Part 1.
TEXAS BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL EXAMINERS
Chapter 3.
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS
Subchapter D. CERTIFICATION AND ANNUAL REGISTRATION
22 TAC §3.66
The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners adopts an amendment
to §3.66, pertaining to the certification and annual registration of
landscape architects. This amendment will ensure that the language of the
rule is consistent with statutory amendments enacted during the last legislative
session. The proposal to amend this rule was published in the December 6,
2002, issue of the
Texas Register
, (27 TexReg
11365). The amendment is being adopted without changes and the text will not
be republished.
The amendment will cause the language in the rules to be consistent with
statutory amendments enacted during the most recent legislative session.
The amendment to the rule will have no significant impact on small business,
and there will be no significant change in the cost to persons required to
comply with the section.
The agency received no comments pertaining to the proposal to amend this
rule.
The amendment is adopted pursuant to Section 4(a) and Section
2(b) of Article 249c, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, which provide the Texas
Board of Architectural Examiners with authority to promulgate rules as necessary
to administer Article 249c, including rules related to restrictions on the
use of the term "landscape architect" and related terms.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300459
Cathy L. Hendricks, ASID/IIDA
Executive Director
Texas Board of Architectural Examiners
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: December 6, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-8535
22 TAC §§3.121 - 3.124
The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners adopts amendments
to §§3.121 - 3.124, pertaining to compliance with and enforcement
of the rules regulating the practice of landscape architecture: §3.121,
which describes the agency's general authority to investigate apparent violations
of the Act and the rules regulating the practice of landscape architecture
and describes the methods for disposing of violations which cannot be resolved
through settlement; §3.122, which requires a landscape architect who
forms a business association with any unregistered person(s) for the purpose
of offering landscape architectural services to enter into a written agreement
of association with the unregistered person(s); identifies the parties who
must sign the agreement and describes the information that must be included
in the agreement; requires documents prepared pursuant to the agreement to
be sealed, signed, and dated in accordance with the landscape architectural
sealing rules; and requires that copies of all documents prepared pursuant
to the agreement must be maintained for ten years from the date of substantial
completion of the project; §3.123, which describes the restrictions on
the use of landscape architectural titles; and §3.124, which describes
the business registration requirements for businesses that offer or provide
landscape architectural services in Texas. This amendment will ensure that
the language of the rule is consistent with statutory amendments enacted during
the last legislative session. The amendment to §3.122 will ensure that
the language of the rule is consistent with statutory amendments enacted during
the last legislative session and will clearly identify a defined term used
within the rule. The amendment to §3.123 will ensure that the language
of the rule is consistent with statutory amendments enacted during the last
legislative session and will clearly identify a defined term used within the
rule. The amendment to §3.124 will ensure that the language of the rule
is consistent with statutory amendments enacted during the last legislative
session. The proposal to amend these rules was published in the December 6,
2002, issue of the
Texas Register
, (27 TexReg
11365 through 11366). The amendments are being adopted without changes and
the text will not be republished.
The amendments make language in the rules more consistent with statutory
amendments enacted during the most recent legislative session and result in
more clearly identified defined terms.
The amendments to the rule will have no significant impact on small business,
and there will be no significant change in the cost to persons required to
comply with the sections.
The agency received no comments pertaining to the proposal to amend these
rules.
The amendments are adopted pursuant to Section 4(a) and Section
2 of Article 249c, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, which provide the Texas
Board of Architectural Examiners with authority to promulgate rules, including
rules related to restrictions on the practice of landscape architecture and
the use of the title "landscape architect" and related titles.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300461
Cathy L. Hendricks, ASID/IIDA
Executive Director
Texas Board of Architectural Examiners
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: December 6, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-8535
22 TAC §3.148
The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners adopts an amendment
to §3.148, pertaining to the prevention of the unauthorized practice
of landscape architecture. This amendment will ensure that the language of
the rule is consistent with statutory amendments enacted during the last legislative
session. The proposal to amend this rule was published in the December 6,
2002, issue of the
Texas Register
, (27 TexReg
11368). The amendment is being adopted without changes and the text will not
be republished.
The amendment will cause the language in the rules to be consistent with
statutory amendments enacted during the most recent legislative session.
The amendment to the rule will have no significant impact on small business,
and there will be no significant change in the cost to persons required to
comply with the section.
The agency received no comments pertaining to the proposal to amend this
rule.
The amendment is adopted pursuant to Section 4(a) and Section
2(b) of Article 249c, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, which provide the Texas
Board of Architectural Examiners with authority to promulgate rules, including
rules related to restrictions on the use of the term "landscape architect"
and related terms.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300462
Cathy L. Hendricks, ASID/IIDA
Executive Director
Texas Board of Architectural Examiners
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: December 6, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-8535
Chapter 101.
DENTAL LICENSURE
22 TAC §101.9
The State Board of Dental Examiners adopts amendments to §101.9,
Dental Profiles without changes to the text as published in the November 22,
2002, issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg
10861).
Senate Bill 187, 77th Legislature provided for a profile system and directed
licensing agencies to gather specific data and make it available to the public
no later than January 1, 2005.
The State Board of Dental Examiners amended §101.9 at subsection (a)
to reflect this time requirement to begin gathering profile data from all
applicants renewing their dental licenses no later than January 1, 2004.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendment.
The amended rule is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties, Senate Bill 187, §11, 77th
Legislature, 2001, which requires the Board to adopt rules to establish a
profile system.
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300362
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 22, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
Subchapter B. PROCEDURES FOR INVESTIGATING COMPLAINTS
22 TAC §107.100
The State Board of Dental Examiners (Board) adopts amendments
to §107.100, Receipt, Processing and Coordination of Complaints without
changes to the text published in the November 22, 2002, issue of the
The Sunset Advisory Commission in its June 2002 report, at Recommendation
3.8, recommended that the Board adopt rules that allow for the acceptance
of anonymous complaints and to relay this policy to the public. The Board
agreed with that recommendation and adopted new language at subsection (c)
establishing procedures for the receipt and processing of all complaints,
including anonymous written complaints filed by patients, and/or other members
of the general public or dental professions against Texas dentists and dental
hygienists and/or dental laboratory registrants.
Comments were received from the Texas Dental Association (TDA). In its
comments, the TDA requested that additional language be added to 107.100 (c)
to clarify that anonymous written complaints will be logged and filed for
information purposes. The TDA stated further that the suggested revision would
reflect the current policy of at least two other licensing agencies and would
also reflect the difficulty of successfully pursuing complaints in cases where
the person making the complaint is unwilling to testify.
The Board appreciates the comments of the TDA however, no additional changes
will be made to the rule. The policy of the Board has always been to accept
written anonymous complaints. The current rule makes clear that written anonymous
complaints will be processed in the same manner as all other complaints to
the Board. The rule, as it is written, also complies with the recommendations
of the Sunset Advisory committee.
The amended rule is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties, and §255.006 which provides
that the Board shall adopt rules concerning filing complaints.
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300363
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 22, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
22 TAC §107.102
The State Board of Dental Examiners (Board) adopts amendments
to §107.102, Procedures in Conduct of Investigation without changes to
the text published in the November 22, 2002, issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 10863).
The Sunset Advisory Commission in its June 2002 report, at Recommendation
3.9, recommended that the Board adopt rules that specify a reasonable time
frame for the PEC to review those dismissed complaints on the request of the
complaint. The Board agreed with that recommendation and amended §107.102
by adding new subsection (i) to ensure that dismissed complaints that are
to be reconsidered by the Board's Professional Evaluation Committee (PEC)
at the request of the complainant are done so in a reasonable time frame.
The Board also amended §107.102 at subsections (f), (g), (h) and (j)
by clarifying language regarding the handling of dismissals and the complaint
review process in general. Specifically, language at subsection (g) now provides
that a case dismissed by the Board Secretary or designee is reviewed by at
least two members of the Enforcement Committee and subsection (h) now provides
that once a complaint is dismissed the Board shall notify the complainant
within ten days from the date of the Board action thereby allowing the complainant
the right to appeal the dismissal.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendment.
The amended rule is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties and §255.006 which provides
that the Board shall adopt rules concerning disposition of complaints.
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300364
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 22, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
22 TAC §107.200
The State Board of Dental Examiners adopts the repeal of §107.200,
Administrative Penalty without changes as noticed in the November 22, 2002,
issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 10865).
Rule 107.200 was repealed as it was obsolete, redundant and irrelevant.
Specifically, subsection (a) referenced §107.201 which was repealed in
2001, and subsection (c) referenced violation categories that were reclassified
in §107.101 (of this title relating to Guidelines for the Conduct of
Investigations). Language defining circumstances under which an administrative
penalty may be imposed as well as criteria for determining the amount of penalty
is found in new §107.202, Disciplinary Guidelines and Administrative
Penalty Schedule.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the repeal.
The repeal is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties.
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300366
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 22, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
22 TAC §107.202
The State Board of Dental Examiners (Board) adopts new §107.202,
Disciplinary Guidelines and Administrative Penalty Schedule, without changes
to the text published in the November 22, 2002, issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 10865).
The State Auditor's Office conducted an internal and financial audit of
the State Board of Dental Examiners, April 2002. The State Auditor's Office
in its June 5, 2002 report cited that "the Board's inconsistent application
of rules and policies and flawed investigation process severely weaken its
oversight of dental professionals." At Chapter 1.1, Failure to Enforce Criteria
Impairs Consistency it was noted "...while the Board adopted specific guidelines
for sanctions in 2001, these guidelines are not codified in the Texas Administrative
Code." The State Auditor's Office recommended that the Board codify in the
Texas Administrative Code suggested sanctions they may levy against license
holders or unlicensed individuals for specific infractions. The Board agreed
with the State Auditor's recommendation and adopted new §107.202 that
sets forth disciplinary guidelines and administrative penalties.
Comments were received from the Texas Dental Hygienists' Association (TDHA).
In its comments, the TDHA requested the deletion of the professional conduct
violation language in Section 107.202(d)(4)(C) regarding the application of
pit and fissure sealants and site specific subgingival medicaments by dental
hygienists while outside the dental office and not under the general supervision
or direction of a dentist. The TDHA also suggested adding language regarding
retaliation against a person who files a complaint and further requested the
addition of language regarding violations as they relate to dental assisting.
The Board appreciates the comments of the TDHA, however, no additional
changes will be made to the rule. The Board believes the current language
in Section 107.202(d)(4)(C) adds clarity to the rules. Additionally, the proposed
rules were not intended to address the issue of retaliation. The rules were
proposed to add clarity and consistency to the Board's processes in light
of the recommendation of the State Auditor's Office. The Board's rules currently
require all dental assistants' to act under the direct supervision of a licensed
dentist who is directly responsible for the actions of the dental assistant.
The new rule is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties, §264.001 which provides
the Board with the authority to impose an administrative penalty, and §263.002
which provides grounds for disciplinary action in general.
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300367
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 22, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
22 TAC §114.2
The State Board of Dental Examiners adopts amendments to §114.2,
Definition without changes to the text published in the October 11, 2002,
issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 9532).
Chapter 114, Extension of Duties of Auxiliary Personnel - Dental Assistants,
establishes permissible duties for dental assistants. House Bill 3507, 77th
Legislature, 2001, and §114.3 of this title (relating to Application
of Pit and Fissure Sealants), provide that a Texas licensed dentist who is
enrolled as a Medicaid Provider with appropriate state agencies may delegate
the application of a pit and fissure sealant to a dental assistant, if the
dental assistant is employed by and works under the direct supervision of
the licensed dentist and is certified. Further, § 114.3(d) establishes
requirements for a dental assistant wishing to obtain the necessary certification
to apply pit and fissure sealants. One such requirement is the completion
of a minimum of 16 hours of clinical and didactic education in pit and fissure
sealants taken through a Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) accredited
dental hygiene program.
The amendments made to §114.2, provide definitional terms that ensure
uniformity and similarity in the training and education given to dental assistants
and dental hygienists under §115.2 of this title (relating to Permitted
Duties). These new definitions include at paragraph (2) didactic education--requires
the presentation and instruction of theory and scientific principles; at paragraph
(3) clinical education--requires providing care to patient(s) under the direct
supervision of a dentist or dental hygienist instructor; and at paragraph
(4) direct supervision--the instructor responsible for the procedure shall
be physically present during patient care and shall be aware of the patient's
physical status and well being.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendment.
The amended rule is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties, and to ensure compliance with
laws relating to the practice of dentistry, and with the provisions of House
Bill 3507, Article 4, 77th Legislature, 2001
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300369
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: October 11, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
22 TAC §115.10
The State Board of Dental Examiners (Board) adopts amendments
to §115.10, Radiologic Procedures, without changes to the text published
in the November 22, 2002, issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 10868).
The State Board of Dental Examiners entered into a contract with an independent
testing organization for the purpose of administering the radiologic examination
to a dental assistant seeking certification to perform radiologic procedures.
Language was amended at subsection (e), paragraph (3) to reflect that the
Board's radiology examination is no longer administered by a licensed Texas
dentist.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendment.
The amended rule is adopted under Texas Government Code §2001.021
et seq.; Texas Civil Statutes, the Occupations Code §254.001 which provides
the State Board of Dental Examiners with the authority to adopt and enforce
rules necessary for it to perform its duties.
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 January 22, 2003.
TRD-200300368
Bobby Schmidt
Executive Director
State Board of Dental Examiners
Effective date: February 11, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 22, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-6400
Chapter 505.
THE BOARD
22 TAC §505.12
The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy (Board) adopts
new §505.12, concerning Enforcement Committee Member Recusals without
changes to the proposed text as published in the November 29, 2002, issue
of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 11036). The
text of the rule will not be republished.
The new rule reduces to writing the Board's recusal practice of not voting
on a matter that was previously considered by a Board member during an enforcement
committee meeting.
The new rule will function by putting the Board's recusal practice into
a rule form.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.
The new rule is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act, Tex.
Occupations Code, §901.151 (Vernon 2001) which provides the agency with
the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable
to effectuate the Act.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300475
Amanda G. Birrell
General Counsel
Texas State Board of Public Accountancy
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 29, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848
Subchapter C. EDUCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS
22 TAC §511.57
The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy (Board) adopts
an amendment to §511.57, concerning Definition of Accounting Courses
with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 29, 2002, issue
of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 11037). The
changes are all in the first paragraph of the rule. The changes are in response
to public comments and further review by staff and are intended to simplify
and clarify the amendments. The sentence structure of the first paragraph
has been reorganized and divided into subsections (a), (b) and (c) for ease
of understanding. The effective date of the amendment was changed to January
1, 2004 in new subsection (c). Because the changes clarify the rule and the
effective date of the change was in response to comments, the changes are
not substantive.
The amendment allows the Board to accept some courses that have been taken
in community colleges and Management Information System ("MIS") courses and
positions the timing or scheduling of internships in a student's college career.
The amendment will function by allowing students to receive credit for
some courses that have been completed at community colleges and MIS courses
and by having internships scheduled for a time in a student's college career
that the Board considers to be most beneficial to the student.
The Board received several comments on the proposed rule during the comment
period. The comments and responses are listed in the next section.
Comment: A commenter stated that changing the definition of accounting
courses to include courses offered at community colleges may be confusing
to students because the courses would not be accepted by degree granting institutions
and this would confuse students. The addition of community college programs
would be detrimental to the accounting programs throughout the state because
most degree granting institutions offer post baccalaureate certificates that
allow students with bachelor's degrees in other areas to obtain accounting
hours to take the exam.
Response: There are a limited number of community colleges that offer a
CPA certification program. To insure that these programs meet the rigors of
upper division accounting course work offered at degree granting institutions,
the Board will complete a process that reviews and evaluates various aspects
of the CPA certification program offered at community colleges prior to acceptance.
Those community colleges offering less than a full CPA certification program
will not meet this definition. However, they may still provide lower division
courses to prepare students for entry into degree granting institutions, as
well as accounting technician programs which serve the business community
in the area. It is not the intent of this requirement to cause hardships to
students or degree granting institutions of the State. It is the Board's responsibility
to insure that students are prepared for the rigors of the accounting profession,
so that they may meet the demands of the business community and the people
of Texas.
Comment: Another commenter noted that the proposed new requirements to
the internship program are too restrictive to accommodate the needs of diverse
student populations. The commenter stated that the changes may mean fewer
opportunities for students to be able to experience an internship.
Response: By design the internship program should be as demanding as traditional
classroom curriculum. The Board has identified areas of abuse in this program
and, in an attempt to tighten controls added these amendments to its current
definition.
Comment: One commenter suggested the proposed rule should include references
to graduate degrees in addition to baccalaureate degrees and to graduate courses
in addition to upper division courses where these terms appear. Since the
implementation of the 150-hour requirement, many candidates are involved in
graduate programs.
Response: The Committee agrees with the commenter's suggestion, however,
restrictions should be placed so that graduate level accounting courses without
an accounting prerequisite do not satisfy this definition. This restriction
is similar to disallowing lower-division accounting courses.
Comment: One commenter stated the proposed changes would significantly
weaken accounting programs across the state at the university level because
students could earn a bachelor's degree in any field and take accounting courses
at community colleges.
Response: There are a limited number of community colleges that offer a
CPA certification program. To insure that these programs meet the rigors of
upper division accounting course work offered at degree granting institutions,
a Board-designed accreditation process must be completed prior to acceptance.
Those community colleges offering less than a full CPA certification program
will not meet this definition. However, they may still provide lower division
courses to prepare students for entry into degree granting institutions, as
well as accounting technician programs which serve the business community
in the area. It is not the intent of this requirement to create hardships
on the students or the degree granting institutions of the State. It is the
Board's responsibility to insure that students are prepared for the rigors
of the accounting profession, so that they may meet the demands of the business
community and the people of Texas.
Comment: One commenter objected that the Board is not an accrediting agency
and that it is inappropriate for the Board to take on that function.
Response: The Board is aware of its position, and does not purport to be
an accrediting agency. However, Section 901.254 of the Public Accountancy
Act requires that the Board determine by rule the accounting and other courses
it will accept. In order to make this determination, and to make the examination
available to all socio-economic groups within the state, the Board must use
some of the criteria currently used by accrediting bodies.
Comment: One commenter said the proposed changes in the courses seemed
appropriate but suggested "graduate" should be included in accounting courses
and degree, since some students are obtaining master's degrees.
Response: The Committee agrees with the commenter's suggestion, however,
restrictions should be placed so that accounting courses including graduate
level courses, without an accounting prerequisite do not satisfy this definition.
This restriction is similar to disallowing lower-division accounting courses.
Two commenters asked several questions:
Comment: Does the additional text concerning the internship not being taken
until a minimum of 12 hours of upper division coursework has been completed
refer to accounting coursework?
Response: The intent is that the internship be performed after the student
has completed 12 semester hours of upper division accounting courses.
Comment: Does "full semester" mean full time credit hour course load?
Response: Yes.
Comment: Does "semester" include summer session?
Response: No.
Comment: Must the internship be taken before a student has fulfilled all
of the requirements to be awarded a degree?
Response: No. The internship may be taken before or after awarding of the
BBA degree. The limitations of taking the internship course after completing
12 semester hours of accounting gives the student a basis of knowledge on
which to build experiences from the internship. The requirement that the internship
be taken prior to the last full semester allows the student an opportunity
to integrate the internship experience into the remaining accounting courses
that must be completed.
Comment: Could the internship be taken after completing the BBA as part
of the additional courses required to accumulate 150 hours?
Response: No. The internship may be taken before or after awarding of the
BBA degree. The limitations of taking the internship course after completing
12 semester hours of accounting gives the student a basis of knowledge on
which to build experiences from the internship. The requirement that the internship
be taken prior to the last full semester allows the student an opportunity
to integrate the internship experience into the remaining accounting courses
that must be completed.
Comment: Will the proposed changes limit internships to summer and fall?
Response: No. Internships could be taken during any semester, provided
the qualifications mentioned in the response to the previous question are
met.
Comment: Will the rule changes apply to students enrolled in an internship
during spring semester 2003?
Response: No. The rule will not become effective until January 1, 2004.
Comment: Can an internship be included in the "other areas related to accounting"?
Response: No.
Comment: Could six semester hours of an internship be counted under the
definition of Related Business Subjects?
Response: No. The Board limited an internship to 3 semester hours as an
accounting course.
Comment: One commenter noted that the rule as written, referring to online
courses, would permit students to complete too much of their accounting education
via online coursework because there is no effective way to ensure that the
person receiving the credit actually did the work. Students do not receive
the benefit of observing and participating in classroom discussions in the
online class. Candidates should be required to complete at least 85% of their
accounting coursework in classes that require physical attendance. The physical
attendance threshold is too low.
Response: This comment does not address a proposed amendment. The text
he is referring to has been in this rule since 1999. However, to respond to
his comment: With the limitation of 15 hours of accounting from online coursework,
the faculty who teach students in classroom settings should be able to determine
if the course curriculum typically taught in the online setting was learned
and could be applied to higher order cognitive skills in the advanced accounting
classes.
Comment: One commenter objected that because the concept of "core" accounting
is being dropped, a candidate could write the examination without having completed
significant auditing coursework. At least one auditing course should be required.
Response: The core accounting courses listed do not require that an auditing
course be taken. This listing only provides the student and the university
with various courses that would meet the core accounting requirement.
Comment: One commenter suggested Grandfathering students who are currently
pursuing a degree in accounting because it is unfair to change the eligibility
when so close to completion.
Response: The effective date of the proposed amendment has been changed
to January 1, 2004. The content of the CPA examination is changing to be more
comprehensive. The business community is demanding that CPAs are knowledgeable
and skilled in various aspects of accounting. Grandfathering creates several
negatives for the profession and the business community. (1) Students would
continue to take courses that did not prepare them for the CPA exam or professional
responsibilities with businesses. (2) Grandfathering could delay the implementation
of curriculum changes at colleges and universities. (3) Businesses might seek
accounting employees from outside the state because their skill and knowledge
level is aligned to current accounting practices. (4) Grandfathering might
delay the implementation of needed changes for 4-5 years.
Comment: One commenter stated that not permitting lower level accounting
courses for those without a degree in accounting but permitting them for non-degreed
persons is a double standard because qualifying courses should be the same
for everyone.
Response: It is not the Board's intent to create a double standard for
individuals who want to take the CPA examination, but rather to level the
playing field. Currently, there are students who enter four-year colleges
to obtain a business or accounting degree, take the requisite coursework to
earn the degree and qualify for the CPA exam. There are also students who
have a degree in another field and want to take the CPA exam. These students
amass the required number of semester hours at various institutions in order
to take the exam. The majority of the courses that are taken are offered at
community colleges and are designed for an accounting technician, not for
a professional designation. The Board found that students who take lower division
courses are not as successful on the CPA exam as those with upper division
courses that demand higher order thinking. It is the Board's intent to evaluate
community colleges that offer a full program that will prepare its students
for the CPA exam. If through this process, the Board determines that the curriculum
offered is equal to that which is available at a degree-granting institution,
then it can recognize the CPA certificate program. Currently, there are a
limited number of community colleges that offer the broad array of courses
that are found at degree granting institutions.
The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act, Tex.
Occupations Code, §901.151 (Vernon 2001) which provides the agency with
the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable
to effectuate the Act and §901.254 which authorizes the Board to promulgate
rules regarding education requirements.
§511.57.Definition of Accounting Courses.
(a)
An individual who holds a baccalaureate degree from a recognized
educational institution may enter into a course of study at an accredited
community college, provided that the accounting program offered at the community
college was reviewed and accepted by the board.
(b)
Credit for hours taken at recognized colleges and universities
using the quarter system shall be counted as 2/3 of a semester hour for each
hour of credit received under the quarter system.
(c)
Effective January 1, 2004 the board will accept not fewer
than 30 passing semester hours of upper division accounting courses without
repeat from the courses listed below. A recognized educational institution
must have accepted the courses for purposes of obtaining a baccalaureate degree
or its equivalent, and they must be shown on an official transcript. At least
15 of these hours must result from physical attendance at classes meeting
regularly on the campus of any transcript-issuing institution.
(1)
intermediate accounting, advanced accounting;
(2)
cost accounting;
(3)
auditing, internal accounting control and evaluation;
(4)
report writing (principally writing financial reports,
internal control reports, and management letters);
(5)
financial statement analysis;
(6)
accounting theory, standards, and analysis;
(7)
up to twelve semester hours of income tax;
(8)
accounting for governmental and/or other nonprofit organizations;
(9)
up to twelve semester hours of accounting systems, including
management information systems ("MIS"), provided the MIS courses are listed
or cross-listed as accounting courses, and the college or university accepts
these courses as satisfying the accounting course requirements for graduation
with a degree in accounting;
(10)
fraud examination; and
(11)
an accounting internship program (not to exceed 3 semester
hours) which meets the following requirements:
(A)
the accounting knowledge gained is equal to or greater
than the knowledge gained in a traditional accounting classroom setting;
(B)
the employing firm provides the faculty coordinator and
the student with the objectives to be met during the internship;
(C)
the internship plan is approved in advance by the faculty
coordinator;
(D)
the employing firm provides a significant accounting work
experience with adequate training and supervision of the work performed by
the student;
(E)
the employing firm provides an evaluation of the student
at the conclusion of the internship, provides a letter describing the duties
performed and the supervision to the student, and provides a copy of the documentation
to the faculty coordinator and the student;
(F)
the student keeps a diary comprising a chronological list
of all work experience gained in the internship;
(G)
the student writes a paper demonstrating the knowledge
gained in the internship;
(H)
the student and/or faculty coordinator provides evidence
of all items upon request by the board;
(I)
the internship course shall not be taken until a minimum
of 12 semester hours of upper division course work has been completed; and
(J)
the internship course shall be taken prior to completing
the last full semester of course work in order to integrate the knowledge
gained during the internship into the curriculum requirements for the degree
program.
(12)
any other course which is principally accounting or auditing
in nature but which may be designated by some other name (and the verification
of which is obtained in writing from the particular college or university).
After the November 1997 examination, elementary accounting may not be considered
under this rule; and
(13)
any CPA review course offered by an educational institution
or of a proprietary nature may not be considered in meeting the requirements
under this rule.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300476
Amanda G. Birrell
General Counsel
Texas State Board of Public Accountancy
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 29, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848
22 TAC §511.58
The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy (Board) adopts
an amendment to §511.58, concerning Definitions of Related Business Subjects
with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 29, 2002, issue
of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 11038). The
changes made to the proposed rule are in response to public comments received
and also based upon further review by staff, to simplify and clarify the rules.
The rule has been changed by dividing and rearranging subsection (a) into
subsection (a) and (b), and as a result of this change, old subsection (b)
is now subsection (c), and old subsection (c) is now subsection (d). As a
result of the comments received, the Board has also made a change to the effective
date from January 1, 2004 to July 1, 2005. Because the change clarifies the
rule and the effective date of the change is more liberal to the regulated
population than the proposed rule, the changes are not substantive and the
Board will not re-publish the proposed rule.
The amendment will require 21 hours of upper division courses instead of
20, will accept some community college courses under certain conditions, requires
the business law course to study the Uniform Commercial Code, requires the
communications course to be business communications and will require completion
of a three hour ethics course.
The amendment will function by directing students' courses toward those
areas the Board believes will be most beneficial to the student and to consumers.
The Board received several comments on the proposed rule during the comment
period. The comments and responses are listed in the next section.
Comment: One commenter questioned whether ethics, of the nature that the
Board apparently has in mind, can be taught. The commenter said some authorities
contend the answer is "no" and suggested the subject needs more thorough study
by the Board and accounting academics in Texas.
Response: Given the unethical practices that recently surfaced in businesses
it is prudent for the Board to require individuals aspiring to enter the accounting
profession to have knowledge of ethical reasoning, integrity, objectivity,
independence and other core values. This knowledge can best be measured by
a course of study in ethics as part of the higher education curriculum. Both
the business community and the public demand ethical business practices of
accounting professionals. The Board is aware that ethical practices cannot
be mandated, however it does require its licensed CPAs and non-CPA owners
to take a Board-approved course on business or accounting ethics. For many
years various curricula for Ethics courses have been available in other fields
of study, and at some higher education institutions ethics courses are also
available in various areas of business.
Comment: Several commenters said the curriculum could not be implemented
efficiently and effectively to meet the January 1, 2004 deadline and requested
the Board delay the implementation of this section of rule 511.58 until January
1, 2005. The commenters said there is insufficient time to design the curriculum
and implement the course so that students can enroll for the Fall 2003 semester
and that this would adversely effect December 2003 graduates. Students who
graduate in Spring or Summer 2003 would only have one opportunity to apply
for the CPA exam prior to the implementation date of this rule. The commenters
said the current implementation date places an undue hardship on CPA exam
candidates.
Response: The Committee is aware of the hardship that the January 1, 2004
implementation date may create for higher education as well as future accounting
graduates. Therefore, it recommends that the implementation date be changed
to July 1, 2005. This change will: (1) allow universities additional time
to develop curriculum and implement the courses; (2) identify courses currently
offered that meet the Board's requirements; (3) incorporate the requirement
in college catalogs; and (4) advise students of the necessity to take the
course. It may also be possible that students could take a course that meets
the Board's requirements at another university.
Comment: One commenter said that accreditation has required AACSB schools
to integrate ethics into the curriculum for the past 10 years.
Response: The Committee considered the AACSB accounting requirement for
accreditation. This policy does not mandate the type of curriculum recommended
by the Committee. Not all colleges and universities in Texas carry the AACSB
accreditation. For an ethics course to be effective from the Board's perspective
it should be quantifiable. By requiring a 3 semester hour ethics course that
contains specific components, the Board has some assurance that universities
are providing a measurable course that meets government, business and public
concerns.
Comment: A commenter said that integrating discussions about ethical issues
in the classroom focus attention on ethical decision-making situations that
accounting students will encounter in the real world.
Response: The Board concurs with the method of integration of ethical decision-making
situations into accounting curriculum. However, not all universities use this
method. Refer to the previous response.
Comment: A commenter noted that mandating the passing of a 3 semester hour
course in ethics would not be a very effective solution to the perceived problem
because there is no evidence that proves the current systems of teaching ethics
in universities are not working.
Response: The Board is not suggesting that the current system of teaching
ethics is not working. It wants to insure that all individuals aspiring to
enter the accounting profession have knowledge of ethical reasoning, integrity,
objectivity, independence and other core values. The best way of making this
assurance is by requiring an ethics course.
Comment: A commenter said the proposed rules would increase the legislative
appropriated support for the accounting curriculum across the state. He noted
that the requirement may be worth the additional costs but that it needs to
be documented.
Response: Universities should consider courses that are currently offered
which could meet the Board's requirements. This requirement may not be a financial
burden to the university.
Comment: One commenter questioned whether the requirement of an ethics
course would have an impact on behavioral patterns. He noted that this is
a controversial issue among experts in ethics. He suggested the Board solicit
input from experts in the field of philosophy and ethics before we commit
ourselves to devoting resources to the requirement of an ethics course.
Response: The Committee will consult with experts in the fields of philosophy
and ethics about the benefit to the Board, the profession, the public and
the individual.
Comment: Several commenters said that community college coursework cannot
be accepted as upper division courses at BBA granting institutions and suggested
that the following text be stricken from the proposed rule, "provided they
are recognized as upper division courses for a 4 year BBA degree from an institution
recognized by the board."
Response: The Committee is aware that community colleges by design may
not offer upper division course work. The intent of this text is to insure
that the related business courses taken at community colleges for the purpose
of taking the CPA examination meets the same rigors as those upper division
courses offered at degree granting institutions.
Comment: One commenter said that acceptable related business courses are
becoming narrower and a higher barrier to those persons with non-business
degrees. He also said that a person with a broad education who wants to take
coursework to enter the accounting profession should be able to accomplish
this as quickly as possible. The logic for the 150 hour requirement should
not be based on increasing the accounting and related business courses to
take the exam.
Response: The 150 hour requirement was implemented in 1991 to insure that
any person who enters the accounting profession must have a broad and well-rounded
education. Since that time the profession and the business community have
experienced many changes. Significant changes were identified in the
Comment: One commenter said that the proposed rules may not be sufficient
to achieve the intent of the Board and that instructors may teach "issue recognition"
rather than "values-based" ethics courses.
Response: Instructors may have several methods of presenting the ethics
curriculum so that students receive information about the concepts that were
defined by the Board, while teaching issue recognition and discussing conceptual
value systems that are acceptable to the business community, governmental
entities and public concerns. It would not be improper for an instructor to
use their value system during classroom discussions so that students may have
other means of developing and/or enhancing their own value systems.
Comment: One commenter said that ethics is currently covered in the auditing
class at his university. He suggested that a separate ethics course should
be dropped in favor of a rule specifying that candidates must have ethics
education somewhere in their college education. He cautioned that the recent
negative publicity and scandals are not a failure of ethics education.
Response: Given the unethical business practices that recently surfaced
it is prudent for the Board to require individuals aspiring to enter the accounting
profession to have knowledge of ethical reasoning, integrity, objectivity,
independence and other core values. This knowledge can best be measured by
a course of study in ethics as part of the higher education curriculum. Both
the business community and the public demand ethical business practices of
accounting professionals. The Board is aware that ethical practices cannot
be mandated, however it does require its licensed CPAs and non-CPA owners
to take a Board-approved course on business or accounting ethics. For many
years various curricula for Ethics courses have been available in other fields
of study and at some higher education institutions ethics courses are also
available in various areas of business.
Comment: One commenter said that some universities may not offer an ethics
course. He opined that if an ethics course were added it would be an elective
for graduate students, and that there may not be a sufficient number of students
to justify offering the course each semester.
Response: It may be possible that students could take a course that meets
the Board's requirements at another degree granting university.
Comment: One commenter suggested the requirement of upper division related
business courses be deleted from the rule because this would impact 40% of
the "stand-alone" MPA students.
Response: The Board was unaware that an MPA degree at this university did
not require the same rigorous coursework that the BBA or PPA degrees demand.
It is recommended that all degree plans be equalized from the standpoint of
acceptable coursework to take the CPA exam.
Comment: A commenter suggested the rule allow up to 9 semester hours of
lower division coursework in related business courses. He said this would
accommodate the "stand-alone" students.
Response: The Board must evaluate all related business courses taken at
Texas universities in an equitable manner. Economics and statistics courses
identified as lower division coursework will be accepted from all colleges
and universities, which will rectify this problem
Comment: One commenter suggested the Board give double credit for related
business courses taught at the graduate level. He said graduate courses should
be more heavily weighted than undergraduate courses because of the increased
rigor and content.
Response: Not all Texas universities offer more rigorous graduate courses.
There must be equity in the Board's assessment of college courses. Therefore,
the Board uses the semester hours credit as indicated on the transcript by
the Registrar. If three semester hours are awarded for a graduate course,
the Board cannot arbitrarily award three additional semester hours simply
because the course is taken at a particular university.
Comment: One commenter asked whether more than one course devoted to social/business
responsibility and ethics could be used to fulfill the ethics requirement.
He said that ethics has traditionally been incorporated throughout the curriculum
rather than in a specialized course.
Response: The Board would accept one three-hour course that covers the
concepts identified in the definition in meeting the requirement.
Comment: One commenter suggested that the ethics requirement should include
an option for documented integration of ethics material within the curriculum.
Response: Not all colleges and universities in Texas integrate ethics in
their curriculum. For an ethics course to be effective from the Board's perspective
it should be quantifiable. By requiring a 3 semester hour ethics course that
contains specific components the Board has some assurance that universities
are providing a measurable course that meets government, business and public
concerns.
The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act, Tex.
Occupations Code, §901.151 (Vernon 2001) which provides the agency with
the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable
to effectuate the Act and §901.254 which authorizes the Board to promulgate
rules regarding education requirements.
§511.58.Definitions of Related Business Subjects.
(a)
An individual who holds a baccalaureate degree from a recognized
educational institution may take related business courses offered at an accredited
community college, provided they are recognized as upper division courses
for a 4-year BBA degree from an institution recognized by the board.
(b)
Effective July 1, 2005, the board will accept not fewer
than 21 passing semester hours of upper division courses (for the purposes
of this subsection, economics and statistics at any college level will count
as upper division courses) as related business subjects (without repeat),
taken at a recognized educational institution shown on official transcripts
or accepted by a recognized educational institution for purposes of obtaining
a baccalaureate degree or its equivalent, in the following areas. Not more
than 6 semester hours taken in any subject area may be used to meet the minimum
hour requirement.
(1)
business law, including study of the Uniform Commercial
Code;
(2)
economics;
(3)
management;
(4)
marketing;
(5)
business communications;
(6)
statistics;
(7)
technical writing (covering subjects such as opinions,
tax planning reports, and management advisory services reports and management
letters);
(8)
finance;
(9)
information systems or technology; and
(10)
other areas related to accounting.
(c)
In addition to the 21 hours required in subsection (b)
of this section, effective July 1, 2005, the board requires that 3 passing
semester hours be earned as a result of taking a course in ethics. The course
must be taken at a recognized educational institution and should include ethical
reasoning, integrity, objectivity, independence and other core values.
(d)
Credit for hours taken at recognized colleges and universities
using the quarter system shall be counted as 2/3 of a semester hour for each
hour of credit received under the quarter system.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300477
Amanda G. Birrell
General Counsel
Texas State Board of Public Accountancy
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 29, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848
22 TAC §511.122
The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy (Board) adopts
an amendment to §511.122, concerning Acceptable Work Experience without
changes to the proposed text as published in the November 29, 2002, issue
of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 11040). The
text of the rule will not be republished.
The amendment redefines what is required to supervise CPA applicants, defines
non-routine accounting, recognizes that experience may be obtained in a non-CPA
firm, deletes the definition of commercial enterprise practice of accountancy
and defines acceptable industry work experience.
The amendment will function by allowing applicants to acquire work experience
in professional settings that the board believes will be beneficial to applicants
and consumers.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.
The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act, Tex.
Occupations Code, §901.151 (Vernon 2001) which provides the agency with
the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable
to effectuate the Act and §901.256 which authorizes the Board to promulgate
rules regarding acceptable work experience.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300478
Amanda G. Birrell
General Counsel
Texas State Board of Public Accountancy
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 29, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848
22 TAC §511.124
The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy (Board) adopts
an amendment to §511.124, concerning Acceptable Supervision without changes
to the proposed text as published in the November 29, 2002, issue of the
The amendment to §511.124 requires a supervising CPA to be experienced
in non-routine accounting and be an actively licensed CPA, it rewrites part
of the rule for clarity and prohibits supervision in situations where independence
is required.
The amendment will function by enabling applicants to be supervised in
a manner that the Board believes will be beneficial to the applicant and to
consumers.
No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.
The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act, Tex.
Occupations Code, §901.151 (Vernon 2001) which provides the agency with
the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable
to effectuate the Act and §901.256 which authorizes the Board to promulgate
rules regarding acceptable work experience.
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 January 23, 2003.
TRD-200300479
Amanda G. Birrell
General Counsel
Texas State Board of Public Accountancy
Effective date: February 12, 2003
Proposal publication date: November 29, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848
Subchapter E. REGISTERED CONTINUING EDUCATION SPONSORS
Subchapter G. COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT
Subchapter H. PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT
Part 5.
STATE BOARD OF DENTAL EXAMINERS
Chapter 107.
DENTAL BOARD PROCEDURES
Subchapter C. ADMINISTRATIVE PENALTIES
Chapter 114.
EXTENSION OF DUTIES OF AUXILIARY PERSONNEL--DENTAL ASSISTANTS
Chapter 115.
EXTENSION OF DUTIES OF AUXILIARY PERSONNEL--DENTAL HYGIENE
Part 22.
TEXAS STATE BOARD OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY
Chapter 511.
CERTIFICATION AS A CPA
Subchapter F. EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS
Chapter 523.
CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION