TITLE 22.EXAMINING BOARDS

Part 11. BOARD OF NURSE EXAMINERS

Chapter 211. GENERAL PROVISIONS

22 TAC §211.6

The Board of Nurse Examiners adopts amendments with changes to §211.6 pertaining to General Provisions. Section 211.6 specifically addresses the Committees of the Board. The original proposed amendment was in the November 10, 2006, edition of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9194). The Board of Nurse Examiners is currently under "Sunset" review. In September 2006, the Staff of the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission recommended in its report that the Board adopt "rules regarding the purpose, structure, and use of its advisory committees, including: the purpose, role, responsibility, and goal of the committees; size and quorum requirements of the committees; composition and representation provisions of the committees; qualifications of the members, such as experience or geographic location; appointment procedures for the committees; terms of service; training requirements, if needed; the method the Board will use to receive public input on issues acted upon by the advisory committees; and the requirement that the Board comply with the requirements of the Open Meetings Act." In response to comments, the Board is incorporating a change to paragraph (f)(9) to place the responsibility of removing a member pursuant to this rule on the Board or Executive Director and not a volunteer chairperson. In addition, the Texas Primary Care Educators organization is being removed from the Advisory Committee on Education (ACE) as they have not been a stakeholder previously involved and were inadvertently added. Its removal warrants a renumbering of this subsection.

The adopted amendments to §211.6 will comply with Chapter 2110 of the Government Code pertaining to State Agency Advisory Committees. The main effect on the Board's existing practice is the "liaison" role of the Board members. Board members have served as chairpersons of some of the standing committees, but this rule amendment will revert their roles to "liaison" status. The organizations who comprise committee membership are substantially the same. One recommended change made by Staff is the removal of "Texas Primary Care Educators" from the Advisory Committee on Education (ACE) due to its inadvertent inclusion on this committee. Texas Primary Care Educators have never been members of the ACE. Subsequent subclauses will be renumbered to correct the numbering.

One comment to the proposed amendments was received from the Texas Nurses Association (TNA). TNA recommended three non-substantive changes as follows:

Comment: Subdivision (f)(6) requires each committee to provide notice of meetings on the Secretary of State's website. TNA believes this may be a more appropriate role for the BNE staff appointed to support the committee.

Response: The Board does not agree that a change is needed to the proposed amendments to clarify whose specific responsibility it is to post the meetings on the Secretary of State's web site. The Board agrees that the BNE Staff is in the better position to submit the notice of meetings to the Secretary of State's web site; however, the committee is in the best position to determine the time and agenda of the meeting. The Board's position is that once that decision is made, the Staff person assigned by the Executive Director to support the committee will then take the appropriate steps to make sure sufficient notice is provided to the public. The committee members would not have the ability to access the necessary web site to publicize the meeting.

Comment: Subdivision (f)(9) authorizes the committee chair to remove members for lack of attendance. TNA is not sure it is feasible to charge a volunteer chair with the responsibility to remove a committee member. The members are appointed by the Board and it would seem more appropriate and practical for the Board or Executive Director to remove a member.

Response: The Board agrees with this comment and will change the paragraph to incorporate this comment.

Comment: Subdivision (f)(2) states the Board may amend the committee membership as needed. TNA assumes the intent is that any change would occur by amending Subdivision (f)(1) that sets out the membership for the various advisory committees but this is not entirely clear from the wording of (f)(2).

Response: The Board disagrees that a change is needed to the currently proposed amendments. The Board's advisory committees must maintain a certain amount of fluidity to allow for the changes that occur in membership organizations. These organizations may cease to exist, may choose not to participate, may change names, etc. Paragraph (f)(2) is for the purpose of allowing for the unforeseen changes that occur with committee memberships and to make a quorum possible; therefore, the paragraph is not for the purpose of allowing the Board the opportunity to engage in arbitrary committee changes. Any permanent changes to committee membership would be incorporated in a rule amendment as soon as possible.

The amendments are adopted pursuant to the authority of Texas Occupations Code §301.151 which authorizes the Board of Nurse Examiners to adopt, enforce, and repeal rules consistent with its legislative authority under the Nursing Practice Act.

§211.6.Committees of the Board.

(a) The following are standing and permanent committees of the board, as established by the board in accordance with the Nursing Practice Act. The responsibilities and authority of these committees include those duties and powers as set forth including other responsibilities and charges which the board may from time to time delegate to these committees.

(b) Eligibility and Disciplinary Committee.

(1) Members of the committee shall be appointed by the president and shall consist of one consumer member and two nurse members. The President shall have authority to substitute committee members when necessary to establish a quorum due to absences of standing members.

(2) The chair shall be named by the president.

(3) Duties and powers. The disciplinary committee shall have the authority to determine matters of eligibility for licensure and discipline of licenses, including temporary suspension of a license, and administrative and civil penalties.

(4) Quorum. Two eligible voting members shall establish a quorum of the Committee of which at least one member is a nurse.

(5) Tele-conference. A meeting by the Committee may be held by telephone conference call or video conference call as authorized by Texas Government Code chapter 551.

(c) Education Liaison. The three board members representing nursing educational programs shall serve as advisory to the staff on matters pertaining to faculty waivers, proposed curriculum revisions and other issues that may arise between regular board meetings. The recommendations of the liaison members are presented to the board at the next regular meeting for consideration.

(d) Advanced Practice Liaison. Three members shall be designated by the president to serve as advisory to the staff on matters pertaining to advanced practitioner waivers and other issues that may arise between regular board meetings. The recommendation of the liaison members are presented to the board at the next regular meeting for consideration.

(e) Other standing or ad hoc committees. The board may designate other standing or ad hoc committees as deemed necessary. Such committees shall have and exercise such authority as may be granted by the board.

(f) Advisory Committees. The president may appoint, with the authorization of the board, advisory committees for the performance of such activities as may be appropriate or required by law.

(1) The board has established the following committees that advise the board on a continuous basis or as charged by the Board:

(A) the Advanced Practice Nursing Advisory Committee (APNAC) advises the Board on practice issues and regulations that have or may have an impact on advanced practice nursing. The APNAC is comprised of representatives from the following:

(i) Texas Association of Nurse Anesthetists (TANA);

(ii) Coalition for Nurses in Advanced Practice (CNAP);

(iii) Texas Nurse Practitioners (TNP);

(iv) Consortium of Texas Certified Nurse-Midwives (CTCNM);

(v) Texas Clinical Nurse Specialists (TXCNS);

(vi) Texas Organization of Nurse Executives (TONE);

(vii) Texas Nurses Association (TNA);

(viii) CRNA Educator;

(ix) CNS Education;

(x) CNM Education;

(xi) NP Educator; and

(xii) other members approved by the Board.

(B) the Advisory Committee on Education (ACE) advises the Board on education and practice issues that have or may have an impact on the regulation of nursing education in Texas. The ACE is comprised of representatives from the following:

(i) Licensed Vocational Nurses Association of Texas (LVNAT);

(ii) Texas Association of Vocational Nurse Educators (TAVNE);

(iii) Texas Organization of Baccalaureate and Graduate Nursing Education (TOBGNE);

(iv) Texas Organization of Associate Degree Nursing (TOADN);

(v) Texas League for Vocational Nursing (TLVN);

(vi) Texas Organization of Nurse Executives (TONE);

(vii) Texas Nurses Association (TNA);

(viii) Texas Association of Deans and Directors Professional Nursing Programs (TADDPNS);

(ix) various educators in Texas nursing programs;

(x) interested state agencies; and

(xi) other members approved by the Board.

(C) the Nursing Practice Advisory Committee (NPAC) reviews and analyzes issues that affect the practice of nursing. The NPAC is comprised of representatives from the following:

(i) Licensed Vocational Nurses Association of Texas (LVNAT);

(ii) Texas Association of Vocational Nurse Educators (TAVNE);

(iii) Texas League for Vocational Nursing (TLVN);

(iv) Texas Organization of Nurse Executives (TONE);

(v) Texas Nurses Association (TNA);

(vi) Texas School Nurses Organization (TSNO);

(vii) Texas Department of Aging and Disability Services (DADS);

(viii) Texas Association for Home Care (TAHC);

(ix) Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS);

(x) Texas Association of Homes and Services for the Aging (TAHSA);

(xi) Texas Hospital Association (THA); and

(xii) other members approved by the Board.

(2) The Board may amend the committee memberships as needed.

(3) A board member or members appointed by the President of the board or the board may serve as a liaison(s) to a committee and report to the Board the recommendations of the committee for consideration by the Board.

(4) Each committee shall select from among its members a presiding officer who shall report to the agency or Board as needed.

(5) Each committee's work and usefulness shall be evaluated annually.

(6) The committees will provide notice of meetings, as feasible, on the Secretary of State's web site to allow the public an opportunity to participate.

(7) The Executive Director shall appoint staff to support the committee.

(8) The committee may consult with the board liaison(s) to authorize the committee to investigate identified topics or issues pending the development and communication of a formal charge by the Board.

(9) Committee members will be expected to attend meetings. The chairperson has the discretion to recommend the dismissal of a member who does not regularly attend. The Board or Executive Director has the authority to approve the dismissal of a member.

(10) Advisory committees chairs may invite individuals as expert resources to participate in committee discussions and deliberations. Invited experts serve as ad hoc members and do not have voting privileges.

(11) The committees will meet on a schedule established by the chair of each committee.

(12) The decisions of the committee are advisory only.

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 February 22, 2007.

TRD-200700695

Katherine Thomas

Executive Director

Board of Nurse Examiners

Effective date: March 14, 2007

Proposal publication date: November 10, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-6823


Chapter 213. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

22 TAC §213.28, §213.33

The Board of Nurse Examiners adopts amendments to §213.28 and §213.33, pertaining to Practice and Procedure. Section 213.33 is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 10, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9196). Section 213.28 is adopted without changes and will not be republished. In §213.33(e), an additional sentence was added; and in subsection (f)(3), a comma was replaced with a semicolon. Sections 213.28 and 213.33 specifically address Licensure of Persons with Criminal Convictions and Factors Considered for Imposition of Penalties/Sanctions and/or Fines, respectively. These adopted amendments were reviewed by the Board's Eligibility and Disciplinary Task Force at its open meeting on October 13, 2006, and approved for recommendation to the Board for proposal and adoption.

In September 2006, the staff of the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission recommended in its report that the Board more clearly identify which crimes relate to the practice of nursing. The proposed amendments to §213.28 attempts to incorporate this recommendation into the Board's rules. The Board evaluated the crimes that other professions have identified as affecting their professions and the rationale provided by those professions. The Board believes that due to the nature of nursing, the crimes that may affect nursing are broad. The practice of nursing is in essence the "front line" of health care provision. The scope of the nursing profession allows nurses to have unfettered access to people and their property more than any other profession. Nurses attend to people at their most vulnerable state and provide care to the most vulnerable individuals in our society the elderly, children, the mentally ill, sedated and anesthetized patients, patients whose mental or cognitive ability is compromised and patients who are disabled and immobilized. The provision of care can be in private homes and home-like settings without direct or, at times, without any supervision. Because of this scope and level of trust required of a nurse, he/she must possess professional character and integrity. The legislature has recognized the need to review criminal backgrounds prior to licensure, Tex. Occ. Code §301.2511, and that crimes may affect licensure eligibility in general, Tex. Occ. Code Ch. 53. The legislature has recently identified specific crimes that bar licensure. See Tex. Occ. Code §301.4535. The scope and nature of nursing require that nurses not commit crimes against persons, not commit crimes against property, be of sound mind and not under the influence of mood-altering substances, be truthful and honest, and be accountable for their actions. For these reasons, a wide variety of criminal acts affect the practice of nursing. To better inform the public and profession of how crimes may affect licensure determination by the Board and to address these issues and the concerns of the Sunset Advisory Committee, the Board proposes amendments to 22 Texas Administrative Code §213.28.

The practice of nursing requires professional character and integrity. Due to the necessity of these qualities, the Board or the Executive Director may request that nurses under investigation or nurse applicants with eligibility issues undergo a psychiatric/psychological evaluation or a forensic psychological evaluation as prescribed by the Board to assess whether the individual may continue to pose a risk to the public health and safety of the public as a nurse that is suggested by the known criminal conduct. The evaluation is voluntary and must be obtained at the licensee's own expense. The evaluation may offer mitigating and/or aggravating information to the investigation of a nurse or nurse applicant.

The amendment to §213.33 relates to a psychological/psychiatric evaluation to determine mental fitness and a more specialized evaluation that addresses the criminal element of unprofessional conduct. The underlying issues may deal with honesty, chemical dependency, and/or fitness to practice. The board has utilized the forensic evaluation for several years, so the amendment is for the purpose of placing this practice in §213.33, Factors Considered for Imposition of Penalties/Sanctions and/or Fines, to address the risk assessment evaluation. In §213.33, the Board has attempted to generally outline the nature of the evaluation which it would view as credible and reliable. The rule is designed to be flexible and have general applicability.

Three comments were received in response to proposed amendments to §213.28 and §213.33. A letter of comment was received from the Texas Nurses Association (TNA) and from two individuals.

The comments to §213.28 are as follows:

Comment: TNA and one individual contend that the proposed amendments to §213.28 do not achieve their stated goal of implementing the Sunset staff report Recommendation 2.1 (Require the Board to more clearly identify which crimes relate to the practice of nursing). In citing Recommendation 2.1, TNA states: 2.1 Require the Board to more clearly identify which crimes relate to the practice of nursing. This recommendation would clarify the Board's responsibility to adopt guidelines that follow the requirements of Chapter 53 of the Occupations Code by specifically requiring the Board to develop rules defining which crimes relate to an individual's ability to practice nursing. Reading the Nursing Practice Act with Chapter 53 would allow the Board to take action against an applicant or licensee who committed a crime including a crime that resulted in a disposition other than a conviction, such as deferred adjudication identified by the Board as relating to the practice of nursing. While the Board should have authority to consider each case on its own merits, identifying those crimes that most directly and consistently relate to the practice of nursing would allow the Board to prioritize its licensing and enforcement efforts related to criminal activity, and thus allow the Board to better allocate its resources. Simply defining all crimes as related to the practice of nursing does not meet the intent of the Legislature and is not the norm among health licensing agencies.

The individual states that the "Occupations Code states that the Board may take action for a felony or a misdemeanors involving moral turpitude or conduct resulting in revocation of probation. The Legislature determined which crimes they consider to be of concern and those are listed in §301.4535 of the Occupations Code. These rules need to be withdrawn and re-drafted to reflect crimes that directly relate to the practice of nursing."

Response: The Board disagrees that it has not more clearly identified the types of crimes that relate to nursing. Although the amendments do not list specific crimes, it does identify those categories of crimes whose elements would constitute unprofessional conduct as defined by the Legislature and Board rules. The Board's rule is to provide guidance to nurses who want to practice in this state. The Board has not gone through the Penal Code in its rule to specifically identify each offense listed therein to determine its applicability to nursing. Likewise, the Board does not intend to go through each State's Penal Code to identify those specific crimes that nurses who come in from other states need to be aware may be an impediment to an unencumbered license. The Board, however, has adopted a disciplinary grid that lists specific crimes listed in the Texas Penal Code that the Board views as affecting the practice of nursing and how. Sunset recommended that the Board look at the Department of Licensing and Regulation's (TDLR) guidelines. TDLR's guidelines are categorized similarly as the Board has implemented into rule; therefore, the Board believes that the amendments define and provide ample guidance regarding types of crimes it feels affect the practice of nursing in compliance with the Sunset Advisory report. In addition, the Board disagrees with the individual's comment that seems to imply that the only crimes that directly relate to the practice of nursing were defined by the Legislature in §301.4535. The crimes listed in §301.4535 are bars to licensure. Crimes exist that are not serious enough to automatically prevent an individual from being a nurse but are serious enough to be considered an impediment to licensure or an unencumbered license. The Board disagrees that the rules should be withdrawn and redrafted to reflect crimes that directly relate to nursing, because the requirements of Chapter 53 do not require the individual crimes to be listed in rule but in guidelines.

Comment: TNA and one individual contend that the amendments appear to be based on a standard of what crimes "relate" to nursing as opposed to "directly relate" to nursing per Chapter 53 of the Occupations Code. While TNA does believe the crimes that directly relate to nursing are quite broad, it does not believe that all crimes do so. While it may be difficult, TNA believes it should be possible to draw more useful lines than is done by the proposed amendments. At the very least, it should be possible to exclude certain offenses, for example, Class B or C Misdemeanors or possibly crimes in which the culpable mental state is criminal negligence (though this would include negligent homicide)."

Response: The Board agrees with TNA that the crimes that relate to nursing are quite broad. The Board disagrees that it needs to specifically identify the types of crimes that relate to nursing in its rule. Chapter 53 of the Occupations Code requires guidelines that delineate specific crimes, and the Board has created the guidelines in the disciplinary grid which states each specific crime. Although the amendments do not list specific crimes, it does identify those categories of crimes whose elements would constitute unprofessional conduct as defined by the Legislature and Board rules. The Board's rule is to provide guidance to nurses who want to practice in this state. The Board has not gone through the Penal Code in its rule to specifically identify each offense listed therein to determine its applicability to nursing. Likewise, the Board does not intend to go through each State's Penal Code to identify in its rule those specific crimes that nurses who come in from other states need to be aware may be an impediment to an unencumbered license. The Board, however, has adopted a disciplinary grid that lists specific crimes listed in the Texas Penal Code that the Board views as affecting the practice of nursing and how. Sunset recommended that the Board look at the Department of Licensing and Regulation's (TDLR) guidelines. TDLR's guidelines are categorized similarly as the Board has implemented into rule; therefore, the Board believes that it has defined and provided ample guidance regarding types of crimes it feels affect the practice of nursing in compliance with the Sunset Advisory report. The Board cannot make a distinction regarding the level of crime without knowing the specific nature of the crime. "Indecent exposure" is a class B misdemeanor, yet if an individual gets two misdemeanor "indecent exposures," he/she is required to register with the sex offender registry, and pursuant to Tex. Occ. Code Ann. §301.4535(16), he/she is barred from licensure; therefore, the Board is not comfortable making a specific distinction. The Board, however, does give weight to the level of the criminal conduct.

Comment: An individual states that subsection (j) is not required "because the authority to take action on any nurse's license is already granted under §301.4535 of the Occupations Code. The proposed subsection (j) is too vague and appears to exceed statutory authority."

Response: The Board agrees that the authority to take action on any nurse's license for the offenses in §301.4535 is granted. Subsection (j) clarifies that the authority under §301.4535 extends to authorization to practice. The Board believes subsection (j) is a reasonable and consistent interpretation of its statutory authority under §301.4535. The Board, therefore, disagrees that subsection (j) is too vague and exceeds statutory authority.

Comment: TNA states that the use of terminology "criminal offense" is confusing since the "offense" is the underlying conduct regardless of any action (arrest, deferred adjudication, conviction) taken by the criminal justice system on the basis of the offense or conduct. Is the intent that the BNE could take disciplinary action on basis of conduct that constitutes a criminal offense even though there has been no action taken against the nurse by the criminal justice system? If the intent is to authorize the taking of action based on an arrest, then that should be explicitly stated. If not, then terminology should probably be "conviction or deferred adjudication" rather than "offense." The individual comments that the term "offense" is overly broad.

Response: The Board disagrees that the term "offense" is confusing and too broad and that its terminology needs to be clarified. The Board agrees that the amendment seeks to make the term "offense" general enough to include deferred adjudication or other criminal action other than "conviction." Not all criminal conduct is prosecuted by the judicial system as a "conviction," so the Board may take action on conduct which is a violation of the Nursing Practice Act (NPA) even though no action was taken by the criminal justice system. For example, when a nurse misappropriates drugs, the facility may not report the conduct to the authorities, but the conduct is still a criminal offense and in violation of the Health and Safety Code. Though the criminal justice system does not take action, the offense may involve theft, falsification of medical documents, being under the influence of drugs, etc. The conduct is criminal and the Board will take the appropriate steps to assure the public that the nurse can safely practice nursing. The Board disagrees that the use of "offense" can be interpreted to authorize agency action based on arrest information. The Board, however, may be interested in investigating the underlying conduct when there is pending criminal charges due to the nature of the conduct and impending judicial action which may be a violation of the NPA.

Comment: One individual comments that the following statements are overly broad and include matters outside the Board's authority in §301.452 and §301.4535 of the Texas Occupations Code and the Board should be required to specifically delineate precisely which crimes pertain to each:

(a)(1) Offenses against the person similar to those outlined in Title 5 of the Texas Penal Code. . .;

(a)(2) Offenses against property, e.g., robbery, burglary, and theft, etc.,. . .;

(a)(3) Offenses involving fraud and deception. . .;

(a)(4) Offenses involving lying and falsification. . . .

Response: The Board disagrees that the statements are overly broad and include matters outside the Board's authority in §301.452 and §301.4535 of the Nursing Practice Act. The behaviors outlined in the proposed rule language constitute unprofessional conduct in almost any profession. The categorized offenses in the rule are specifically in violation of the Board's criteria for "professional character" as defined in rule 213.27 through 213.28. Due to the nature of nursing and the potential unfettered access nurses have to personal information, belongings, and dwellings without supervision, the Board believes that it does have the authority to expect and require nurses to have professional character and, therefore, not commit criminal offenses against individuals and their property and to be truthful, forthright, and accountable for their actions. The public expects nurses to have professional character and the legislature has granted the Board the authority to require it.

Comment: One individual states that "subsection (i) is not required because this issue is covered under Chapter 53 of the Occupations Code. The inclusion of "deferred adjudication" goes beyond the statutory authority."

Response: The Board disagrees that subsection (i) is not required. This subsection is not in conflict with Chapter 53 and the Board has found that many nurses and their attorneys are unfamiliar with the requirements of Chapter 53. The subsection is in rule to reiterate the requirement of Chapter 53. In addition, the Board's enabling legislation, Tex. Occ. Code §301.452(b)(3), specifically includes "deferred adjudications" with "convictions."

Comment: TNA states that although subsection (c)(1) - (8) are not proposed for amendment, paragraphs (1) and (2) would appear to become unnecessary if proposed new specific crimes language in subsection (b)(1) - (5) are adopted and likewise, paragraphs (7) - (8) would appear to become unnecessary if proposed new subsections (i) - (j) relating to imprisonment are adopted.

Response: The Board disagrees that the paragraphs cited are not necessary due to the proposed amendments. Paragraphs (1) and (2) repeat the statutory language of Occ. Code §301.452(b) and do not conflict or create ambiguity with the proposed language. Paragraph (1) may or may not constitute criminal conduct and the proposed amendments more clearly delineate the felony or misdemeanor conduct of paragraph (2) that concerns the Board. Paragraphs (7) and (8) state considerations for the Board but the proposed subsections (i) and (j) reflect the language of Chapter 53 of the Occupations Code. The proposed rule language appears to complement the existing language; however, the Board will continue its review of all of the rule for ambiguity and redundancy when it conducts its rule review of Chapter 213, if not sooner.

Comment: One individual states that the "board places no time limit on the date of convictions or deferred Orders. Prior to the merger of the Board of Nurse Examiners and the Board of Vocational Nurse Examiners, LVNs were not even asked about deferred adjudication. For the Board to now consider criteria previously not applicable to vocational nurses is over-reaching. The Board did not have statutory authority to discipline any nurse for deferred adjudication until September 1, 2005. The date of the offense should confer jurisdiction and a limitations period is necessary."

Response: The Board agrees that no time limit has been placed on the date of convictions or deferred Orders and that LVNs were not asked about deferred adjudications prior to the merger of the Board of Vocational Nurse Examiners and the Board of Nurse Examiners in February 2004. Jurisdiction, however, is not conferred by the Board but by the legislature and the legislature alone provides a limitations period. The Board agrees that it did not have the statutory authority to discipline for the deferred order on its face; however, it disagrees that it did not have the statutory authority to discipline nurses for the underlying conduct that served as the basis for the deferred order if the conduct is otherwise a violation of the standards associated with LVN licensure. Prior to the statutory authority granted by the Legislature regarding deferred adjudications, both Boards had statutory authority to discipline for "unprofessional conduct" and both boards had rules that addressed specific acts of "unprofessional conduct" which served and serve as the basis for investigating deferred adjudications. The Board's concern for its failure to investigate deferred adjudications was heightened when it became aware that nurses who had admitted guilt, received deferred orders, and were registered sex offenders, were practicing nursing without restrictions, and were providing care to the most vulnerable members of the public in autonomous situations. Subsequent to this awareness, the legislature specifically included "deferred adjudications" in the Board's enabling legislation. The Board believes it has and had the statutory authority to take action on conduct deemed to be unprofessional and, therefore, has not overreached its statutory authority.

Comment: One individual states that the board needs to provide data to support the following statement in subsection (a)(5), "offenses regarding delivery, possession, manufacture or use of or dispensing or prescribing a controlled substance, dangerous drug or mood altering drug may raise questions as to whether the same misconduct will be repeated in the workplace. . . ."

Response: The Board disagrees that it needs to provide the specific data the individual requests in response to a comment. The Board would point out that the definition of professional nurse includes "administering of medication" and it seems axiomatic that when the quintessential function of nursing is "dispensing and giving medication" that any offense regarding delivery, possession, or use of a controlled substance in an illegal manner raises questions about whether that misconduct can occur in the workplace. The Board's experience with and concern regarding individuals who are chemically dependent on mood altering substances, abuse controlled substances, or who engage in criminal behavior involving the same is that an individual's need or desire for the mood-altering substance may potentially override the responsibility to provide appropriate care to the patients. Because the practice of nursing provides more opportunity for an individual to have access to and, therefore, engage in the use of mood altering substances, the potential threat to the safety of patients will be investigated by the Board.

Comment: One individual states that the board needs to provide data to support the statement, regarding nurses who commit offenses against property, e.g., robbery, burglary, and theft, outside the workplace may raise questions as to whether the same misconduct will be repeated by the nurse in the workplace, and therefore, place patient's property at risk.

Response: The Board disagrees that it needs to provide the specific data the individual requests in response to a comment. The Board's concern as stated in the rule with individuals who possess the propensity to commit crimes against property, however, is that the practice of nursing would allow further opportunity for an individual to further engage in crimes against property. Nurses have access to people's valuables, their homes, their personal information, etc., and the Board is concerned that this access will allow the recidivism of the previous criminal conduct unless the factors listed in rule 213.33 provide mitigation to the contrary. In addition, the public would have concerns with an individual who has a criminal past involving offenses against property providing care to them in a vulnerable state and having access to their personal items.

In response to §213.33, the comments are as follows:

Comment: TNA states that "subsections (e) and (f)(1)(E) state that the evaluation be "designed to test the . . . veracity of the applicant or licensee." TNA assumes the intent of this language is to permit or recognize the use of a polygraph test as part of the evaluation. TNA has significant reservations about the use of polygraph tests, and believes that if polygraph tests are to be performed as part of the evaluation, then this should be explicitly stated in the rules. It also believes the rules should set out specific guidelines or criteria for when a polygraph test will be used as part of the evaluation and for assuring there are safeguards in place against inappropriate use. TNA also believes that the consent signed by the nurse/applicant for the evaluation state explicitly that the evaluation will/may include a polygraph test." One individual comment voices a similar concern and also states that a polygraph is "not reliable, valid or admissible in Texas" and she does not believe "that polygraphy could withstand a Daubert challenge."

Response: The Board agrees that the polygraph exam may be used as a tool by the forensic evaluator. The Board's experience with the evaluator's use of polygraph is varied, but generally, the polygraph has been a tool reasonably relied upon in performing evaluations. It is but one assessment tool which may be used. Therefore, the rule recognizes the broader category of tests used to evaluate veracity. The Board's experience is that polygraphs can be beneficial when conflicting stories are presented regarding allegations being investigated by the Board. The polygraph does not stand alone. It is one of several factors that may be used by the evaluator. The individual is informed when a polygraph is requested in conjunction with the evaluation, but the Board will modify the consent form for the evaluation to include the specific language regarding the possibility of a polygraph. Polygraphs are not generally requested in psychological/psychiatric evaluations, but are more prevalent in the forensic psychological evaluation when the "veracity" of the individual's version of the event is in question, e.g., the individual's interpretation of events versus the police report or other witnesses' testimony. The Board is aware of the limitations of the use of a polygraph exam in evidentiary hearings, but has relied on its common use by evaluators. The request is not mandatory and the individual has the right to refuse to obtain an evaluation.

Comment: TNA contends that "subsections (e) and (f)(1) use the terminology "the Board or Executive Director may request . . ." which makes it unclear if the nurse or applicant can refuse the evaluation. TNA's understanding is that the evaluation is voluntary, and if so the rule should make this clear."

Response: The Board disagrees that the "may request" language is unclear regarding whether the evaluation is voluntary. The evaluation is a factor considered in determining the appropriate sanction, if any, that should be imposed. It is not uncommon for the Board to request an evaluation from individuals whose past conduct would be a barrier to licensure, but a positive evaluation would justify the Board's approval. The Board, however, will consider guidelines regarding evaluations to be posted on its web site in the near future after the rule amendments are adopted and the Board's Eligibility and Disciplinary task force has had the opportunity to review and advise the Board.

Comment: One individual states that §213.33 is intended for use once a determination has been made that discipline is indicated. Psychological evaluations determine whether a need for disciplinary action exists, so these proposed rules do not belong under §213.33.

Response: The Board disagrees. The evaluations are a factor used in making a determination in resolution of a case. Evaluations are generally requested to provide additional information to the Board as to whether an individual is safe to practice nursing or whether an individual poses a threat to patient safety based on the factors considered by the evaluator; therefore, the conclusions and recommendations of a qualified evaluator who has reviewed the case constitute factors to be considered by the Board in determining an appropriate remedy.

Comment: TNA contends that neither "subsection (e) nor (f) set out any standards or criteria for when a nurse would be requested to have a psychological/psychiatric examination nor are any parameters set on how the evaluation will be used. Rather, both sections only address the process to be used once a decision is made that an evaluation will be requested." An individual states in her comment that the criteria should be stated in the appropriate rules relating to criminal conduct, mental or chemical dependency fitness issues, or in the cases involving sexual misconduct. One individual does not believe that a forensic evaluation is beneficial and that a psychiatric/ psychologist evaluation is sufficient.

Response: The Board disagrees that no standards are specifically set out, since the Board assumes that the "factors" in §213.33 will be considered, and specifically relevant information about "evidence of present fitness to practice" as stated in §213.33(a)(5). The psychological/ psychiatric evaluation is designed to provide an expert opinion regarding the mental fitness of an individual and the forensic evaluation would provide an expert opinion regarding "fitness" to be a safe practitioner, the "potential harm" the nurse may provide to clients or the public, provide mitigating or aggravating factors, and forensic evaluations are provided in the criminal justice system to determine the potential that the person will engage in subsequent conduct that may make him/her unsafe to practice. The parameters of an evaluation are dictated mainly by the professional expertise of the evaluator. The evaluators are recognized and approved based on their knowledge of how to conduct the evaluation. The Board does not have jurisdiction to dictate the scope of practice for a psychologist or psychiatrist who has the expertise to perform the fitness evaluation. The criminal justice system uses forensic evaluations and the Board has found these evaluations governed by the forensic credentialing entities may be very beneficial when considering an appropriate sanction that protects the public but is fair to the nurse.

Comment: TNA contends that the "release the nurse is required to sign by both subsections (e) and (f)(2) is very broad and apparently the evaluation is not limited in what it can cover or how the information uncovered can be used even if unrelated to the original reason for evaluation. If the nurse is consenting to the BNE's using the evaluation for any purpose the BNE determines appropriate, then the scope of use should be clearly stated in the consent the nurse is asked to sign. TNA also believes it would be desirable if the consent identify that the evaluation will be performed by a psychologist/psychiatrist selected or approved by the BNE. In summary, TNA believes that the consent signed by the nurse include sufficient detail that the nurse knows precisely what she or he is consenting to." One individual commented that instead of "forcing a nurse to utilize an evaluator on an approved 'list,' the Board should publish the minimum acceptable criteria with regard to education, specific credentials and experience for a psychologist or psychiatrist to possess in order to conduct an evaluation that is acceptable to the Board." Another individual stated that the board should not approve evaluators.

Response: The Board agrees that it uses a general release form for all of its evaluations and the evaluation is not limited. The Board's only purpose for the evaluation is to obtain an expert opinion determining whether an individual is safe to practice nursing or poses a risk when evidence, e.g., criminal conduct, behavior at work, etc., may suggest that he/she does. The evaluation based on objective criteria, however, may show that the individual's potential risk is minimized because of the individual's subsequent maturity, rehabilitation or that the risk is minimized if his/her license is subject to stipulations, e.g., counseling, supervision, education, etc. The evaluation may also show that the individual is not safe to practice. The Board admits that information often emerges in an evaluation that was beyond the Board's knowledge prior to obtaining the evaluation.

The Board disagrees that it is "forcing" the nurse to submit to an approved list. The Board also disagrees that it should not approve evaluators. The Board has a forensic evaluator list that is Board-approved; however, it is not an all-inclusive list and the Board does not force a nurse to use the list. If a nurse wants to use an evaluator who is not on the list, the evaluator can be approved by the Executive Director. The Executive Director approves forensic evaluators whose credentials and resumé evidence experience in doing forensic evaluations and whose names may not be on the list. If that evaluator submits credible evaluations based on objective criteria and professional expertise, he/she is asked whether he/she can be added to the list. Psychological/ Psychiatric evaluators are approved based on licensure and no board-approved list exists.

Comment: TNA contends that there exists "no requirement in subsection (e) that the applicant/nurse be provided a copy of the evaluation as there is in subsection (f)(3)."

Response: The Board agrees that no requirement exists but the Board assumes that a copy will be provided, because the nurse/applicant paid for it. If no copy is provided by the evaluator, the Board provides a copy to the nurse/applicant. The Board will add the requirement to subsection (e).

Comment: TNA contends that "subsection (e) describes the evaluation as "designed to test the psychological stability and veracity of the applicant or licensee" and subsection (f)(1)(E) as "designed to test the psychological stability, fitness to practice, professional character, and/or veracity of the nurse applicant or licensee." Is the intent that the scope of the two evaluations be different other than the fact that the one involves a criminal history?"

Response: Generally, the purpose of the evaluations is to determine whether an individual is safe to practice nursing. The underlying concern, e.g., mental issue, criminal conduct, etc., for seeking the evaluation is different.

Comment: TNA contends that neither "subsection (e) or (f) addresses maintaining the confidentiality of the evaluations. If an evaluation is done, TNA believes that disclosure to or use by the BNE should not result in the evaluation becoming a public record subject to disclosure under the open records act."

Response: The evaluation is subject to the open records act only if it is admitted into evidence at a public hearing. An agreed order may include a finding of fact that addresses the evaluation to justify the Board's action.

Comment: Individual comment states that the individual subject to evaluation "should have the opportunity to review the information submitted to the evaluator and provide additional information to ensure the evaluation is done fairly and is based on the evidence. In addition, the applicant or licensee must have the opportunity to obtain all information the BNE gets from the evaluator at the same time that the BNE obtains it; the applicant/licensee is paying for the examination and is entitled to the results." Another individual stated that the evaluator should be allowed to review the complete file, other than confidential information.

Response: The Board does not agree that an individual should have access to the Board's work product, but the Board believes that the individual being evaluated should be able to know what the evaluator has reviewed and to provide additional information, and it is the Board's experience that the individual usually does provide such information. The Board also agrees that the individual should be given the results.

Comment: One individual states that the "board must substantiate the usefulness of an evaluation that predicts the recidivism of a nurse or applicant."

Response: The board disagrees that it must substantiate the usefulness of a recidivism prediction in response to its rule. The board, however, believes it is logical to presume that such a prediction is useful in determining whether an individual's practice would potentially place the public at risk due to past behaviors or a fitness issue.

Comment: One individual states that the Board should not order which tests are required to be administered, but rather should accept the opinion of the evaluator without influence.

Response: The Board does not order testing but disagrees that it should not request which tests are required to be administered. The Board wants the evaluator to use objective testing that is the generally accepted tools used by an evaluator and to address certain issues that are of concern to the Board whether it be a sexual predator component, chemical dependency test, or polygraph, etc. It is not the Board's experience that the tests requested influence the evaluator's conclusion.

The amendments are adopted pursuant to the authority of Texas Occupations Code §301.151 which authorizes the Board of Nurse Examiners to adopt, enforce, and repeal rules consistent with its legislative authority under the Nursing Practice Act.

Texas Occupations Code §301.452 and §301.4535 are affected by these amendments.

§213.33.Factors Considered for Imposition of Penalties/Sanctions and/or Fines.

(a) The following factors shall be considered by the executive director when determining whether to dispose of a disciplinary case by fine or by fine and stipulation and the amount of such fine. These factors shall be used by SOAH and the Board in determining the appropriate penalty/sanction in disciplinary cases:

(1) evidence of actual or potential harm to patients, clients, or the public;

(2) evidence of a lack of truthfulness or trustworthiness;

(3) evidence of misrepresentation(s) of knowledge, education, experience, credentials, or skills which would lead a member of the public, an employer, a member of the health-care team, or a patient to rely on the fact(s) misrepresented where such reliance could be unsafe;

(4) evidence of practice history;

(5) evidence of present fitness to practice;

(6) evidence of previous violations or prior disciplinary history by the Board or any other health care licensing agency in Texas or another jurisdiction;

(7) the length of time the licensee has practiced;

(8) the actual damages, physical, economic, or otherwise, resulting from the violation;

(9) the deterrent effect of the penalty imposed;

(10) attempts by the licensee to correct or stop the violation;

(11) any mitigating or aggravating circumstances;

(12) the extent to which system dynamics in the practice setting contributed to the problem; and

(13) any other matter that justice may require.

(b) Each specific act or instance of conduct may be treated as a separate violation.

(c) Unless otherwise specified, fines shall be payable in full by cashier's check or money order not later than the 45th day following the entry of an Order.

(d) The payment of a fine shall be in addition to the full payment of all applicable fees and satisfaction of all other applicable requirements of the NPA and the Board's rules.

(e) When determining evidence of present fitness to practice, the Board or Executive Director may request an evaluation by a psychologist or psychiatrist, who is licensed by the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists or the Texas Medical Board, respectively. The evaluator must be familiar with the duties appropriate to the nursing profession. The evaluation must be conducted pursuant to professionally recognized standards and methods. The evaluation must include the utilization of objective tests and instruments which at a minimum are designed to test the psychological stability and veracity of the applicant or licensee. The applicant or licensee subject to evaluation shall sign a release allowing the evaluator to review the file compiled by the Board staff and a release that permits the evaluator to release the evaluation to the Board. The applicant or licensee should be provided a copy of the evaluation upon completion by the evaluator; if not, the Board will provide the individual a copy.

(f) When determining evidence of present fitness to practice by a licensee or applicant for licensure:

(1) the Board or Executive Director may request an individual risk assessment conducted by a Board-approved forensic psychologist or psychiatrist who:

(A) evaluates the criminal history of a person; and

(B) seeks to predict:

(i) the likelihood that the person will engage in criminal activity that may result in the person receiving a second or subsequent reportable adjudication or conviction; and

(ii) the continuing danger, if any, that the person poses to the community.

(C) is familiar with the duties appropriate to the nursing profession.

(D) conducts the evaluation pursuant to professionally recognized standards and methods; and

(E) utilizes objective tests and instruments that, at a minimum, are designed to test the psychological stability, fitness to practice, professional character, and/or veracity of the nurse applicant or licensee.

(2) The applicant or licensee subject to evaluation shall sign a release allowing the evaluator to review the file compiled by the Board staff and a release that permits the evaluator to release the evaluation to the Board.

(3) The applicant or licensee should be provided a copy of the evaluation upon completion by the evaluator; if not, the Board will provide the individual a copy.

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 February 22, 2007.

TRD-200700699

Katherine A. Thomas

Executive Director

Board of Nurse Examiners

Effective date: March 14, 2007

Proposal publication date: November 10, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-6824


Part 21. TEXAS STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF PSYCHOLOGISTS

Chapter 461. GENERAL RULINGS

22 TAC §461.16

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts the repeal of §461.16, Witness Fees, without changes to the proposal as published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9789).

The repeal is being adopted to re-position it in a more relevant chapter.

The adopted repeal will help to ensure protection of the public.

No comments were received regarding the adoption of the repeal.

The repeal is 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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700632

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


Chapter 470. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

22 TAC §470.2

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.2, Definitions, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9789).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and correct errors in punctuation.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700643

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.4

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.4, Records of Official Action, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9790).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and for formatting corrections.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

No comments were received regarding 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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700644

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.5

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.5, Conduct and Decorum, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9790).

The amendments are being adopted to correct grammar.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700645

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.6

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.6, Agreement to be in Writing, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9791).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and to be compatible with SOAH rules of procedure, 1 TAC §155.39(d).

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700646

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.9

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts new §470.9, Witness Fees, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9791).

The new section is being adopted to place it with relevant administrative procedure provisions.

The adopted new section will help to ensure protection of the public.

No comments were received regarding the adoption of the new section.

The new section is 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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700647

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.15

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.15, Proposal for Decision, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9791).

The amendments are being adopted to comport with the SOAH rule, 1 TAC §155.59.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700648

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.16

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.16, Final Decision, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9792).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and to comport with Administrative Procedure Act, Government Code, §§2001.141, 2001.142 and 2001.144.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700649

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.18

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.18, The Record, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9793).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and to comport with Administrative Procedure Act, Government Code, §2001.060.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700650

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.22

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.22, Schedule of Sanctions, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9794).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700651

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.23

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.23, Aggravating and Mitigating Circumstances, with no changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9795).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and make internal provisions consistent.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700652

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §470.24

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §470.24, Enforcement of Orders, Decisions, and Rules, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9796).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the rule and to add text in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, Government Code, §2001.202.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700653

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


Chapter 471. RENEWALS

22 TAC §471.1

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §471.1, Notification of Renewal, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9796).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the notice for renewal.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700654

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §471.5

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §471.5, Updated Information Requirements, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9797).

The amendments are being adopted to clarify the information that is needed on the annual renewal form.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700656

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


22 TAC §471.6

The Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists adopts amendments to §471.6, Renewal Penalty Waiver for Licensees on Deployment, without changes to the proposed text published in the December 8, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 9797).

The amendments are being adopted to simplify and clarify the rule.

The adopted amendments will help to ensure protection of the public.

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 February 20, 2007.

TRD-200700659

Sherry L. Lee

Executive Director

Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists

Effective date: March 12, 2007

Proposal publication date: December 8, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7706


Part 24. TEXAS BOARD OF VETERINARY MEDICAL EXAMINERS

Chapter 573. RULES OF PROFESSIONAL CONDUCT

Subchapter B. SUPERVISION OF PERSONNEL

22 TAC §573.10

The Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners adopts the amendments to §573.10, concerning Supervision of Non-Licensed Employees, without changes to the proposed text as published in the November 3, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 8956).

This section authorizes a non-veterinarian approved by the Texas Animal Health Commission and supervised by a Commission approved veterinarian to perform brucellosis testing on cattle at livestock markets (sales barns) to insure that the cattle are free of disease at sale. However, in some areas of the state, cattle are shipped directly from the ranch to slaughter without ever arriving at a market. In some larger ranches, cattle herds are often located at great distances from each other and from markets, making it difficult for a veterinarian to personally collect blood samples from each herd. Often large animal veterinarians are scarce in rural areas. In order to facilitate timely testing and still ensure that testing is done properly, the amended section allows, in those "direct to slaughter" situations, trained persons under the general supervision of a veterinarian to collect blood for testing in the same way blood sampling is done at the sales barns.

Several comments were received from veterinarians. Some supported the amendment for the reasons stated above. Others opposed the amendment because of concerns about lay persons assuming too much of a veterinarian's traditional functions, and that such persons would not be properly trained for their duties, and that lay persons should receive direct rather than general supervision. Several opined that veterinarian shortages in rural areas should be addressed by increasing the per-head fee paid to veterinarians for testing.

The Board believes the amendment is a reasonable approach to the need for cattle testing in rural areas. Training for the layperson is addressed by the Animal Health Commission which must approve such persons for testing purposes. Testing at markets by non-veterinarians under the supervision of veterinarians is an accepted practice. In addition, the scope of the amendment is limited to those situations where cattle are shipped directly to slaughter. For these reasons, the Board does not make any changes in the adopted amendment.

The amendments are adopted under the authority of the Texas Occupations Code, §801.151(a), which authorizes the Board to adopt rules necessary to administer the Veterinary Licensing Act.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on February 16, 2007.

TRD-200700594

Julie A. Barker

Executive Assistant

Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners

Effective date: March 8, 2007

Proposal publication date: November 3, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7555


Chapter 575. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

22 TAC §575.27

The Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners ("Board") adopts the amendments to §575.27, concerning Complaints--Receipt, Investigation and Disposition, with changes to the proposed text as published in the November 3, 2006, issue of the Texas Register (31 TexReg 8957).

The amended section contains the procedures used by the Board to receive and process complaints. One amendment (subsection (b)) allows the Board to use either informal procedures to resolve complaints against persons accused of practicing veterinary medicine without a license, or recently authorized formal cease and desist orders specified in §801.508, Texas Occupations Code. Other amendments reflect updated procedures used by the director of enforcement and investigators in handling complaints.

One significant change in the section is found in subsection (c)(6). The previous procedure for requesting patient records from the respondent veterinarian in a complaint was to have an investigator provide a copy of the complaint to the respondent veterinarian and at the same time request the relevant patient records from the veterinarian. The amendment reverses the process and requires the patient records to first be forwarded from the veterinarian to the investigator, upon receipt of which the investigator would provide a copy of the complaint to the veterinarian. The reason for the amendment is to discourage a veterinarian from using the information contained in the complaint to possibly alter the patient records to reflect a more favorable position of the veterinarian. Only after furnishing the patient records to the Board would the veterinarian be informed of the specifics of the complaint against him.

The amendment to subsection (c)(6) generated approximately 85 written comments from veterinarians, of which almost 80 percent opposed the new language. Some indicated that the amendment unfairly implies that veterinarians are not honest about maintaining patient records. Others said that they should not be required to submit patient records without knowing specifically what they are accused of in a complaint, and they should not be deprived of the ability to prepare an adequate defense. The Board does not, in adopting subsection (c)(6) wish to imply that veterinarians are dishonest in responding to requests for patient records. Some isolated cases of suspected patient record alterations have occurred in the past. This amendment would minimize that issue. In addition, the veterinarian is not deprived of his right to respond to the complaint. The amended language simply delays by a few days--until receipt by the Board of the patient record--the Board's sending of the complaint to the veterinarian. Prior to any determination of the merits of the complaint, the veterinarian is given ample opportunity to respond to the complaint. Because the rights of the veterinarian in a complaint process are protected, the Board does not make any changes to the language of subsection (c)(6).

One comment was received concerning proposed language in subsection (c)(7). The original language required the investigator, during the investigation of a complaint, to interview the complainant. The Board suggested that the original language be amended to say that the investigator "will" interview the complainant, "if possible." The commentator urged that the section's original language mandating an interview be restored. While agreeing with the commentator that the complainant should be contacted during the investigation, the Board has also found that interviews are often difficult to schedule because the complainant has moved and disconnected his telephone, or does not respond to messages left on recorders, etc. In light of the comment, the Board proposes to change the proposed language to require that the investigator "shall contact" the complainant. This eliminates the requirement that an interview be conducted while assuring that the complainant will have an opportunity to submit information to the Board during an investigation.

Because only one change is made from the originally published amendment and that change does not significantly alter the section, the Board shall not re-propose the section for amendment.

The amendments are adopted under the authority of the Texas Occupations Code, §801.151(a), which authorizes the Board to adopt rules necessary to administer the Veterinary Licensing Act.

§575.27.Complaints--Receipt, Investigation and Disposition.

(a) Complaints against licensees.

(1) All complaints filed by the public against board licensees must be in writing on a complaint form provided by the board and signed by the complainant. If a complaint is transmitted to the board orally or by means other than in writing and the complaint alleges facts showing a continuing or imminent threat to the public welfare, the requirement of a written complaint may be waived until later in the investigative process.

(2) Complaints by the board's enforcement section shall be initiated by the opening of a complaint file.

(3) The board shall maintain a log of complainants to whom the board sends a complaint form.

(4) Anonymous written complaints will not be investigated, but will be logged and filed for information purposes only.

(5) The board shall utilize violation code numbers to distinguish between categories of complaints.

(b) Complaints against non-licensees. Complaints against persons alleged to be practicing veterinary medicine without a license may be investigated and resolved informally by the executive director with the consent of the non-licensee, or the Board may utilize formal cease and desist procedures specified in §801.508, Occupations Code. Complaints not resolved by the executive director may be referred to a local prosecutor or the attorney general for legal action.

(c) Investigation of complaints.

(1) The policy of the board is that the investigation of complaints shall be the primary concern of the board's enforcement program, and shall take precedence over all other elements of the enforcement program, including compliance inspections.

(2) The board shall investigate complaints based on the following allegations, in order of priority:

(A) acts or omissions, including those related to substance abuse, that may constitute a continuing and imminent threat to the public welfare;

(B) acts or omissions of a licensee that resulted in the death of an animal;

(C) acts or omissions of a licensee that contributed to or did not correct the illness, injury or suffering of an animal; and

(D) all other act and omissions that do not fall within categories (A) - (C) of this paragraph.

(3) Upon receipt of a complaint, a letter of acknowledgment will be promptly mailed to the complainant.

(4) Complaints will be reviewed every thirty (30) days to determine the status of the complaint. Parties to a complaint will be informed on the status of a complaint at approximately 45 day intervals.

(5) Upon receipt of a complaint, the director of enforcement will review it and may interview the complainant to develop additional information. If the director of enforcement concludes that the complaint resulted from a misunderstanding, is outside the jurisdiction of the board, or is without merit, the director of enforcement shall recommend through the general counsel to the executive director that the investigation not be initiated. If the executive director concurs with the recommendation, the complainant will be so notified. If the executive director does not concur with the recommendations, the investigation will proceed.

(6) The director of enforcement will assign an investigator to the complaint, and the investigator will send a request for patient records to the licensee. Once the investigator receives the patient records, the licensee will be sent a copy of the complaint and a request for a written response to the complaint.

(7) After the licensee's response to the complaint is received, further investigation may be necessary to corroborate the information provided by the complainant and the licensee. During the investigation, the investigator shall contact the complainant. The investigator may request additional medical opinions, supporting documents, and interviews with other witnesses.

(8) Upon the completion of an investigation, the director of enforcement shall present to the executive director a report of investigation (ROI) and a conclusion as to the probability that a violation(s) exists.

(A) If the executive director determines from the ROI that the probability of a violation involving medical judgment or practice exists, the director of enforcement shall forward a copy of the complaint file to the board secretary and another board member (the "veterinarian members") who will determine whether or not the complaint should be closed, further investigation is warranted, or if the licensee should be invited to respond to the complaint at an informal conference at the board offices.

(B) If the probable violation does not involve medical judgment or practice (example: administrative matters such as continuing education and federal and state controlled substances certificates), the executive director shall forward the complaint file to a committee of the executive director, director of enforcement, the investigator assigned to the complaint, and general counsel (the "staff committee"), which shall determine whether or not the complaint should be dismissed, investigated further, or settled.

(C) If the veterinarian members determine that a violation has not occurred, the executive director or director of enforcement shall notify the complainant and licensee in writing of the conclusion and that the complaint is dismissed.

(D) If the veterinarian members conclude that a probable violation(s) exists, the executive director shall invite the licensee in writing to an informal conference to discuss the complaint made against the licensee. If the veterinarian members cannot agree to dismiss or refer the complaint to an informal conference, the complaint will be automatically referred to an informal conference. The letter invitation to the licensee must include a list of the specific allegations of the complaint.

(E) A complaint considered by the staff committee shall be referred to an informal conference if:

(i) the staff committee determines that the complaint should not be dismissed or settled;

(ii) the staff committee is unable to reach an agreed settlement; or

(iii) the licensee who is the subject of the complaint requests that the complaint be referred to an informal conference.

(d) Informal conferences

(1) The informal conference is the last stage in the investigation of a complaint. The licensee has the right to waive his or her attendance at the conference. The licensee may be represented by counsel.

(2) The board may be represented at the informal conference by a conference committee of the executive director, the veterinarian members and a public member of the board (if the complaint involves medical judgment or practice), the director of enforcement, the investigator assigned to the complaint, and the board's general counsel. The complainant and the licensee and the licensee's legal counsel may attend the conference. Any other attendees are allowed at the discretion of the executive director. The executive director or the director of enforcement shall conduct the conference.

(3) Subject to the discretion of the executive director, the following procedure will be followed at the informal conference. The executive director shall explain the purpose of the conference and the rights of the participants, lead the discussion of the allegations of the complaint, and explain the possible courses of action at the conclusion of the conference. The licensee will be asked to respond to the allegations. The complainant will be allowed to make comments relevant to the allegations. Comments of the licensee and complainant must be addressed to the person conducting the conference and not to each other. In the interest of maintaining decorum, the licensee or complainant may be asked to leave the room while the other is talking with the committee. The committee may ask questions of the licensee and complainant in order to fully develop the complaint record.

(4) At the conclusion of the informal conference, the conference committee shall determine if a violation has occurred. If the conference committee determines that a violation has not occurred, the conference committee will dismiss the complaint, and will advise all parties of the decision and the reasons why the complaint was dismissed.

(5) If the conference committee determines that a violation has occurred and that disciplinary action is warranted, the executive director will advise the licensee of the alleged violations and offer the licensee a settlement in the form of an agreed order that specifies the disciplinary action and monetary penalty. With the agreement of the licensee, the conference committee may recommend that the licensee refund an amount not to exceed the amount the complainant paid to the licensee instead of or in addition to imposing an administrative penalty on the licensee. The executive director must inform the licensee that the licensee has a right to a hearing before an administrative law judge on the finding of the occurrence of the violation, the type of disciplinary action, and/or the amount of the recommended penalty.

(6) Within 20 days after the date the licensee receives the settlement offer, the licensee must submit a written response to the board

(A) accepting the settlement offer and recommended disciplinary action; or

(B) requesting a hearing before an administrative law judge.

(7) If the licensee accepts the settlement offer by signing the agreed order, the agreed order will be docketed for board action at the next regularly scheduled board meeting. The board may approve the agreed order as docketed, approve the agreed order with amendments, or reject the agreed order. If the board approves the agreed order with amendments, the executive director shall mail the amended agreed order to the licensee and the licensee shall have fourteen (14) days from receipt to accept the amended agreed order by signing and returning it to the board. If a licensee does not sign an amended agreed order or does not respond within the fourteen (14) days, the complaint will be scheduled for a hearing before an administrative law judge. If the board rejects the agreed order, the complaint may be scheduled for a hearing before an administrative law judge, or the board may direct the executive director to take other appropriate action.

(e) Contested case hearing

(1) If the licensee declines the board's settlement offer, or if the licensee fails to respond timely to the offer, or if the board rejects a proposed agreed order, the investigator of the complaint shall prepare a complaint affidavit containing the allegations against the licensee. The signed and notarized complaint affidavit will then be reviewed by the board's legal counsel and signed by the executive director. The date the executive director signs the complaint affidavit is the official date of filing the complaint affidavit with the board. The complaint affidavit shall serve as the board's pleading in a contested case. At least ten (10) days prior to a scheduled hearing, the complaint affidavit and notice of hearing shall be served on the licensee as set out in subsection (e)(3)(A) of this section.

(2) The executive director shall submit to the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH) a completed Request to Docket Case requesting SOAH to set a hearing and/or assign an administrative law judge to the contested case. The board shall provide notice of the time, date, and place of the hearing to the licensee. Following issuance of a proposal for decision by the administrative law judge, the board by order may find that a violation has occurred and impose disciplinary action, or find that no violation has occurred. The board shall promptly advise the complainant of the board's action.

(3) Notice of SOAH hearing; continuance and default

(A) The board shall send notice of a contested case hearing before SOAH to the licensee's last known address as evidenced by the records of the board. Notice shall be given by first class mail, certified or registered mail, or by personal service.

(B) If the licensee fails to timely enter an appearance or answer the notice of hearing, the board is entitled to a continuance at the time of the hearing. If the licensee fails to appear at the time of the hearing, the board may move either for dismissal of the case from the SOAH docket, or request that the administrative law judge issue a default proposal for decision in favor of the board.

(C) Proof that the licensee has evaded proper notice of the hearing may also be grounds for the board to request dismissal of the case or issuance of a default proposal for decision in favor of the board.

(f) Contingency. The board president shall appoint another licensee board member to assume the duties of the board secretary in the complaint process in the event the board secretary is unable to serve in the capacity set out in this section.

(g) Report to the board of dismissed complaints. The executive director or the director of enforcement shall advise the board at each scheduled meeting of the complaints dismissed since the last meeting. The information will consist of a summary of the allegations, investigation conducted, reasons for dismissal, and file number.

(h) Use of Private Investigators. The executive director may approve the use of private investigators to assist in investigation of complaints where the use of board investigators is not feasible or economical or where private investigators could provide valuable assistance to the board investigators. Private investigators may be utilized in cases involving honesty, integrity and fair dealing; reinstatement applications; solicitation; fraud; dangerous drugs and controlled substances; and practicing veterinary medicine without a license. Private investigators will be utilized in accordance with existing purchasing rules of the Texas Building and Procurement Commission.

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

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on February 16, 2007.

TRD-200700593

Julie A. Barker

Executive Assistant

Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners

Effective date: March 8, 2007

Proposal publication date: November 3, 2006

For further information, please call: (512) 305-7555