, Nicks, NuWay #245, One Stop, One Stop #57, Outback, P & P, Pak A Sack #3, Pak A Sak, Palmer Chev., Parkway, Pasadena Liquor, Payless, Payless Food Market, Payless Liquor, Payless Supermarket, Pearl's, Petro Pantry #11, Petro Pantry #9, Phillips 66, Pic N Pak, Pic Stop #5, Pico #10, Pico #11, Pic-Up Mail #1158819, Pik Nik #22, Piknik #26, Pine Sap Shell, Pit Stop, Pleak Korner, Pruitts Texaco, Quality Liquor, Quick Grocery, Quick Pick, Quick Sak, Quick Way #30, Quick Way Food Store 102152, Race Trac, Race Trak #476, Ralph's, Ram Store #14, Randall's #66, Randall's 36, Randall's 39 421604, Razorback, RB Liquor, Red Coleman's #17, Refuge General, Ries Drive Inn, Right Time, Rindler Groc., Rio Grande Grum Co-op, Rios #2, Rite Price Liquor, Riverwalk Mrt, Robert Cut Rate, RPM #1, RPS Discount Tabacco, Sac N Pac #504, Sack N Save, SageBrush, Sak N Sav, Salems Mart, Sam's Grocery, Sam's Quick Way, Samco, Santa Fe Junction #444601, Save N Go, Save Way, Savey, Scott's One Stop, Shamrock, Shell, Shelly's Liquor, Shew, Shop go, Shop N Go, Shop N Go #2, Shop N Save #10, Shop N. Drive, Shopper #14, Shoppers Mart, Short Stop, Shp N. Go, Shyam's Exxon, Sieglers, Skinny's, Skinny's #38, Skinny's #42, Skinny's #76, Skiny's, Smiley's Food Store, Smokey, Sommers Texaco, South Island, Speedy Stop #1, Speedy Stop #2, Speedy Stop #40, Spinn Mkt, Sprint 24 #301, Star Stop #7, Stephanie Liquor, Stoneham Grocery, Stop & Go, Stop and Save, Stop Go 2150, Stop Grocery, Stop N Buy, Stop N Go, Stop N go #02605, Stop N Go #2125, Stop N Go 2584, Stop No, Stop One, Stop-N-Go, Studen Korner, Sun Down, Sundown, Sundown Market, Sundown Mkt, Sunglo Inc. #38, Sunmart, Sunny Chevron, Sunny's Food Store, Sunrise Superstop, Super Food, Super Kwik, Super S 309, Super Sak #3, Super Serve Food and Ice Store, Super Shop, Taylor Petro, Terry Texaco, Terry's Food, TETCO, Tetco #215, TETCO #33, Tetco 221, TETCO 260, Tetco 46, Tetco 636, Texaco, Texaco 3030, Texaco on Valen Rd, Texaco Sealy, Texas Cooler #2, Texas Food, Texas Tobacco, Tex-Mart 4, THA Food Store, Thalji Ent, The Back Box, The Chuckwagon, The Filling Station, The Ice Box Store, The Little Store, The Store I, The Trading Post, Thrift Stop Liquors, Thrifti Korner, Tiger, Tiger Tote #21, Tiki Food, Time Out, Time Out Grocery, Timewise, Timewise 3201, Timewise 4501, TJ's Package Store, TMA, TNT 78, Today's News, Toms EZN, Tony's F.M., Total, Town & Country Chevron, TR's Quick Stop, Troy's, Tx Slam, UDS #2029, Uvalde Suprette, Valley Ck, Valley Liquor, Valley Mart, Villager, Vista Del Sol 66, Vivraux, VM #8, Wag-A-Bag #3, Walnut Bear, War Lee Food, Weatherford KOA, West Prah Food Store, Westbrooks Food & Fuel, Western Bev, Western Beverages #95, Winn Dixie, Witte Food Mart 106824, Zoom IN #11.

Groups or associations that are for the adoption of the amendments are: Robinson Public Warehouse Co., Jasper Oil Co., Joe's Grocery & Ice, C Store, Zip in 107, Easy Shop#3, Jecks Macgregor Fastime, Triangle Drive In, Quix 460, Tetco #208, Town & Country, Lakeshore Store, Payless 62, Big TX, Inc., The Toddy House, Get N Go, Austin, DS 1308, Korner Food Store, Melvin's Drive In, Diamond Shamrock #1381, Gen Dandy #9, Jiffy Mart, Georgetown, Sam's Groceries, Smith Brothers Food Stores, TMCS, Texas Food Industry Association, Texas Association of Lottery Retailers, Ultramar Diamond Shamrock, Shop & Go Grocery, Vice Stop, Melek Corporation, Fiesta Mart, Inc., Country Center, TMT, Inc. dba Whip In, Rudy's Stop & Shop, Hughs Auto Parts, Jackies Exxon, Tetco Stores, Tool n Totum Food Stores, Adrian's Drive In Gro., Fast Food Holding, Dave's Ski & Tackle, Country Side Grocery, Melvin's 19th Street Drive In, West T Go Conv. Stores, Lucky's Food Mart #1 Express Food, #10 Good Times, #2 Kidd Jones, #4 Petro Pantry, #43 Uncle Sams, #5128, #809 7-11, #91 Akeya, #91 Quick, (5) Times Market, 007 Grocery, 1 Stop, 106-214, 14 Texaco, 1631 Texas Star, 1st Choice Food, 1st Stop Beverage Barn, 1st Stop Neighbor, 1st Stop of Texas, 1st Stop Store, 2 N 2 Drive Inn, 2000 Food Store, 21 Food Mart, 21`, 22 Enter., 2305 Stop N Go, 2375 V.C.C., 24 Market, 26235 7-11, 268 EZ Mart, 2-Fast, 2Y, 300 Short Stop, 304 DMM, 3079-Maverick, 310 Coastal Mart, 3790 C-Mav, 3793 Maverick, 4 Corners, 4 Less, 40 Foods, 401 Friend, 4084 Albertson's, 440 Diamond Shamrock, 452 Diamond Shamrock, 4th St Fina, 5 Points Quick Stop, 5 Star Food Mart, 5 Star Texaco, 5 Wints, 5083 Pump N. Shop, 577 EZ Mart, 608 #717, 6-11 Fuel Store, 6-12 Food Store, 7 Days, 7 Eleven, 7 Star Enter, 7-11 #116, 7-11 #124, 7-11 #1662, 7-11 #16802, 7-11 #27441, 7-11 #57620, 7-11 #601, 7-11 #613, 7-11 #621, 7-11 #624, 7-11 #629, 7-11 #631, 7-11 #635, 7-11 #641, 7-11 #642, 7-11 #648, 7-11 #804, 7-11 105, 786 Truck Stop, 7-Eleven, 7-Eleven #603, 7-Eleven #606, 7-eleven #607, 7-Eleven #614, 7-Eleven #615, 7-Eleven #617, 7-Eleven #618, 7-Eleven #627, 7-Eleven #628, 7-Eleven #630, 7-Eleven #633, 7-Eleven #634, 7-Eleven #636, 7-Eleven #638, 7-Eleven #640, 7-Eleven #644, 7-Eleven #645, 7-Eleven #646, 7-Eleven #649, 813 Seven Eleven, 86 Diamond Shamrock, 865 Diamond Shamrock, 8th Ave Texaco, 9325 Kmart, 957 Kroger, 9642 Circle K, 9th Avenue Food Store, 9th St. Groc., A & A, A & B Food, A & B Food Mart, A & B Food Store, A & E Liquor, A & K Food Store, A & M Liquor, A & T G. Mart, A & V Lopez, A Plus Beer, A&A food Mart McGrgor, A&R Town & Cit, A&W, A. Garza Exxon Store, A. Z. Mart, A.J. Liq, A+Grocery, A-1, A-1 Check, A-1 Grocery Store, A-1 Liquors, A-1 Mity Mart, AA Food Mart, AB Petroleum Co, Ace #102, Ace #514, Ace #526, Ace 1320, Ace 316, Ace 512, Ace Ash 267, Ace Cash, Ace Cash #5175, Ace Cash #703, Ace Cash Express, Ace Cash Express #1418, Ace Express, Ace Mart 2, Ace Store, ACS of Rogers, ADH Food Mart, Airport Liquor, AJ's Place, Al's Food, Al's Gro #2, Al's Kash N. Karry, Alamo Food, Alba Food Mart, Albertson, Albertson #2758, Albertson 2702, Albertson 4054, Albertson 933, Albertson Fuel, Albertson Store 4209, Albertson's, Albertson's #2721, Albertson's #4025, Albertson's #932, Albertson's #934, Albertson's 401, Albertson's 4073, Albertsons 4064, Albertsons 4082, Albertsons 4287, Ali Texaco, Allsup #58, Allsup #65, Allsup's, Allsup's #127, Allsup's #156, Allsup's 289, Allsups #14, Allsups #17, Allsups #19, Allsups #231, Allsups #26, Allsups #27, Allsups #283, Allsups #43, Allsups #72, Allsups #78, Allsups #82, Allsups #85, Allsups 163, Allsups 166, Allsups 244, Allsups 3, Allsups 332, Allsups #7, Allsups 92, Als #2, Als Gro #1, Alvarado's Food Mart, AM PM Mkt, AM Twin Stop, A-Mart #3, Amato Food Mkt, Amburn Food, American & Or., Americas Cash Plus, Amigo Food Mart, Amigo Food Way, Amigo Texaco, Amigos, Amigos #1, Amigro #1, Amistad Drive Inn, Amy's, Ana Shell, Anderson Food, Andy's, Andy's Groc., Andy's Quick Stop, Andys Texaco, Angel Gas, Angel's #4, Angels, Angels #1, ANV Quick Stop, AOK Camper Park, AP's Drive Thru, Appletree, Aptus Drive, AR's Food Store, Arcadia Liquor, Arlans, Arlington Mart, Armadillo, Armadillo #14, Armadillo Food Mart, Arp Food Store, Arp SS #3, Arthur City, Arts Mobil, Arturo's Cash Gro, AS Grocery, Asaraf Enterprises, Ashford Texaco, Athens Shell, Autry's, Ayers City Stop, AZ Food Store, Aziz, Azle Diamond Food Inc., B & B Conv, B & B Grocery, B & B Shell, B & C Quik, B & L Grocery, B & L Liquor, B & M Stamps, B Diamond, B J Mini Mart, B&B Food Store, B&G's Grocery Supply, B&H Quik Stop, B&R Bait & Tackle, Bacliff Gro, Balcones Height Chevron, Ballard Exxon, Bandera Exxon, Bar B Travel, Bardwell Food Mart, Bargain Groc, Barrel House Conv, Barretts Gro, Bartlett Food, Basse, Bates, Bay Area Exxon, Bay Side Express, Bay Texaco, Bay View, Bayou Good, BDJ's, Beasley Foods, Bee Caves Car Wash, Beer Mart, Bel Hi, Bell Mart, Bellalt's One Stop, Belly Food, Belt Line Mobil, Belton Fast Stop, Beltway Food, Ben, Ben Short Stop #11, Ben's Grocery, Ben's Mobil, Bennetts, Berkman Food, Berry Creek Food Mart, Bert Wheeler, Best Check Cashing, Best Food #2, Best Stop, Betty Liquor, Betty's Quik Stop, Beverage Express, Big 8 Foods, Big Apple Comics, Big D Inc #979, Big Daddy's, Big Diamond, Big Diamond #1351, Big Diamond 1270, Big Diamond 1369, Big Diamond Inc, Big Mikes, Big Tex #4, Big Texas #3, Big Z, Bill's Drive Inn, BJ's Food & Fuel, BJ's Food Store, BJ's Quick Food, BJ's Quik Stop, Blanco Jr., Blessing County Store, Blessing Drive In, Blue Bonnett Store, Blvd Spirits, Bobby McGee Grocery, Bomadt, Inc., Bomort, Bonaire Food Mart, Boots Liquor, Boyd IGA, Brander 76, Brannan's, Brazos Bend Home & Ranch, Bread & Butter Stop, Break IGA #2, Breckenridge IGA, Briar Hall Groc, Bright Star Oil, Brinkman Food, Broadway, Broadway Fast Stop, Bromer Counts, Bromers, Brook/Conarroe Apple Springs, Brook /Conarroe Jacksonville, Brooks & Conacoe, Brown Trail Groc, Brownies, Brownsville Beauty Supply, Bryan Drive-In, Bryan's #3, Bryon's Conv., BTCS, Bubba's #316, Bubba's 304, Bubba's Fuel Stop, Bubbas, Bubbas #3, Bubbas 360, Buccaneer Food Stores, Buckets, Buddies Grocery, Buddy's, Buddy's Pkg Store, Budget Mart, Buena Vista, Buma Jiffy Mart, Busy Mart, BZ Mart, C & B One Stop, C & J Grocery, C & L Market, C & R #6, C & S Food, C & W, C & W #11, C & W #3, C & W #9, C & W One Stop, C & W. Mini Mart, C & Y Food, C Star, C&L Food, C&P #1, C&P Grocery, C&R #3, C&R #8, C. C. Store, C. Mart 322, C. Store, C.C.'s, C.S. food, Cada Dia, Cady Cove, Calmont Quick Stop, Camco Mart, Camino Super Mkt, Campsey Food & Fuel, Candy Barrel, Canton Travel Plaza, Cap Quick Stop, Carden Chevron, Cardenas Produce, Carl Rd. Shell, Carl's Liquor, Carlo Diamond, Shamrock, Carlo's Store, Carmona's, Carnieceria la Modena, Carnival, Carol's, Carousel Conv. Store, Carr's Gro, Carrera's Gro., Carter Gro, Carter's Country Store, Carver E Mart, Cash Food Mart, Cash It Here, Cash It Here #12, Cash It Here #2, Cash It Here #6, Cash N Cash, Cash N Dash, Cash N Dash #17, Cash N Dash #2, Castro Texaco, Cata's, Cateway Store, Cavazos Grocery, Caveness Groc., CC Food Mart, CC Shamrock, CC's Food Mart, Cedar Valley Gro, Central Texaco, Centre Convenience, Cesar's Airport, CFC Store, Chacha's Grocery, Chalos, Chamm Corp, Champ's #4, Champion Liq, Chavor 2 Food, Che's Texaco, Checkers, Checkers #2, Checks Cashed, Cheers, Chevron, Chevron #122, Chevron 1242, Chevron 446301, Chevron Convenience, Chevron Food Mart, Chevron Inc, Chevron Mart, Chevron One Stop, Chichuahu, Chick's, Chico Mart, Chiefs Food Mart, Chihuahua Pump N. Shop, China Mkt, Chris's Park #1, Chuck, Chuck Wagon #2, Chuck's, Churchills IGA Food Store, Chuy Mart, Cielo Vista Chevron, Cigarette & More, Ciigo Mart, Circle 7, Circle 7 #2, Circle 786, Circle 9629, Circle 9636, Circle A, Circle J, Circle K, Circle K 2151, Circle K #9677, Circle K #9679, Circle K #9857, Circle K #0006, Circle K #1257, Circle K #1482, Circle K #1624, Circle K #1641, Circle K #20, Circle K #2124, Circle K #2146, Circle K #43, Circle K #481, Circle K #5306, Circle K #5312, Circle K #5313, Circle K #8515, Circle K #8516, Circle K #8775, Circle K #890, Circle K #9553, Circle K #9628, Circle K #9675, Circle K #9692, Circle K #9847, Circle K #9870, Circle K 1508, Circle K 153, Circle K 2127, Circle K 2128, Circle K 2144, Circle K 2149, Circle K 2158, Circle K 26, Circle K 9203, Circle K 9393, Circle K 9394, Circle K 9432, Circle K 96?1, Circle K 9646, Circle K 9648, Circle K 9656, Circle K 9662, Circle K 9762, Circle K 9773, Circle K 9793, Circle K 9831, Circle N. Store, Circle S Food, Circle S Food Mart, Circleville Store, Citgo, Citgo Mart, City Market #4, City Star Texaco, CJ's Convenience Store, Cjrooms, CJS Mini Mart, Classic Laundry, Clayton's, Clayton's Mini North, Clear L Shell, Cleo's Convenience, Cleo's Texaco, Click Food Store, Cline's Corner, Clint Exxon, Clints, Clute Fuel Stop, Cmart, C-Mart, C-Mart #234, C-Mart #3795, C-Mart 306, CMMS #75, Coastal, Coastal #3, Coastal #3055, Coastal #3127, Coastal #3347, Coastal #3455, Coastal #3456, Coastal #3459, Coastal #3754, Coastal 3055, Coastal 3082, Coastal 312, Coastal 3128, Coastal 3342, Coastal 3804, Coastal 387, Coastal Mart, Coastal Mart 302, Coastal Mart 314, Coastal Marverick 3134, Coastal Maverick, Coastal Maverick #3039, Coastal Mkt #2753, Coastal Mkt #3463, Coastal Mkt 3342, Cofford at Graery, Cogblan Grocery, Cohn Wash 14, Coley's Corner, Collins Food, Colony Express, Colony Lakes Wine & Spirits, Columbus Chevron, Come N Buy, Come N Go, Comet Liquor, Commercial, Compodres Perez, Conoco, Conoco #5, Conoco 4300, Conoco Food, Conoco Food Mart, Convenient Food Mart, Cooks Pt., Coons, Cooper Food Mart, Coppell Mobil Mart, Corner Express, Corner Food Mart, Corner Market, Corner Mini Mart, Corner Stop Food Mart, Costal #3450, Costal Mar #3460, Coulder Key, Coulter's Video, Counerys, Country Side Groc., Country Bags, Country Boy Store, Country Center, Inc., Country Corner, Country Crossroads, Country Food Store, Country Junction, Country Kwik Stop, Country Liq., Country Peddler, Country Store, Countryside, County Seal Gro, County Side, County Store, Cowboy's, Cowboys, Cowboys #2, Cozby's Conv., Cracker Barrel, Cracker Barrel #5, Crawford's #4, Crawfords #2, Crestwood Chevron, Crones, Crosby Texaco, Cross Roads Truck, Crossroads Express, Crossroads Shamrock, Crystal, CSI, CSI #654, CSI #664, CSI 1290, CSI 648, CSI 650, C-Store, C-Store #110, C-Store Texaco, Culebra, Cullen Stop N Go, Culleyvile Mobil, Curtis, Cuseway Marina, Cushing Grocery, Cypress Point Inc., D & D One Stop, D J Liq, D J One Stop, D Shamrock, D&N, D. J. Chevron, D.C. Garza Ent., D.S. #45, D.S. 1328, Da & Ben's, Dairy Mart, Dairy Mart #5, Dalin, Dalton's Conv., Dan B Jiffy Mkt, Dan's Texaco, Daniel Food, Danny's Citgo, Dannys #3, Dans & Bens, Darby, Daves Conoco, Dawson Super, Day-Night #3, Day & Night #24, DC, Deacory, Debb's Liquor, Decent Food Stop, Delta Food Store, Den Mart #3, Den's #5, Denton F/M, Depot Liquor, Detroit Superette, Diamond, Diamond #1032, Diamond #2137, Diamond Mart, Diamond Mini Mart #303, Diamond Mini Mart #312, Diamond Mini Mart 307, Diamond Shamrock, Diamond Shamrock #1015, Diamond Shamrock #100, Diamond Shamrock #1003, Diamond Shamrock #104, Diamond Shamrock #1043, Diamond Shamrock #117, Diamond Shamrock #1255, Diamond Shamrock #1262, Diamond Shamrock #1264, Diamond Shamrock #1273, Diamond Shamrock #1350, Diamond Shamrock #1354, Diamond Shamrock #1355, Diamond Shamrock #1356, Diamond Shamrock #1359, Diamond Shamrock #1360, Diamond Shamrock #1362, Diamond Shamrock #1371, Diamond Shamrock #1375, Diamond Shamrock #2129, Diamond Shamrock #225123, Diamond Shamrock #2295, Diamond Shamrock #27, Diamond Shamrock #36, Diamond Shamrock #425, Diamond Shamrock #459, Diamond Shamrock #510, Diamond Shamrock #514, Diamond Shamrock #943, Diamond Shamrock 1036, Diamond Shamrock 177, Diamond Shamrock 43, Diamond Shamrock Master Oil, Diamond Shrock 2079, Diamond Store #184, Diane JR's, Dickenson Food, Diers Drive In, Dillard's, Dimple Quick Stop, Discount Mini, D-K Food Store, DK's Quick Stop, DMM #106, DMM #404, DMM 311, Dokes #35, Dollar Bills, Dominy's, Don #3, Don's, Don's & Ben's, Don's & Ben's #34, Don's & Ben's Liquor, Donna's Place, Donny's, Donny's Citgo, Doomis Citgo, Double T, Dow #5, Downtown DKC 124819, Dram 401, DRG Pantry Food, Drigges Gas, Dripping Springs Grocery, Drivers, Druggen, DS #1372, DS #19, Duke's, Dukes #2, DW Shell, E & R Convenience, E 2 Shop, E Mart 443, E Z Mart, E.D., E.M.S. Supply, Eagle C Store, Eagle Pass Exxon, East Mart, East Tex Exxon, Eastside Check Cashers, Eastside Gro, Eastwood Chevron, Easy Shop, Easy Spring, Echo Ent. Inc, Econ Liquor, Econo Mart, Econo Mkt, Economy #294, Economy #635, Economy #637, Economy #719, Economy 284, Economy 607, Economy Drive In, Economy Oil, Ed's Country Store, Ed's Drive In, Eddie's Grocery 436903, Ehamrok Liquor, EL Chaparrel, El Paso Truck Term, El Rendio Gro, El Roncherit, El Slabo Brownsville, El Tigre Exxon #3, El Tigre I, Elkins Cut Rate, Ellis Super Mkt, Elmer's, Elmers #1, Elmers #7, Empire Central Beverage, Erasmo's Liquor Store, Esparza Grocery, Esquina Mart, ETM, Eve's Exxon, Evergreen, Every Day Store, Every Thing 1 Plus, Everyday, Everyday #5220, Everyday 5253, Everything 99¢, EX Mart, Exit 8, Express Business, Express Food, Express Lane, Express Lane #300, Express Mart, Express Mart #10, Express Mart #2, Express Mart #5, Express Mart #6, Express Truck Stop, Express Way, Express Way Food, Exxon, Exxon-Martinez, Exxon #2009, Exxon #60031, Exxon 61417, Exxon-67938, Exxon Comaland, Exxon Express Mkt, Exxon Food Store, Exxon Post Vak, Exxon Tiger Market, Exxon Tiger Mart, Exxon Tigermarket, Exxon Tigermart, Exxon/BK, EZ, EZ Mart, E-Z Mart, E-Z Mart #1, EZ Mart #239, E-Z Mart #275, E-Z Mart #297, E-Z Mart #300, EZ Mart #318, E-Z Mart #325, E-Z Mart #326, E-Z Mart #327, EZ Mart #328, E-Z Mart #458, E-Z Mart #459, EZ Mart #463, EZ Mart #5, EZ Mart #559, EZ Mart #594, EZ Mart #68, E-Z Mart 127, E-Z Mart 159, EZ Mart 162, EZ Mart 29, EZ Mart 310, E-Z Mart 352, E-Z Mart 464, EZ Mart 570, EZ Mart 589, E-Z Shop, EZ Stop, E-Z Store #6, EZ Way, F. O. C. #1, Fairview Farms General Store, Falcon Farm, Family Corner, Family Food, Family Food Mart, Family Mart, Family Mart #1, Family Mini Mart, Far-Pac, Fast Break, Fast Cash, Fast Con, Fast Lane, Fast Lane #5, Fast Mart, Fast Mart, Inc., Fast Stop, Fast Stop #1, Fast Stop Mart, Fast Way food Store, Fastex Food Mart, Fastlane #7, Fastlane #9, Fastop #3, Fastop #4, Fastop Foosd #3, Fast-Stop, Fastway Food Mart, Feldman's #2, FFP #228, FFP Marketing, Fidel's Grocery, Fiesta #29, Fiesta #46, Fiesta Food Mart, Fiesta Groc, Fiesta Mart, Fiesta Mart #7, Fina, Fina Food Mart, Fina Mart, Fina Vista 4014, First & Last Stop Liquor, First Convenience, First Stop, First Stop Food Store, Five Star Foods, FL Shop, FM 1764 Shell, FMF Mart, FOC, FOC #10, FOC #11, FOC #2, Follet Oil, Food & Gro, Food Bag, Food Basket, Food Basket #8, Food City #1, Food City #5, Food Fast, Food Fast #100, Food Fast #101, Food Fast #102, Food Fast #103, Food Fast #50, Food Fast #51, Food Fast #52, Food Fast #53, Food Fast #54, Food Fast #55, Food Fast #56, Food Fast #57, Food Fast #58, Food Fast #59, Food Fast #60, Food Fast #61, Food Fast #62, Food Fast #63, Food Fast #64, Food Fast #65, Food Fast #67, Food Fast #68, Food Fast #69, Food Fast #70, Food Fast #71, Food Fast #72, Food Fast #73, Food Fast #74, Food Fast #75, Food Fast #76, Food Fast #77, Food Fast #79, Food Fast #80, Food Fast #81, Food Fast #82, Food Fast #85, Food Fast #86, Food Fast #89, Food Fast #95, Food Fast #96, Food Fast #97, Food Fast #98, Food Fast #99, Food Fast 100, Food Fast 103, Food Fast 62, Food King, Food Mart, Food Rite, Food Spot, Food Store, Food Town, Food Valley, Foots Liquor, Fort Stockton B45 Terminal, Four Corners Exxon, Four Points Stop, Four Way Stop, Frenchy's Beverage Barn, Friend's #322, Friendly Gro, Friendly Shell, Friendly's, Friends, Friends #404, Friends 410, Frio Canyon Gro, Frio Self Serv, Frontier Country Store, Frost Store, Fuel City, Fuel Mart, Full Service Inc., Furr's #946, Furr's 945, Furrs, Furrs 933, Furrs 967, Furrs 993, Furs #937, Fuzzy's, Fuzzy's 1 Stop, G & G Gro, G & H Texaco, G.H. Texaco, Gabriels, Galene Store, Garza's Quick Stop, Garza's Ser Sta, Gas & Go #2, Gas Go, Gas Go 11, Gas Go Mkt, Gas Gro kt, Gas Stop, Gem Dandy's #102, Gen Dandy #14, Gene's HQ, George West Truck Stop, GeorgeDeter Big-8, Gerlunds #70, Get N Go, Gifts from the Sea, G-Market, Go Check Cashing, God Dan Many Mart, Gold Fashions, Gonzales Grocery, Good City #2, Good Neighbor Store, Good tiem Store #41, Good Time, Good Time #11, Good Time #117, Good Time #24, Good Time #26, Good Time Store, Good Time Store #1, Good Time Store #14, Good Time Store #22, Good Time Store #25, Good Time Store #27, Good Time Store #29, Good Time Store #34, Good Time Store #35, Good Time Store #37, Good Time Store #39, Good Time Store #40, Good Time Store #43, Good Time Store #44, Good Time Store #45, Good Time Store #6, Good Time Store #62, Good Times, Good Times #2, Good Times #30, Good Times #65, Goodtime Store #38, Goodtime Store #49, Gordon's Bait Tackle, Grand Discount, Grandad's Junction, Green Top Fina, Greenbriar, Greta's Shell Cashing, Griffin Groc, Gromger Food Mart, Groveton One Stop, Grub Sack, GTS #15, GTS #20, GTS #21, GTS #31, Guerra's International, Guffey's Grocery, Gulf Bank Grocery, H Mall, Hah Gas, Haley's One Stop, Halfmann's General Store, Hamiton Chevron, Han D Pak, Handi Plus, Handi Plus #35, Handi Plush #61, Handi Stop, Handi Stop #5, Han-D-Shop, Handy Andy, Handy Andy #726, Handy Andy #750, Handy Andy 745, Handy Foods, Handy Mart, Handy Mart #1, Handy Pantry, Handy Stop, Haney Food, Hanson Hanks, Hap's, Happy, Happy Hill, Harmon & Creed, Harp City Store, Harris Food Store, Harrisburg Food, Haskell Foods, Hasty, Hasty #37, Hasty Liquor, Hatahoe, Hatton RR Cut-Rate, Hawell Exxon, Heartigs, HEB, HEB #292, HEB #84 CC #5, HEB 403, HEB G Town, Heights Meats, Helmer Food Store, Hendricks Texaco, Henry's Pack, Henry's Quikstop, Hernandez Drive Inn Gro, HI Class, Hi-C Food Store, Highland Food, Hill Cost Drive Inn, Hill's #4, Hillcrest Grocery, Hills #2, Hills #4, Hilltop, Hinby E Foods, Hitchin Post, Hitching Post, Hiway One Stop, HLD Food, Hoath Market, Holiday Liquor, Home Town, Homeboys Mobil, Hondo Texaco, Honey Dew, Honey Stop, Honey Stop #1, Honey Stop #10, Honey Stop #29, Honey Stop #3, Honey Stop #5, Honey Stop 22, Honey Stop 4, Hop N Shop #6, Hop N Shop 1, Hop N. Shop #17, Hopias Mini Mart, Hop-n-Shop #14, Horizon, Horizon #4, Horizon #5 Tiny Thom, Horizon Big 8, Horizon Store, Horizon Vista, Houdy #8, Housco Tech, Housham Mart, Howdy Citgo, Howdy's, Howdy's #1, Howdy's #2, Howdy's #3, Howdy's #9, Howdy's Joe Battle, Hughson's Texaco Mart, Hurel's Gro, Hussaim, Hwy 19 Chevron, Hwy 271 Chevron, Hwy 271 Texaco, HWY 51, Hycock, I 35 Pump N Shop, I30 Chevron, I-30 Fast Mart, Inc., Icon Drive In #2, Ideal Food Store, IGA #400, IGA Family Food, Igloo, In & Out, Inderjit, Industrial Shell, In-N-Out, In-N-Out Food Mart, Interstate Fast Snack, Interstate Stop Mart, Inwood 66 Phillips 66, Irnvington Conoco, Island Mkt., J & C Mobil, J & J, J & J Food Mart, J & J Food Mt, J & J Grocery, J & L Liquor, J & R #2, J A M, J P, J&B, J&M, J. Cowboy Super Express, J. Food Mart, J's Food, Jack's Grocery, Jack's Midway Stop, Jacks, Jacks #102, Jacquez Grocery, Jake Salim Pkg, Jake's, Jalomo's Gro., Janies Country Store, Jansen Super Mkt, Jarrell Liquor Store, Jasper Jiffy, JC, JD's 282 Texaco, Jeanies Corner, Jeff Co, Jeff Stop, Jenie's, Jensen Coastal, Jerry Drive Inn, Jerry's, Jesse's Liquor, Jessie's Food Store, Jessie's Liquor, Jetters, JG's #228, Jif E Mart, Jife Mart #3, Jiffy Mart #6, Jiffy Mart #9, Jim B. Lee, Jim's Foodmart, Jim's Quick Stop, Jimmy's Corner Store, JJ #271, JJ 105, JJ 107, JJ 211, JJ Fastop, JJ's, JJ's #210, JJ's #212, JJ's #217, JJ's #260, JJ's Video, JJ's Fastrac, JJ's Fastrac 110, JOC #5, JOC #9, JOC 6, Joc Bob's, Joe Country Store, Joe King Disct Mkt, Joes Grocery, John's Handi Plus, Jonahtan's #3, Jonathan's Shop, Jones, Jones Cowboys, Jones Food Mart, Jones Mini Mart, Jordan's Cigarette Store, Joshua Fina, Jr Food Mart, JR Quickee, Jr. Food Mart, JR's, JR's Gro., Jr's Grocery, Jr's Supermarket, Jromers, JS Food Mart, Juanito's Liquor Store, Jud's #1, Juds Food Store #5, Jumpin Jaus Inc., Junction Express, Juniors Drive Inn & Meat Market, Just A $1.00, K & B Liquor, K & M Grocery, K & S Jiffey Mart #1, K-Jims, K Mart, K Mart 3835, K. J #15, K. W. Express, K.J. Liquor, K.K. Food Marts, Kastis, Kate's Fina Mart, Kates Fina, Katies, Katies Pantry #907, Kay's Convenience, KC Oil #12, Ken #11, Kent, Kent #206, Kent 203, Kent 312, Kent Kwik, Kent Kwik #312, Kent Kwik 3096, Key Food Express, KeyFood, Khan Shell, Kiby Valle Gro, Kicks 66, Kid Jones, Kidd Jones, Kidd Jones #1, Kidd Jones #11, Kidd Jones #12, Kidd Jones #2, Kidd Jones #3, Kidd Jones #4, Kidd Jones #5, Kidd Jones #6, Kidd Jones #6 Whitehouse, Kidd Jones #9, Kidd Jones Brownsboro, Kidd Jones Chandler, Kidd Jones Chevron, Kidd Jones ESE Loop 323 Tyler, Kidd Jones Murchison, Kidd Jones WSW Loop Tyler, Kiko's Meat Mkt., Kim's #1, Kim's #24, Kim's #3, Kim's 4, Kimbols, Kims, King Bros., King Food Mart, King Mini, King Mini Market #2, Kings Court #3, Kings Food & Gas, Kings Liquor, Kirby Bullard Shamrock Bullard, Kirby Food Mart, Kirby Front St. Tyler, Kirby Gresham Shamrock Tyler, Kirby Henderson Shamrock Henderson, Kirby Hwy. 64 Tyler, Kirby Kilgore Shamrock Kilgore, Kirby North Dixie Tyler, Kirby Oil, Kirby Oil Co., Kirby Oil Overton, Kirby Overton Shamrock Overton, Kirby S Broadway Tyler, Kirby South Jackson Jacksonville, Kirby South Loop Tyler, Kirby Troup Hwy. Tyler, Kirby Troup Shamrock Troup, Kirby West Loop, Kirby Westloop Tyler, Kirk's Handy Way, Kirkwood Mart, KJ, Kmac's #1, Kmac's #3, Kmac's #4, Kmac's #7, Kmac's 5, Kmart, K-Mart, Kmart 3919, KMK, Knox Fuel #, Knox Palmer, Kold Spot, Korner F. Store, Korner Food Mart, Korner Market, Korner Market #2, Korner Stop, Korner Store, Kountry Food, Kountry Food #3, Kountry Konvenience Center, KP 907, KP Store, Kraft's, Kramers, Kroger, Kroger #108, Kroger #201, Kroger #250, Kroger 197, Kroger 526, Kroger Store, Kureshee's, KV Country Store, Kwik Chek, Kwik Discount, Kwik Korner, Kwik Mart, Kwik Pantlher, Kwik Pantry, Kwik Pantry #5101, Kwik Pantry #5157, Kwik Pantry #5165, Kwik Pantry #5173, Kwik Pantry #663, Kwik Pantry 5130, Kwik Pic, Kwik Shop, Kwik Stop, Kwik Stop Discount Gas, Kwik Trip Food, Kwik Way II, Kwik-Stop, Kyle's Kwik Stop, K-Z Mart #393, L & M, L & P Market, L Loupes, L&E Grocery, La Aztecca, La Esquinta, La Feria, La Feria #936, La Fiesta #14, La Hacienda, La Pasada Exxon, La Tejana Meat Mkt, La Tienda #3, Ladd's Grocery, Lagarto Store, Lake Kiowa Trading Post, Lake Side, Lakeport Grocery, Lakeshore, Lakeside Big-8, Lakeside Foodmart, LakesideGrocery, Lakeview, Lakeway Groc, Lakeway Mini Mart, Lane S. #80, Lanes, Laredo Mini Mart, Larry's Liquor, Las Vegas Groc, Lasses Food, LaVernia One Stop, Lawn Dale, Lawrence IGA, League City, Lee's Drive In, Lee's Grocery, Lee's Mobil Mart, Lemarket, Len's Texaco, Leo's Drive In, Leo's Food Mart, Leo's Self Serv, Leos Food Mart #2, Level's Food Ceneter, Levels Meridian, Lezano's Store, Liberty, Lil General, Lili, Lim's One Stop, Linares Gro., Lindsay Gro, Liq World, Liquid Town, Liquor Barn, Liquor Town, Little Red's, Little World #105530, Live Corner Gro, LJ's Food Store, LM Food Store, LMS Exxon, Logan Sport, Loma Bonita Grocery, Lone Star Market, Lone Star Stop #1, Lone Star Stop #2, Longhorn Liquor, Loop Liquor, Lopez, Lopez Food Store, Lopez Super Mkt #1, Lorena Fastime, Loretta, Loretta's, Lorrie's, Lotte Food Mart, Louis Food Store, Lous Gro, Love Field, Loves 250, Lowe's, LS Express #100, L-Stop, Lucky #23, Lucky 1, Lucky 7, Lucky 7 F-Mart, Lucky Food, Lucky Food Mart, Lucky Grocery, Lucky Lady, Lucky Lady #24, Lucky Mini Market, Lucky One Stop, Lucky Seven, Lucky Star, Lucky Star Food, Lucky Stop, Lucky Store, Lucky's, Lumps 1, Lynn's, Lynn's Check Cashing, Lynzy's Short Stop, Lytle One Stop, M & D Food, M & M, M & M Fast Food, M & M Gro, M & M Lucky Lady, M & M Market, M C Food Mart, M S Express, M&M #1, M&M Food Store, M&M Liquor, M&M One Stop, M.C. Corner, M.P. Travel #2, M.P. Travel 1, M.S. Express, Mac's Drive by, Macarana, Macs Mini Mkt, MaGee's, Magic Food Mart, Magic Mikes, Magon Store #2, Mai Chi Market, Majestic, Majestic 16, Major Gas, Malik Food, Malik Fuel, Mama Mkt, Mandy's, Mann #2, Manning's, Mansell Gro, Marcarture Texaco, Mario's Mkt, Marios, Market, Market Citgo, Market Place, Market Place #22, Market Place #7, Marshall's Grocery, Martae's, Martals Pump N Shop, Marter Food Mart, Massey's, Mat #4, Mata Gro, Mathis Country, Matus Supermarket, Max, Max #5, Max E Mart, Max E Mart #2, Max E Mart #4, Max Food Mart, Max Texaco, Max-E-Mart #3, Max-E-Mart #6, Maxi Mart, MB Joe Food, McArthur's, McCombs Corner Store, McCullough Grocery, McKies Food Store, McPherson Produce, McPherson Pump N. Shop, MCW Enterpresor, Meadow Food, Meadowbrook Food Store, Measquet Food Mart, Medical Drive Texaco, Medico #5, Medico #6, Medico #7, Medico Health, Melek 07, Melek Service Center, Meletz, Mellip, Menzie's Inc., Merry Land Food, Metro Mart, Metroplex, Mickey #2, Mickey #5, Mickey's #3, Mickey's 23, Mickeys #16, Mid Valley Express, Middlta, Midpoint Travel, Midtown Exxon, Midway, Midway Gro, Mike Liquor, Mike's Market, Mike's Pit Stop, Milby, Military Mart, Miller Height Mini Mart, Milton Food Mart, Milts Mini Mart, Mimis Country Store, Ming Food, Mini Food Mart, Mini Mart, Mini Mart #1, Mini Mart #16, Mini Mart #2, Mini Mart #6, Mini Mart #66, Mini Mart #7, Mini Mart Texaco, Mini Stop, Minimart, Minimax, Minit Stop, Minyard #60, Minyards, Miracle Mart, Mireles Groc & Veg, Mirror Lake Texaco, Miskay, Mitchell's, Mitchells Thrift Mart, Mizell Superette, MLK 66, MLS #1012, Mobil, Mobil Mart, Mobil Mkt, Mocks Grocery, Model Market, Mohawk Inc, Mont. Oaks, Montana Vista Gro., Montavos Texaco, Monterrey Food, Moon Lite Market, Moon Mart, Moonlight Grocery, Moore's Chevron 102151, Moreno's, Morning News, Movie Palace, Movie Shoppe, Mr Cartender #2, Mr. B, Mr. Cart Citgo, Mr. Cart Mart #3, Mr. Cartender, Mr. Cut Rate, Mr. D's, Mr. Dollar, Mr. Jakes Food Mart, Mr. Jim's, Mr. Kwik, Mr. Kwik #1, MS Express, MS Express 709, MS Xpress, MS Xpress #110, Multi Mart #8, Mundy mart #2, Munoz Seru Sta, Munoz Store, Murphy Food Mart, MVA Entr, My Store food, My T-Quick, N & B Texaco, N. Timberland Lufkin Polk Oil #16, Nasa Texaco, Nassua, National Truck Stop, Navarro Mills Gen.Store, NB Exxon, NC Foodmart, NCH One Stop #32, Neal #1, Neal #18, Neal Fuel, Neal Inc #10, Neal Inc., Neal Inc. #5, Neal One Stop, Neal Tac #50, Ned Q Stop, Neighborhood, Neighborhood Mini Mart, Neon's, Neumann Food Store, Neumart, New Angels, New Avalon Store, New King Food Store, New Quick Stop, New Way, New Wheeling Food Shop, Newark Food Mart, Newark IGA Foodliner, News Plus, Nick's, Nicky's Food, Nina Mart, Niro's, NLR Cut Rate, N-N Out Convenience, Nolanville Grocery, Nolanville Texaco, Noor Pantry, North Corner Store, North Line, North Park Shamrock, Northgate Texaco, Northridge, Northshore Marina, Northside, Northstore, Northwest Food, Norwood Quick Food, Nu King, Nu Way @277, Nu Way 271, Nu Way 272, Nunar Oil #583, Nuway #226, Nuway #227, Nu-Way #250, Nu-Way #276, NuWay #314, NuWay 300, NuWay 905, N-W Liquor, Oak Hill, Oak Hill Center, Oak Hill Liq, Oak Island, Oak's Food Mart, OATES, Oats Petroleum, Ocean Food Store, Ocean Mini Mart, Ochoa's Groc., OK Supermarket, Okay #27, Okay 2, Okay Food #26, Old Mill, Old Timen, Old Tyme, Olvery Fuel, On Stop, On Video Plus Food Mart, One Rock Stop, One Star, One Stop, One Stop #15, One Stop #2, One Stop #53, One Stop 103, One Stop Food Store, One Stop Foods, Onestop, Onestop #6, Onion Creek Liq, Opra. Rieville Store, Osbunns #11, OU Way #306, Out Past, Outpost, P & L's Superstop, P and N Big 8, P&S, P. J's, P. M. I., P.D.Q. Fast Stop, P/S 2092, Pace Trac #499, Pack Cratenship, Paisano Beverage, Paks, Paks Food Store, Palacios Dr. Inn, Palmer Food, Palmers, Palo Alto Super Market, Pantry, Pantry Place, Papa's Market, Pappy's, Paradise Corner, Pardners Conv Stop, Paris Food, Park Pump N Shop, Park N Buy, Park Place Conv. Store, Park Way Chevron, Parker Food Mart, Parks Conv Ctr, Parkway Gro., Partners, Partners #2, Partners #5, Party Time II, Paso Del Davalos, Pat, Patsys Place, Pay #2, Payan's, Payless, Payless #602, Payless #64, Payless Super, PDQ Drive Inn, Pecan Food Mart, Pecan Grocery, Pecan Grove, Pecan Tree, Pedigos, Pepe Drive Thru, Pepes, Peppers, Peppers 2, Peppers Conv. Store, Per-Mart, Perez Produce, Perez Station, Perrin Pantry, Pete's Ser Ste, Petes Drive In, Petro Express, Petro Express 116, Petro Pantry #12, Petro Pantry #14, PFI #7, Phase Phil's #5, Phillip 66, Phillips 60, Phillips 66, Phillips Express, Pic & Go, Pic & Pac #11, Pic N Go 33, Pic N Go2, Pic N Pac, Pic N Pay, Pic Stop, Pick N Go, Pick-Up, Pic-N-Pac #10, Pic-N-Pac #9, Pico #13, Pico #15, Pico #16, Pico #17, Pico #19, Pico #2, Pico #20, Pico #21, Pico #3, Pico #7, Pico #8, Pico #9, Pic-Pac Food, Pik N Pac, Pik Nic, Pik Nik #29, Pik Nik Food #1, Pik Wik #3, Pik-Nic #7, Pik-Nik, Pik-Nik #28, Pilot, Pilot #273, Pilots, Pinewood Groc, Pineywood, Pinkie's #72, Pinkies, Pinkies #71, Pinky's, Pit Stop, Pit Stop #14, Pit Stop #15, Pit Stop #6, Pit Stop #7, Pit Stop Gro., Pittman's Qwik Mart, PJ Liquor, Plantation Mart, Plantation Net., PMI #9, PNI Star City, POC Shamrock, Pocket Change, Polk Oil #14, Polk Oil #5, Polk Oil Pick It Up #16, Polk Oil Polk Pick It Up #2, Polk Oil Polk Pick It Up #3, Polk Pick It up #3, Polk Pick It Up #6, Polk Pick It Up #7, Polk Pick It Up #8, Poncho's, Poochie #2, Poochies #11, Poochies #14, Poochies #17, Poochies #24, Poochies 23, Pop One Stop, POWA #1, Powell's, Power Mart, PR's Country Store, Prime Outlets, Prime Time Drive Inn, Prime Travel, Primo Food Store, Primo's, Prince, Prince Food Mart, Pronto, Pronto #15, Pronto #4, Pronto #8, Pronto Supermarket, Pronto's #1, Prontos #4, Pump Pantry #5, Pure Country Inn, Q-Express, Q Stop, QFM #3, QM 269, Q-Trip, Quail Valley Shell, Quality #507, Quality Food Mart #3, Quality Liquor #2, Quick 2 Save, Quick Check, Quick Food, Quick Mart, Quick Pantry, Quick Pick, Quick Pick #7, Quick Pickie Oak Hill, Quick Sak #17, Quick Shop, Quick Stop, Quick Stop #2, Quick Stop Food Mart, Quick Store, Quick Way #26, Quick-N-Save, Quickway 2, Quik, Quik 471, Quik 480, Quik Pik, Quik Saver, Quik Way, Quix, Quix #476, Quix 404, Quix 857, Qwik Stop, R & B Liq, R & M Quick Stop, R & S Drive Thru, R&R Mini Mart, R/C 63, Race, Race Trac, Race Trac #15, Race Trac #378, Race Trac 606, Racetrac, RaceTrac #560, Racetrac #626, Racetrac 324, Raceway, Raco Conv. Store, Rahman, Rain or Shine, Rainbow Plalza, Rainbow Plazette, Rally #8, Ralston, Ram #10, Ram #17, Ram #3, Ram #4, Ram #7, Ram 11, RAM Mkt #18, Ram Store #12, Ram Store #19, Ranalls 490, Ranchester Food, Rand Food Store, Rand oil, Randall's, Raul's Comal Mexican Food, R-B-M, RDM #3, Reardi, Reck's Supermarket, Red 65, Red Coleman #53, Red Coleman's, Red Coleman's 54, Red E. Mart #35, Red Seven Country Store, Red's Fast, Red-Coleman, Redi-Go, Redman Market, Regalados Exxon, Rekahns, Remah Texaco, Remer Program Inc, Reuben's, Reyna's Food Store, RIB Grocery, RIB II, Ricebird Drive In, Rick, Rick's, Ricks Drive In, Rigsby Food Mart, Rio Bravo Grocery, Rios #4, Rite Drive In 1, Inc., Rite Stop, Ritz #2, Ritz #4, River #3, River Stop, River View Family Center #2, Riverview, Riverview Family Center, R-J's Stop, RNR Super Mart Mkt, Road Runner, RoadRunner Food, Roadrunner Food Mart, Roadside 2, Robert's Drive Inn, Roberts, Rock Bottom, Rock Creek, Rocket Mart, Rockwall Onestop, Rod's Quick Stop, Rodeo Country 107502, Rogelio's Corr. Penn., Roger's Exoxn #2, Roger's Exxon #1, Rogers Groc, Rojoj Mkt, Rolandos Liquor, Roman's Texaco, Rominy Drive Inn, Ron's Food Mart, Rosa Co Inc, Rosedale Texaco, Rosharon Superette, Roweltt Shell, Roxy Tiger Mart, Roxys Tiger Mart, Royal Oak & Drive, Rsie Upholstery, Ruben's, Rubens Gro, Rudy's Country Store & Bar-B-Q, Rudys BBQ, Ruiz Martah, Ruiz Meats, Rusi R Diesel, S & K Food Mart, S & N 99¢ Store, S & R Liquor, S & S Texaco, S and S Big 8, S&P Kwik Stop, S&S Citgo, S&S Liquor, S. Liquor, S. Timberland Lufkin Polk Oil #15, Sabine Food, Sable Mart, Sac N Pac, Sac-N-Pac, Sac-N-Pac #201, Sadie Hawkins I, Salim Discount Liq, Salinas Food Store, Sam's, Sam's Liquor, Sam's Market, Sammy, San Antonio Smokes, San Juan Foodmart, San Pedro Groc, Sand's Liquor, Sandy Beach, Sandy Creek Drive In, Sandy's Food Store, Sansing Food Store, Santo Cay Store, Sargent Country Store, SARI, Sari Food Mart, Satch's Con Store, Saunders Pump N Shop, Saunders Texaco, Save A Step, Save Time Food Mart, Save Tx Mkt, Saver, Saver Food Store, Sav-M #147, Sav-Mart, Scarboroug's, Scobee's Minimart, Scotties, Scottsdale Big 8, See N Stop, Seller DI, Sellers #1, Seven Days Drive In, Seven Eleven, Seven Eleven #231082, Seven-Eleven #616, Sevens, Shain Gas, Shamrock, Shamrock Marina, Shatime, Shawn, Shell, Shell @ Hidden Meadows, Shellfood, Shelly's, Shepherd Food, Sherwood Way Exxon, Shipps, Shirley's Corner, Shivani's, Shop & Groc, Shop & Save, Shop E Save 9, Shop Mart, Shop N Drive, Shop N Go, Shop N Go #4, Shop N Save, Shop Rite, Shop-Mart, Shop-N-Go #5, Shop-N-Save, Shopper & Mart, Shopper Mart #34, Shoppers Mart #6, Shore Stop #1, Shore Stop #10, Shore Stop #11, Shore Stop #12, Shore Stop #13, Shore Stop #14, Shore Stop #15, Shore Stop #16, Shore Stop #17, Shore Stop #18, Shore Stop #19, Shore Stop #2, Shore Stop #20, Shore Stop #21, Shore Stop #22, Shore Stop #23, Shore Stop #24, Shore Stop #25, Shore Stop #26, Shore Stop #3, Shore Stop #4, Shore Stop #5, Shore Stop #6, Shore Stop #7, Shore Stop #8, Shore Stop #9, Short Stop, Short Stop #19, Short Stop #23, Short Stop #25, Short Stop #26, Short Stop #4, Short Stop #7, Short Stop Food Mart, Short Stop Food Store, Short's, Shot's #5, Shots #10, Sierra's Quick Stop, Sikano, Silva's Mini #3, Silva's Supermarket, Simons, Sing Food Store, Singleton Store, Six Pack Corner, SJ's Fast, Skimp 89, Skinners, Skinny #70, Skinny's, Skinny's #97, Skinny's 101, Skinny's 127, Skinny's 17, Skinny's 18, Skinny's 44, Skinny's 52, Skinny's 83, Skinny's 88, Skinny's 90, Skinnys #112, Skips, Skyway Food, Slims, Smart Shop Exxon, Smart Stop, Smile Food Mart, Smiley's Ice House, Smily's, Smith Bros. Dive In Groc., Smith Bros. Red & White Food Store, Smith's, Smith's #516, SN Mart, Snack & Tackle, Snack Mart, Snappy #3, Snappy #5, Snappy Food, Snappy Foods #4, Snappy Foods #6, Snook Drive In, Snyder One Stop, Sodelak's Grocery, Solley's Inc, Sonic, Sonny's Drive Inn, Sorrell Star, South Fourth Gro, South Lakewood, Souther Liquor, Southern Mart, Southlake Wood, Southland Exxon, Southton C-Store, Southwest Liq, Spanish Shield #1, Spartan Liquor, Special Liquor, Speedy, Speedy Mart, Speedy Mini Mart, Speedy Stop, Speedy Stop #12, Speedy Stop #2, Speedy Stop #24, Speedy Stop #27, Speedy Stop #3, Speedy Stop #37, Speedy Stop #51, Speedy Stop #7, Speedy Stop 20, Speedy Stop 38, Speedy Store #11, Spillway Bait, Spin & Market, Spin N Market, Split Second, Sportman Liquor, Sportsman Mkt, Sportsman's, Sportsmans One Stop, Spring Texaco, Spring Times Mart, Springer Chevron, Sprint 24, Squeak's Conv., Sratek's, Sryene Mobil, SS, SS #6, SS#14, SS#2, SS8/Circle K, SSP Circle K 9644, SSPK 9623 Circle K, Sstop N Go, St. Mary's Food Mart, Stagecoach Stop, Stanley #12, Stanley's Ice #2, Stanley's Ice Station, Stanleys, Stanlyes, Stanlys, Star Food, Star Market, Star Mart #2, Star Stop, Star Stop #12, Star Stop #14, Star Stop #2, Star Trac #3, Starkey's 1, Starr, Starr Gro., Steak House Mt. M., Step N Go, Step N Go #2, Step N Save, Steve Ice House, Stone T-24, Stop & Drive, Stop & Drive Store, Stop & Get, Stop & Go, Stop & Go #2452, Stop & Go 2442, Stop & Shop, Stop & Shop Groc., Stop a Minit, Stop Amigo, Stop Fast Marina, Stop Go, Stop Go 2371, Stop Go 2597, Stop In Go, Stop Mart, Stop N (x), Stop N All, Stop N Buy, Stop N Drive, Stop N Fey, Stop N Go, Stop N Go #2275, Stop N Go #2489, Stop N Go #4, Stop N Go 2036, Stop N Go 204717, Stop N Go 2196, Stop N Go 2205, Stop N Go 2314, Stop N Go 2327, Stop N Go 2340, Stop N Go 2750, Stop N Save, Stop N Shop, Stop N Stop, Stop One, Stop Shop Exxon, Stop to Save, Stop-N-Bye, Stop-N-Fly, Stop-N-G0, Stop-N-Go 2114, Stop-N-Point, Stop-N-Save, Store Keepers, Store Real #3, Strawberryhill, Sugar Hill 107375, Sun Food, Sun Mart, Sun Mart #102, Sun Mart #133, Sun Mart #304, Sun Mart 168, Sun Rise Mini Mart, Sunbelt Jewelry & Loan, Sunglo, Sunglo #10, Sunglo #15, Sunglo #18, Sunglo #22, Sunglo #29, Sunglo #34, Sunglo #39, Sunglo #5, Sunglo Inc #36, Sunmart, Sunmart #129, Sunny, Sunny Fast Groc., Sunny Food Mart, Sunny Super Market, Sunny's, Sunny's Food Mkt, Sunny's Food Store, Sunrise, Sunrise Conoco, Sunrise Foods #4, Sunrise Gro, Sunrise Grocery, Sunrise Market, Sunrise Mart, Sunrise Mkt, Sunrise Mkt #2, Sunrise R.V. Ctr., Sunrise Super, Sunshine, Sunshine Mkt, Sup Food, Sup-Save Beer and Wine, Super Circle, Super Circle 7#5, Super Discount Package, Super Food, Super Food #35, Super Food 13, Super Food Mart #18, Super Food Mart #3, Super Foods 302, Super Handy Inc., Super Inc., Super K 4926, Super K 7296, Super K C Store, Super Kmart, Super Mart, Super Mart #23, Super Pak, Super Plus, Super S, Super S #347, Super S Foods, Super Sack #5, Super Save, Super Serv, Super Stop, Super Stop #1, Super Stop #2, Super Stop #4, Super Stop Food Mart, Super T Store, Superette, Superfresh Super Market, Superior Mart, Sur Stop, Swif T Texaco, T & J Crowley, T Country, T J's, T S Texaco Trefny, Inc., T Y Market, T. C. Conv., T. C. Exxon, T. C. Food, T. W. Shell, T. Woods, Ta Sins Jew, Tac #216, TAI Groc, Take A Break, Take Away #1, Talty Store, Tatum #9 Short Stop/Food Fast, Tawaroni Stop, Taylor, 120, Taylor FFP 5163, Taylor Food Mart #3146, Taylor Food Mart #511, Taylor Mart, Taylor's Food Mart, Taylor's Petroeum #40, Taylors #49, Taylors 5132, Taylors' #64, TBTC #2 418, TCOC, Ted's Shop II, Tegle Den, Tejano Mart #2, Tejano Mart 1, Tejas, Telge Chevron, Telge Food Mart, Terry's Corner, Tet Conaco, Tetco, Tetco #201, Tetco #204, Tetco #21, Tetco #216, Tetco #254, Tetco #35, Tetco #56, Tetco #633, Tetco #811, Tetco 1104, Tetco 1105, Tetco 206, Tetco 210, Tetco 256, Tetco 265, Tetco 603, Tetco Mobil #61, Tex Best, Tex Best Travel, Tex Mart, Tex Mart #1, Tex Mart #11, Tex Mart #2, Tex mart #24, Tex Mart 34, Tex Pac Beverage, Tex's T, Texaco #103, Texaco #2585, Texaco #3, Texaco #3031, Texaco #35, Texaco #5, Texaco @ Crestway, Texaco 2397, Texaco 281/#410, Texaco at Nahoma, Texaco Food, Texaco Food Mart, Texaco I35, Texaco Motiva, Texan Kwik Stop, Texan Mart, Texas Bev Mart, Texas Conv Store, Texas Conv., Texas Country Inc, Texas Express, Texas Fill Up, Texas Food & Fuel, Texas Grocery, Texas HQ, Texas Liquor #10, Texas Market, Texas Mart, Texas Mart #18, Texas Mkt, Texas PlU, Texas Star, Texas Way, Tex-Mart #31, Tex-Mart #9, Tex-Mart 33, The Barn, The Bottle Shop, The Cork, The Depot, The Liguor Store, The Little Store, The Money Market, The Other Store, The Other Store #2, The Other Store #3, The Pit Stop, The Point, The Six Pack Stop, The Store, The Tote 29, The Wright Stop #1, Thelma Food Store, Thibs Pkg, Thomas Food Mart, Thompson Oil #3, Three Amigos, Thrif Tee Super Mart, Thriftee Food, Thrifty, Thuy Hoank, Tiger Land Quick Stop, Tiger Mart, Tiger Mart #24, Tiger Mart #4, Tiger Tote, Tiger Tote #1, Tiger Tote #15, Tiger Tote #2, Tiger Tote #7, Tiger Tote #9, Tigerland Express, Tigermart 21, Tigers Stop, Tigre #2, Time Mart, Time Save Food Store, Time Saver, Times Market, Times Market #105, Times Market #21, Times Market 101, Times Mkt, Times Mkt #102, Timewise 260, Timpson Quick Stop, TJ #105, TK Quick Stop, TMAC #3, T-Mac's, Tmac's #2, Tmac's #3, Tobacco Cheaper, Tobaccomart, TOC, Tod's Shop Exxon, Today's News, Todo, Tom Thumb, Toma Food Store, Tommy's, Tommy's #7, Tommy's 15, Tommy's Groc., Tonny 126556, Tony Food, Tony's Food Store, Tony's Pit Stop, Tony's Smack Shop, Toot'n Totum, Total, Total #4523, Total 4528 ODS, Total 4531, Tote 29, Toteabag, Totol, Town & Country #1108, Town & Country #38, Town & Country #4, Town & Country #5, Town & Country #6, Town & Country 188, Town & Country 207, Town & Country Laundry, Town East Exxon, Townley Food Market, Tran's Food, Travel Mart, Travel Mart #14, Travelmart Exxon, Triangle Station Inc., Trinity Food Mart, Trinity Store, Triple R, Triple Sun, Tropicana, TRS, TSJISJ, Tuckers, Tuckers Texaco 106422, Tuxas Star 164, Twin Hills, Twin Stop #4, Twin Towers, Twister's Exxon, Tx 1-Stop, Tx Star #163, Tx. Express, Tyler Truck, Tyree Park Groc, U.D.S., U.D.S. #1256, U.S.A. Checks Cashed, UDS #1370, UDS 883, UDS 90, UFO Liquor, UL, Uncle P Drive In, Uncle Sam, Uncle Sam's, Uncle Sam's #103, Uncle Sam's #14, Uncle Sam's #19, Uncle Sam's #20, Uncle Sam's #23, Uncle Sam's #24, Uncle Sam's #26, Uncle Sam's #32, Uncle Sam's #4, Uncle Sam's #5, Uncle Sam's #8, Uncle Sams, Uncle Sams #11, Uncle Sams #21, Uncle Sams #28, Uncle Sams #29, Uncle Sams 40, Uncle Sams 45, Uncles, Uncles #76, Uncles #81, Uncles 201, United Drive In, United Enterprises, United Rive In #2, Univ. 66, Unv. Chevron's Morgan Oil Co., UPS 2256, Urban Grocery, Urbanek Store, US Food Mart, US Super Mkt, USA Checks, USA Checks 2503, USA Checks Cashed, USA Checks Cashed #2386, USA Food, USA Food Mart, Utopia General Store, Valdivia, Valley Check, Valley Check Cashiers, Valley Mart, Valley Mart #5, Valley Mart #7, Valley Mart 1, Valley Shamrock, Valley Shamrock #06, Valley Shamrock #11, Valley Shamrock #14, Valley Shamrock 21, Valley View Exxon, Valley View Mobil, Valu Liquor, Vanita, Variety, VAS#2419, Vasek Drive In, VCC 2514, Venus Country Store, Venus Texaco, Vic's, Vic's Cut Rate, Victor's Citgo, Video Exchange, Video Loco, Village Creek Mobil, Village Mkt, Village North Mobil, Village Stop, Vishu Enter, Vision Video #12, Vision Video #7, Vista, Vista 4046, Vista Food Mart, Vista Food Mart 410, Vista Hills Car Wash, Vista Stores, Vs #5, W C Video, W. Oil Texaco, Wades, Wag #11, Wag a Bag, Wag A Bag #2, Waga Bag 1, Waked at Citgo, Walker's Food, Walkers Liq., Wallnut Food, Wally's Liquor, Walters, Wand'a Kountry Korner, Water hole 83, Watson's Big Creek Grocery, Watson's City, Watson's One Stop, Watts Grocery, WD Miller #4, Welcome Stop, Wencho's Food, Wendy's, Wes T 84 #23, West Bel 1153, West Rover Mobil, West Way Foods, Wes-T-60, West-60 #4, Westbrooks, Western Beverage, Western Beverage #8, Western Beverage #97, Western Food, Wes-T-Go #1, Wes-T-Go #97, West-T-Go #26, Whi-In, Whip In 102, Whip-In, Whoa 'N' Go, Willbanks, Willco Petroleum, Wil-Max Gilmer, Winn Dixie, Winn Dixie 2438, Winn Dixie 2442, Winn Dixies, Witcher Shell, Witts Liq., Wm Lopez Supermarket, Wolff, Wolfin Square Texaco, Womack's Food Store, Wonder F.S. #8, Wonder Food Store, Wood Ridge Shell, Wooden Rcl. Quick Stop, Wright Stop, Wright Stop #361, Wright Stop #521, Wright Stop #531, Wright Stop #532, Wright's Drive Inn, Wyatt's Super C, Wylie Fina, Y Drive Inn, Yarbrough Chevron, Yonkers, You and I Food, Youngblood's, Youself, Zaragosa, Zaragosa Discount Liquor, Zaragosa Food Mart, Ziggy's Mart, Zip-N, Zip In, Zipps, Zippy J's #1, Zippy J's #3, Zoom Food Mart, Zoom In, Zoom Zooms, Zosuh.

The following is a summary of the comments received during the comment period from persons who indicated they were opposed to the proposed amendments but offered additional comments:

Comment: Many commenters indicated that they did not want the odds to go to 1 in 25 million and if the change is made, these commenters will not play.

Response: The Commission recognizes the commenters' opposition in connection with increasing the odds; however, the Commission understands the Lotto game to be jackpot driven. When jackpots are high, more people buy tickets. The Commission understands that it may lose some players because of the increase in the odds of winning; however, the Commission believes higher jackpots will bring players to the game, and, as a result, offset the loss of players who will not play because of the increase in the odds of winning.

Comment: Many commenters suggested that there should be more winners with lower jackpots.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comments because player research indicates that most players play Lotto Texas to win high jackpots and do not play when the jackpots are at low levels. Actual sales information for recent years supports this statement.

Comment: Many commenters indicated that the odds of winning should be decreased for the players, not increased.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because decreasing the odds of winning would generate lower jackpots and thereby reduce sales amounts.

Comment: Many commenters do not want four extra balls.

Response: The Commission understands the comment but believes that adding four balls will generate higher jackpots and, in turn, higher sales. Player research indicates that Lotto players want higher jackpots and play this particular game for the chance to win high jackpots. Sales history supports this contention because when jackpots reach high amounts, more tickets are sold than at lower jackpot levels.

Comment: Several commenters indicate that there are too many different Lottery games and that the Commission should eliminate Texas Million, Cash 5, and Pick 3.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because each of the Lottery online games was designed to meet the different requests of the players. For example, Lotto Texas offers higher jackpots, Texas Million offers at top prize of $1 million with lower odds, Cash 5 offers pari-mutuel larger prizes and Pick 3 offers smaller prizes with daily drawings.

Comment: Several commenters indicated that the "Lotto game is not broken, please don't try to fix it."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because sales history information indicates that Lotto Texas sales have declined.

Comment: Several commenters indicated that Cash 5 should go back to drawings twice a week.

Response: The Commission does not believe the comment is relevant to the proposed amendments on the Lotto Texas rule.

Comment: Several commenters suggested that the Commission should increase the amount of winners and increase the amount of the jackpot.

Response: The proposed matrix change is designed to increase sales and to result in higher jackpots.

Comment: Several commenters indicated that Texas should have Powerball.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Lotto Texas sales have declined and the Commission believes it should address this problem first.

Comment: Some commenters suggested that the numbers should be decreased from 50, not increased.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they wanted multimillion dollar jackpots and 60% would accept more difficult odds for a bigger grand prize and better chances to win smaller prizes.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that players should be able to choose cash option or annuity at the time the ticket is claimed.

Response: The Commission understands the comment but believes the comment is irrelevant to the reasons why the Commission proposed the amendments-declining Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: How are decreasing the odds from 1:15M to 1:25M better for the player?

Response: The Commission has conducted player research that indicates 81% of people polled said they wanted multimillion dollar jackpots and 60% would accept more difficult odds for a bigger grand prize and better chances to win smaller prizes. The Commission, by proposing the amendments, is responding to player requests.

Comment: A few commenters said there should be a 4 number daily lotto game.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment insofar as the proposed amendments are concerned since the comment is irrelevant to issue at hand, declining Lotto Texas sales. Whether the Commission introduced a 4 number lotto game would not increase Lotto Texas sales and may adversely affect sales because of cannibalization.

Comment: A few commenters want to add a bonus ball to increase the chances of winning.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because amendments to the Lotto Texas rule were proposed earlier this year to add a bonus ball to Lotto Texas. During the comment period, player comments were opposed to this proposal.

Comment: A few commenters suggested the Commission give retailers a higher monetary incentive.

Response: The Commission understands the comment but believes it is irrelevant to the issue at hand and what the proposed amendments are intended to address, declining sales.

Comment: One commenter suggested selling tickets outside the State of Texas.

Response: Currently, to sell Texas Lottery tickets outside Texas would require entering into a compact with the state in which Texas Lottery tickets would be sold. The State of Texas has not entered into such a compact, nor does it contemplate doing so.

Comment: Some commenters want the Commission to cut marketing and advertising to save money to put into the lotto.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Riders in the Commission's legislative appropriation prohibit the use of advertising dollars for other operating expenses. Further, the money that goes to players in prizes from Lotto Texas is generated from ticket sales and is distributed according to the current game rule.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that players should get 2 plays for a $1.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because giving players 2 plays for $1 would increase the number of plays per game but not help to offer higher prizes or larger jackpots.

Comment: Several commenters indicated that they will only play the large jackpots if the change is made to 54 balls.

Response: The proposed rule matrix change which increases the number of balls from 50 to 54 statistically will create larger jackpots.

Comment: Some commenters indicated the Commission needed better marketing and advertising.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the comment is not relevant to the proposed amendments. The Commission's marketing and advertising efforts address all its products. If the commenters believe the reason Lotto Texas sales have declined is because of poor marketing and advertising, all Texas Lottery products' sales would be in a decline which is not the case.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that retailers need friendlier and better trained clerks. For example, clerks do not ask if a person wants lotto tickets and some clerks complain when a person asks for certain scratch cards.

Response: The Commission disagrees that the solution to declining Lotto Texas sales is friendlier and better trained clerks. If sales were declining as a result of unfriendly and untrained clerks, all Lottery products sales would be declining which is not the case.

Comment: Some commenters suggested that overhead of the lottery should be cut to reduce costs, rather than change the game.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because reducing the Commission's operating expenses would not stop Lotto Texas sales from declining.

Comment: Some commenters indicated that the current payouts are too low.

Response: The Commission agrees with the comment and the proposed amendments reflect an increase from 50% to 55% payout.

Comment: One commenter stated that people do not play because there aren't enough winners.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because as of April 5, 2000, there have been 398 jackpot winners out of 778 drawings and Lotto Texas sales are still declining.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that the prize money should be increased to attract more players.

Response: The Commission agrees with the comment and the proposed amendments reflect an increase from 50% to 55% payout which will increase the prize money to the players.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that they will not play Powerball.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment insofar as the proposed amendments are concerned because the proposed amendments do not contemplate participation in Powerball or any other multi-state game. The proposed amendments provide for changes to the Lotto Texas game only.

Comment: Some commenters want to drop the 3 of 6 payout and increase the 4 and 5 of 6 greatly.

Response: The Commission agrees with the comment, in part, and disagrees, in part. The increased 55% payout will increase the payout at the 4 of 6, 5 of 6, and 6 of 6 levels. The Commission disagrees with the suggestion to drop the 3 of 6 payout because the Commission believes players want to win at lower levels as well as win the jackpot.

Comment: Some commenters suggested that Lotto Texas should be a once a week drawing instead of two.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because conducting drawings once a week would not make an impact on efforts to pay players higher prizes and larger jackpots which is primary focus of the proposed amendments.

Comment: One commenter wants to bring back Scratchman.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because bringing back Scratchman would not necessarily increase Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "What happens to all of the money?"

Response: Currently approximately 57% goes back to players in prizes, 5% goes to Lottery retailers for sales commission, 7% is used for Lottery operations, and 31% goes to the Foundation School Fund.

Comment: One commenter suggested matching numbers from any line on a five line ticket to win.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because this type of play style would require a minimum $5.00 purchase which the Commission does not believe Lotto Texas players would be willing to spend at lower jackpot levels. Also, this suggestion would change the proposed matrix to allow a player to have 30 possible numbers from which to have 6 numbers match the 6 drawn from the 54 balls. The Commission believes this approach would result in lower jackpots. Player research indicates that players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter stated that public meetings should be held in all major cities because not everyone can go to Austin.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because it is not relevant to the proposed amendments. Further, with regard to providing comment on a rulemaking, interested persons may submit written comment.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the winning numbers should be picked only from the tickets sold so that each drawing has at least one winner.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because if every drawing had a winner the jackpot would never rise above $4 million. Depending on sales, the Commission may have to reduce the jackpots to even lower amounts. Also, current Lottery research indicates that 81% of people polled said they wanted multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter wants to lower the starting jackpot amount.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players want higher jackpots, not lower jackpots. However, if sales continue to decline the starting jackpot may need to be lowered from $4 million to $3 million.

Comment: A few commenters want the Commission to continue to draw numbers until there is a winner and make 104 millionaires a year.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they wanted multimillion dollar jackpots. If the Commission continues to draw numbers until there is a winner, the jackpot amount will always be at low levels.

Comment: One commenter suggested capping the jackpot at a certain amount and save the excess money for the next jackpot.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter stated that players want to have either 48 or 49 numbers or charge $1.25 per play to increase income.

Response: The Commision disagrees with the comment because having fewer numbers would increase the number of jackpots won at the starting jackpot levels. Recent Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled want multimillion dollar jackpots. Increasing the cost of playing may appear to generate more sales, but players would have to be willing to spend more money per play and Lotto Texas sales are already declining due to a decline in the number of people playing.

Comment: Several commenters indicated that the usual customers will play less in the end.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players want higher jackpots. The proposed amendments are intended to generate higher jackpots and therefore the Commission believes it will have more players, not less. Additionally, Lotto Texas core players (usual players) are already playing less with the current game, based on sales information at the lower jackpot levels.

Comment: Several commenters asked the question: "Why mess with something that already works?"

Response: Lotto Texas is not working if fewer players are playing and sales continue to decline.

Comment: A few commenters stated that the Commission has spent money going around the state asking for public opinion but knowing that their minds are made up.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because until the Commission receives comment, considers comment, and takes formal action, no action has been taken.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that "you have to spend money to make money."

Response: The Commission doesn't understand the significance of the comment.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that they will go out of the State to purchase lottery tickets if the changes are made.

Response: The Commision understands the comment. The proposed game changes statistically result in jackpot amounts higher than those available in some other states except jackpots in connection with muti-state games. Having higher Lotto Texas jackpots as a result of the proposed amendments will allow the Commission's jackpots to be comparable to those in multi-state games.

Comment: Some commenters stated that there is not enough advertising to create interest and the Commission should show more winners and have more hoopla.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment if the comment is to suggest not to change the rule but to have more advertising in the manner indicated. The Texas Lottery's advertising budget is used to promote all its games. To advertise statewide there are 20 designated market areas to cover. In addition to television, radio and newspaper advertising, this money is spent on outdoor billboards, signage, in-store point-of-sale materials and other forms of mass media. The Commission advertises all its products appropriately; however, Lotto Texas sales are declining while the other products do not appear to be.

Comment: A few commenters asked the question: "Why is the Commission complaining about so many winners in a row?"

Response: The Commission is concerned with the decline in sales as a result of the inability to generate high jackpot amounts.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that the Commission should hire an experienced supervisor of gambling and lottery operations and get someone who knows how to give the public what they want--better odds and bigger payoffs.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment if the comment is intended to have the suggestion be an alternative to changing the Lotto Texas game. Research is conducted with Lottery players to get their input and opinion on Lottery products. For example, monthly tracking studies, annual segmentation studies, mini-labs and focus groups are conducted throughout the state. Such research indicates that players want higher jackpots. Hiring a person such as the one described in the comment will not accomplish the commenters' desired result.

Comment: One commenter suggested allowing more advanced drawing purchases to 26 or 52.

Response: The current Lotto Texas game and the proposed amendments do not offer advanced draws. The multi-draw feature is available currently and is not being proposed to be deleted as part of the proposed amendments.

Comment: One commenter stated that for each $5 purchase, a player should be able to purchase insurance for $1 to pay Federal Income tax if the player wins.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the suggestion would not appear to increase sales or result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested the Commission "leave the Lotto alone and live with in your budget, we do."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment is suggesting that the Commission could supplement Lotto Texas sales or the revenue derived from such sales through savings from the Commission's operating budget of 7% of sales. The sales from all products set the Commission's operating budget. The issue presented by the proposed amendments is not a question of "living within a budget". Instead, it is a question, in part, of addressing player requests for higher jackpots. Finally, the Commission has historically remained within its operating budget. In fact, each year, it has returned money from its budget to the State of Texas.

Comment: One commenter wants the Commission to offer "bonus tickets" which give 11 numbers for $10, 22 numbers for $20, etc.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because this type of discounting will not address player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested splitting the total jackpot to pay 40% on Wednesday and 60% on Saturday, shifting the incentive to buy Friday, which is payday.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the jackpot cannot be split between draws since the estimated jackpot amounts are based on the sales for each draw. Also, if the jackpot was won on Wednesday, there would be nothing left for Saturday. Additionally, to the extent the comment is suggesting that the Commission focus on "payday" as the day people are most likely to have more money than other days, and, therefore, the best opportunity for the Commission to sell tickets, the Commission disagrees. The Commission wants people to play responsibly and spend only what they can afford.

Comment: One commenter suggested establishing a minimum number of tickets that one can buy.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission does not want a player to buy more tickets than a player believes he/she can afford. The Commission wants people to play the Lottery responsibly.

Comment: One commenter indicated that if the Lotto changes the commenter will buy tickets out of state.

Response: The purpose of the proposed amendments is to increase the jackpots to higher amounts. At times, the jackpot amounts may be higher than those in other states.

Comment: One commenter suggested that if there were more winning possibilities there would be more players.

Response: The Commission disagrees with comment because as of April 5, there have been 398 jackpot winners out of 778 Lotto Texas drawings. The proposed amendments are in response to player requests for higher jackpots. More winning possibilities will result in low jackpot levels. Player research indicates that players want higher jackpots, not lower.

Comment: One commenter suggested that people will not play the lower jackpots because of the increased difficulty in winning.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because players have already reduced their playing at the lower jackpot levels. Lottery research shows that players are more concerned with higher jackpot amounts than chances of winning. Additionally, the odds of winning at high jackpot levels are the same as at lower jackpot levels.

Comment: One commenter suggested that there are fewer big winner scratch cards because the sales are spread over too many games.

Response: The proposed amendments are on the Lotto Texas rule and do not address scratch games. Therefore, the comments are not relevant to the proposed amendments.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the Commission should increase the retailers' commission to help promote lottery in their outlets.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment is intended to suggest that increasing retailers' incentives will provide for higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter stated: "We have been a better than average outlet for Lotto and don't want anything to change that. Please consider this proposed change with more foresight than when the scratch cards were changed."

Response: The purpose of the proposed amendments is to increase Lotto Texas sales and create higher jackpots. The purpose of proposing amendments is to receive public comment so the Commission can fully consider the issues presented.

Comment: One commenter suggested the Commission lower its cost by cutting its staff of high paid executives that don't do anything.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment is suggesting that Commission staff "don't do anything". Additionally, the Commission disagrees with the comment because lowering its cost by a staff reduction will not result in higher jackpots. The proposed amendments are intended to address player requests of higher jackpots.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that "officials are taking money away from the jackpot."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the money for the jackpot comes from the sales for the game. No money is taken from the jackpot amount with the exception of taxes at the time the prize is claimed.

Comment: One commenter suggested keeping the balls at 50 and pay a set amount for 3 of 6, 4 of 6, and 5 of 6.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because it would have an impact on the jackpot amount. The 3 of 6 prize amount is currently the only one with a guaranteed prize amount of $3. The 4 of 6 and 5 of 6 prize levels pay out on a pari-mutuel basis, each representing a percentage of total prize pool.

Comment: One commenter wants the Commission to advertise how much money a million dollars really is for people.

Response: The Commission has advertised this message in the past. Therefore, while the Commission agrees with the suggestion, the Commission does not believe it addresses player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested making all lotto payments cash to reduce administrative costs.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because some players want to have payments over time. The Commission wants the players to have control over this decision. Further, reducing administrative costs do not address player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: Many commenters wants to keep the game the same and lower the odds of winning.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research shows that players prefer to play at the higher jackpots. Lowering the odds would result in more frequent winners at the lower jackpot levels.

Comment: One commenter suggested increasing payouts to increase revenue.

Response: The proposed amendments increase the prize payout from 50% to 55%.

Comment: One commenter stated: "It seems that a high instance of big Jackpots are won in the southern portion of the State. It seems that quick pick winners are concentrated in the Houston area."

Response: The number of winners in a given area is relative to the population of people playing in that area.

Comment: One commenter stated: "I will only play the large pots if the changes take place."

Response: The commenter's statement is representative of player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested budgeting the money for the Lottery on the amount previously earned, not on anticipated funds.

Response: The Commission does not understand the comment. If the comment is intended to indicate that a budget should be based solely on historical information and not on expected sales, the Commission considers all relevant information when it creates its budget. However, the comment is irrelevant to the proposed amendments.

Comment: One commenter indicated that people will spend their money in the casinos in Louisiana.

Response: The Commission acknowledges the competition for discretionary dollars. However, the purpose of the proposed amendments is to respond to player requests for higher jackpots and to increase Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "What are the odds of the numbers coming up in consecutive order?"

Response: The question is irrelevant to the proposed amendments. However, the Commission has not conducted a statistical analysis on this question.

Comment: One commenter indicated that with the cash option one has to wait for the jackpot to be over 10 million to play because of the low payout.

Response: With the proposed changes, statistically the Commission should reach higher jackpots more quickly.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the balls are not mixed thoroughly because there are repetitious numbers.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Prior to the drawings the Commission's Security staff and independent auditors conduct a series of test of nearly 300 checkpoints to ensure the randomness, security and integrity of the games are maintained. This includes testing of the drawing machines to make sure that are operating properly.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a live drawing with 6 blind-folded people, each will draw a ball and someone calls out the numbers.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. This method of drawing would not be secure because the Commission would be relying on 6 people instead of the tested performance of the drawing machines.

Comment: One commenter indicated that players are getting tired of constant non-winning tickets.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because there are many winners in each drawing of Lotto Texas.

Comment: One commenter indicated that if people won occasionally, they would play more.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent it suggests people are not winning because people are winning. However, the proposed amendments are intended to address player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: A few commenters suggested dropping the 3 of 6 number payout.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research suggests that players want to win at the lower lever as well as have higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested redirecting the money the lottery earns into funds people support.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because all Lottery proceeds go to the Foundation School Fund and any redirection of Lottery proceeds is a policy decision for the State to decide, not the Commission.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the average person doesn't have the money that they had in 1992 to spend on the lottery with expenses increasing and salaries decreasing.

Response: The Commission wants players to play responsibly and only spend what they can afford.

Comment: One commenter suggested having Lotto on Saturday only.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because only having one drawing per week, a Saturday drawing, would lessen the players' opportunity to play and adversely impact sales and affect jackpot amounts.

Comment: One commenter indicated that Lotto should be competitive with free on-line sites.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission is to generate revenue for the State of Texas. If there were no cost associated with playing there would be no revenue or prizes to return to the players.

Comment: One commenter believes that any money the State receives from the Lottery is free money.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because pursuant to state law proceeds from Lottery sales go to the Foundation School Fund.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the more the Commission messes with the game, the more the public loses trust.

Response: The Commission, by proposing the amendments, is attempting to respond to player requests as well as increase sales.

Comment: One commenter suggested posting the winners on the internet after each drawing and the next drawing amount right away.

Response: Winning numbers are posted on the Lottery's website at www.txlottery.org. Information on actual winners is not known until players claim their prize.

Comment: One commenter suggested giving 5 free quick picks for 3 of 6 numbers.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Player research indicates that players want money, not Quick Picks. However, the proposed amendments offer an increased prize of $5 from the current $3 prize for matching 3 of 6. This would give players the option of buying $5 worth of Quick Picks if the player chose to do so.

Comment: One commenter suggested giving away a million dollars a day, six days a week tax free and have better odds.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the funding is not available.

Comment: One commenter suggested advertising the winners more. For example, there were no ads showcasing Hollywood.

Response: Winners have the option not to participate in publicity.

Comment: One commenter indicated that taxes have already been paid on the money in the Lottery, why pay them again.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because taxes have not been paid on the money until a winner is determined and the prize is paid.

Comment: One commenter indicated that increasing the odds to 1:25 million will lose more players.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission is losing players with the current game. Lottery research shows that players want higher jackpots. The increased odds will allow for jackpot growth. The proposed amendments should bring lapsed players back into the game.

Comment: One commenter indicated that eight-liners are causing Lotto sales to slump.

Response: The Commission, by proposing the amendments, is, in part, responding to player requests for higher jackpots. The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent that the comment suggests the play of eight-liners is the sole or primary cause of the decline in Lotto sales. The Commission believes that if the comment is correct, all Lottery products sales would be in a decline, which is not the case.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "Does it cost too much to air the drawings on the news?"

Response: It is expensive to use paid advertising to show the drawings. The drawings are still filmed live and broadcast via satellite for the TV stations to broadcast. It is the choice of each station to broadcast the drawings and fit them into their airtime.

Comment: One commenter wants to decrease the amount paid to the Lobbyist.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Texas Lottery Commission pays no lobbyist.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the media sometimes prints the wrong numbers and the Lottery does not correct it.

Response: The drawing numbers are verified and faxed to the media. The newspapers are responsible for publishing the correct numbers.

Comment: One commenter indicated that if there are no winners, there are no players.

Response: The Commission agrees with the comment.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the state is becoming greedy.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the proposed amendments are intended to address player requests for higher jackpots as well as increase sales.

Comment: One commenter suggested modeling Lotto Texas after the Canadian Lottery. Have larger pay outs for 5 of 6 numbers and leave the number of balls at 50. Let people enter more than 6 numbers on a draw. A 7 number ticket lets customers believe that they have a higher chance of winning. Charge more for tickets and let people buy 7, 8, and 9 numbers combinations, raising the price more for each.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the proposed amendments offer a higher payout of prizes at all levels. Amendments were proposed in the past that suggested a 7th bonus number and received negative comment from players. Charging more for the tickets and adding different combinations would make for a more complicated game and comments received in connection with past proposed amendments indicated a desire not to complicate it.

Comment: One commenter stated: "The pots will be slow growing with the changes. I will save my money on the lower pots and only play the large ones."

Response: The comment is representative of how players are playing Lotto Texas today. With sales declining as fewer people play, jackpots remain smaller.

Comment: One commenter suggested having the drawing at 6:00 p.m. on the news, so they will carry it live.

Response: The Commission cannot mandate a station broadcast the drawing. Commission: One commenter suggested selling tickets 24 hours a day.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because there must be a draw break after each drawing takes place for the system to recognize whether a ticket with the winning numbers has been sold. The retailer's ability to sell tickets is based mostly on the retailer's business hours. There are not enough retailers who are open 24 hours a day to warrant keeping the system up through the night.

Comment: One commmenter suggested that people have stopped buying tickets because the 3 of 6 number payout is to low.

Response: The proposed amendments offer an increased prize amount of $5 from $3 on the 3 of 6 prize.

Comment: One commenter stated: "We don't have California's population to increase the odds 1:25 million."

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to increase sales and have higher jackpots. The design of the proposed matrix was not based on a comparison of California's population.

Comment: One commenter stated: "If Texas is hurting that much for money, why not have a state income tax that will allow Governor Bush, Linda Cloud and the Texas Lottery Commission to play after all, the Lottery is nothing more than a self imposed tax."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the proposed amendments are intended to address player requests for higher jackpots as well as increase sales. Also, the Commission has no authority to impose a tax.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "Does the State have a graph of Lotto sales by day and/or week since its inception?"

Response: The Commission has sales information but not in graph form.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "Why are the sales and jackpots graph presented in such a way as to imply that the Lottery is losing money? It is deceitful and dishonest."

Response: The Commission and, more importantly, the state is not losing money. The Commission continues to return to the state a significant amount of money for the Foundation School Fund. However, sales are declining because players are spending less and playing less frequently.

Comment: One commenter asked the question "Why don't Cash 5 dollars roll like Lotto?"

Response: The question is irrelevant to the proposed amendments. However, each Lottery game is designed differently to appeal to a different segment of Lottery players.

Comment: One commenter suggested having lifetime winners who get $1000 per week.

Response: The commission disagrees with the comment because the suggestion would not result in high jackpots. However, the Commission does have an instant game that offers $1000 week for 20 years.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the pot will rise slowly and if someone from out of state wins, Texans will be inclined to play less.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the more people play, the more quickly the jackpots will increase. Having a winner from out of state could happen at any time, now or if the game is changed.

Comment: One commenter suggested that the store clerks should be rewarded for selling tickets to encourage them to sell.

Response: The Commission conducts clerk incentive promotions occasionally.

Comment: One commenter suggested eliminating the small prizes and decrease the odds and let players win and split the big prize.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players not only want to have the opportunity to win at lower levels but also want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter stated: "It didn't work in California, New York and is not working in Florida, so why will it work in Texas?"

Response: The Commission is aware of the experience in these states. The Lotto game changes in California and New York were different than what has been proposed in connection with Lotto Texas. Additionally, the Commission is aware that very recently, California made a matrix change to its Lotto game. While it is premature to know whether the change is successful, the act alone by California to change its Lotto matrix is instructional, especially given California's past experience with changing its Lotto matrix. Also, the experience in Florida appears to indicate an increase in Lotto sales based on a change in Florida's Lotto game. The changes in Florida's Lotto game are similar to the changes proposed in the Lotto Texas game.

Comment: One commenter indicated that retailers need a reason to push sales in the stores.

Response: The Commission believes that the proposed amendments will benefit retailers because retailers are paid 5% in sales commissions. As a result of the proposed amendments, sales should increase. Therefore, retailers should experience an increase in income from the increase in sales.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "What will the minimum starting Jackpot be?"

Response: Currently, the minimum jackpot is four million dollars. However, this amount is subject to change should it become necessary to do so.

Comment: One commenter stated: "In the beginning, we were led to believe that the money was going to the schools and it's not. These changes will only help the Texas Lottery make more money for itself."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment that the changes will only benefit the Commission. The Commission anticipates players and retailers as well as the State of Texas to benefit. At the start of the Lottery all proceeds went to the General Fund. As a result of legislative changes, all proceeds now go to the Foundation School Fund.

Comment: One commenter suggested that if a player gets 2 of 6 numbers, a free play should be given if the player buys a $5 ticket.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because free plays are still a prize expense and would have to be deducted from the total prize pool for that draw.

Comment: One commenter suggested selling 3, 6, 9 month and yearly advance tickets at a discount.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Offering this option would require the development of a subscription database. The Commission has researched this concept by reviewing other states' experience. It appears that it is cost prohibitive and would require additional staff without results to support it.

Comment: One commenter indicated that it is obvious that the contractor is having an influence in this decision.

Response: The Commission relies on its vendors for their expertise and knowledge. The Commission's vendors are required contractually to propose ideas to keep the Lottery games healthy. However, the Commission is unaware of undue influence by its vendors in connection with the Commission's decision to propose the amendments.

Comment: One commenter suggested increasing profit by "increasing volume, have a sale!"

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment is to "have a sale" on long term basis. The Commission would not be in a position to pay high jackpots since jackpots are sales driven. Occasionally, as a promotion, the Commission does offer 2 for 1 purchases or buy 5, get 1 free.

Comment: One commenter suggested having scanners at Lotto locations for people to scan their own tickets to see if they are winners.

Response: Industry technology has designed prototypes of such hardware, but it is expensive and would require additional efforts on the behalf of Lottery retailers also.

Comment: One commenter suggested looking at other lotteries to see what works before increasing the odds.

Response: The Commission monitors other lotteries to watch for trends. For example, the successful change Florida made to its Lotto game has been instructional for the proposed changes in Lotto Texas.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the reason people stop playing the Lotto is that the TLC keeps changing the rules.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Texas is the only state that has gone this long, from inception, without changing its Lotto matrix. As a result, Lotto Texas sales have declined and Texas is not experiencing the high jackpots it once did.

Comment: One commenter stated: "What part of NO don't you understand?"

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission believes the proposed amendments will increase sales and result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggests the Commission restore the original parameters, 20 annual payments and a 65% return.

Response: The original parameters did not include a 65% prize payout. It has always been at 50%. The Commission disagrees with the comment because restoring the annual payments to 20 will not result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated that one solution is to "get rid of Kiplin, the Lottery Commission needs some new blood."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because taking the suggested action will not result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested cutting 5 balls, not adding 4, cutting the ball sets to four and machines to two.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because it would not result in higher jackpots and increased sales.

Comment: One commenter wants to keep Lotto 6 of 50, pay $5 for 3 numbers and increase the prize from $4 to $5 Million. Instead of Texas Million, play a special 6 of 50 Lotto Friday night and sell $2 tickets, the prizes will be: 3 of 6 pays $50, 4 of 6 pays $1,000, 5 of 6 pays $10,000.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter wants the Commission to make a deal with Texas Cable News Network to televise the drawings at 9:59 pm and have another show at 10:59 pm to announce if there was a winner. It is the Texas Lottery Commission's job to keep the interest up.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Lottery drawings are filmed live and broadcast via satellite. It is the individual television station's choice to pick up the drawings and broadcast them.

Comment: One commenter indicated that there are a certain number of people who gamble, and no more and the player base is saturated.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because Lottery research shows that players would play if the jackpots were higher.

Comment: One commenter wants the Commission to do away with all the scratch offs and have one card only.

Response: The comment is not relevant to the proposed amendments. However, players want more than one instant game available.

Comment: One commenter indicated that "it is almost impossible to really win a lottery, unless the controller wants a winner. They choose when and where (and many times who)."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Lottery drawings are random and a series of nearly 300 checkpoints are conducted each draw to ensure the security and integrity of the games.

Comment: One commenter suggested reviving the Texas Lottery by reducing it to five numbers and let there be a winner one out of three.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because Cash 5 is the Commission's 5 digit online game.

Comment: One commenter stated: "I would like to know if the total from all the games is about the same as just having the Lotto Texas and scratch off games." Response. The total sales from all games is not the same as the combined sales from Lotto Texas and instant games.

Comment: One commenter suggested having 10 plays on a card.

Response: The Commission will consider this suggestion in the future. Currently, there is not enough physical space on one Lotto Texas playslip for 10 different sets of numbers.

Comment: One commenter suggested having machines in stores for people to scan their own tickets to see if they are winners, instead of having lines for the clerks.

Response: The Commission will consider this suggestion in the future. While the Commission is aware that lottery vendors are working on such hardware, the technology is not currently available to the Commission.

Comment: One commenter suggested trying a game show.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the suggestion will not result in higher jackpots in Lotto Texas. Player research indicates players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested that the 3 of 6 should pay out $5.00, 4 of 6 pay out in the thousands, and the 5 of 6 should pay out in the tens of thousands.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because funding the suggested prize levels would require taking money from the jackpot level. Player research indicates players want higher jackpots, not lower.

Comment: One commenter indicated he/she doesn't "win when the Commission, school foundation and retailers make more money."

Response: The proposed amendments increase the prize pool from 50% to 55%.

Comment: One commenter suggested leaving Lotto alone and starting the jackpot at $2 or $3 million.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates players want higher jackpots and the proposed amendments are intended, in part, to result in higher jackpots.

The following are comments received during the comment period from persons who did not specify if they were for or against the proposed changes:

Comment: Several commenters suggested changing the pay out over time to 15 or 20 years.

Response: The Commission disagrees with comment because this change would not increase Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: Some commenters want to raise the prize amounts for all numbers.

Response: The proposed amendments include an increase in the direct prize category percentages which will provide for higher prizes at the 3 of 6, 4 of 6, 5 of 6 and 6 of 6 prize levels.

Comment: One commenter wants to increase retailer compensation for more of an incentive.

Response: The Commission believes that the proposed amendments will result in increased compensation to the retailers because as sales increased, the dollar amount based on the 5% commission will also increase.

Comment: A few commenters want to have positive changes advertised in the Lottery.

Response: The Commission is careful to avoid advertising that would unduly influence a person to participate in the Lottery. The Commission believes advertising positive changes, i.e., "change of life" advertisements, as a result of winning the Lottery could be considered undue influence.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a weekly drawing of $1 million, tax-free and give away $52,000 per year.

Response: The Lotto Texas game was intended to address players' request for high jackpots. This suggestion is not consistent with the purpose of Lotto Texas. The game designed to address players' request for a weekly $1 million draw is the Texas Million game. The Texas Million game offers a top prize of $1 million to meet player's requests. However, the Commission cannot offer a tax free prize because federal tax law requires that taxes be paid on all prizes $600 and above.

Comment: Some commenters indicated that the television and radio stations do not announce the numbers.

Response: Lotto Texas drawings are filmed live and broadcast via satellite for television stations to air. It is the choice of each individual station as to whether it will carry the drawings. The Commission cannot mandate to the stations to carry the drawings.

Comment: One commenter asked the question: "Why not let the winners choose annuity or cash option at the time of claim?"

Response: The Commission purchases its investments to fund the prize which is paid out over time the day after the drawing. It would not be financially prudent for the Commission to sell its investments shortly after the purchase. Further, whether the Commision afforded its players the flexibility to elect this option at the time the player claimed the prize would not increase Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: Some commenters stated that there are too many games.

Response: Each of the Lottery online games were designed to meet the requests of our players; Lotto Texas offers higher jackpots, Texas Million offers at top prize of $1 million with lower odds, Cash 5 offers higher prizes at lower levels and Pick 3 offers smaller prizes with daily drawings. Eliminating some of the games would not necessarily increase Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: Some commenters suggested that draws should be once a week.

Response: The Commision does not believe that reducing drawings to once a week would address player requests regarding higher jackpots. In fact, it would have the opposite effect.

Comment: Some commenters indicated that players should get 2 picks for a $1.

Response: Giving players 2 plays for $1 would increase the number of plays per game but not help to offer higher prizes or larger jackpots which is what player research indicates Lotto players want.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that the amount the retailer receives should be capped at $200,000.

Response: The Commission does not believe that capping the amount retailers receive as incentive is relevant to the proposed changes

Comment: One commenter wants jackpots to be described in terms of so much money a month or a week so that people can relate it to the amount they have now.

Response: The Commission does not believe characterizing jackpot amounts in such a way will have an impact on Lotto Texas sales. However, the Commision has produced point-of-sale materials in the past that show the breakdown of jackpot amounts; such as, "$4 million is not Chicken Feed", and "$4 million is more than $13,000 a month".

Comment: Several commenters want to increase the 3, 4 and 5 of 6 percentage of the prizes.

Comment: The proposed matrix has a higher prize payout of 55% which will allow for higher prizes at the 3 of 6, 4 of 6, 5 of 6 and 6 of 6 prize levels.

Comment: A few commenters want to have more winners of smaller $2 million jackpots.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research indicates that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the Commission should pay the tax on the jackpot.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission's operating expenses are approximately 7% of total sales and the Commission is not in a position, financially, to pay taxes on jackpot prizes.

Comment: One commenter suggested raising the pay out on 3 of 6 to $10.

Response: The Commission does not agree with the comment to raise the 3 of 6 to $10 because eof the cost involved. However, the Commision is responding to player requests regarding an increase in the payout amount at the 3 of 6 level. The proposed amendments reflect an increase from $3 to $5 for the 3 of 6 prize.

Comment: Several commenters suggested having smaller pay outs with more chances to win.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because decreasing the percentage of payout results smaller prizes to win, without increasing the player's chance to win.

Comment: A few commenters suggested increasing the percentage of pay out on the cash option.

Response: The Commission disagrees with comment because the cash value option is based on the sales for that particular draw. The cash value option is approximatey 50% of the advertised Lotto jackpot.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a mini-Powerball.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to make the Lotto Texas game healthy. Having a mini-Powerball will not help in improving Lotto Texas game.

Comment: One commenter wants the odds lowered in order to make everyone in Texas a millionaire.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter wants to increase the starting pot to $5 million and charge $1.50 a ticket.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because increasing the starting jackpot to $5 million would require an increase in sales to support a higher starting jackpot. Increasing the price of a ticket to $1.50 would not compensate for increased jackpot amount. At the rate of current sales, the starting jackpot may have to be reduced from $4 million to $3 million or lower.

Comment: Some commenters suggested improving existing games.

Response: The proposed amendments are designed to improve the existing Lotto Texas game.

Comment: A few commenters suggested decreasing overhead.

Response: Whether the Commission decreases its operating expenses is irrelevant to the reason the Commission proposed amendments to the Lotto Texas game. The Commision, by proposing the amendments, is attempting to stop declining Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: A few commenters suggested improving the image of the Commission.

Response: The integrity, security, and honesty of the Lottery are the Commission's primary focus. At no time, has the integrity, security, and honesty of the Lottery been questioned. However, the Commission reviews player research routinely to address perceived image issues, if the players raise them.

Comment: Some commenters suggested dropping some games.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots. Dropping some Lottery games will not address these players' requests. Additionally, each game appeals to a different category of players.

Comment: Some commenters stated that local television does not show the drawings and that the Commission should advertise more.

Response: The comment is irrelevant to the proposed amendments. However, Lotto Texas drawings are filmed live and broadcast via satellite for television stations to air. It is the choice of each individual station to decide to broadcast the drawings. The Commission can not mandate a station broadcast the drawings.

Comment: Some commenters want to join Powerball and leave Lotto Texas alone.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission believes it should improve its Lotto Texas game regardless of whether it should participate in another game.

Comment: Some commenters indicated the pay out on 5 of 6 numbers should be substantially higher.

Response: The proposed amendments are designed, in part, to increase the 5 of 6 prize level from $1,500 to $2,500. Comments: A few commenters want to reduce the jackpot and increase the odds of winning.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter wants to have 40 $100,000 winners instead of 1 $4 million winner.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter wants people to have a real chance at being a winner.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment is suggesting that the proposed amendments will not give people a "real chance at being a winner". The proposed matrix does not indicate this statement to be correct. Further, as of April 5, there has been 398 Lotto jackpot winners out of 778 draws. Along with Lotto Texas, the Commission offers other games with various odds of winning a prize at different levels. Current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: A few commenters suggested adding a bonus number.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because past proposed amendments to Lotto Texas featured a bonus and comments from players were not in favor of this type of game.

Comment: One commenter suggested the following: Reduce $4 million to: 1 million 1st prize $500,000 x 4 2nd prize, $100,000 x 10 3rd prize, for a total of 15 winners.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested choosing 8 numbers instead of 6 to allow more chances to win.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because having 8 numbers would not increase the chances to win.

Comment: One commenter wants to go back to live drawings showing one ball at a time.

Response: The comment is irrelevant to the proposed amendments. However, Lotto Texas drawings are filmed live and broadcast via satellite for television stations to air. It is the choice of each individual station to decide to broadcast the drawings. The Commission cannot mandate a station broadcast the drawings.

Comment: One commenter wants to increase 3 of 6 to $50 payout.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because increasing the prize level to this amount would have a significant impact on other prize levels in the game.

Comment: Some commenters want to have the ability to play Lotto Texas over the Internet.

Response: The Commission is prohibited under current law from selling tickets via the Internet.

Comment: One commenter suggested drawing 4 sets of numbers for 4 $1 million winners.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots. The Commission offers a game which offers $1 million prizes at the top level, Texas Million.

Comment: Several comments suggested having advertising that features more winners.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because it does not respond to player requests for higher jackpots. However, the Commission produces a player newsletter Winning showing recent winners and is distributed through licensed Lottery retailers. Winner information can also be found on the Commission's website at www.txlottery.org

Comment: Several commenters want to give the winners more money.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to give winners more money by increasing the prize payout from 50% to 55% which results in increasing all four prizes levels; 3 of 6, 4 of 6, 5 of 6, and 6 of 6.

Comment: Several commenters want to drop the amount of numbers from 50 to 49 to allow more winners.

Response: The Commission does not agree with the comment because it would not result higher jackpots which are what player research shows players want.

Comment: Some commenters suggested giving incentives for playing, such as buy 5 get 1 free.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the suggestion is irrelevant to the purpose of the proposed amendments. However, the Commission has offered such promotions through coupon distribution either to invite trial or cross promote two games.

Comment: Some commenters want to return to the original payout percentage.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the current prize payout for Lotto Texas is 50% and has not changed since the introduction of the game. The proposed amendments increase the prize payout to 55%.

Comment: A few commenters suggested reducing the number of scratch off tickets to save money because they are expensive to print.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because reducing the number of scratch games has no relevance to declining Lotto Texas sales and the proposed amendments. However, the average number of scratch games that retailers carry is 20. Player research indicates that players like the freshness of new games and new ways to win.

Comment: One commenter indicated that when they called the 800# and asked questions concerning the rules, the personnel at the Commission got very defensive.

Response: The Commission appreciates the comment. This should not be the attitude of Commission personnel.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the Lottery is a voluntary tax. If the Lottery pays out more of the prize money and decreases the "tax", more people would play.

Response: The proposed amendments increase the prize payout from 50% to 55%.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a once a month Super Jackpot of $15 million to $20 million and having the other weekly drawings of 5 winners of $600,000 or 8 winners of $500,000.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because current Lottery research shows that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated making Lotto picks bought during a week be good for all the following week and have 5 draws per week.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because this suggestion would not help increase sales or increase the size of the jackpot.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a set jackpot of $20 million and selling the tickets until the Commission has enough to pay and then have the drawing.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because this suggested type of game would not result in higher jackpots and player research indicates players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter stated that the media doesn't tell what the jackpot amount is for the next draw.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission produces radio jackpot alerts and 10 second metro reads that advertise the jackpot amounts. Many of the newspapers publish the drawing results along with the estimated jackpot for the next draw. Some television commercials have been tagged with the jackpot amount. Additionally, eighty outdoor billboards showing the jackpot amount are placed throughout the state.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a big wheel drawing on TV or some location and allows people to buy chances to win smaller prizes.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because television game shows are very expensive to produce and funding has to be available for the prizes. Further, such a suggestion would not increase Lotto Texas sales or create higher jackpots.

Comment: A few commenters stated that the Commission only allows winners from large cities.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the number of winners in any given area is relative to the population of players participating in the games from that area. The drawings for all Texas Lottery games are random and the Commission Security Division goes through a checklist of nearly 300 steps for each drawing to ensure the integrity, security and fairness of the games is maintained. Also, winners come from all sizes of cities.

Comment: One commenter suggested that if the Federal Government would only take 14%, the State could keep the other 86%.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment the Commission cannot change federal income tax law. Further, the comment is not relevant to the proposed amendments.

Comment: One commenter stated that "GTECH is sucking the State dry at roughly 33% each and every drawing."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because it is not a true statement. GTECH is currently paid 3.361% of sales.

Comment: One commenter stated: "When I first started playing, I won a little and now I still play a lot and I don't win at all."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment if the comment is intended to suggest that the odds of winning have decreased. The odds of winning on the current Lotto game have not changed since the game was introduced.

Comment: One commenter indicated that when "advertising the odds of winning, it is certainly deceptive advertising, if not an out and out lie to call a ticket that sells for a dollar that is redeemed for a dollar, a winner."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because there is not a one dollar prize amount in the Lotto Texas game. The least amount a person can win is by matching 3 of 6 numbers for a prize of $3.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that the wording in the proposed amendment is inaccurate because the proposal indicates that the changes will increase odds, when the odds will be decreased.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the odds of winning are increased when the odds of winning increase from approximately 1 in 15 million to 1 in 25 million.

Comment: One commenter stated: "We were "promised" higher jackpots when you changed the pay out from 20 to 25 years."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the payout over time was changed to 25 years but not the percentage of prize payout.

Comment: One commenter stated: "There are more winners in east Texas than west Texas."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the number of winners in any given area is relative to the population of players participating in the games from that area. The drawings for all Texas Lottery games are random and the Commission Security Division goes through a checklist of nearly 300 steps for each drawing to ensure the integrity, security and fairness of the games is maintained.

Comment: One commenter suggested showing which winners are quick picks and which are not because people don't feel the Lottery is run honestly.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent comment indicates that the Lottery isn't run honestly. Lottery information indicates that the distribution of players picking their own numbers or playing Quick Pick is about 50/50. The selection of Quick Pick continues to be the option of the player.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the Commission is not making as much money because of all of the illegal gambling available to the public.

Response: The Commission agrees that other forms of gaming, whether legal or illegal, may have an impact on Lottery sales; however, the Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment is intended to suggest that other forms of gambling are the cause for the decline in Lotto Texas sales. If comment is correct, the Commission would be experiencing a decline in sales for all its games and it is not.

Comment: One commenter suggested modeling Lotto Texas after the successful German Lottery.

Response: The Commission is not familiar with Germany's Lotto game. However, from a review of the information contained in the comment it appears that the German Lotto includes a bonus ball and increased number of prize categories. The Commission proposed amendments to the Lotto Texas rule which included a bonus ball and increased number of categories. Comments received concerning the use of a bonus ball and increase in the number of categories were negative. Additionally, recent player research indicates that the majority of players want multimillion dollar jackpots which is not the case with the German Lottery. Also, like the German Lottery, the Commission produces a player newsletter.

Comment: One commenter suggested drawing 2 sets of numbers when the Lotto goes over 10 million. If there is only one winner, he/she gets all the money. If there are more winners, it is split evenly. People will buy more tickets because their chances of winning increase.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because jackpots are already split when there is more than one winner. Also, drawing two sets of numbers in the manner suggested will not result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested capping the prize at 10 million, have a second drawing for the excess instead of letting it roll to a new jackpot.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested reminding the public what 4 million dollars is.

Response: The Commission has conducted advertising campaigns to carry this message.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the average person has no idea how much money goes into education.

Response: The Commission produces a pamphlet showing the breakdown, by percent, of where the money goes. However, the revenue generated by the Lottery for the Foundation School Fund is a fraction of the education budget. It is not the Commission's role to inform the public about the education budget.

Comment: One commenter indicated that if the economy were better, people would play more.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because the economy does not appear to be better or worse than it was in past years. The Commission believes that players want higher jackpots and will not play at lower jackpot levels as much as they once did.

Comment: One commenter suggested having only one drawing per week because most people want a chance at bigger Jackpots.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because having one drawing per week will not result in higher jackpot levels.

Comment: One commenter indicated that in east Texas it is easy to drive to Louisiana for Powerball tickets. If the Texas Lotto could mirror the Powerball, players might buy more tickets here.

Response: The proposed amendments do not mirror Powerball but are intended to result in higher jackpots. Past proposed Lotto Texas amendments mirrored to some extent Powerball and player comments were opposed to the proposed changes.

Comment: One commenter indicated that five numbers in Powerball pays $100,000.

Response: The Commission does not understand the significance of the comment except to the extent the comment is suggesting increasing the 5 of 6 prize amount in the Lotto Texas game. The proposed amendments do increase the prize level for the 5 of 6 tier; however, not to this suggested amount. If the Commission accepted the suggestion, the money would have to come from another prize level, such as the 6 of 6 level which would result in lower jackpot levels. Player research indicates players want higher jackpots, not lower.

Comment: One commenter suggested that the Lottery should not be so secretive. People in big stores who purchase tickets do not win. The Lottery is run by computers and the people know immediately the exact location and time the ticket was purchased. The winners should not be protected by secrecy, they should be glad they won.

Response: The Commission is subject to the Open Records Act. Certain information about a winner is public information. However, certain information, such as the winner's home address and telephone number, is exempt from disclosure. Additionally, winners have the option to participate in publicity at the time the winner claims the prize.

Comment: One commenter suggested reducing the prize of 6 of 6 numbers to $1 million, increasing the amount of funds in reserve for 5 of 6 numbers to $1.5 million (higher payoffs for those who win), increasing the amount of funds in the reserve for 4 of 6 numbers to $500,000 (higher payoffs for those who win), and increasing the prize amount for 3 of 6 numbers to $4. The cost of implementing this change will not be as great. For most players, a million dollar prize is enough.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. Player research indicates that 81% of people polled said they want multimillion dollar jackpots.

Comment: One commenter asked the questions: "Does Cash 5 and Texas Million take away from Lotto sales? Could it be that adding new on-line games has detracted from the primary game?"

Response: The Commission expects some cannibalization with new game introduction. Such cannibalization is considered at the time a new game is proposed. The Commission relies on player research which indicates that each of the on-line games appeals to a different category of players.

Comment: One commenter suggested the following: Leave the Jackpots and numbers the same, instead of giving $3 for 3 numbers, give a free ticket. Raise the amount of money for 4 numbers to $5000 and raise the amount of money for 5 numbers to $25,000 or as high as possible.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because it would have an adverse impact on the jackpot prize amount, so it could not be left the same.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the New York Lottery just decreased the number of balls to increase sales.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comment intends to indicate that decreasing the number of balls will increase sales. Decreasing the number of balls should result in lower jackpot levels. Player research indicates that players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the "Lotto was doing just fine until some anti-lottery commission members were elected to the board. The advertising for the Lottery decreased (I can't remember the last time I saw a TV commercial), the odds of winning were reduced, as a result people started playing."

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because Lotto Texas sales have been declining for some time and player research indicates players want higher jackpots. The Commission's advertisement is at approximately the same level it has been in the past.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the Commission's greatest adversary is the "Law of Diminishing Utility".

Response: The Commission does not understand the comment.

Comment: One commenter indicated that if the Commission reduced the initial jackpot, the marginal players will drop out of the market until the jackpot gets bigger.

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to increase jackpots and, as a result, avoid having to reduce the minimum jackpot level.

Comment: One commenter stated: I don't believe the money should only support schools. I'd prefer for some money to go to animal rights groups, environment, etc. On scratch-offs, you should be able to redeem tickets for items (t-shirts, key chains, more tickets) to help the environment and prevent tickets from being thrown on the ground."

Response: The Commission does not decide how lottery revenue is used. With regard to possible prizes for instant tickets, players indicated they want money.

Comment: One commenter suggested letting people from other states buy our lottery that would increase our pots and only letting them choose the 25 year payment option and the interest is the Commission's to use.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because people from other states can buy Texas Lottery tickets now. However, the interest in the 25 year payment option makes up the total jackpot amount won over time. There is no interest gained by the Lottery.

Comment: One commenter wants to combine his own picks with random picks. For example, combine his birthday (11-3) with 4 random numbers.

Response: The current software technology does not make such a suggestion possible.

The following is a summery of the comments received during the comment period from persons who indicated they were in favor of the proposed amendments but offered additional comments:

Comment: Many commenters want to see the 3, 4, and 5 of 6 levels pay higher.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to achieve higher prize levels.

Comment: Many commenters indicated they agree with the matrix change.

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to respond to player requesters such as these comments.

Comment: Many commenters stated they want bigger jackpots.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher jackpots.

Comment: Some commenter indicated that the odds are impossible anyway so why not have bigger jackpots.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested paying for pairs in Pick 3 to increase its popularity.

Response: The proposed amendments only relate to Lotto Texas. Paying pairs in Pick 3 would change the payout for other combinations.

Comment: One commenter indicated that notification of the numbers drawn on the website is not timely.

Response: The Commission will raise this its issue with the appropriate staff.

Comment: One commenter indicated that bigger jackpots will attract out of state players.

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to respond, in part, to player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter suggested increasing the number of advance draws from 10 weeks.

Response: The Commission will consider this suggestion in the future.

Comment: Several commenters indicated that "it's about time" the changes were made to the game.

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to increase sales and to respond to player requests for higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated that "it keeps me going to win a little every now and then."

Response: The proposed amendments increase the guaranteed 3 of 6 payout from $3.00 to $5.00.

Comment: One commenter suggested that with the increased number of balls, the Commission should pay $1.00 for 2 of 6 numbers.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because paying at this level would affect the other prize levels and would result in lower jackpot levels than what is expected as a result of the proposed changes. Player research indicates that players want higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated that Lotto allows a chance at the big jackpot with the opportunity to win smaller ones at the same time.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended, in part, to result in higher jackpots.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that funding for education will increase.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher jackpots as well as an increase in Lotto Texas sales. An increase in sales should result in an increase in revenues to the State for the Foundation School Fund.

Comment: One commenter suggested the Commission picking 6 balls when the jackpot is under $15 million and 7 or 8 balls when the jackpot is over $15 million.

Response: The Commission proposed amendments to the Lotto Texas game in the past that contemplated picking more than 6 balls. The comments received in connection with the past rulemaking were opposed to this type of concept.

Comment: One commenter wants the scanning ink darkened.

Response: The Commission will bring this comment to its vendor's attention.

Comment: One commenter suggested that after the jackpot reached $20 million, it should be distributed between 2 or 3 people.

Response: The Commission is uncertain as to how the "2 or 3 people" would be selected if they did not have tickets with numbers that matched the 6 numbers drawn. The 6 of 6 is already parimutual and players with matching 6 of 6 already must split the jackpot.

Comment: Some commenters suggested that payouts should be higher.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher payouts at all prize levels.

Comment: One commenter indicated that people from all over will play with bigger jackpots.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher jackpots and increased Lotto Texas sales.

Comment: One commenter wants live television drawings.

Response: The Commission places its drawings on satellite for television stations to be able to broadcast the drawings live. However, the Commission can not compel a television station to broadcast the drawings.

Comment: One commenter wants the public perception of the Lottery improved.

Response: The Commission conducts research routinely to ascertain the public's perception of the Lottery and makes adjustments in response to such feedback.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that more money will come into Texas instead of going to Powerball.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended, in part, to respond to player requests for higher jackpots. One result of higher jackpots is that players may opt to play Lotto Texas rather than travel to a border state that participates in Powerball.

Comment: One commenter suggested having a bonus ball.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment. The Commission proposed amendments in the past in connection with Lotto Texas that involved a similar concept. Public comment was opposed to the idea.

Comment: One commenter suggested eliminating the 3 of 6 prize.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the comment because player research indicates that not only do players want higher jackpots but they also want to win at the lower levels.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the changes will benefit everyone and more people will play.

Response: The Commission believes the proposed amendments will result in what the commenter suggests.

Comment: One commenter wants the Commission to notify players as soon as possible where the winning ticket was sold.

Response: The Commission makes the information available as to where the 6 of 6 ticket was sold as soon as possible after the drawing.

Comment: One commenter suggested decreasing the number of scratch games.

Response: The proposed amendments relate only to Lotto Texas. However, the Commission offers the number of scratch games it does because players have requested variety.

Comment: A few commenters indicated that the changes will create more excitement.

Response: In the past, high jackpot amounts created excitement. The proposed amendments are intended, in part, to result in higher jackpots which may also result in creating more excitement.

Comment: One commenter indicated that sales will increase with the changes.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended, in part, to result in increased sales.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the changes will improve Lotto Texas.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to improve Lotto Texas.

Comment: One commenter indicated that he/she will play anyway.

Response: The Commission wants the game to be played by all who want to play but still want people to play responsibly.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the decline in Lotto sales is the current matrix. The commenter stated: "Review of the sales data shows that peer capita participation ranges from $.25 to $.50 for jackpots from $3 million to $25 million. It is not until the jackpots get larger than the $25 million that per capita spending increase to levels that build sales." The commenter indicated that the matrix needs to be adjusted to increase the likelihood of the jackpot rolling to levels above $25 million. The commenter referenced the Florida Lotto changes and indicated Florida has realized a 30% increase in sales year-to-year since the change was implemented last fall.

Response: The Commission agrees.

The Commission conducted a hearing on April 19, 2000 to receive public comment on the proposed amendments. The following is a summary of the comments received at the hearing:

Comment: A few commenters indicated that the proposed changes will increase enthusiasm for Lotto Texas and be more fun for the players as it generates more revenue for the State.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher jackpots and increased sales. Increased sales will result in increased revenue to the State. Higher jackpots should create increased enthusiasm.

Comment: A few commenters indicated more money will be brought into the State and that their customers are for the changes because of the bigger jackpots.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended, in part, to result in higher jackpots.

Comment: One commenter indicated that the changes will bring more people to the game.

Response: The proposed amendments are intended, in part, to result in higher jackpots. Higher jackpots should bring more people into the game.

Comment: One commenter suggested that the Commission be more honest in its responses when math errors are pointed out to the Commission. In making this suggestion, the commenter referred to a past rulemaking and does not refer to the current rulemaking. The commenter also suggested increasing the jackpot to 55% while keeping the game at 6 of 50 balls and eliminating the $3.00 prize. The commenter indicates that this suggestion will increase the projected jackpot by 36% without decreasing dramatically the probability of anyone winning it. The commenter also indicated that the proposed changes will change the probability of winning a prize greater than the minimum prize which the commenter feels at $3.00 and $5.00 is insignificant. The commenter suggest that nobody buys a Lotto ticket to win $3.00 or $5.00. The commenter also indicated that his students are surveying players and asking them if they would be willing to give up a $3.00 prize to have a 36% increase in the jackpot. The commenter indicates that according to his students' survey, many players did think that they preferred the commenter's suggestion of giving up $3.00 to have a 36% increase in the jackpot.

Response: The Commission disagrees with the suggestion of eliminating the 3 of 6 level. Player research indicates that while players want higher jackpots, players also want the opportunity to win at the 3 of 6 level.

Comment: One commenter indicated that sales are down and when sales are down, the Commission should look to see why sales are down. The commenter indicated that retailers are not making enough money and do not want to "push lotto". The commenter also indicated that the retailers "absolutely have got problems with their money, their five percent". The commenter indicated that the retailers are unhappy when eight-liners were discontinued because "everybody who played the eight-liners also spent their winnings on the Lotto." The commenter also suggested that the retailers are unhappy with the Commission's theft policy for their scratch off tickets. The commenter indicated that she wants sales to go up. The commenter suggested that the Commission abandoned its past Lotto Texas rulemaking in order to come back with a better plan and a better way to present it to convince the Commissioners to do it. The commenter indicated that her first thought is to add the four balls because the Commission would fail and the commenter could tell the Commission "I told you so". The commenter indicated that she believed Commission staff had already been working on getting retailers to approve the plan so when presented to the Commissioners, Commission staff could have the power to convince the Commissioners that staff has support for adding the four balls. In addition, the commenter offered comments regarding a survey to retailers. The commenter indicated that the problem she has with the retailer survey is information in the retailer survey that states that "similar changes in New York and Florida brought marked increases in sales and dramatically boosted player interest in those states." The commenter stated that this information "is a lie". The commenter indicated that she received information from New York regarding every change that New York has made and stated that New York dropped the number of balls from six in 54 to six in 51 and that New York is happy now. The commenter also discussed California's experience and indicated that "California did the same thing": The commenter stated that "California came back and lowered their balls and it only took them a year or two." The commenter suggested that making it harder for people to win will make people quit playing. The commenter indicated the retailer survey left out that the changes in New York and California failed. The commenter suggested that the Texas Association of Lottery Retailers (TALR), GTECH, and the Commission, in a group effort, did the retailer survey. The commenter believes this because the TALR only has 200 or 300 members but 4,000 surveys were sent. The commenter also indicated that she disagreed with the statement in the proposed rulemaking that there will be no adverse effect on small businesses because if the Commission put them out of business that would be an adverse effect. The commenter also indicated that the Commission knows and has known that the retailers are unhappy and have been begging for some way to increase sales. The commenter also criticized the Commission for having a statistician from A&M come to the March 14, 2000 Commission meeting and explain why there were six winners in a row because the Lotto game is to be won. The commenter also criticized GTECH telling the Commissioners that "Texas only had a cold" and that part of the sales pitch was Texas losing a lot of money to border states. The commenter disagrees with the statements based on information she obtained from North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries (NASPL). The commenter suggested looking at Delaware, and, in particular, Delaware's per capita spending. The commenter does not believe Texas is losing money to other states and Texas should not begrudge competition. The commenter criticized Texas using Florida's Lotto change experience to support the proposed changes. The commenter indicated Florida increased their draws from once a week to twice a week which should automatically double their sales. The commenter also indicated that Florida sales were up and now they are down. The commenter brought to the hearing comments divided into two piles. One pile represented comments from people against the proposed amendments and indicated that pile had 2,500 to 3,000 names. The other pile represented people in favor of the proposed amendments and it had 8 names. The commenter also criticized the Commission for not issuing a press release and asking people to come to the public hearing while through the previously mentioned retailer survey Commission staff was "getting retailers to come forward." The commenter read excerpts from correspondence she received into the record at the hearing. The comments she read were all opposed to the proposed amendments. The commenter also stated that she was upset because she learned that the Commission already purchased the 54 balls.

Response: The Commission agrees with the commenter that the Commission should look to see why sales are down when sales are down. Based on its research, the Commission believes that sales are down because people are not playing as much as they used to play. Player research indicates that players want higher jackpots. The proposed amendments are intended to result in higher sales and higher jackpots. The Commission disagrees with the comment to the extent the comments suggest that Lotto Texas sales are down because of a relationship to eight-liners. If this statement was a true statement, the Commission would experience a decline in sales of all products. Other Lottery products are not experiencing a decline in sales like Lotto Texas. The Commission disagrees with the comment that retailers are unhappy with the Commission's theft policy for instant game tickets. The proposed amendments relate solely to Lotto Texas and are intended, in part, to address the decline in Lotto Texas. In fact, instant ticket sales appear to be increasing. The Commission disagrees with the comment that the Commission abandoned its past Lotto Texas rulemaking simply to "come back with a better plan and a better way to convince the Commissioners" to adopt changes to Lotto Texas at a later date. The Commission indicated at the time the past rulemaking was withdrawn that it may have to consider changes to Lotto Texas in the future if sales did not improve. Sales have not improved since the withdrawal of the past rulemaking. Insofar as the commenter has suggested that Commission staff was making efforts during the interim time between the past rulemaking and the present rulemaking to convince retailers to approve the changes, the Commission is unaware of such efforts by Commission staff. Regarding the comments made about the retailer survey issued by TALR, Commission staff reviewed a draft of the survey prior to its issuance. TALR notified Commission staff of its intention to issue the retailer survey to TALR members and offered to allow Commission staff to review it. After the Commission staff's review, TALR issued the survey to its members. The Commission is aware that after the survey was issued; GTECH contacted TALR to suggest making the survey available to all retailers. GTECH delivered the same survey to lottery retail locations and picked up the surveys once they were completed. GTECH provided TALR with the completed surveys. TALR provided the surveys to the Commission at its April 13, 2000 meeting. With regard to the commenter's claim that the survey's reference to other states Lotto game change experience is inaccurate, the information provided to the Commission in connection with Florida's experience indicates that Florida's Lotto change has increased Lotto sales. The Commission is aware that Florida increased the number of drawings per week from one to two. However, the Commission does not believe the change accounts for the marked increase in Lotto sales. The Commission believes the primary reason for the increase in sales is attributed to the matrix change. Lotto's sales are jackpot driven. As the jackpot grows, sales grow. Additionally, as the odds of winning the jackpot remain the same regardless of the number of drawings per week. As to the reference in the survey regarding New York, the Commission agrees that the indication in the survey that New York experienced similar changes and the changes boosted sales dramatically is inaccurate. Based on the information the Commission has regarding New York's Lotto game changes, the changes were not similar. The Commission, in proposing the amendments, did not rely on New York's experience as a basis for its decision to propose the amendments. Further, the Commission is not now relying on information regarding New York. As to the commenter's information regarding California, the Commission is aware that very recently, California made a matrix change to its Lotto game. While it is premature to know whether the change is successful, the act alone by California to change its Lotto matrix is instructional, especially given California's past experience with changing its Lotto matrix. As to the comment regarding the reference that there will be an adverse effect on small businesses, the Commission disagrees. The proposed amendments are intended to result in increased sales. As sales increase, the retailers' income based on the 5% commission will increase. Therefore, the effect on small businesses (retailers) will be positive. Regarding the comment that GTECH provided inaccurate information to the Commission in connection with Texas losing a lot of money to border states and that the Commission should not begrudge competition, the Commission believes Texans play border states' games, particularly multi-state games, when the jackpots are higher than Lotto Texas jackpots. Further, the Commission does not "begrudge" competition. However, the Commission must stay competitive and make appropriate changes to its products when such changes are warranted. The commenter suggested the Commission look to Delaware's per capita spending. The Commission disagrees with the comment because the Commission believes it is more helpful to look at states with comparable population. However, the Commission reviews other states' experience for insight when appropriate. As to the comment's criticism regarding what the commenter perceives as a failure to notify the public about the Commission meeting and public comment hearing but notifying retailers, the Commission notified all persons through its website as well as the required notice in the Texas Register. The Commission is interested in hearing comment from all interested persons. The Commission is aware of action by GTECH to notify retailers of the meeting. However, the Commission is not aware of any action by GTECH to tell retailers what to comment. As to the comments by other people the commenter read into the record, such comments have been summarized herein and responses have been provided herein. As to the comment that she was upset because the Commission had already purchased the 54 balls, the Commission has purchased the additional balls prior to the adoption of these amendments. However to the extent the comment suggests that adoption of the proposed amendments was a "fait accompli", the Commission disagrees. Commission staff ordered 5 ball sets, numbers 1 through 54, in the Fall. When the proposed rulemaking was withdrawn the order of balls numbers 51 through 54 was canceled. However, two sets had already been manufactured and were sent to the Commission. In addition to these two sets, the Commission took possession of 3 sets of balls numbers 1 through 50. Notwithstanding the issue of ball numbers 51 through 54, the Commission needed new ball sets because the old sets were the originals and were due to be replaced. Commission staff purchased the 3 sets of ball numbers 51 through 54, in order to be ready, from a time perspective, to use the balls in the event the Commission adopted the proposed amendments. Commission staff was aware that it would take 30 days from the time of placing the order to receiving the balls. After receiving the balls, considerable testing of the balls must occur and the Commission's statistician must complete his analysis to ensure that the balls will function randomly before the statistician can certify to the Commission that the balls may be put in rotation for the draw. Each ball costs approximately $200. The approximate total cost is $4,000. On balance, Commission staff spent $4,000 versus not being prepared to implement these proposed amendments as soon as possible and lose a far greater revenue to the State. Therefore, the purchase of the balls should not be indicative that the adoption of the proposed amendments was a "fait accompli" but instead should be considered a reasonable business decision by Commission staff. Finally, in summary, with regard to the issues surrounding the survey, the Commission recognizes the import of such issues and has considered such issues when making its decision.

At the April 13, 2000 and May 12, 2000 Commission meetings, the Commission received public comment on the proposed amendments. The following is a summary of the comments received at the meetings which is not redundant, repetitive, or duplicative to comment already received, summarized, and considered by the Commission:

Comment: One commenter indicated that his association sent out a survey to retailers. The response out of 3,973 returned surveys was 3,505 in favor of the proposed amendments and 468 opposed to the proposed amendments. The commenter indicated the percentage breakdown to be: 88% in favor and 12% opposed. The commenter also indicated that the changes will breathe new life into the Lottery and maybe the changes will generate interest and sales will increase.

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to result in higher jackpots and increase sales.

Comment: One commenter indicated that he had opposed the proposed changes in connection with the past Lotto Texas rulemaking; however, the commenter indicated that he had done some research and polled customers and is in favor of the proposed amendments. The commenter indicated that the Florida Lottery had sent him information on sales figures since Florida made the matrix change and sales have increased. The commenter indicated that if the jackpot is higher, sales are higher.

Response: The Commission proposed the amendments to result in higher jackpots and increase sales.

Comment: One commenter indicated that bigger jackpots increase the "traffic in the stores".

Response: The Commission anticipates that higher jackpots will increase sales and the retailers will experience an increase in "traffic in their stores".

Comment: One commenter set out the activities surrounding the retailer survey and the process implemented by TALR in conducting the surveys and input TALR received from Commission staff regarding the surveys.

Response: The Commission appreciates the commenter's clarification of the process.

Comment: One commenter indicated that she had obtained copies of the retailer surveys and had reviewed the surveys herself and had obtained private analysis of the surveys for purposes of determine their authenticity. The commenter read portions of the reports prepared for her by two different reviewers, which essentially suggested that it was "highly probable" certain specific surveys were not written by different people. The commenter stated that she had delivered about 566 surveys for analysis and had received one report of 64 pages, mostly copies of the suspect one-page surveys and the other report of 26 pages, mostly copies of the suspect surveys.

Response: The Commission understands the commenter to be suggesting that some of the surveys are not authentic, insofar as she is relying upon the reports that suggest that some signatures were not written by different people. The concerns raised by the commenter appear to go to some 90 surveys; a total of 4,600 surveys were submitted. The Commission will consider the commenter's concern and give the retailer surveys the appropriate weight in the Commission's reliance on those surveys.

Comment: One commenter discussed GTECH's role in disseminating the retailer surveys and addressed the other commenter's contention that the surveys were not accurate or authentic. The commenter stated that he knew of no concern regarding the authenticity of the retailer surveys. He stated that GTECH had identified one representative that did not following certain procedures in gathering the surveys; however, that act still did not cause him to question the underlying survey results.

Comment: One commenter discussed GTECH's role in disseminating the retailer surveys and addressed the other commenter's contention that the surveys were not accurate or authentic. The commenter stated that he knew of no concern regarding the authenticity of the retailer surveys. He stated that GTECH had identified one representative that did not following certain procedures in gathering the surveys; however, that act still did not cause him to question the underlying survey results.

Response: The Commission appreciates the clarification given regarding the retailer surveys.

The amendments are adopted under Texas Government Code §466.015, which gives the Texas Lottery Commission the authority to adopt all rules necessary to administer the State Lottery Act and rules governing the establishment and operation of the lottery; and, under Texas Government Code §467.102 which gives the Commission the authority to adopt rules for the enforcement and administration of the laws under the Commission's jurisdiction.

Texas Government Code, Chapter 466 is affected by the amendments.

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 May 12, 2000.

TRD-200003351

Kimberly L. Kiplin

General Counsel

Texas Lottery Commission

Effective date: June 1, 2000

Proposal publication date: March 31, 2000

For further information, please call: (512) 344-5113