Part 2. TEXAS ETHICS COMMISSION

Chapter 12. SWORN COMPLAINTS

The Texas Ethics Commission adopts the repeals to §12.1, §12.3, §12.17, §12.27, §12.31, §12.33, §12.37, §12.39, §12.51, §12.55, §12.63, §12.65, §12.69, §12.71, §12.81, §12.89, §12.101, §12.103, §12.105, §12.111, §12.113, §12.115, §12.117, §12.121 and §12.123, the amendments to §12.5, §12.7, §12.9, §12.11, §12.13, §12.15, §12.19, §12.21, §12.23, §12.25, §12.29, §12.35, §12.53, §12.57, §12.59, §12.61, §12.67, §12.83, §12.85, §12.87, §12.119, and new §12.6 and §12.52.

The rules are adopted without changes to the text as published in the March 19, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2829) and will not be republished.

The repeal of §12.1 would repeal the rule defining "complainant" and "respondent." This rule is unnecessary because these definitions are set out in section 571.002(2) and 571.002(4) of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.3 would repeal the rule relating to defining the scope of complaint proceedings before the Ethics Commission. This rule is unnecessary because it provides no guidance or clarification.

The repeal of §12.17 would repeal the rule relating to the agreed settlement of a complaint. This rule is unnecessary because section 571.121 of the Government Code gives the Ethics Commission authority to agree to the settlement of issues.

The repeal of §12.27 would repeal the rule relating to the extension of deadlines for action on a complaint. This rule is unnecessary because it duplicates section 571.136 of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.31 would repeal the rule relating to the referral of a complaint to an administrative law judge. This rule is unnecessary because chapter 2003 and section 2001.058 of the Government Code govern the circumstances under which the Ethics Commission may refer a matter to an administrative law judge.

The repeal of §12.33 would repeal the rule relating to the application of the Administrative Procedure Act to complaint proceedings. This rule is invalid because it conflicts with section 571.139 of the Government Code, which provides that the Administrative Procedure Act applies only to the formal hearing stage of the complaint process.

The repeal of §12.37 would repeal the rule relating to the assessment of sanctions. This rule is unnecessary because it duplicates the content of sections 571.172, 571.173, 571.174, 571.175, 571.176, and 571.177 of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.39 would repeal the rule relating to a criminal referral at the conclusion of a formal hearing. H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, amended section 571.171 of the Government Code to set out the circumstances under which the Ethics Commission may make a referral to a prosecuting attorney. That amendment supersedes subsection (a) of this rule. Subsection (b) duplicates section 571.134 of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.51 would repeal the rule relating to the filing date of a complaint. The file date is different for different purposes, which is clarified by rules §12.5(c) and §12.6.

The repeal of §12.55 would repeal the rule relating to the filing of a complaint that does not satisfy the statutory requirements. This rule is unnecessary because section 571.123 of the Government Code sets out the procedure for responding to a complaint that does not satisfy the statutory requirements.

The repeal of §12.63 would repeal the rule relating to the Ethics Commission's response to a complaint. This rule is inconsistent with section 571.123 of the Government Code, as amended by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, and with section 571.1241 of the Government Code, which was added by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The repeal of §12.65 would repeal the rule relating to notification of the status of a pending complaint. This provision is unnecessary because it duplicates section 571.1351(c) of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.69 would repeal the rule relating to the Ethics Commission's acceptance of jurisdiction in a complaint. This rule is inconsistent with section 571.124 of the Government Code, as amended by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, and with section 571.1241 of the Government Code, which was added by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The repeal of §12.71 would repeal the rule relating to notification of the Ethics Commission's acceptance or refusal of jurisdiction. This rule is inconsistent with section 571.124 of the Government Code, as amended by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, and with section 571.1241 of the Government Code, which was added by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The repeal of §12.81 would repeal the rule relating to initial investigation procedures. This rule is inconsistent with section 571.124 of the Government Code, as amended by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, and with section 571.1241 of the Government Code, which was added by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The repeal of §12.89 would repeal the rule relating to the notice of the Ethics Commission's action at the end of the preliminary review process. This provision is inconsistent with section 571.126 of the Government Code, as amended by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The repeal of §12.101, §12.103, and §12.105 would repeal the rules relating to an informal hearing. This subchapter is unnecessary because H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, eliminated the informal hearing from the complaint process.

The repeal of §12.111 would repeal the rule relating to the standard of proof at a formal hearing. H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, amended section 571.129 of the Government Code to change the standard of proof at a formal hearing from "clear and convincing evidence" to a "preponderance of the evidence." That amendment supersedes this rule.

The repeal of §12.113 would repeal the rule relating to procedures in connection with a formal hearing. This rule is unnecessary because it duplicates section 571.131 of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.115 would repeal the rule relating to the disclosure of information about subpoenaed witnesses. Subsection (a) duplicates section 571.130(b) of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.117 would repeal the rule relating to certain requests to appear at a formal hearing. This rule is unnecessary because section 571.130 of the Government Code governs such requests.

The repeal of §12.121 would repeal the rule relating to the notice of a resolution of a formal hearing. This rule is unnecessary because it duplicates section 571.132 of the Government Code.

The repeal of §12.123 would repeal the rule relating to the availability of the Ethics Commission's decision and written report after a formal hearing. This provision is unnecessary because it duplicates section 571.132(c)(2) of the Government Code.

The amendment to §12.5 deletes the incorrect description of the Ethics Commission's authority. Moreover, it is not necessary to describe the Ethics Commission's authority in a rule because it is clearly set out in section 571.061 of the Government Code. Subsection (a)(2) of the current rule is unnecessary because it no longer covers any situation that is not covered by other parts of the rule. The rule makes clear that the rule applies to a matter initiated on the Ethics Commission's motion as well as to a complaint filed by a third party. The amendment defines "file date" for purposes of the Ethics Commission's authority to consider a complaint as the date the complainant relinquishes control of the complaint. (New §12.6 defines "file date" for purposes of the deadline for responding to a complaint.) Also, the amendment makes clear that a non-complying complaint does not toll the running of the statute of limitations.

The amendment to §12.7 deletes portions of the rule that are unnecessary because they duplicate section 571.140 of the Government Code. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.9 deletes the reference to §12.105, because the Ethics Commission has repealed §12.105. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.11 replaces the term "sworn complaint" with "complaint" to be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code.

The amendment to §12.13 replaces the term "sworn complaint" with "complaint" to be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code.

The amendment to §12.15 deletes current subsection (a) because it duplicates section 571.138 of the Government Code, which provides that a complainant is not a party to a complaint.

The amendment to §12.19 deletes current subsection (a)(3) because it adds nothing to current subsection (a)(1). The amendment also deletes current subsection (b) because §12.19 does not purport to limit any right other than the right to rely on an oral agreement. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.21 deletes a part of current subsection (a) that duplicates section 571.032 of the Government Code. The amendment also deletes a part of current subsection (b) that is inconsistent with current law. For purposes of section 571.1242 of the Government Code, notices to a respondent are effective when received. Also, the amendment deletes current subsection (d) because the five-day deadline is provided for in sections 571.123, 571.124, 571.1241, 571.126, and 571.132 of the Government Code.

The amendment to §12.23 makes the rule more precise.

The amendment to §12.25 clarifies the rule because, taken literally, the current rule would allow a respondent to revoke a waiver of a preliminary review hearing after later stages of the complaint process had been completed.

The amendment to §12.29 relates to statutory changes to the Ethics Commission's authority to issue subpoenas. H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, amended section 571.137 of the Government Code, which sets out the Ethics Commission's authority to issue subpoenas in connection with a formal hearing.

The amendment to §12.35 deletes portions that are either unnecessary or duplicative of section 571.176 of the Government Code. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.53 makes clear that a matter initiated by the Ethics Commission is a complaint for all statutory purposes, not just for purposes of the Ethics Commission rules. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.57 deletes language that duplicates section 571.122 of the Government Code. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.59 makes the rule more precise than the current rule. To be consistent with chapter 571 of the Government Code, the term "complaint" replaces "sworn complaint."

The amendment to §12.61 deletes unnecessary language.

The amendment to §12.67 makes the amended rule more precise.

The amendment to §12.83 reflects the addition of section 571.1244 of the Government Code by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session, which requires the Ethics Commission to adopt procedures for the conduct of preliminary reviews and preliminary review hearings. The amendment deletes current subsection (b) because it is inconsistent with section 571.1242 of the Government Code, which was added by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The amendment to §12.85 reflects changes made necessary by section 571.1242 of the Government Code, which was added by H.B. 1606, 78th Legislature, Regular Session.

The amendment to §12.87 deletes provisions that are unnecessary because they duplicate section 571.126 of the Government Code. The amendment also deletes the reference to an informal hearing, which is no longer part of the complaint process. The amendment provides for a resolution in case the Ethics Commission is deadlocked after a preliminary review hearing.

The amendment to §12.119 deletes language that duplicates section 571.132 of the Government Code. The amendment also prescribes the resolution after a formal hearing if the Ethics Commission is unable to reach either the five votes required to find that a violation has not occurred or the six votes needed to find a violation. Chapter 571 of the Government Code does not address this situation.

The new §12.6 defines the file date for purposes of section 571.123 of the Government Code.

The new §12.52 clarifies what constitutes a response for purposes of section 571.1242 of the Government Code and sets out the consequences for failure to respond.

The following comment was received regarding the adoption of the amendment to §12.5. Fred Lewis with Campaigns For People objected to subsection (c) as too harsh. His specific concern was that the statute of limitations provision should not prevent a complainant from filing technical problems with a complaint. The Commission considers comments from all parties but was satisfied with the rule as proposed. No change was made as a result of this comment.

The following comment was received regarding the adoption of the amendment to §12.23. Fred Lewis with Campaigns For People suggested that the two instances of the word "may" in this rule should be changed to "shall." The Commission considers comments from all parties but was satisfied with the rule as proposed. No changes were made as a result of this comment.

The following comment was received regarding the adoption of the amendment to §12.59. Fred Lewis with Campaigns For People objected to the phrase "clearly and concisely" in subsection (a). Section 571.122(b) of the Government Code requires that information in a complaint be set out in "simple, concise, and direct statements." The Commission considers comments from all parties but was satisfied with the rule as proposed. No changes were made as a result of this comment.

The following comment was received regarding the adoption of the amendment to §12.87. Fred Lewis with Campaigns For People objected to this rule because he understood it to say that the executive director would dismiss a complaint if the commission found insufficient evidence of a violation after a preliminary review hearing. The procedure set out in the statute assumes the commission will be able to decide that there is credible evidence of a violation, that there is insufficient evidence of a violation, or that there is credible evidence of no violation. The purpose of the rule was to prescribe a resolution in a situation in which the commission is deadlocked and cannot make any determination. The Commission considers comments from all parties but was satisfied with the rule as proposed. No changes were made as a result of this comment.

No comments were received regarding adoption of the other sections.

Subchapter A. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND PROCEDURES

1 TAC §§12.1, 12.3, 12.17, 12.27, 12.31, 12.33, 12.37, 12.39

The repeal of §12.1, §12.3, §12.17, §12.27, §12.31, §12.33, §12.37, and §12.39 is adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403942

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §§12.51, 12.55, 12.63, 12.65, 12.69, 12.71

The repeal of §12.51, §12.55, §12.63, §12.65, §12.69, and §12.71 is adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403944

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §12.81, §12.89

The repeal of §12.81 and §12.89 is adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403945

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §§12.101, 12.103, 12.105

The repeal of §12.101, §12.103, and §12.105 is adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403946

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §§12.111, 12.113, 12.115, 12.117, 12.121, 12.123

The repeal of §12.111, §12.113, §12.115, §12.117, §12.121, and §12.123 is adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403947

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §§12.5 - 12.7, 12.9, 12.11, 12.13, 12.15, 12.19, 12.21, 12.23, 12.25, 12.29, 12.35

The amendments to §12.5, §12.7, §12.9, §12.11, §12.13, §12.15, §12.19, §12.21, §12.23, §12.25, §12.29, §12.35, and new §12.6 are adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403948

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §§12.52, 12.53, 12.57, 12.59, 12.61, 12.67

The new §12.52 and the amendments to §12.53, §12.57, §12.59, §12.61, and §12.67 are adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403949

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §§12.83, 12.85, 12.87

The amendments to §12.83, §12.85, and §12.87 are adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403950

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

1 TAC §12.119

The amendment to §12.119 is adopted under Government Code, Chapter 571, Section 571.062, which authorizes the Ethics Commission to adopt rules concerning the laws administered and enforced by the Ethics Commission.

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 June 15, 2004.

TRD-200403951

Sarah Woelk

General Counsel

Texas Ethics Commission

Effective date: July 5, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 19, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 463-5800

Chapter 355. MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENT RATES

Subchapter F. REIMBURSEMENT METHODOLOGY FOR PROGRAMS SERVING PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS AND MENTAL RETARDATION

1 TAC §355.761

The Texas Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) adopts the amendments to §355.761, concerning reimbursement methodology for Institutions for Mental Diseases (IMD), in its Medicaid Reimbursement Rates chapter to specify that reimbursement is determined bi-annually and that the reimbursement period is based on state fiscal year and that the prospective reimbursement rate is compared to the Support, Maintenance and Treatment (SMT) rate. The amendments are adopted with a minor change to the proposed text as published in the March 26, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2999). The text of the rule will be republished. The adopted amendments will be effective September 1, 2004.

No comments were received from the public, but one correction was made as a result of a staff comment. The commenter noted that although the text of the proposed rule describes a process that is intended to result in a rate determination every two years, the term "biannually" was incorrectly used in the first sentence of the rule. In order to be internally consistent HHSC is replacing the term "biannually" with "biennially" in the adopted rule.

The amendment is adopted under the Texas Government Code, §531.033, which provides the executive commissioner of HHSC with broad rulemaking authority; the Texas Government Code, §531.021(a), and the Texas Human Resources Code, §32.021(a), which provide HHSC with the authority to administer the federal medical assistance (Medicaid) program in Texas; and the Texas Government Code, §531.021(b), which provides HHSC with the authority to propose and adopt rules governing the determination of Medicaid reimbursements.

§355.761.Reimbursement Methodology for Institutions for Mental Diseases (IMD).

(a) The Health and Human Services Commission (HHSC) determines IMD reimbursement biennially. A statewide prospective reimbursement will be available to all eligible IMD providers for reimbursable IMD services. This reimbursement is inclusive of all costs allowable under Medicare payment principles.

(b) Initial reimbursement period. The initial reimbursement period is defined as November 16, 1994-April 30, 1996. The reimbursement for this period is determined from Medicare cost reports for state-operated hospitals, which provided IMD services between September 1, 1993, and August 31, 1994. The Medicare cost reports are reviewed by HHSC to assure that the costs used for calculating each hospital's average per diem cost for IMD services are allowable under Medicare payment principles and are only those costs incurred by the hospital for care and treatment provided to persons 65 years and older and occupying a Medicare-certified bed. Using these Medicare cost reports, each hospital's average per diem cost for IMD services is calculated. HHSC adjusts each hospital's average per diem cost for IMD services to the initial reimbursement period by applying a cost-of-living index. The cost-of-living index used is the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Market Basket Forecast Excluded Hospital Input Price Index (as reported in the Dallas Regional Medical Services Letter Number 95-015). Due to the length of the initial reimbursement period, the percentages by which the average per diem costs are adjusted are prorated by taking 1/12 of the forecast for calendar year 1994 plus 2/12 of the forecast for calendar year 1995 plus 4/12 of the forecast for calendar year 1996. After adjusting the average per diem cost for each hospital, the average per diem costs for all of the hospitals are arrayed from high to low. The median (50th percentile) average per diem cost is selected as the prospective reimbursement for the initial reimbursement period. If the 50th percentile falls between IMD providers, then the immediately higher average per diem cost will be selected as the reimbursement.

(c) The reimbursement period begins on September 1 and ends on August 31 of the following year.

(1) Annually, each IMD provider is required to submit to HHSC a copy of its Medicare cost report for its most recent fiscal year ending prior to September 1. Cost reports must be received by HHSC no later than 90 days following the end of the IMD provider's fiscal year. Each IMD provider is required to identify in its cost report as a subunit (IMD unit) those Medicare-certified units on which reimbursable IMD services were provided. The Medicare cost reports are reviewed by HHSC to assure that the costs to be used for calculating each IMD provider's average per diem cost for IMD services are allowable under Medicare payment principles and are only those costs incurred for care and treatment provided to persons 65 years of age and older and occupying a Medicare-certified bed.

(2) Upon completion of the reviews of cost reports, and prior to calculating average per diem costs for each IMD provider, cost reports and prior payment histories are reviewed. To ensure the integrity of the data and avoid bias in the resulting reimbursement due to low volume and other inefficiencies, cost reports of IMD providers will be eliminated from the database for any one of the following reasons:

(A) being in operation fewer than 90 calendar days during the previous cost reporting period;

(B) having an occupancy rate on its IMD units of less than 90% for 50% or more of the days covered during the previous cost reporting period; or

(C) individually accounting for fewer than 5.0% of the total days of care reimbursed by Medicaid as IMD services during the previous cost reporting period.

(3) Using the Medicare cost reports in the database, HHSC calculates for each IMD provider an average per diem cost for IMD services. Each IMD provider's average per diem cost is adjusted to the future reimbursement period by applying a cost-of-living index. The cost-of-living index used is the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Market Basket Forecast Excluded Hospital Input Price Index (as reported to the States in the Dallas Regional Medical Services Letter for the federal fiscal quarter ending in December of the year preceding the next reimbursement period). The percentage used for adjustments to each IMD provider's average per diem cost is prorated, using 1/3 of the forecast for the calendar year in which the reimbursement period begins (September through December) plus 2/3 of the forecast for the next calendar year (January through August).

(4) After adjusting the average per diem cost for each IMD provider, the average per diem costs of all IMD providers remaining in the database are arrayed from high to low. The median (50th percentile) average per diem cost is selected as the prospective reimbursement for the future reimbursement period. If the 50th percentile falls between IMD providers, then the immediately higher average per diem cost will be selected as the reimbursement. The prospective reimbursement rate is compared to the Support, Maintenance and Treatment (SMT) rate. All IMD providers will be paid the lower of the prospective rate or SMT rate for each day during the next reimbursement period that IMD services are provided to an eligible individual.

(d) Financial Audits. Financial audits are performed periodically on all IMD providers. IMD providers have the right to appeal exclusions and adjustments to cost reports according to TDMHMR's informal reviews and administrative hearings process.

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 June 18, 2004.

TRD-200404007

Steve Aragón

General Counsel

Texas Health and Human Services Commission

Effective date: September 1, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 26, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 424-6576