ADOPTED RULES An agency may take final action on a section 30 days after a proposal has been published in the Texas Register. The section becomes effective 20 days after the agency files the correct document with the Texas Register, unless a later date is specified or unless a federal statute or regulation requires implementation of the action on shorter notice. If an agency adopts the section without any changes to the proposed text, only the preamble of the notice and statement of legal authority will be published. If an agency adopts the section with changes to the proposed text, the proposal will be republished with the changes. TITLE 4. AGRICULTURE PART I. Texas Department of Agriculture CHAPTER 9. Seed Quality Special Provisions for Labeling 4 TAC sec.9.10 The Texas Department of Agriculture (the department) adopts an amendment to sec.9.10, concerning the labeling of treated seed under the Texas Seed Law without changes to the proposed text as published in the January 17, 1997, issue of the Texas Register (22 TexReg 819). The Texas seed regulations did not address the labeling of treated seed offered for sale or sold within Texas, and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act only covers applications of a substance to the seed and does not extend to the labeling of the seed product after treatment. The amendment is adopted to provide notice to consumers using treated seed so that they can take precautionary action if necessary, based on the label. No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendment. The amendment adopts by reference the federal requirements for treated seed found at 7 Code of Federal Regulations 201.31a. The amendment is adopted under the Texas Agriculture Code sec.61.002, which provides the Texas Department of Agriculture with the authority to establish rules necessary for the administration of the seed program. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 6, 1997. TRD-9703156 Dolores Alvarado Hibbs Deputy General Counsel Texas Department of Agriculture Effective date: April 1, 1997 Proposal publication date: January 17, 1997 For further information, please call: (512) 463-7583 CHAPTER 20. Cotton Pest Control SUBCHAPTER C. Cotton Stalk Destruction 4 TAC sec.20.22 The Texas Department of Agriculture (the department) adopts amendments to sec.20.22, concerning authorized cotton stalk destruction methods without changes to the proposed text as published in the January 14, 1997, issue of the Texas Register. The department amends its cotton stalk destruction schedule to clarify what destruction methods are appropriate for destruction zones by adding references to methods of destruction in the schedule. The department is also acting on behalf of cotton farmers in Houston County to delete reference "d" in the schedule which specifies the destruction method for that county. The current destruction method for Houston County only is shred and plow. With the deletion of reference "d", the adopted destruction method will be shred and/or plow. No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendments. The amendments to sec.20.22 add references to methods of stalk destruction in the department's stalk destruction schedule and establish a new destruction method for Houston County only. The amendments are adopted under the Texas Agriculture Code, sec.74.006, which provides the Texas Department of Agriculture with the authority to adopt rules as necessary for the efficient enforcement and administration of Chapter 74, Subchapter A; and sec.74.004, which provides the department with the authority to establish regulated areas, dates, and appropriate methods of destruction of stalks, other parts, and products of host plants for cotton pests. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 7, 1997. TRD-9703219 Dolores Alvarado Hibbs Deputy General Counsel Texas Department of Agriculture Effective date: March 27, 1997 Proposal publication date: January 14, 1997 For further information, please call: (512) 463-7583 TITLE 7. BANKING AND SECURITIES PART II. Texas Department of Banking CHAPTER 25.Prepaid Funeral Contracts SUBCHAPTER A.Applications for License 7 TAC sec.25.7 Texas Department of Banking (the department) adopts new sec.25.7, concerning the description of merchandise on a prepaid funeral contract (the contract) regulated under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 548b (the Act), with non- substantive changes to the proposed text as published in the January 3, 1997 issue of the Texas Register (22 TexReg 14). Express content guidelines for descriptions of merchandise on the contract has not existed before. Complete descriptions on the contract are essential to the protection of consumers because the delivery of merchandise usually occur many years after t he contract is executed and the people involved with the delivery generally are not the original parties to the contract. Section 25.7, developed in cooperation with industry representatives, will require that certain merchandise descriptions appear on the contract. This section provides for fuller and more consistent disclosures which will better ensure that the purchaser's rights and interests are protected. A permit holder does not violate the section if a pre-existing contract does not comply wit h a requirement of the section that was not required by statute or rule at the time of contracting. The Department received two comments on the proposed section. One commenter requested clarification as to how this section would affect existing inventories of contract forms that do not fully comply with its terms. The Department will encourage permittees to simply add additional information to their existing forms since these forms have adequate space to accommodate such additions. The other commenter requested that the name of the casket manufacturer be stated on the contract. However, there are no guarantees that a manufacturer will be able to supply a casket at the time of need. For example, over the term of a contract, a casket manufacturer may cease to exist; in such a case, the manufacturer's name on the contract could cause unwarranted concerns to the family of the contract beneficiary. As a consequence, the Department opted not to require disclosure of the manufacturer's name. In addition, the Department has made certain non-substantive changes to the text. Since bronze and copper caskets are not described by gauge, provisions allowing such descriptions have been omitted. Also, the examples of material lining the casket have been broadened further to include both "satin" and "twill;" and the examples of sealing features have been broadened to include "nonprotective." Finally a provision was added to the urn description requiring that an urn which is predominately bronze be described as cast or sheet bronze. No commenter objected to adoption of this section. The new section is adopted pursuant to rulemaking authority under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 548b, sec.2, which authorizes the department to prescribe reasonable rules and regulations concerning all matters incidental to the enforcement and orderly administration of Article 548b. sec.25.7. Casket and Outer-Burial Containers. (a) Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, shall have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. (1) Casket--A rigid container, including but not limited to casket inserts and rest beds, which is designed for the encasement of human remains and which is usually constructed of wood, metal, fiberglass, plastic, or like material, and ornamented and lined with fabric. (2) Contract--The prepaid funeral benefits contract. (3) Outer-burial container--Any container which is designed for placement in the grave around the casket including, but not limited to, containers commonly known as burial vaults, grave boxes, and grave liners. The term "outer-burial container" does no t include lawn crypts regulated under the Texas Health and Safety Code, Chapters 711 and 712. (4) Urn--A temporary or permanent receptacle used for the containment of cremated remains. (b) Descriptions. (1) Conformity of descriptions. The prepaid funeral benefits contract must fully describe all services and merchandise purchased, including the casket or urn and any outer-burial container, as required by this section. (2) Description content. (A) Caskets. The description of a casket under this section must, at a minimum, include the following specifications: (i) The type of material that is predominately used in the construction of the merchandise, i.e.: (I) steel, identified as stainless or by gauge, e.g., 18 gauge; (II) wood, identified by type, e.g., pecan or cherry; (III) bronze, described by weight, e.g., 32 oz.; (IV) copper, described by weight, e.g., 32 oz.; or (V) other specifically named material, e.g., such as cardboard or corrugated wood; (ii) The type of sealing feature, e.g., sealer, non-sealer, protective, or non- protective, if specified on the permit holder's price list; and (iii) The material lining the interior of the casket, e.g., crepe, velvet, satin, twill, or silk. (B) Urns. The description of an urn under this section must, at a minimum, include the type of material predominately used in its construction. Bronze urns must be described as sheet bronze or caste bronze, whichever is applicable. (C) Outer-burial container. The description of an outer-burial container under this section must, at a minimum, include the following specifications: (i) The type of material that is predominately used in the construction of the merchandise, i.e.: (I) concrete, specifying type of construction, e.g., liner, box, or vault; (II) steel, identified as stainless or by gauge, e.g., 12 gauge (or described as galvanized of a particular gauge); (III) wood; (IV) bronze or copper, described by weight or gauge, e.g., 32 oz. or 18 gauge; (V) other specifically named material; and (ii) The type of sealing feature, e.g., sealer, non-sealer, protective, or non- protective, if specified on the permit holder's price list. (D) Caskets, urns, and outer-burial containers. Merchandise that is marketed as being of a particular content or fabrication, e.g., a fiberglass liner, must be described under this section according to the particular content or fabrication referenced i n marketing the product. (E) Optional disclosures. Except for information required under this section, no additional description of caskets, urns, or outer burial containers is required; however, relevant information, e.g., a model number or color, may be added to a description at the election of the permit holder. (c) Rule application. With respect to contracts entered prior to the effective date of this section or the effective date of any amendment to this section, a permit holder will not violate this section or such amendment if it fails to comply with one o r more requirements of this section or an amendment that were not previously required by statute or 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 5, 1997. TRD-9703068 Everette D. Jobe General Counsel Texas Department of Banking Effective date: March 25, 1997 Proposal publication date: January 3, 1997 For further information, please call: (512) 475-1300 TITLE 10. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PART V. Texas Department of Commerce CHAPTER 181. Texas Leverage Fund Program 10 TAC sec.sec.181.1-181.10 The Texas Department of Commerce ("Commerce") adopts new sec.sec.181.1-181.10, concerning rules relating to loans to industrial development corporations under Commerce's Texas Leverage Fund Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the October 4, 1996, issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 9590). The new sections are being adopted to comply with the requirements of Texas Government Code, sec.481.075 which requires Commerce to adopt program rules to establish criteria for determining which users may participate in programs established by Commerce under Texas Government Code, Chapter 481, Subchapter E and to adopt collateral or security requirements to ensure the full repayment of any loan and the solvency of any program implemented. The Texas Leverage Fund Program was created under the provisions of that one certain Master Resolution establishing a $300,000,000 Taxable Commercial Paper Note Program Series A dated as of September 9, 1992, as amended, and a First Supplemental Resolution dated as of September 9, 1992, as amended which authorized the issuance of $25,000,000 in aggregate principal of the Taxable Commercial Paper Notes Series A for the purpose of funding economic development programs. The Texas Leverage Fund Program was established to provide an alternative source of easy to access capital with favorable terms to industrial development corporations created pursuant to the Development Corporation Act of 1979, Texas Civil Statutes, Article 5190.6, sec.4A or sec.4B to fund the cost of eligible projects. The new rules establish guidelines, procedures and loan requirements governing the Texas Leverage Fund Program. The new rules specify which industrial development corporations are eligible to participate in the Texas Leverage Fund Program, the types of eligible projects for which a program loan may be obtained, program loan limitations, the contents of applications, the basis for denial of applications, the general terms and conditions of Commerce financial commitments, and the procedures for loan approval, loan closing and loan administration. No comments were received regarding adoption of the proposed rules. The new rules are adopted under the authority of Texas Government Code, sec.sec.481.005(d) and 481.075. Texas Government Code, sec.481.005(d) provides that the Commerce Policy Board shall establish policy and adopt rules for Commerce. Texas Government Code, sec.481.075 provides the authority for Commerce to adopt program rules to establish criteria for determining which users may participate in programs established by Commerce under Texas Government Code, Chapter 481, Subchapter E and to adopt collateral or security requirements to ensure the full repayment of any loan and the solvency of any program implemented. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 7, 1997. TRD-9703178 W. Lane Lanford Chief Administrative Officer Texas Department of Commerce Effective date: March 27, 1997 Proposal publication date: October 4, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 936-0178 CHAPTER 183. Texas Department of Commerce Policy Board Investment Policy 10 TAC sec.sec.183.1-183.9 The Texas Department of Commerce ("Commerce") adopts new sec.sec.183.1-183.9, concerning the Commerce Policy Board investment policy in regard to investing funds subject to the Public Funds Investment Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 2256, Subchapter A, as amended (the "PFI Act"), without changes to the proposed text as published in the December 13, 1996 issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 11921). The new sections are being adopted to comply with the requirements of the PFI Act. The PFI Act, sec.2256.005(a) requires the governing body of an investing entity (as defined by the PFI Act) to adopt by rule (or other appropriate means) a written investment policy for investment of public funds and funds under its control which are not required to be invested through the State Treasury (now the Comptroller of Public Accounts, Treasury Operations Division). Commerce, as the governing body of the Texas Small Business Development Corporation ("TSBIDC"), and the Commerce Policy Board, as the ex officio board of directors of TSBIDC, have administrative and oversight responsibility for TSBIDC as provided by the Development Corporation Act of 1979, Texas Civil Statutes, Article 5190.6, sec.sec.4(b)-(j). TSBIDC has an outstanding bond issue which established funding for its Texas Public Facilities Capital Access Program. The proceeds of the bond issue are required to be invested under the terms of a trust indenture, subject to the approval of credit/liquidity facility providers. The funds invested are subject to the requirements of the PFI Act. The new sec.sec.183.1-183.8 will establish the investment policy, objectives and guidelines of the Commerce Policy Board to be followed for making appropriate and prudent investment decisions and provide performance and investment criteria to achieve earnings sufficient to support a low risk, self-supporting program. Additionally, reporting and review procedures are established for the on-going oversight of the investment of funds which will ensure compliance with the PFI Act and bond indenture covenants. The new rules provide for a code of ethics, investment policy purposes, responsibilities of the Commerce Investment Officer, investment objectives, permissible and prohibited investments, standards of performance, and performance and review procedures. The new sec.183.9 establishes the investment strategy for the investment funds of the TSBIDC bond issue. No comments were received regarding adoption of the new rules. The new rules are adopted under the authority of Texas Government Code, sec.sec.481.005(d), 481.021(a)(1) and 2256.005(a) as amended. Texas Government Code, sec.481.005(d) provides the Commerce Policy Board the authority to establish policy and adopt rules for Commerce. Texas Government Code, sec.481.021(a)(1) provides Commerce the authority to adopt and enforce rules necessary to carry out its statutory duties. Texas Government Code, sec.2256.005(a) requires the governing body of an investing entity (as defined by the PFI Act) to adopt by rule (or other appropriate means) a written investment policy for the investment of its funds and funds under its control which are subject to the PFI 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 7, 1997. TRD-9703177 W. Lane Lanford Chief Administrative Officer Texas Department of Commerce Effective date: March 27, 1997 Proposal publication date: December 13, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 936-0178 CHAPTER 195. Memoranda of Understanding 10 TAC sec.195.13, sec.195.14 The Texas Department of Commerce (Commerce) adopts by reference new sec.sec.195.13 and 195.14, concerning Memoranda of Understanding with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department and with the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission, respectively. Government Code, sec.481.028(b)(5) requires Commerce to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department regarding each agency's efforts to promote tourism. Government Code, sec.481.028(b)(6) requires Commerce to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission regarding small business finance and permits, the marketing of recyclable products and business permits. The new rules are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the September 20, 1996 issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 9033). Commerce adopts sec.195.13, containing the memorandum of understanding by and between the Texas Department of Transportation, the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department and Commerce, dated May 25, 1995, and effective through August 31, 1999, by reference to 43 TAC sec.sec.23.40-23.47 of the rules of the Texas Department of Transportation. The rules contained in 43 TAC sec.sec.23.40-23.47 were published for final adoption on March 12, 1996 in 21 TexReg 5980 and became effective July 9, 1996. The memorandum of understanding with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department designates the parties to the agreement, cites the statutory authority and responsibilities of the parties to promote Texas tourism, and sets forth the agreement to cooperate on developing and promoting Texas as a premier travel destination through marketing, magazines, TOURTEX 2000, travel information centers, photo files, shows, research/information sharing, community profiles, community education/training, tourism business assistance, 1-800 numbers, fulfillment operations and collateral materials. The memorandum of understanding also provides for effective and termination dates, permits each agency to terminate the agreement, requires that amendments be made in writing, requires each agency to adopt the memorandum of understanding as a rule, and requires that the memorandum of understanding is subject to the statutory authority of each agency, other applicable law and appropriations. Commerce adopts sec.195.14, containing the memorandum of understanding by and between the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission and Commerce, which is effective through August 31, 1999, by reference to 30 TAC sec.7.101. The rule contained in 30 TAC sec.7.101 was published for final adoption on July 23, 1996 in 21 TexReg 6896 and became effective August 5, 1996. The memorandum of understanding with the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission allows the two agencies to coordinate their programs and activities for small businesses effectively. No comments were received in response to the publication of the proposed rules. The rules are adopted under Government Code, sec.481.005(d) which gives the Commerce Policy Board the authority to adopt rules to carry out responsibilities under the Commerce Act and sec.481.028(d) which requires Commerce to adopt memoranda of understanding as agency rules. Government Code sec.481.028 is affected by the rules. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 7, 1997. TRD-9703179 W. Lane Lanford Chief Administrative Officer Texas Department of Commerce Effective date: March 27, 1997 Proposal publication date: September 20, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 936-0178 TITLE 16. ECONOMIC REGULATION PART II. Public Utility Commission of Texas CHAPTER 23. Substantive Rules Customer Service and Protection 16 TAC sec.23.57 The Public Utility Commission of Texas adopts an amendment to Substantive Rule sec.23.57, relating to Telecommunications Privacy with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 22, 1996, issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 11343). The proposal amends subsection (g) of the rule, relating to caller ID services, by clarifying that a provider of caller ID services may offer and provide per- line blocking to a customer without waiting for the customer to send a "compelling need statement" to the commission. Because the proposed amendment was not published in the Texas Register until three days after the date cited in the preamble for the public hearing, two public hearings were held on the proposal. Both hearings were held at commission offices. The first hearing was held on November 19, 1996, at 10:00 a.m. and was attended by representatives from AT&T Communications (AT&T), Texas Statewide Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (TSTCI), and John Staurulakis, Inc. (JSI). No party made a comment on the record. The second hearing was held on January 16, 1997, at 10:00 a.m. and was attended by representatives of GTE of the Southwest (GTE) and Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (SWBT). Both companies stated that they were not opposed to the rule, however SWBT noted for the record that they believe that the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995 (PURA 95) requires that requests for per-line blocking be in writing. Written comments were received from GTE, TSTCI, Texas Telephone Association (TTA), JSI, AT&T and SWBT. AT&T had one comment regarding subsection (g)(4) of the proposed rule which requires that providers that are aware of a blocking failure to report the failure to the commission, the Caller ID Consumer Education Panel and the customer. AT&T stated that because of the number of carriers involved in some calls, it could be impossible for a carrier to know if a block had been interrupted -- especially if the interruption occurred at a point not on its own network. AT&T requested that the rule or the preamble affirmatively recognize the fact that circumstances exist in which the provider will not have an opportunity to know when a block has failed. PURA 95 sec.3.3025(a) states "[w]hen a telecommunications provider providing caller ID service to a customer originating a call becomes aware of a failure to block . . . it shall report such a failure to . . . " (emphasis added). The commission interprets this provision to mean that a telecommunications provider must report all failures that they know about, not that they must know about all failures. Certainly, a provider's responsibility with regard to a call is limited to the extent to which it has carried the call to its destination (whether that be the called party or another provider) with all of the information received on the call intact. The commission makes no change to the rule based on this comment. GTE stated general support for the amendment and made no recommendations. TTA and SWBT both commented that they are not opposed to having customers contact the provider directly to request per-line blocking, but they stated that PURA 95 requires "written certification" that the customer has a compelling need for the blocking. SWBT commented that the language of proposed subsection (g)(3)(B)(i) which would "allow a provider to implement per-line blocking without the commission receiving any written certification that the customer has a compelling need for blocking, (is) contrary to the express requirements of sec.3.302(d) of PURA 95." They stated, "[t]he requirements of sec.3.302 are clear. Providers of caller ID services shall offer per-line blocking only if this commission receives a written request from a customer certifying a compelling need . . . ." Therefore, SWBT claimed, if they were to comply with the rule, they would have to violate the law. However, SWBT went on to state that they believe it would be legally possible for the providers to receive written certification of a customer's compelling need for per-line blocking directly from the customer and then forward the certification on to the commission. "Such an action," SWBT commented, "would have the effect of streamlining the request process by allowing customers to directly contact their providers and also would provide the commission with the requisite 'written certification' in sec.3.302." SWBT stated, however, that irrespective of the commission's action in this rulemaking, they intend to continue to require written certification of a compelling need for per-line blocking from their customers because they believe that such a process "eliminates or substantially reduces false or frivolous request for such blocking." The commission does not agree with SWBT and TTA regarding the interpretation of sec.3.302(d) of PURA 95. The exact language of subsection (d) states that "the commission shall require that a provider offer per-line blocking at no charge to a particular customer if the commission receives from the customer written certification that the customer has a compelling need for per-line blocking." Given that the words in the sentence are, "the commission shall require. . . if . . .," and not, "providers shall offer if . . .," the commission finds that the plain language of this sentence clearly set out the specific conditions under which the commission can order a provider to offer per-line blocking to a customer; however, it does not state that a provider is prohibited from offering per-line blocking absent such an order. Similarly, the language does not link offering per-line blocking to the written certification, rather it links a commission requirement to offer per-line blocking to the written certification. The commission does agree with the SWBT and TTA, that subsection (e) of sec.3.302 prohibits the commission from prescribing that blocking requests be handled in a manner other than that which is set out by the statute, but the amendment to sec.23.57(g) does not prescribe any new requirements, it merely offers an alternative. If SWBT and the TTA member providers choose to continue to require written certification, whether through the commission or by forwarding requests on to the commission, they are certainly free to do so and the commission will process the requests. The purpose of the amendment is merely to clarify the commission's interpretation of the statute for those providers which are interested in facilitating the provision of per-line blocking service to their customers. The commission makes no changes to the rule based on SWBT's and TTA's comments on the certification process. TSTCI commented that direct contact between the service provider and the customer would allow the provider to better fulfill the needs of their customers and that they viewed the amendment to the certification process as an alternative to what is set out in the statute. However, TSTCI did recommend that proposed subsection (g)(3)(B)(i) include the words "at no charge," such that any customer, regardless of the manner in which the provider chose to offer per-line blocking, would receive the per-line block at no charge. The commission agrees with TSTCI that per-line blocking should be offered at no charge to any customer who requests it, irrespective of the manner in which the provider chooses to offer the service. Unfortunately, sec.3.302(e) of the law does not allow the commission to add any requirements with respect to blocking that are not explicitly prescribed by the statute. Therefore, the commission can only require providers to offer free per-line blocking for those customers who offer written certification of a compelling need for that service; the commission cannot require a provider to offer free per-line blocking without such certification. However, the commission strongly encourages all providers to offer per-line blocking at no charge to all customers regardless of the manner in which the request is made. In light of the statutory limitations on commission authority with respect to blocking requirements, no change is made to the rule based on TSTCI's comments on this matter. TSTCI and JSI both commented that the proposed rule language unfairly limited the providers' ability to assess a service order charge for subsequent reinstatements of per- line blocking to only those customers who had originally requested the per-line blocking through a written statement to the commission. The commission did not intend to so limit the providers' ability to assess a service order charge and has revised the rule to allow the provider to assess the service charge for reinstatement of per-line blocking regardless of the manner in which the customer made the original request for such blocking. Both TSTCI and JSI commented on subsection (g)(3)(B)(ii)(III) of the proposed rule regarding the commission's authority to prescribe and assess fees and assessments from providers of caller ID in an amount sufficient to cover the additional expenses incurred by the commission in implementing the customer certification provisions of the statute. TSTCI asked for a definition of "customer certification provisions," and a list of the types of "additional expenses" the commission envisions incurring. JSI also wanted clarification as to whether such an assessment for "implementation expenses" would apply to those providers who already have tariffs approved and have deployed caller ID services. The language in the rule reflects the authority granted to the commission by sec.3.302 to prescribe and assess fees from the providers for expenses incurred by the commission in implementing the certification provisions of the statute. While the commission has an administrative procedure in place for processing requests for per-line blocking, the commission to date has not utilized the authority to prescribe and assess fees for this function. In consideration of the overall objective sought by the amendment to this rule, the commission anticipates a reduction in the number of requests that will be processed through the agency, therefore there is no immediate need to address how an assessment might be determined. However, the commission reserves the right to revisit the need for an assessment in the unlikely event that the agency's involvement in the customer certification provisions of sec.3.302 should increase or become otherwise more burdensome. The commission makes no changes to the rule based on the comments regarding a commission-ordered assessment on the providers of caller ID services. This amendment is adopted under PURA 95 sec.1.101, which provides the commission with the authority to make and enforce rules reasonably required in the exercise of its powers and jurisdiction; and specifically, sec.3.302, relating to Caller Identification Services, and sec.3.3025, relating to Caller ID Services: Consumer Information. Cross Index to Statutes: PURA 95 sec.sec.1.101, 3.302, and 3.3025. sec.23.57. Telecommunications Privacy. (a)-(f) No change. (g) Caller Identification Services ("caller ID"). (1)-(2) No change. (3) Caller ID blocking. (A) Per-call blocking. All providers of caller ID shall provide per-call blocking at no charge to each telephone subscriber in the specific area in which caller ID is offered. (B) Per-line blocking. (i) A provider of caller ID may offer and provide per-line blocking to any customer at any time without any notification to the commission by the customer or the provider. The telecommunications provider is encouraged to notify the customer by mail of the effective date that per- line blocking will be instituted. (ii) All providers of caller ID shall provide per-line blocking at no charge to a particular customer in the specific area in which caller ID is offered if the commission receives from the customer written certification that the customer has a compelling need for per-line blocking. (I) When a customer requests per-line blocking through the commission, the telecommunications provider shall notify the customer by mail of the effective date that per-line blocking will be instituted. (II) The commission may prescribe and assess fees and assessments from providers of caller ID in an amount sufficient to cover the additional expenses incurred by the commission in implementing the customer certification provisions of clause (ii) of this subparagraph. (III) Reports, records, and information received under clause (ii) of this subparagraph by the commission or by a provider of caller ID are confidential and may be used only for the purposes of administering this subparagraph. (iii) A provider may assess a service order charge relating to administrative costs in an amount approved by the commission to reinstate per-line blocking on a line, if the customer initially received the per-line block at no charge and then later asked the provider to remove it. (4) Blocking failures and provider responsibilities. When a telecommunications provider providing caller ID service to a customer originating a call becomes aware of a failure to block the delivery of calling party information from a line equipped with per-line blocking or per-call blocking (and the caller had attempted to block the call), it shall report such failure to the Caller ID Consumer Education Panel, the commission, and the affected customer if that customer did not report the failure. The provider shall report such failure to the commission by contacting the commission liaison to the Panel. A reasonable effort shall be made to notify the affected customer within 24 hours after the provider becomes aware of such failure. (5) Public policy statement. A provider of caller ID services is encouraged to inform all telephone subscribers of how the subscriber can unblock a line equipped with per-line blocking. (6) Caller ID Consumer Education Panel. The Caller ID Consumer Education Panel shall consist of one person appointed by the Governor, one person appointed by the chair of the commission, after consultation with the Texas Council on Family Violence, and one person appointed by the Public Counsel of the Office of Public Utility Counsel. A commission staff member shall serve as liaison between the panel and the commission. (A) Role of the Caller ID Consumer Education Panel. The Panel shall meet at least quarterly to: (i) review the level of effort and effectiveness of consumer education materials; (ii) investigate whether educational materials are distributed in as effective a manner as marketing materials; and (iii) develop recommendations for the commission related to the safe use of caller ID services, promotion and preservation of privacy for both the called and calling customers, and decreasing the likelihood of harm resulting from caller ID services. (B) Reporting. The panel shall file an annual report with the commission detailing its findings pursuant to subparagraph (A)(i) and (ii) of this paragraph, and its recommendations for increasing the safe use and privacy of the calling customer and decreasing the likelihood of harm resulting from caller ID services. The commission may implement the recommendations of the panel, as well as those of any interested party, to the extent consistent with the public interest. (C) Evaluation of the panel. The commission shall evaluate the panel annually. The evaluation shall be conducted by an evaluation team appointed by the executive director of the commission. The commission liaison, members of the panel, and any other commission employee who works either directly or indirectly with the panel shall not be eligible to serve on the evaluation team. The evaluation team will report to the commission in open meeting each August of its findings regarding: (i) the panel's work; (ii) the panel's usefulness; and (iii) if the panel is reimbursed for its costs by the state, the costs related to the panel's existence, including the cost of agency staff time spent in support of the panel's activities. (D) Duration of the panel. The panel shall disband on September 1, 1999, unless reauthorized by statute. (E) Filing of caller ID materials. All telecommunications providers offering caller ID services shall provide all existing caller ID materials used as well as all future materials (when they become available) as set out in clauses (i) and (ii) of this subparagraph. (i) One copy of all such material shall be mailed to each member of the panel. (ii) Two copies of all such material shall be filed in Central Records under Project Number 14505. (h) (No change.) 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 7, 1997. TRD-9703167 Paula Mueller Secretary of the Commission Public Utility Commission of Texas Effective date: March 27, 1997 Proposal publication date: November 22, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 936-7152 TITLE 19. EDUCATION PART VI. Foundation School Fund Budget Committee CHAPTER 201.Practice and Procedure 19 TAC sec.sec.201.1, 201.5, 201.9, 201.13, 201.25 The Foundation School Fund Budget Committee (FSFBC) adopts amendments to sec.sec.201.1, 201.5, 201.9, 201.13, and 201.25, concerning the operating rules of the committee, without changes to the proposed text as published in the November 22, 1996, issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 11352). The rules were amended to reflect the changes made in the recodification of the education code in Senate Bill 1, 74th Legislature. The rules define the operating procedures of the committee. No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendments. The amendments are adopted under the Foundation School Fund Budget Committee's authority in Texas Education Code, sec.42.256, which authorizes the committee to adopt rules. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 5, 1997. TRD-9703119 Pete Wassdorf Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Governor Foundation School Fund Budget Committee Effective date: March 26, 1997 Proposal publication date: November 22, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 463-1750 CHAPTER 203.Cost of Education Index 19 TAC sec.sec.203.1, 203.20, 203.25, 203.30 The Foundation School Fund Budget Committee adopts amendments to sec.sec.203.1, 203.20, and 203.25, and 203.30, concerning the cost of education index (CEI), an adjustment to the formula allocations of public school districts, without changes to the proposed text as published in the November 22, 1996, issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 113553). The rules were amended to make the existing cost of education index applicable for the 1997-98 and 1998-1999 school years. The cost of education index will be used by the Texas Education Agency to adjust the allocation of funds to school districts based upon cost factors beyond the control of school districts. The comments received by the committee recommended that the committee maintain the existing cost of education index, and that the debate on updating the index should occur in the 75th Legislative Session. Comments for the proposal were received from the School Finance Working Group. No comments were received against the proposal. The amendments are adopted under the Foundation School Fund Budget Committee's authority in Texas Education Code, sec.42.256, which authorizes the committee to adopt rules. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 5, 1997. TRD-9703121 Pete Wassdorf Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Governor Foundation School Fund Budget Committee Effective date: March 26, 1997 Proposal publication date: November 22, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 463-1750 CHAPTER 205.Equalized Funding Elements 19 TAC sec.sec.205.1, 205.11, 205.31, 205.41, 205.51, 205.61 The Foundation School Fund Budget Committee (FSFBC) adopts amendments to sec.sec.205.1, 205.11, 205.31, 205.41, 205.51, and 205.61, concerning equalized funding elements for the Foundation School Program, without changes to the proposed text as published in the November 22, 1996, issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 11354). The purpose of the amendments is to update the rule for the 1997-1998 and 1998- 1999 school years and to reflect the recodification of the Texas Education Code in Senate Bill 1 by the 74th Legislature. The adopted equalized funding elements will be used by the Texas Education Agency in the determination of state aid allocations to school districts for the 1997-1998 and 1998-1999 school years, unless these funding elements are superseded by the acts of the 75th Legislature. The comments received at the public hearing called for a higher level of funding and equity. Increases were recommended for the basic allotment, special program weights, transportation, guaranteed yield program, and facilities. It was recommended that the committee adopt the current cost of education index. Comments against the proposal were received from the School Finance Working Group. The amendments are adopted under the Foundation School Fund Budget Committee's authority in Texas Education Code, sec.42.256, which authorizes the committee to adopt rules. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 5, 1997. TRD-9703122 Pete Wassdorf Deputy General Counsel, Office of the Governor Foundation School Fund Budget Committee Effective date: March 26, 1997 Proposal publication date: November 22, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 463-1750 TITLE 31. NATURAL RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION PART I. General Land Office CHAPTER 15. Coastal Area Planning SUBCHAPTER A. Management of the Beach/Dune System 31 TAC sec.15.11 The General Land Office adopts an amendment to sec.15.11, concerning certification of local government dune protection and beach access plans (plans), without changes to the proposed text as published in the January 10, 1997, issue of the Texas Register (22 TexReg 683). The amendment to sec.15.11(a)(11) certifies that the Padre Shores Ltd. Final Master Plan (Master Plan) as adopted by the Cameron County commissioners court by order on November 5, 1996, is consistent with state law. The amendment also relocates the previous certification of the Cameron County plan into a new sub-paragraph. The site encompassed by the Master Plan is in an area of the Texas coast that has an historical erosion rate of 5-10 feet per year. The site also is located in a washover area and adjacent to the eroding public beach. Washover areas are low areas that are adjacent to beaches and periodically are inundated by waves and storm tides from the Gulf of Mexico. During Tropical Storm Josephine, October 4-7, 1996, portions of the proposed construction site were inundated by flood waters. Among other construction activities authorized landward of a 440-foot building line, the Master Plan authorizes the construction of a man-made dune complex within the area extending from the 440-foot building line to no farther than 20 feet seaward of that line. While this man-made dune complex is seaward of the Master Plan area, its authorization is consistent with 31 TAC sec.15.7(e)(1), concerning dune construction or restoration on public beaches. However, once this man-made dune complex is constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Master Plan, any artificial modifications to the man-made dune complex are prohibited unless prior additional written approval has been issued by the General Land Office and the Office of the Attorney General. The Land Office has prepared a takings impact assessment for the adoption of this amendment. The Land Office has determined that adoption of this amendment will not result in a taking of private real property. To receive a copy of this takings impact assessment, please send a written request to Ms. Cheli Cook, Texas General Land Office, Legal Services Division, 1700 North Congress Avenue, Room 626, Austin, Texas 78701-1495, facsimile number (512) 463-6311. No comments were received regarding the proposed amendment. The amendment is adopted pursuant to the Texas Natural Resources Code, sec.sec.63.121, 61.011, and 61.015(b), which provides the General Land Office with the authority to: identify and protect critical dune areas; preserve and enhance the public's right to use and have access to and from Texas' public beaches; protect the public easement from erosion or reduction caused by development or other activities on adjacent land; and other minimum measures needed to mitigate for any adverse effect on public access and dune areas. The amendment is also adopted pursuant to the Texas Natural Resources Code, sec.33.601, which provides the General Land Office with the authority to adopt rules on erosion, and the Texas Water Code, sec.16.321, which provides the General Land Office with the authority to adopt rules on coastal flood protection. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 7, 1997. TRD-9703164 Garry Mauro Commissioner General Land Office Effective date: March 27, 1997 Proposal publication date: January 10, 1997 For further information, please call: (512) 305-9129 TITLE 40. SOCIAL SERVICES AND ASSISTANCE PART XIX. Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services CHAPTER 700.Child Protective Services The Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services (TDPRS) adopts the repeal of sec.700.102 and sec.700.103 and new sec.sec.700.201-700.207, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 13, 1996, issue of the Texas Register (21 TexReg 11942). TDPRS is adopting the new sections in new Subchapter B, Confidentiality and Release of Records. The justification for the repeals and new sections is to clarify when and to whom confidential records may be released. The repeals and new sections will function by clarifying the conditions necessary for the release of confidential child protective service records. No comments were received regarding adoption of the repeals and new sections. SUBCHAPTER A.Administration 40 TAC sec.700.102, sec.700.103 The repeals are adopted under the Texas Family Code, Title 5, Chapters 261 and 264, which authorizes the department to provide services to alleviate the effects of child abuse and neglect. The repeals implement the Human Resources Code, Title 2, Subtitle D, Chapter 40, and the Texas Family Code, Chapter 261. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 6, 1997. TRD-9703126 C. Ed Davis Deputy Director, Legal Services Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services Effective date: April 1, 1997 Proposal publication date: December 13, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 438-3765 SUBCHAPTER B.Confidentiality and Release of Records 40 TAC sec.sec.700.201-700.207 The new sections are adopted under the Texas Family Code, Title 5, Chapters 261 and 264, which authorizes the department to provide services to alleviate the effects of child abuse and neglect. The new sections implement the Human Resources Code, Title 2, Subtitle D, Chapter 40, and the Texas Family Code, Chapter 261. 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. Issued in Austin, Texas, on March 6, 1997. TRD-9703127 C. Ed Davis Deputy Director, Legal Services Texas Department of Protective and Regulatory Services Effective date: April 1, 1997 Proposal publication date: December 13, 1996 For further information, please call: (512) 438-3765