TITLE 22.EXAMINING BOARDS

Part 1. TEXAS BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL EXAMINERS

Chapter 1. ARCHITECTS

Subchapter E. FEES

22 TAC §1.81

The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners adopts an amendment to §1.81 for Title 22, Chapter 1, Subchapter E, pertaining to examination fees, as published in the April 16, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3735). The section is being adopted with changes.

The section specifies the fees charged by the board, including examination fees. As amended, section 1.81 lists the fees for taking the Landscape Architect Registration Examination to be administered during 2004 and 2005, lists the fees for the administration of the examination for registration as an interior designer during 2005, and repeals the administrative fee charged by the board for the administration of the interior designer registration examination. The board changed Section § 1.81 as proposed by repealing an obsolete fee specified for the administration of the examination for registration as an interior designer during April 2004.

The amended section repeals other obsolete fees charged for examinations that have been administered. The amendment increases the examination fees for registration as a landscape architect and for registration as an interior designer. Examination providers that sell the examinations to the board have increased the charge imposed upon the board. The amendment to §1.81 increases the fees to cover the additional cost to the board of purchasing the examinations. The interior designer examination provider is assuming the services previously rendered by the board. The amendment repeals the administrative fee that the board has imposed to cover the cost for the services.

The board received no comments pertaining to the proposal to adopt this section.

The amendment to this section is adopted pursuant to Section 1051.202 of Tex. Occupations Code Annotated ch. 1051, which provides the board with general authority to promulgate rules necessary to the administration of its statutory responsibilities. The board also is authorized to set a fee for a board action involving an administrative expense in an amount that is reasonable and necessary to cover the cost of administering chapters 1051, 1052, and 1053, Tex. Occupations Code Annotated, relating to architects, landscape architects, and interior designers, pursuant to Sections 1051.651(a), 1052.054(a), and 1053.052(a) of Tex. Occupations Code Annotated, respectively.

§1.81.General.

(a) In addition to any fees established elsewhere in these rules, by the Act, or by another provision of Texas law, the following fees shall apply to services provided by the Board:

Figure: 22 TAC §1.81(a)

(b) The Board cannot accept cash as payment for any fee.

(c) An official postmark from the U.S. Postal Service may be presented to the Board to demonstrate the timely payment of any fee.

(d) If a check is submitted to the Board to pay a fee and the bank upon which the check is drawn refuses to pay the check, the fee shall be considered unpaid and any applicable late fees shall accrue. The Board shall impose a processing fee for any check that is returned unpaid by the bank upon which the check is drawn.

(e) A Registrant who is in Good Standing or was in Good Standing at the time the Registrant entered into military service shall be exempt from the payment of any fee during any period of active duty service in the U. S. military. The exemption under this subsection shall continue through the remainder of the fiscal year during which the Registrant's active duty status expires.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403411

Cathy L. Hendricks, ASID/IIDA

Executive Director

Texas Board of Architectural Examiners

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 16, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-8535


Chapter 3. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS

Subchapter E. FEES

22 TAC §3.81

The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners adopts an amendment to §3.81 for Title 22, Chapter 3, Subchapter E, pertaining to examination fees, as published in the April 16, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3746). The section is being adopted with changes.

Section 3.81 specifies the fees charged by the board, including examination fees. As amended, §3.81 lists the fees for taking the Landscape Architect Registration Examination to be administered during 2004 and 2005, lists the fees for the administration of the examination for registration as an interior designer during 2005, and repeals the administrative fee charged by the board for the administration of the interior designer registration examination. The board changed §3.81 as proposed by repealing an obsolete examination fee for the administration of the examination for registration as an interior designer that was administered during April 2004.

The amended section repeals other obsolete fees charged for examinations that have been administered. The amendment increases the examination fees for registration as a landscape architect and for registration as an interior designer. Examination providers that sell the examinations to the board have increased the charge imposed upon the board. The amendment increases the fees to cover the additional cost to the board of purchasing the examinations. The interior designer examination provider is assuming the services previously rendered by the board. The amendment repeals the administrative fee that the board has imposed to cover the cost for the services.

The board received no comments pertaining to the proposal to adopt this section.

The amendment to this section is adopted pursuant to §1051.202 of Tex. Occupations Code Annotated ch. 1051, which provides the board with general authority to promulgate rules necessary to the administration of its statutory responsibilities. The board also is authorized to set a fee for a board action involving an administrative expense in an amount that is reasonable and necessary to cover the cost of administering chapters 1051, 1052, and 1053, Tex. Occupations Code Annotated, relating to architects, landscape architects, and interior designers, pursuant to §§1051.651(a), 1052.054(a), and 1053.052(a) of Tex. Occupations Code Annotated, respectively.

§3.81.General.

(a) In addition to any fees established elsewhere in these rules, by the Act, or by another provision of Texas law, the following fees shall apply to services provided by the Board:

Figure: 22 TAC §3.81(a)

(b) The Board cannot accept cash as payment for any fee.

(c) An official postmark from the U.S. Postal Service may be presented to the Board to demonstrate the timely payment of any fee.

(d) If a check is submitted to the Board to pay a fee and the bank upon which the check is drawn refuses to pay the check, the fee shall be considered unpaid and any applicable late fees shall accrue. The Board shall impose a processing fee for any check that is returned unpaid by the bank upon which the check is drawn.

(e) A Registrant who is in Good Standing or was in Good Standing at the time the Registrant entered into military service shall be exempt from the payment of any fee during any period of active duty service in the U. S. military. The exemption under this subsection shall continue through the remainder of the fiscal year during which the Registrant's active duty status expires.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403412

Cathy L. Hendricks, ASID/IIDA

Executive Director

Texas Board of Architectural Examiners

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 16, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-8535


Chapter 5. INTERIOR DESIGNERS

Subchapter E. FEES

22 TAC §5.91

The Texas Board of Architectural Examiners adopts an amendment to §5.91 for Title 22, Chapter 5, Subchapter E, pertaining to examination fees, as published in the April 16, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3755). The section is being adopted with changes.

Section 5.91 specifies the fees charged by the board, including examination fees. As amended, the section lists the fees for taking the Landscape Architect Registration Examination to be administered during 2004 and 2005, lists the fees for the administration of the examination for registration as an interior designer during 2005, and repeals the administrative fee charged by the board for the administration of the interior designer registration examination. The board changed Section §5.91 as proposed by repealing an obsolete fee charged for the administration of the examination for registration as an interior designer that was administered in April 2004.

The amended section repeals other obsolete fees charged for examinations that have been administered. The amendment increases the examination fees for registration as a landscape architect and for registration as an interior designer. Examination providers that sell the examinations to the board have increased the charge imposed upon the board. The amendment increases the fees to cover the additional cost to the board of purchasing the examinations. The interior designer examination provider is assuming the services previously rendered by the board. The amendment repeals the administrative fee that the board has imposed to cover the cost for the services.

The board received no comments pertaining to the proposal to adopt this section.

The amendment to this section is adopted pursuant to Section 1051.202 of Tex. Occupations Code Annotated ch. 1051, which provides the board with general authority to promulgate rules necessary to the administration of its statutory responsibilities. The board also is authorized to set a fee for a board action involving an administrative expense in an amount that is reasonable and necessary to cover the cost of administering chapters 1051, 1052, and 1053, Tex. Occupations Code Annotated, relating to architects, landscape architects, and interior designers, pursuant to Sections 1051.651(a), 1052.054(a), and 1053.052(a) of Tex. Occupations Code Annotated, respectively.

§5.91.General.

(a) In addition to any fees established elsewhere in these rules, by the Act, or by another provision of Texas law, the following fees shall apply to services provided by the Board:

Figure: 22 TAC §5.91(a)

(b) The Board cannot accept cash as payment for any fee.

(c) An official postmark from the U.S. Postal Service may be presented to the Board to demonstrate the timely payment of any fee.

(d) If a check is submitted to the Board to pay a fee and the bank upon which the check is drawn refuses to pay the check, the fee shall be considered unpaid and any applicable late fees shall accrue. The Board shall impose a processing fee for any check that is returned unpaid by the bank upon which the check is drawn.

(e) A Registrant who is in Good Standing or was in Good Standing at the time the Registrant entered into military service shall be exempt from the payment of any fee during any period of active duty service in the U. S. military. The exemption under this subsection shall continue through the remainder of the fiscal year during which the Registrant's active duty status expires.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403413

Cathy L. Hendricks, ASID/IIDA

Executive Director

Texas Board of Architectural Examiners

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 16, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-8535


Part 10. TEXAS FUNERAL SERVICE COMMISSION

Chapter 203. LICENSING AND ENFORCEMENT--SPECIFIC SUBSTANTIVE RULES

22 TAC §203.7

The Texas Funeral Service Commission adopts an amendment to Title 22, Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 203, Section 203.7 (relating to Price Disclosures). Notice of the proposed action was published in the March 12, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2530). The amended section is adopted without changes to the proposed text.

The amendment to Section 203.7 is adopted to clarify that the statement of funeral goods and services selected must be itemized and list the funeral goods and services selected by a person and the prices to be paid for each of them, unless there is a discounted package arrangement that itemizes the discount provided by the package arrangement.

The Alderwoods Group and Jerry Miller of Hewitt, Texas commented favorably on the proposed new chapter and section.

The amendment to section 203.7 is adopted under Texas Occupations Code, Section 651.152. The commission interprets section 651.152 as authorizing it to adopt rules as necessary to administer Chapter 561.

No other statutes, articles, or codes are affected by the proposal.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403467

O. C. Robbins

Executive Director

Texas Funeral Service Commission

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 12, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 936-2474


22 TAC §203.17

The Texas Funeral Service Commission adopts an amendment to Title 22, Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 203, Section 203.17 (relating to Clarification of Other Facilities Necessary in a Preparation Room). Notice of the proposed action was published in the March 12, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2531). The amended section is adopted without changes to the proposed text.

The amendment to Section 203.17 is adopted because existing subsections 203.17(b) and (c) simply parrot the language of Occupations Code, Section 651.351(g). The statute is self-explanatory. The rule is redundant.

The Alderwoods Group and Jerry Miller of Hewitt, Texas commented favorably on the proposed new chapter and section.

The amendment to section 203.17 is adopted under Texas Occupations Code, Section 651.152. The commission interprets section 651.152 as authorizing it to adopt rules as necessary to administer Chapter 561.

No other statutes, articles, or codes are affected by the proposal.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403468

O. C. Robbins

Executive Director

Texas Funeral Service Commission

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 12, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 936-2474


22 TAC §203.35

The Texas Funeral Service Commission adopts a new rule at Title 22, Texas Administrative Code, Chapter 203, Section 203.35 (relating to Clarification of Establishment Chapel Requirements). The new rule is proposed in order to clarify required facilities under Texas Occupations Code, Section 651.351. Notice of the proposed action was published in the March 12, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2531). The new section is adopted without changes to the proposed text.

The Alderwoods Group and Jerry Miller of Hewitt, Texas commented favorably on the proposed new chapter and section.

The new section 203.35 is adopted under Texas Occupations Code, Section 651.152. The commission interprets section 651.152 as authorizing it to adopt rules as necessary to administer Chapter 651.

No other statutes, articles, or codes are affected by the proposal.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403470

O. C. Robbins

Executive Director

Texas Funeral Service Commission

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 12, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 936-2474


Chapter 207. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

22 TAC §207.1

The Texas Funeral Service Commission (commission) adopts new chapter 207 (relating to Alternative Dispute Resolution) and new §207.1 (relating to Alternative Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure). Notice of the proposed action was published in the March 12, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2532). The new chapter and section are adopted with changes to the proposed text.

New §207.1 implements the legislative directive of Occupations Code, §651.167 to develop and implement a policy to encourage the use of alternative dispute resolution procedures for the resolution of internal and external disputes. The section closely tracks the Guidelines developed by the State Office of Administrative Hearings. The changes made from the published version include putting the language of the first paragraph in the active voice, substituting the word "counsel" for "legal" in subsection (b)(7), removing an unnecessary semicolon in subsection (i)(4), and removing the word "of" from subsection (i)(5).

The Alderwoods Group and Jerry Miller of Hewitt, Texas commented favorably on the proposed new chapter and section.

The new chapter and section are adopted under Texas Occupations Code, §§651.152 and 651.167. The commission interprets §651.152 as authorizing it to adopt rules as necessary to administer Chapter 651. The commission interprets §651.167 as requiring it to adopt alternative dispute resolution procedures.

No other statutes, articles, or codes are affected by new chapter and section.

§207.1.Alternative Dispute Resolution Policy and Procedure.

(a) Policy. The Texas Funeral Service Commission encourages the resolution and early settlement of all contested matters through voluntary settlement procedures. Commission employees shall implement this policy.

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

(1) ADR--Alternative Dispute Resolution.

(2) Alternative dispute resolution director or ADR procedure--A nonjudicial and informally conducted forum for the voluntary settlement of contested matter through intervention of an impartial third party.

(3) Alternative dispute resolution director or ADR director--The director of the agency office empowered by the commission to coordinate and oversee ADR procedures and mediators.

(4) Contested matter--A request for an order or other formal or informal authorization from the commission that is opposed.

(5) Mediator--The person appointed by the ADR office director to preside over ADR proceedings regardless of which ADR method is used.

(6) Parties--The agencies, employees, managers, supervisors or customers who are in conflict.

(7) Participants--The executive director, the agency legal counsel, the complainant, the respondent, the person who timely filed hearing requests which gave rise to the dispute or if parties have been named, the named parties.

(8) Private mediator--A person in the profession of mediation who is not a Texas state employee and who has met all the qualifications prescribed by Texas law for mediators.

(c) Referral of Contested Matter for Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures. The commission or the ADR director may seek to resolve a contested matter through any ADR procedure. Such procedures may include, but are not limited to, those applied to resolve matters pending at the State Office of Administrative Hearing (SOAH) and in the state's district courts.

(d) Appointment of Mediator.

(1) For each matter referred for ADR procedures, the ADR director shall assign a mediator, unless the participants agree upon the use of a private mediator. The ADR director may assign a substitute or additional mediator to a proceeding as the ADR director deems necessary.

(2) A private mediator may be hired for commission ADR procedures provided that:

(A) the participants unanimously agree to use a private mediator;

(B) the participants unanimously agree to the selection of the person to serve as the mediator;

(C) the mediator agrees to be subject to the direction of the commission's ADR director and to all time limits imposed by the director, the judge, statute or regulation.

(3) If a private mediator is used, the costs for the services of the mediator shall be apportioned equally among the participants, unless otherwise agreed upon by the participants, and shall be paid directly to the mediator. In no event, however, shall any such costs be apportioned to a governmental subdivision or entity that is a statutory party to the hearing.

(4) All mediators in commission mediation proceedings shall subscribe to the ethical guidelines for mediators adopted by the ADR Section of the State Bar of Texas.

(e) Qualifications of Mediators.

(1) The commission shall establish a list of mediators to resolve contested matters through ADR procedures.

(A) To the extent practicable, each mediator shall receive 40 hours of formal training in ADR procedures through programs approved by the ADR director.

(B) Other individuals may serve as mediators on an ad hoc basis in light of particular skills or experience which will facilitate the resolution of individual contested matters.

(2) SOAH mediators, employees of other agencies who are mediators and private pro bono mediators may be assigned to contested matters as needed.

(A) Each mediator shall first have received 40 hours of Texas mediation training as prescribed.

(B) Each mediator shall have some knowledge in the area of the contested matter.

(C) If the mediator is a SOAH judge, that person will not also sit as the judge for the case if the contested matter goes to public hearing.

(f) Commencement of ADR.

(1) The commission encourages the resolution of disputes at any time, whether under this policy and procedure or not. ADR procedures under this policy may begin, at the discretion of the ADR director, anytime once deemed administratively complete and at least one letter of appeal has been filed with commission.

(2) Upon unanimous motion of the parties and the discretion of the judge, the provisions of this subsection may apply to contested hearings. In such cases, it is within the discretion of the judge to continue the hearing to allow use of the ADR procedures.

(g) Stipulations. When ADR procedures do not result in the full settlement of a contested matter, the participants, in conjunction with the mediator, shall limit the contested issues through the entry of written stipulations. Such stipulations shall be forwarded or formally presented to the judge assigned to conduct the hearing on the merits and shall be included in the hearing record.

(h) Agreements. Agreements of the participants reached as a result of ADR must be in writing and are enforceable in the same manner as any other written contract.

(i) Confidentiality of Communications in Alternative Dispute Resolution Procedures.

(1) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4) of this section a communication relating to the subject matter made by the participant in an ADR procedure whether before or after the institution of formal proceedings, is confidential, is not subject to disclosure and may not be used as evidence in any further proceedings.

(2) Any notes or record made of an ADR procedure are confidential, and participants, including the mediator, may not be required to testify in any proceedings relating to or arising out of the matter in dispute or be subject to process requiring disclosure of confidential information or data relating to or arising out of the matter in dispute.

(3) An oral communication or written material used in or made a part of and ADR procedure is admissible or discoverable independent of the procedure.

(4) If this section conflicts with other legal requirements for disclosure of communications or materials, the issue of confidentiality may; be presented to the judge to determine, in camera, whether the facts, circumstances and context of the communications or materials sought to be disclosed warrant a protective order or whether the communications or materials are subject to disclosure.

(5) The mediator may not, directly or indirectly, communicate with the judge or any commissioner, of any aspect of ADR negotiations made confidential by this section.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403469

O. C. Robbins

Executive Director

Texas Funeral Service Commission

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 12, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 936-2474


Part 21. TEXAS STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF PSYCHOLOGISTS

Chapter 473. FEES

22 TAC §473.3

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §473.3, concerning Annual Renewal Fees (Not Refundable) without changes to the proposed text as published in the March 5, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2171)

The amendments are being adopted to correct implementation of HB 2985 which requires the agency to raise annual licensure renewal fees.

The adopted amendments will make the rule easier for the licensees and public to follow and understand.

No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.

The amendments are adopted under Texas Occupations Code, Title 3, Subtitle I, Chapter 501, which provides the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists with the authority to make all rules, not inconsistent with the Constitution and Laws of this State, which are reasonably necessary for the proper performance of its duties and regulations of proceedings before it.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 18, 2004.

TRD-200403356

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: June 7, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 5, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7700


22 TAC §473.5

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §473.5, concerning Miscellaneous Fees (Not Refundable) without changes to the proposed text as published in the March 5, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 2172).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify miscellaneous fees.

The adopted amendments will make the rule easier for the licensees and public to follow and understand.

No comments were received regarding the adoption of the amendments.

The amendments are adopted under Texas Occupations Code, Title 3, Subtitle I, Chapter 501, which provides the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists with the authority to make all rules, not inconsistent with the Constitution and Laws of this State, which are reasonably necessary for the proper performance of its duties and regulations of proceedings before it.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 18, 2004.

TRD-200403357

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: June 7, 2004

Proposal publication date: March 5, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7700


Part 22. TEXAS STATE BOARD OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY

Chapter 501. RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

Subchapter A. GENERAL PROVISIONS

22 TAC §501.52

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts an amendment to §501.52 concerning Definitions without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3322). The text of the rule will not be republished.

The amendment to §501.52 will add the Administrative Code citation for the board’s rules, place quotation marks around terms to be defined and add limited liability partnerships and limited liability companies to the definition of a CPA firm.

The amendment will function by clarifying the definitions and making them easier to read.

No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.

The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act.

No other article, statute or code is affected by the adoption.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403414

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


22 TAC §501.53

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts an amendment to §501.53 concerning Applicability of Rules of Professional Conduct without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3324). The text of the rule will not be republished.

The amendment to §501.53 will add §501.78 (regarding Withdrawal or Resignation) to the list of rules of professional conduct that are applicable to CPAs that do not engage in the client practice of public accountancy.

The amendment will function by being applicable to all licensed CPAs.

No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.

The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act.

No other article, statute or code is affected by the adoption.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403415

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Subchapter D. RESPONSIBILITIES TO THE PUBLIC

22 TAC §501.80

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts an amendment to §501.80 concerning Practice of Public Accountancy without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3325). The text of the rule will not be republished.

The amendment to §501.80 will clearly state that a person must possess both a certificate and a current license in order to represent that they are a Certified Public Accountant.

The amendment will function by clearly stating that unlicensed persons may not represent that they are CPAs.

No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.

The amendment is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act.

No other article, statute or code is affected by the adoption.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403416

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Chapter 509. RULEMAKING PROCEDURES

22 TAC §509.6

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new rule §509.6 concerning Rulemaking Procedures without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3325). The text of the rule will not be republished.

New rule §509.6 moves, re-names and re-numbers former rule §519.3.

This new rule is the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 509 in the February 7, 2003 issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

The new rule will function by being placed in a more logical location.

No comments were received regarding adoption of the rule.

The new rule is adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act.

No other article, statute or code is affected by the adoption.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403417

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Chapter 518. UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY

22 TAC §518.1, §518.2

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts the repeal of §518.1 concerning Cease and Desist Orders and §518.2 concerning Administrative Penalty Guidelines for Violations of Cease and Desist Orders without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3327).

The proposed repeal of §518.1 and §518.2 will repeal two rules that are being rewritten and relocated.

The repeals will function by rewriting and relocating these rules.

No comments were received regarding adoption of these repeals.

The repeals are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act.

No other article, statute or code is affected by these adoptions.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403418

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


22 TAC §§518.1 - 518.4

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new rules §518.1 concerning Definitions, §518.2 concerning Cease and Desist Orders, §518.3 concerning Violation of a Cease and Desist Order and §518.4 concerning Administrative Penalty Guidelines for Violations of Cease and Desist Orders without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3327). The text of the rules will not be republished.

New rules §518.1 through 518.4 will explain that the definitions in chapter 519 are applicable to chapter 518, will describe the cease and desist orders, the procedures and the consequences for not complying with cease and desist orders.

The new rules will function by offering faster hearing dates at SOAH than district courts.

No comments were received regarding adoption of these rules.

The new rules are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act.

No other article, statute or code is affected by these adoptions.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403419

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Chapter 519. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

22 TAC §§519.1 - 519.14, 519.16, 519.17

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts the repeal of Chapter 519, §519.1 concerning Purpose and Scope, §519.2 concerning Computation of Time, §519.3 concerning Rulemaking Proceedings, §519.4 concerning Conduct and Decorum, §519.5 concerning Ex Parte Consultations, §519.6 concerning Informal Conferences and Informal Dispositions, §519.7 concerning Administrative Penalties, §519.8 concerning Subpoenas, §519.9 concerning Procedures after Hearing, §519.10 concerning The Record and Assessment of Cost of Preparation, §519.11 concerning Follow-Up, §519.12 concerning Publication of Disciplinary/Administrative Sanctions, §519.13 concerning Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution, §519.14 concerning Emergency Suspension, §519.16 concerning Misdemeanors that Subject a Certificate or Registration Holder to Discipline by the Board and §519.17 concerning Administrative Penalty Guidelines without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3329).

The proposed repeal of Chapter 519 will remove these rules so they can be replaced by re-written rules.

The repeals will function by replacing this rules with re-written rules that are current and applicable.

These repeals are the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 519 in the February 7, 2003 issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

No comments were received regarding adoption of these repeals.

The repeals are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act and §2001.039 of the Government Code Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act) that requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency.

No other article, statute or code is affected by these adoptions.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403420

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Chapter 519. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

Subchapter A. GENERAL PROVISIONS

22 TAC §§519.1 - 519.9

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new rules §519.1 concerning Purpose and Scope; §519.2 concerning Definitions; §519.3 Computation of Time; §519.4. concerning Conduct and Decorum; §519.5. concerning Ex Parte Consultations; §519.6 concerning Subpoenas; §519.7 concerning Misdemeanors that Subject a Certificate or Registration Holder to Discipline by the Board, §519.8 concerning Administrative Penalties and §519.9 concerning Administrative Penalty Guidelines in Subchapter A concerning General Provisions without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3330). The text of the rules will not be republished.

New board rule §519.1 describes the purpose and scope of Chapter 519. New board rule §519.2 contains the definitions needed to understand Chapter 519. New board rule §519.3 describes computation of time. New board rule §519.4 describes conduct and decorum in committee and board proceedings. New board rule §519.5 addresses ex parte consultations. New board rule §519.6 describes the board’s new subpoena power. New board rule §519.7 lists the criminal offenses that involve dishonesty, fraud, moral turpitude or alcohol abuse or controlled substances that directly relate to the practice of accounting, including recidivism. New Board Rule §519.8, which is former board rule §519.7, recreates the administrative penalties that may be assessed against licenses. New board rule §519.9 contains guidelines for the assessment of administrative penalties in disciplinary matters.

These new rules are the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 519 in the February 7, 2003 issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

The new rules will function by making the rules clearer and easier to understand.

One comment was received regarding adoption of these rules. Mr. Ray E. Berend, Managing Partner of Padgett, Stratemann & Company, commented on the proposed rewrite of Chapter 519. He believes proposed rule 519.9 should require complainants to reimburse licensees for the costs that licensees incur and the time they spend responding to frivolous complaints or to complaints that lack substantial merit. Assessing a licensee’s costs to respond to the board against complainants would be unfair to complainants and would cause a major decline, if not a cessation, in the receipt of complaints. Individuals are, and should be, encouraged to forward any potential complaints to the Board for examination by board staff. All complaints are screened by board staff to exclude complaints that are not within the board’s jurisdiction and complaints that are patently frivolous. However, if the board asks a CPA or CPA firm to respond to an allegation, then this means that board staff has determined that the allegation is within the board’s jurisdiction and that it should be the subject of an inquiry at least to the extent of requiring a response or explanation. Lacking substantial merit is a particularly onerous burden because it means the complaint has merit, but not substantial merit.

The new rules are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act and §2001.039 of the Government Code Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act) that requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency.

No other article, statute or code is affected by these adoptions.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403421

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Subchapter B. COMPLAINTS AND INVESTIGATIONS

22 TAC §§519.20 - 519.25

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new rules §519.20 concerning Complaints; §519.21 concerning Investigations; §519.22 concerning Committee Considerations; §519.23 concerning Informal Conferences, §519.24 concerning Committee Recommendations and §519.25 concerning Mediation and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Subchapter B concerning Complaints and Investigations without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3333). The text of the rules will not be republished.

The new rules §519.20 through §519.25 will describe the Board's enforcement complaint, investigative, informal conference and committee procedures.

These new rules are the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 519 in the February 7, 2003 issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

The new rules will function by describing the Board's enforcement complaint, investigative, informal conference and committee procedures for anyone to read.

One comment was received regarding adoption of these rules. Mr. Ray E. Berend, Managing Partner of Padgett, Stratemann & Company, commented on the proposed rewrite of Chapter 519. Regarding proposed rule §519.21(d), Mr. Berend wants licensees to be allowed additional time (beyond the thirty days) in which to respond to the Board. It is and has been the practice of board staff to grant requests for additional time when the licensee has a good reason why they need additional time in which to respond. However, unsupported requests for additional time or requests based on being busy are not granted.

The new rules are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act and §2001.039 of the Government Code Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act) that requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency.

No other article, statute or code is affected by these adoptions.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403422

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Subchapter C. PROCEEDINGS AT SOAH

22 TAC §§519.40 - 519.53

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new rules §519.40 concerning General Provisions; §519.41 concerning Pleadings in Contested Cases; §519.42 concerning Service in SOAH Proceedings; §519.43 concerning Emergency Suspension; §519.44 concerning Default; §519.45 concerning Discovery; §519.46 concerning Official Notice and Business Records Affidavit; §519.47 concerning Waiver of Privilege/Confidentiality, §519.48 concerning Final Witness List, §519.49 concerning Exhibits, §519.50 concerning Reporter and Transcripts, §519.51 concerning Evidence, §519.52 concerning Motions and §519.53 concerning Dismissal by the Board. Board rules §519.40, §519.44, §519.45, §519.49 and §519.53 are adopted with non-substantive changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3336). The change in §519.40 corrects the name of the document that confers jurisdiction on SOAH. The change in §519.44 deletes a sentence that required an ALJ to grant a board motion to remand. The change in §519.45 inserts "may" to allow an ALJ to issue certain types of orders. The changes to §519.49 allow an ALJ to exclude unnecessary and duplicative exhibits and allow an ALJ to re-consider their initial ruling. The changes to §519.53 recognize that SOAH loses jurisdiction once it issues a proposal for decision and omits a sentence that might be misread as barring re-prosecution. Board rules §519.41, §519.42, §519.43, §519.46, §519.47, §519.48, §519.50, §519.51 and §519.52 are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004 issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3336). The text of those rules will not be republished.

New rules §519.40 through §519.53 describe the procedures for proceedings at the State Office of Administrative Hearings ("SOAH"). While all of the rules are new, most of them describe the current actual practice and supplement SOAH’s procedural rules and the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 519.40 appoints SOAH to hear the Board’s cases. Rule 519.41 describes the contents of pleadings in contested cases, procedures, applicable time limits and contains language for default proceedings. Rule 519.42 requires service according to SOAH’s rules. Rule 519.43 is former rule 519.14, and it describes emergency suspension procedures and the Executive Committee’s role. Rule 519.44 describes default proceedings. Rule 519.45 describes the several available discovery procedures and deadlines. Rule 519.46 describes the official notice and business records affidavit procedures and filing schedules. Rule 519.47 describes waiver of privilege and confidentiality in discovery proceedings. Rule 519.48 describes the procedure and deadline for designation of witnesses and final witness list. Rule 519.49 describes the procedure and deadlines for exhibits. Rule 519.50 addresses court reporters and transcripts of the hearings. Rule 519.51 describes the evidentiary rules that are applicable. Rule 519.52 applies SOAH's rules to Motions. Rule 519.53 allows the Board to dismiss a complaint at anytime.

These new rules are the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 519 in the February 7, 2003 issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

The new rules will function by streamlining the proceedings at SOAH.

Two comments were received regarding adoption of these rules. Mr. Ray E. Berend, Managing Partner of Padgett, Stratemann & Company, commented on the proposed rewrite of Chapter 519. Mr. Berend objects to proposed §519.40 because it allows the Board to overrule an ALJ’s findings and rulings. Mr. Berend believes this confers arbitrary power on the Board to overrule a neutral fact finder. If an ALJ has reached an incorrect or unsupportable opinion, decision or recommendation, then it is the board’s duty to protect the public by correcting the ALJ’s incorrect opinion, recommendation and decision. Mr. Berend mentioned "rulings," but evidentiary admissibility rulings are not corrected by the Board. The ALJ merely makes a recommendation as to the appropriate disposition. ALJ’s are not empowered to decide what, if any, disciplinary or corrective action should be imposed because that power is expressly reserved for the Board.

Mr. Berend wants proposed §519.40 to allow licensees to appeal an enforcement committee’s recommendation to the full Board prior to proceeding to a hearing before an ALJ. The enforcement committee’s finding is merely a preliminary determination as to whether a violation has occurred and a recommendation as to the appropriate disposition of the matter. The administrative hearing is where the facts are conclusively established by the Board’s appointed neutral fact finder. The full Board cannot render a decision until the facts are established. Allowing licensees to "appeal" a committee’s "findings" to the full board before proceeding to a hearing before an ALJ would require the full Board to make a determination without giving the respondent an opportunity for a hearing as required by statute. The full Board would have participated in the investigation of the matter. This would leave no unexposed board members available to consider the ALJ’s proposed recommendations because of the requirement in §901.153(e) of the Public Accountancy Act that board members who participated in the investigation may not vote on the final disposition of the case. The only findings that are made by Enforcement committees are the recommended findings of fact that are contained in consent orders that have been agreed to in writing by the licensees. Enforcement committees make recommendations which include recommending an administrative hearing in contested matters.

Ms. Shelia Bailey Taylor, Chief Administrative Law Judge of the State Office of Administrative Hearings ("SOAH") commented in opposition to the adoption of certain parts of the proposed chapter 519.

Ms. Taylor objected to proposed new §519.40(a) because it appoints SOAH as the Board’s fact finder. She states that SOAH is the fact finder for all parties, not just the Board. In response, the Board agrees. However, §901.508 of the Public Accountancy Act requires the Board to offer a person against whom it proposes to take disciplinary action a hearing either before the Board or a hearings officer appointed by the Board. Rather than conduct the required hearings before the Board, the Board elected to appoint SOAH as the Board’s hearing officer, which is a reflection of current Board practice. SOAH is a neutral forum and provides a level playing field to both complainants and the general public, whose interests are represented by Board staff because they are not parties to the hearing, and respondents, who represent their own interests.

Ms. Taylor notes that proposed §519.40(b) states that SOAH obtains jurisdiction over a matter referred to it by the Board upon the filing of a complaint with SOAH, but SOAH rule 155.7(b) states that SOAH acquires jurisdiction over a referred matter when an agency files a request to docket case. In response, proposed §519.40(b) was changed to provide that SOAH obtains jurisdiction over a matter referred to it by the Board upon the filing of a request to docket case with SOAH to make the board’s rule consistent with SOAH’s rule.

Ms. Taylor objected to language in proposed new §519.44(a) that requires an Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") to grant a motion for remand to the Board upon motion of Board staff in cases where a respondent has failed to file a timely written answer. She states current SOAH rules that allow a continuance are sufficient to address the situation and that the Board’s proposed language mandating the granting of a motion to remand constitutes undue influence on the independence of an ALJ. She does not object to the concept of a default for the failure to file a written answer and notes that other agencies employ this device successfully. The Board intends the remand device, which is routinely employed in litigation in the judicial branch, as a mechanism to remove the matter from SOAH’s docket while the Board is taking final action on the matter. It is viewed as assisting SOAH with its disposition statistics on case resolution by removing the months it takes to present the default to the Board for final resolution from SOAH’s docket. Additionally, remand avoids the unnecessary paperwork of filing a periodic status report, as required by SOAH, for cases that remain pending on its docket. The remand procedure is a measure to conserve scarce resources and enhances judicial economy. To avoid any appearance of undue supervision of ALJs, the Board will delete the second sentence which states "(t)he ALJ shall grant any motion by the board to remand the matter to the board for final disposition" and substitute with "(u)pon failure to timely file a written answer, the board will give notice of its intent to dispose of the matter based upon the allegations contained in the complaint or amended complaint to SOAH and the parties by filing a motion for remand to the board for final disposition." This removes the mandatory language regarding the ALJ’s actions, but preserves the remand procedure which eliminates the necessity for the matter to remain on SOAH’s docket and the filing of status reports.

Ms. Taylor noted that proposed new §519.45 "could be interpreted as instructions or limitations on the ALJs regarding discovery matters." The proposed rule is intended to supplement gaps in SOAH’s rules regarding discovery by placing reasonable limits on discovery. Subsection (a) limits discovery to matters relevant and material to matters within the Board’s jurisdiction, or at least designed to lead to such matters. This language tracks both the state and federal rules of civil procedure. Subsection (b) also tracks state and federal rules of civil procedure and requires the disclosure of basic information in a timely manner. Subsection (c) makes widely recognized discovery tools available to the parties in accordance with the Act and the Board’s and SOAH’s rules. Subsection (d) simply makes the cost allocation principles for making copies already contained in Board rule 501.93 applicable to copies made in response to a request for production made in discovery. Subsections (e) and (f) address the taking and use of depositions and require them to be completed no later than 30 days prior to the final hearing on the merits. This is to require the parties to prepare their cases reasonably well in advance of the scheduled hearing date and prevent "trial by ambush", where one party intentionally fails to disclose relevant information to the other party in order to gain an advantage. Subsection (g) addresses the failure of a party to comply with a discovery request and does mandate, that after notice and hearing, the ALJ make such orders as are just. This is not viewed as infringing upon the independence of ALJs. The provision does go on to provide several remedies from which the ALJ may choose to remedy the discovery abuse. Because the "shall" could be interpreted to require the ALJ to order one or more of the listed remedies, the word "may" was inserted so that the phrase states "...the ALJ shall, after notice and hearing, make such orders in regard to the failure as are just, and may issue one or more of the following orders..." Subsection (h) allows a party to avoid sanctions for discovery abuse upon a showing of good cause. Subsections (i) and (k) allow the discovery requirements to be modified by agreement of the parties or, if agreement cannot be reached, by motion upon showing good cause and lack of harm to the opposing party. Subsection (j) sets a discovery cutoff of 30 days prior to the final hearing on the merits to encourage the parties to timely prepare for the final hearing. SOAH currently has no such discovery cutoff, thus a motion for scheduling order must be filed in every case. By setting a reasonable cutoff time, the necessity to file a motion for scheduling order in every case is eliminated. A motion is required only if a party seeks to change the discovery cutoff and the parties cannot reach agreement as to the appropriate cutoff. Subsection (l) simply imposes a duty on the parties to supplement discovery responses based on newly discovered information. None of the discovery provisions infringes upon the independence of the ALJs, but rather sets rules for the orderly progress of discovery in all cases, thereby requiring the intervention of an ALJ only in unusual cases instead of in every case.

Ms. Taylor is concerned that §§519.48, 519.49, 519.50 and 519.51 "attempt to dictate the manner in which ALJs conduct contested case hearings." In response to her comments, these rules are designed to provide for the orderly conduct of the hearing and prevent trial by ambush. They are not meant to unduly restrict the evidence available to the ALJ or to put a party at a disadvantage who, for reasons beyond his control, locates newly discovered evidence after the deadlines have passed. As Ms. Taylor noted in her comments, SOAH’s continuance procedure is available to anyone finding his evidence excluded due to failure to timely comply with the Board’s rules through no fault of his own. The prevention of trial by ambush is worth the occasional continuance necessitated to allow compliance with the Board’s rules.

Ms. Taylor is concerned that §§519.48- 519.51 will be disruptive of the mass hearing process. To the contrary, because of the remand to the Board for final disposition after the failure to file a written answer provision, it is anticipated that mass hearings will be virtually eliminated. Mass hearings are used to address those who fail to pay license fee renewals, fail to report the required amount of Continuing Professional Education ("CPE") or fail to complete their license renewal notice. The goal is compliance, thus if at any time prior to the Board order a respondent comes into compliance, he is removed from the mass hearing process. It is extremely rare that a respondent will file a written answer without coming into compliance. It is therefore anticipated that the rules requiring exchange of witness lists and exhibits prior to hearing will have no significant impact on mass hearings.

Rule 519.48 is modeled after federal local rules and allows the parties and the ALJ to accurately assess the amount of time the case will take based on the number of witnesses. Subsection 519.48(a) requires a party to designate his expert witnesses within 20 days of receipt of a written request to do so; however, the ALJ may modify this requirement upon motion showing good cause. All experts must be designated no later than 60 days prior to the final hearing date and made available for deposition before the end of the discovery period. SOAH’s rules do not contain a cutoff for the designation of experts. Under SOAH’s rules, a motion for a scheduling order that requests a cutoff date for the designation of experts must be filed in every case. The proposed new rule eliminates the necessity for a motion followed by a hearing and order, thus promoting judicial economy and conserving scarce resources. Requiring the parties to disclose witnesses in response to a discovery request in order to make them eligible to testify tracks state and federal civil procedure. Also, requiring a party to designate the portions of a deposition transcript he plans to offer into evidence in lieu of live testimony reduces the size of the record by eliminating unnecessary portions of the transcript.

Rule 519.49 is also modeled after federal rules and is designed to shorten trial time by organizing and marking all exhibits prior to trial and requiring written objections to facilitate the ALJs’ decisions regarding admissibility. By making admission of all exhibits the first order of business, all parties can examine any witness regarding any exhibit. This eliminates the necessity of recalling a witness to discuss an exhibit that was not admitted while the witness was on the stand and required the testimony of another witness to make the exhibit admissible. It also eliminates the potential for inadvertent errors by counsel for any party, and particularly the self represented respondent, who may forget to move for admission of an exhibit or obtain a ruling thereon.

Ms. Taylor is concerned that the admonition to admit all exhibits to which there has been no objection could lead to the admission of duplicitous, irrelevant or immaterial exhibits and that this will unnecessarily clutter the record. The Board added language to the rule to limit the admission of exhibits to which there was no objection to those "that are not duplicitous, irrelevant or immaterial." Ms. Taylor notes that proposed new Board rule 519.51(a) already excludes irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious evidence.

Proposed new §519.50 merely makes provision for a transcript of the hearing and allocates the cost for the transcript. SOAH does not provide a traditional court reporter to transcribe hearings, but rather simply records the hearing on a tape that the parties can then have transcribed if needed. Due to equipment failures and human error, the tapes are not always the most accurate and complete record. Therefore the proposed new rule also makes provision for correction of the transcript.

Proposed new §519.51 addresses evidence and adopts the standards set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"). The rule goes on to make provision for a proffer of excluded evidence to allow a complete record for the Board’s consideration and for any subsequent appeal.

Ms. Taylor is concerned about the dismissal provisions contained in proposed new §519.53. She notes that the rule allows the Board to dismiss even after "issuance of a proposal for decision if the matter is currently pending at SOAH." She states that "...once a proposal for decision is issued, (SOAH) loses jurisdiction in a matter...", although it retains limited jurisdiction to resolve exceptions to a proposal for decision. In response, the phrase "if the matter is currently pending at SOAH" was deleted to eliminate the implication that SOAH retains jurisdiction after a proposal for decision is issued in a matter. She is also concerned that the last sentence of the section that prohibits the Board from imposing a disciplinary sanction on a respondent based on a dismissed matter could be interpreted to mean that the Board cannot re-file the matter and impose a disciplinary sanction based on the re-filed case. In response, the Board agrees and deleted the last sentence of §519.53. The intent was to assure respondents that a sanction will not be imposed based on a dismissed case, but rather the case must be re-filed and prosecuted to completion or resolved by agreement prior to the imposition of a disciplinary sanction.

Ms. Taylor is also concerned that proposed new §519.53 infringes on the independence of the ALJs by requiring them to enter an order of dismissal without prejudice upon the request of the Board. Both federal and state rules allow a plaintiff to dismiss a case without cause, provided there is no counter-claim pending. In state courts, the dismissal is presumed to be without prejudice to the re-filing of the case. Although SOAH’s rule 155.56 addresses dismissals, it makes no provision for a traditional dismissal without cause. ALJs can dismiss for want of prosecution, lack of jurisdiction, lack of authorization, mootness, failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted, unnecessary duplication of proceedings or settlement of the claims. Proposed new §519.53 is designed to give the Board the traditional right of dismissal without cause and without prejudice to re-filing.

Ms. Taylor is concerned that Board staff will misuse the dismissal provision to get a preview of a respondent’s case, then dismiss after trial, shore-up weaknesses in the Board’s case and re-file. She suggests that such a course raises "issues of due process, fairness, and harassment, along with issues of judicial economy and efficiency." In response, Ms. Taylor’s mistrust of Board staff is unwarranted. The Legislature has entrusted the Board with enforcement of the Act. To effectively discharge that trust, the Board must be able to develop a record of facts on which to base a determination of a violation. Because the Board is not as well equipped to resolve contested facts as a formal tribunal, the Legislature gave the Board the option of appointing a hearings officer to develop the factual record and assist the Board in applying the law to the facts developed. Matters brought to SOAH for resolution have first been considered by an enforcement committee of the Board. These matters are only brought to SOAH when the respondent and the enforcement committee cannot agree on the correct state of the facts or the correct disposition of the matter. Board staff follows the direction of an enforcement committee and is present at the hearing to assist in making a full and fair record on which the ALJ can base his recommendation and the Board can ultimately base its decision. The abuse of process that Ms. Taylor fears, although possible, is not probable given the expanded chapter 519 which is designed to prohibit trial by ambush, and thus eliminate the need for exploring weaknesses at trial. Re-trying a matter does not raise issues of due process, but rather of double jeopardy, which only apply in criminal cases. Whether a re-trial is unfair or harassing depends upon the reasons for the re-trial. As noted above, staff works at the direction of an enforcement committee. An enforcement committee would not pursue a re-trial if to do so would be unwarranted harassment of the respondent or patently unfair to the respondent. It is more likely that to not pursue a re-trial would be patently unfair to the complainant and the public. It will be up to the enforcement committee to balance these interests in the rare instances in which a dismissal results in the need for a re-trial.

Ms. Taylor notes that section 2003.050 states that an agency’s procedural rules govern a proceeding at SOAH only to the extent that SOAH enacts a rule adopting that agency’s rules by reference. She states it is unlikely she would enact such a rule to preserve uniformity across all state agencies. In response, Ms. Taylor is correct that she has rarely recognized another agency’s rules. She declined to adopt many more agency’s rules, including those of the Texas Board of Medical Examiners and the Texas Department of Insurance, the two agencies upon whose rules the Board has modeled the proposed new chapter 519. As noted at the beginning of this response, the Board, as do all state agencies, has a duty to enact rules of practice pursuant to section 2001.004 of the Government Code. The ALJs who conduct hearings for the Board are required to consider the Board’s rules and written polices when conducting a hearing on its behalf pursuant to section 2001.058 of the Texas Government. Chapter 519 has been carefully considered and designed to avoid conflicts with SOAH’s rules. The Board’s rules are intended to fill in gaps in SOAH’s rules and procedures to streamline the process for all participants. The necessity for numerous motions to fill in gaps in SOAH’s rules is eliminated in most instances. This replaces the uncertainty of a case by case scheduling order with a uniform procedure that ensures fairness to all of the participants. ALJs should have no difficulty in following the Board’s rules of practice and procedure.

The Board understands and appreciates the mandate of SOAH to remain independent from the boards it serves and the duty of an ALJ to remain free from supervision, direction and indirect influence of the state agency for whom they are serving as a neutral fact finder. The Board’s proposed rules are not intended to exert undue influence on ALJs, but rather are intended to put current Board practice into a written policy to be followed by complainants and respondents alike to assure that all sides receive a fair hearing. In fact, the Board has a legislated command to promulgate such rules. Section 2001.004 of the Government Code provides that "a state agency shall (1) adopt rules of practice stating the nature and requirements of all available formal and informal procedures...". Chapter 519 serves that purpose for the Board. Section 2001.039 of the Government Code requires every state agency to conduct a comprehensive review of its rules at least once every four years. The proposed amendments and additions to chapter 519 are a part of that rule review.

Rule review requires the Board to address several questions when it considers its existing rules: Is the rule needed to fairly administer and justly enforce the Act? Does the rule reflect current Board policy and interpretations of the Act? Does the rule reflect current Board procedure?

The Board finds that chapter 519 is in need of substantial revision to ensure the fair administration and just enforcement of the Act. Additionally, the Board finds that numerous Board policies and procedures were not present in the existing chapter 519 and it is necessary to adopt significant changes to Chapter 519 to include the omitted policies and procedures in conformity with Sections 2001.004 and 2001.039 of the Government Code.

The new rules are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act, §2001.039 of the Government Code Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act) that requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency and §519.43 is also proposed under §901.5045 of the Act regarding Emergency Suspension.

No other article, statute or code is affected by these adoptions.

§519.40.General Provisions.

(a) The board appoints SOAH to be its finder of fact in contested cases pursuant to section 901.508 of the Act. The board does not delegate to the ALJ and retains for itself the right to make the final decision in any contested case.

(b) SOAH hearings of contested cases shall be conducted in accordance with the APA by an ALJ assigned by SOAH. Jurisdiction over the case is acquired by SOAH when the board staff files a request to docket case.

§519.44.Default.

(a) The failure of the Respondent to timely file a written response as provided in §519.41(c) of this title (relating to Pleadings in Contested Cases) shall constitute a waiver of the right to a hearing and entitles the board to render a final order disposing of the complaint without further hearing. In such instances, the factual and legal allegations contained in the complaint or amended complaint shall be deemed by the board to be true and the board shall act accordingly.

(b) Failure of the Respondent to appear in person or by legal representative on the day and at the time set for a final hearing on the merits of a contested case, regardless of whether a written response has been filed, shall entitle the board to a default judgment.

(c) After remand to the board upon default or entry of a default judgment by the ALJ, the Respondent may file a motion to set aside the remand or default order and reopen the record. The motion to set aside the remand or default judgment shall be granted if the Respondent establishes that the failure to file a written response or to attend the hearing was neither intentional nor the result of conscious indifference, and that such failure was due to a mistake or accident.

§519.45.Discovery.

(a) Matters subject to discovery are limited to those that are relevant and material to, or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of matters relevant and material to, issues within the board’s jurisdiction as set out in the Act.

(b) Not later than 20 days after receiving a written request from an opposing party, the responding party shall provide to the requesting party the following information:

(1) the correct names of the parties to the lawsuit;

(2) the name, address, and telephone number of any potential parties;

(3) the legal theories and, in general, the factual bases of the responding party’s claims or defenses;

(4) the name, address, and telephone number of persons having knowledge of relevant facts, and a brief statement of each identified person's connection with the case;

(5) for any testifying expert:

(A) the expert’s name, address, and telephone number;

(B) the subject matter on which the expert will testify;

(C) the general substance of the expert's mental impressions and opinions and a brief summary of the basis for them, or if the expert is not retained by, employed by, or otherwise subject to the control of the responding party, documents reflecting such information; and

(D) if the expert is retained by, employed by, or otherwise subject to the control of the responding party:

(i) all documents, tangible things, reports, models, or data compilations that have been provided to, reviewed by, or prepared by or for the expert in anticipation of the expert's testimony; and

(ii) the expert’s current resume and bibliography;

(6) any witness statements.

(c) The parties may use the following methods of discovery:

(1) requests for admissions and genuineness of documents as permitted by SOAH’s rules:

(2) interrogatories as permitted by SOAH’s rules, which must be sworn to in accordance with Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 197.2;

(3) requests for production as permitted by SOAH’s rules;

(4) deposition on written questions as provided for in the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure;

(5) oral depositions taken in accordance with the Act and the board’s rules; and

(6) other forms of discovery as provided for in the APA and SOAH’s rules.

(d) The board may request production of documents and tangible items that are identified in a discovery response, but a copy of which was not provided with the response, in accordance with §501.93 of this title (relating to Responses). The board shall make available requested documents and tangible items which it has no objection to providing for inspection and copying at the board’s offices. The board, in its sole discretion, may provide a copy of the requested documents and tangible items for a reasonable charge.

(e) The taking and use of depositions shall be governed by the APA or by an agreement between the parties either on the record or in a writing signed by the parties or their representatives. Except by an agreement between the parties either on the record or in a writing signed by the parties or their representatives or by order of the ALJ, depositions shall be conducted and completed no later than 30 days prior to the scheduled hearing date. Failure of a properly noticed witness who is a party to the case to attend a deposition for the purpose of taking the testimony of that party witness, or the failure of such a witness to attend such a deposition as agreed to by the parties on the record or in a writing signed by the parties or their representatives, may result in the imposition of the sanctions and remedies set forth in paragraph (g) of this section.

(f) In the event that, as provided for in the APA, an original deposition transcript is not returned by a deponent or a deponent's counsel, or is not filed by a deponent, a deponent’s counsel, or other individual, officer, or entity in possession of or last known to be in possession of the original transcript, a party to the contested case pending before SOAH shall be entitled to have a certified true copy of the deposition transcript filed under seal at the board by the officer or a court reporter who transcribed the deposition testimony or their designee. Such a copy shall be presumed to be authentic unless an objecting party is able to rebut such a presumption by a preponderance of competent evidence.

(g) In the event of a failure by a party to comply with a discovery request, to the extent required by the board’s rules, SOAH’s rules, the APA, or as agreed to between the parties in a discovery agreement, the ALJ shall, after notice and hearing, make such orders in regard to the failure as are just, and may issue one or more of the following orders:

(1) an order granting a continuance;

(2) an order limiting or restricting the admissibility and use of evidence, to include exclusion of evidence or testimony;

(3) an order requiring the non-compliant party to pay the requesting party’s attorney’s fees, hearing and court reporter costs, and actual costs for participation in the discovery process, incurred as a result of a failure of the non-compliant party to abide by the discovery requirements;

(4) an order imposing a scheduling order providing for discovery deadlines necessary to remedy the failure to comply with discovery requirements under the board’s rules;

(5) an order for remedies and sanctions agreed to by the parties in writing or on the record;

(6) an order disallowing further discovery of any kind or of a particular kind by the offending party;

(7) an order holding that designated facts be considered admitted for purposes of the proceeding;

(8) an order refusing to allow the offending party to support or oppose a designated claim or defense or prohibiting the party from introducing designated matters into evidence;

(9) an order disallowing in whole or in part requests for relief by the offending party and excluding evidence in support of those requests; or

(10) an order striking pleadings or testimony, or both, in whole or in part.

(h) A showing of good cause for failure to comply with a discovery request to the extent required by the board’s rules, SOAH’s rules, the APA, or as agreed to between the parties in a discovery agreement, may justify the imposition of less severe remedies or sanctions which might otherwise be imposed. Good cause shall include but is not limited to the following:

(1) lack of knowledge of the existence of the information or material;

(2) lack of access to or control of the information or material; and

(3) act of nature.

(i) The discovery requirements governing SOAH proceedings may be modified by agreement of the parties either on the record or in writing signed by the parties or their representatives without approval of an ALJ.

(j) All discovery shall be completed no later than 30 days before the date set for a final hearing on the merits. All discovery requests shall be served in a timely manner to allow for a timely response prior to the end of the discovery period.

(k) The discovery requirements and time limitations set by the board’s rules and SOAH’s rules may be modified by the ALJ only upon a showing of good cause and lack of harm to the opposing party made pursuant to the motion of the party seeking the modification.

(l) Upon receiving new information or material, or upon otherwise determining that an inaccuracy exists in a previous discovery response, each party shall supplement such responses as soon as practicable.

§519.49.Exhibits.

(a) All exhibits that a party intends to offer at the final hearing, except those offered solely for impeachment, must be marked with a label that identifies the exhibit by the number under which it will be offered at the final hearing and must be exchanged with the opposing parties not later than the tenth day before the date scheduled for the final hearing. At least ten days before the date scheduled for the final hearing, each party must file with SOAH and deliver to the opposing parties a separate list of the exhibits to be offered at the final hearing, separately identifying those which the party expects to offer and those which the party may offer if the need arises.

(b) Objections to the admissibility of exhibits must be made at least five days before the final hearing by filing written objections with SOAH that include copies of the disputed exhibits and authority to support the objection. The opposing parties may file a written response with SOAH that includes authority to support the admission of the disputed exhibits. At the beginning of the final hearing the ALJ shall admit all timely exchanged and listed exhibits of any party to which there has been no objection that are not duplicitous, irrelevant or immaterial and rule on the objections to the admission of exhibits. If at any time during the hearing it becomes apparent that the initial ruling on an objection was incorrect, the ALJ on his own motion, or the motion of any party may re-consider the initial ruling and admit or exclude the disputed exhibit. Failure to timely object to an exhibit in writing under this subsection concedes the authenticity of the exhibit.

§519.53.Dismissal by the Board.

The board may dismiss a complaint at any time, even after hearing or issuance of a proposal for decision. The dismissal is effective immediately upon the board giving notice of the dismissal. If the matter is pending at SOAH at the time of the dismissal, the board shall file the notice of dismissal with SOAH and the ALJ assigned to the matter shall promptly enter an order of dismissal without prejudice.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403423

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Subchapter D. PROCEDURES AFTER HEARING

22 TAC §§519.70 - 519.72

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new §519.70, concerning Proposals for Decision; §519.71, concerning Exceptions and Replies; and §519.72, concerning Final Decisions and Orders in Subchapter D, concerning Procedures after Hearing. Board rules §519.70 and §519.72 are adopted without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3340). The text of the rules will not be republished. Board rule §519.71 is adopted with a non-substantive change to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3340). The change to §519.71 replaces the board's rule on exceptions and replies with SOAH's rules.

New §§519.70 - 519.72 will rewrite the old rules and describe the procedure and timing for the events that occur after the hearing at SOAH has ended.

These new rules are the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Texas Administrative Code, Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 519 in the February 7, 2003, issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

The new rules will function by being rewritten and easier to understand.

Two comments were received regarding adoption of these rules. Larry A. Turner of Cavett, Turner & Wylie, commented that he opposes the adoption of proposed §519.72(c). Mr. Turner voluntarily disclosed that a complaint was filed against him with this board, that the complaint was investigated by the Behavioral Enforcement Committee ("BEC") of the board, that he entered into an agreed consent order, and that he was disappointed with the experience.

Mr. Turner is concerned that the board wants to adopt proposed §519.72(c) which would allow the board to change a finding of fact or conclusion of law or vacate or modify an ALJ's proposed order under certain conditions. In response, §2001.058(e) of the Government Code already authorizes the board to vacate or modify an ALJ's proposed order if the ALJ did not properly apply or interpret the board's policies. The existing §519.9(h) sets forth circumstances which the Board believes falls within the directive of the Government Code. The proposed §519.72(c) merely moves §519.9(h) to new location and is intended to further flesh out and interpret §2001.058(e) of the Government Code.

Mr. Turner states he was told that if he did not enter into an agreed consent order that investigations would be opened against his partners and his firm even though no complaints had been filed against the partners or the firm. In response, prior to being offered an agreed consent order, Mr. Turner participated in an informal conference with the BEC accompanied by an attorney and other representatives and associates of his choosing. Based on the statements that were made by Mr. Turner and his party to the BEC during the informal conference, the BEC decided there were grounds to open additional investigations against others and if the matter involving Mr. Turner was not promptly resolved, then the BEC would open additional investigative files and the board would file complaints against Mr. Turner and other with the State Office of Administrative Hearings ("SOAH"). Ultimately, Mr. Turner did not have to voluntarily enter into an Agreed Consent Order, yet he did so, and the board required that Mr. Turner acknowledge in writing that he executed the agreed consent order voluntarily and pursuant to the unfettered advice and counsel of his licensed attorney. The BEC decided not to pursue the others based on assurances by all that the practice that formed the basis of the complaint against Mr. Turner had been discontinued by all.

Mr. Turner states he was told that it would be futile to refuse the agreed consent order and to proceed to a hearing before an administrative law judge ("ALJ") at SOAH because the issues were policy issues and only the board may decide policy issues. In response, Mr. Turner was represented by and received the counsel of his attorney throughout the investigatory proceeding, and he does not state who made this statement to him. However, by statute, the board is the ultimate arbiter of board policy.

Mr. Turner wants a task force of licensees and attorneys, possibly including board staff, to review the board's enforcement program and to make recommendations that will insure licensees receive due process. In response, during 2002 and 2003 the board and its entire enforcement program underwent extensive review and examination by the Sunset Commission. The Sunset Commission's report regarding the board's enforcement program was favorable and the Public Accountancy Act was amended during the last legislative session to further enhance the board's enforcement authority. Licensees receive all procedural and substantive due process protection during proceedings at SOAH. The Board's enforcement committees do not issue orders, they only make recommendations and agreed consent orders are recommendations to the full board for its consideration. One independent test as to whether the board denies due process is that there have been no successful lawsuits against the board that alleged violation of due process.

Shelia Bailey Taylor, Chief Administrative Law Judge of the State Office of Administrative Hearings ("SOAH") commented in opposition to the adoption of certain parts of the proposed Chapter 519.

Ms. Taylor states that despite proposed new §519.70 that sets forth the required contents of a proposal for decision, SOAH'S ALJs will abide by the provisions of the APA. In response, §2001.062(c) of the Government Code requires a proposal for decision to "contain a statement of the reasons for the proposed decision and of each finding of fact and conclusion of law necessary to the proposed decision." This section is a mandatory minimum and not a prohibition on additional contents. This fact is already recognized by SOAH's ALJs who routinely include many, if not all, of the additional items specified in the proposed new rule in proposals for decision prepared in Board matters. The Board's proposed new rule does not conflict with the APA and reflects current practice.

Ms. Taylor notes that proposed new §519.71 conflicts with a new SOAH rule governing the time to file exceptions to a proposal for decision and replies. In response, the proposed new rule merely carries forward the provisions of the current §519.9(d) and (e). Subsection (d) sets forth the time for filing exceptions and replies with the Board and subsection (e) makes provision for a request for oral argument before the Board. At the time §519.9(d) was adopted, SOAH had no rule specifying the time within which exceptions and replies must be filed. Effective March 2004, SOAH now has a rule setting a deadline by which exceptions and replies must be filed. The proposed text of §519.71(a) was deleted and replaced with "[E]xceptions to the PFD and replies to exceptions must be filed within the time specified in SOAH's rules."

Ms. Taylor states that proposed new §519.72 appears to grant the Board the authority to change a proposal for decision for reasons that are impermissible under the APA. In response, proposed new §519.72(c) substantially carries forward the existing §519.9(h). This subsection comprises the Board's interpretation of §2001.058 of the Government Code and gives greater definition to the circumstances under which the Board may change a finding of fact or conclusion of law. Resolving matters of contested fact are the province of the ALJ, but resolving matters of policy are the province of the Board. Unfortunately the resolution of some facts has the effect of determining Board policy. The Board is comprised of 15 members, 10 of whom are CPAs. Most ALJs are not CPAs and technical matters presented to an ALJ can be difficult to resolve. The Board reserves the right to make the ultimate determination of matters of policy. This is clearly within the Board's authority under the Act and §2001.058 of the Government Code.

Ms. Taylor notes that §2003.050 states that an agency's procedural rules govern a proceeding at SOAH only to the extent that SOAH enacts a rule adopting that agency's rules by reference. She states it is unlikely she would enact such a rule to preserve uniformity across all state agencies. In response, Ms. Taylor is correct that she has rarely recognized another agency's rules. She declined to adopt many more agency's rules, including those of the Texas Board of Medical Examiners and the Texas Department of Insurance, the two agencies upon whose rules the Board has modeled the proposed new Chapter 519. As noted at the beginning of this response, the Board, as do all state agencies, has a duty to enact rules of practice pursuant to §2001.004 of the Government Code. The ALJs who conduct hearings for the Board are required to consider the Board's rules and written polices when conducting a hearing on its behalf pursuant to §2001.058 of the Texas Government. Chapter 519 has been carefully considered and designed to avoid conflicts with SOAH's rules. The Board's rules are intended to fill in gaps in SOAH's rules and procedures to streamline the process for all participants. The necessity for numerous motions to fill in gaps in SOAH's rules is eliminated in most instances. This replaces the uncertainty of a case by case scheduling order with a uniform procedure that ensures fairness to all of the participants. ALJs should have no difficulty in following the Board's rules of practice and procedure.

The Board understands and appreciates the mandate of SOAH to remain independent from the boards it serves and the duty of an ALJ to remain free from supervision, direction and indirect influence of the state agency for whom they are serving as a neutral fact finder. The Board's proposed rules are not intended to exert undue influence on ALJs, but rather are intended to put current Board practice into a written policy to be followed by complainants and respondents alike to assure that all sides receive a fair hearing. In fact, the Board has a legislated command to promulgate such rules. Section 2001.004 of the Government Code provides that "a state agency shall (1) adopt rules of practice stating the nature and requirements of all available formal and informal procedures...". Chapter 519 serves that purpose for the Board. Section 2001.039 of the Government Code requires every state agency to conduct a comprehensive review of its rules at least once every four years. The proposed amendments and additions to Chapter 519 are a part of that rule review.

Rule review requires the Board to address several questions when it considers its existing rules: Is the rule needed to fairly administer and justly enforce the Act? Does the rule reflect current Board policy and interpretations of the Act? Does the rule reflect current Board procedure?

The Board finds that Chapter 519 is in need of substantial revision to ensure the fair administration and just enforcement of the Act. Additionally, the Board finds that numerous Board policies and procedures were not present in the existing Chapter 519 and it is necessary to adopt significant changes to Chapter 519 to include the omitted policies and procedures in conformity with §2001.004 and §2001.039 of the Government Code.

The new rules are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act and §2001.039 of the Government Code Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act) that requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency.

No other article, statute or code is affected by the adoption.

§519.71.Exceptions and Replies.

(a) Exceptions to the PFD and any replies to exceptions must be filed within the time specified in SOAH's rules.

(b) The form of exceptions and replies is governed by SOAH's rules.

(c) Each exception or reply to a finding of fact or conclusion of law shall be concisely stated and shall summarize the evidence in support thereof. Arguments shall be logical and citations to authorities shall be complete.

(d) Any party may request oral argument before the board after service of the PFD and disposition of the exceptions, if any, and before the board's final determination of the matter. The written request for oral argument must be filed with the Board's Executive Director no later than 5:00 p.m. on the twentieth day prior to the board meeting at which the matter is to be considered. Oral argument is allowed only at the discretion of the board. In the event oral argument is granted by the board, each party will be notified of the time and place of the argument and the amount of time allotted for the presentation. Only one spokesman per party and position will be allowed to speak. At the conclusion of the presentation, board members may ask questions of the person who made the presentation. Under no circumstances may any party making oral argument to the board refer to or urge reliance on materials that are not part of the administrative record.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403424

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848


Subchapter E. POST BOARD ORDER PROCEDURES

22 TAC §§519.90 - 519.94

The Texas State Board of Public Accountancy adopts new §519.90, concerning Motions for Rehearing; §519.91, concerning Judicial Review; §519.92, concerning The Record and Assessment of Cost of Preparation; §519.93, concerning Publication of Disciplinary/Administrative Sanctions and §519.94, concerning Compliance with Board Orders in Subchapter E, regarding Post Board Order Procedures without changes to the proposed text as published in the April 2, 2004, issue of the Texas Register (29 TexReg 3342). The text of the rules will not be republished.

New §§519.90 - 519.94 renumber and relocate former §519.9(f) which is now §519.90, former §519.10 which is now §519.92, former §519.12 which is now §519.93, and former §519.11 which is now §519.94. New §519.91 states that appeals of board orders are governed by the APA. These rules describe the sequence of events, deadlines and procedure after the Board issues an order.

These new rules are the result of rule review conducted pursuant to §2001.039 of the Government Code. Government Code §2001.039 requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency pursuant to the Government Code, Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act). The Board published a Notice of Intention to Review Texas Administrative Code, Title 22, Part 22, Chapter 519 in the February 7, 2003, issue of the Texas Register (28 TexReg 1234). No comments were received following publication of the notice.

The new rules will function by addressing post-board order events by being located sequentially and in one location.

No comments were received regarding adoption of these rules.

The new rules are adopted under the Public Accountancy Act ("Act"), Texas Occupations Code, §901.151 which provides the agency with the authority to amend, adopt and repeal rules deemed necessary or advisable to effectuate the Act and §2001.039 of the Government Code Chapter 2001 (Administrative Procedure Act) that requires that each state agency review and consider for readoption each rule adopted by that agency.

No other article, statute or code is affected by the adoption.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on May 20, 2004.

TRD-200403425

Rande Herrell

General Counsel

Texas State Board of Public Accountancy

Effective date: June 9, 2004

Proposal publication date: April 2, 2004

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7848