ADOPTED 
 RULES 
 
 An agency may take final action on a section 30 days after a proposal has been 
published in the  Texas Register. The section becomes effective 20 days after 
the agency files the correct document with the  Texas Register, unless a later 
date is specified or unless a federal statute or regulation requires 
implementation of the action on shorter notice. 
 If an agency adopts the section without any changes to the proposed text, only 
the preamble of the notice and statement of legal authority will be published. 
If an agency adopts the section with changes to the proposed text, the proposal 
will be republished with the changes. 
 
   
  TITLE 16. ECONOMIC REGULATION 
 Part II. Public Utility Commission 
  Chapter 23. Substantive Rules 
  
  Customer Service and Protection 
 
  16 TAC sec.23.49 
 
  The Public Utility Commission of Texas adopts an amendment to sec.23.49, 
concerning telephone extended area service (EAS) and expanded local calling 
service (ELC), with changes to the proposed text as published in the August 25, 
1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 6571). 
 The purpose of the amendments is to implement sec.44 of House Bill 2128, which 
amends sec.3.304 of the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995 relating to 
telephone expanded local calling service. The amendments apply certain 
provisions to incumbent local exchange carriers, prescribe the points from which 
distances are measured to determine eligibility for ELC service, require a 
community of interest demonstration be made in a petition, and reflect charges 
for obtaining ELC to more than five exchanges. 
 The persons who filed comments are Southwestern Bell Telephone Company (SWB) , 
Texas Statewide Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (TSTCI), and Texas Telephone 
Association (TTA). All of the commenters generally approved of the rule as 
drafted, but each had suggestions as to its details. 
 SWB proposed that under (c)(5)(B)(iv)(II) and (c)(6)(B), which states that 
customers in the petitioning exchange will be charged up to $3.50 per 
residential line and $7.00 per business line, depending upon the costs incurred 
by the company in providing the service, the commission add and toll revenue 
projected to be lost. The commission agrees that adding the reference to toll 
revenue lost in (c)(5)(B)(iv)(II) would clarify that the rate additive is 
designed to recover both lost revenue and costs incurred and thus added this 
language to the rule. In addition, under (c)(3)(B)(iii), wherein it states that 
toll-free calling service shall not include an area where the affected central 
offices are more than 50 miles apart, SWB proposed that language be added that 
would set out the type of measurement staff will utilize, that is, utilizing the 
vertical and horizontal geographic coordinates of the central switching office 
of the exchange requested. The commission agrees that adding this language would 
clarify the type of measurement used by staff and has added that language to the 
rule. 
 TSTCI proposed that prior to the filing a petition, the Petitioners should be 
required to contact the affected LEC before the petition process begins so that 
the Petitioners do not invest time in gathering signatures if the LEC is 
eligible to exempt itself from the rule. The commission rejects this proposal. 
Contacting the LEC beforehand may be helpful, but it should not be required. The 
petition enables customers to indicate the services they would like to receive. 
Nothing in the rule or the statute requires a LEC to exempt itself from 
providing ELC service. Petitioners should not be required to obtain prior 
approval from the LEC before filing a petition. Additionally, TSTCI proposes 
that besides the commission staff, the rule also provide for LECs to investigate 
whether petitioners have a community of interest and to present additional facts 
regarding community of interest assertions made by Petitioners. The commission 
likewise rejects this proposal as unnecessary for the reason that the rule 
allows any party to challenge an assertion made at any time during the process 
by requesting that the case be docketed. 
 TTA proposed minor language changes to clarify the rule. Those minor changes 
included the correct spelling of a word and the use of Expanded Local Calling 
Service as opposed to Expanded Toll-Free Calling Areas. The commission agrees 
that these changes would clarify the rule and has made the changes as proposed. 
 All comments submitted, including those not specifically referenced herein, 
were fully considered by the commission. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995, 
sec.1.101, which provides the Public Utility Commission of Texas with the 
authority to make and enforce the rules reasonably required in the exercise of 
its powers and jurisdiction, and sec.3.304 which requires the commission to 
implement rules relating to the provision of expanded local calling service. 
 
 
  sec.23.49. Telephone Extended Area Service (EAS) and Expanded Local Calling 
Service. 
 
  (a) Purpose. This section is intended to establish consistent procedures for 
the processing of requests for extended area service (EAS) and to provide for an 
expedited hearing allowing the expansion of two-way toll-free local calling 
(ELCS) for rural areas, as enacted in Senate Bill 632 by the 73rd Legislature 
and amended by House Bill 2128 by the 74th Legislature. 
   
  (b) (No change.) 
   
  (c) Expanded local calling service. 
 
  (1) Petition for expanded local calling service. 
 
  (A)  Filing a petition. In order to be considered by the commission, a request 
for expansion of two-way toll-free local calling areas may be initiated by 
filing a petition with the commission. The petition shall be initiated by one or 
more of the following actions: 
 
  (i) a petition signed by the lesser of 5.0% or 100 subscribers in the exchange 
from which the petition originates; 
   
  (ii)-(iii) (No change.) 
     
  (B) Other filing requirements. When submitted for filing, the petition shall 
be accompanied by a filing letter. The petition and the accompanying filing 
letter shall contain the information described in subparagraph (C) of this 
paragraph. When filed, the petition shall be assigned a project number. A 
presiding officer shall be assigned and the petition shall be reviewed 
administratively, under the provisions of Chapter 22, Subchapter C, sec.22.32 
(relating to Administrative Review), unless the presiding officer, for good 
cause, determines at any point during the review that the petition should be 
docketed. Within five working days of receipt by the Office of Regulatory 
Affairs of a filed petition, the Office of Regulatory Affairs shall send a copy 
of the petition and letter by certified mail to each incumbent local exchange 
company (incumbent LEC) serving either a petitioning or petitioned exchange. 
   
  (C) Contents of a petition and filing letter. 
 
  (i) (No change.) 
   
  (ii)  Petition. 
 
  (I) (No change.) 
   
  (II) Signature pages. Each signature page of the petition for expanded local 
calling service shall include: 
 
  (-a-)-(-d-) (No change.) 
   
  (-e-) a clear statement that subscribers in the petitioning exchange will be 
required initially to pay a monthly expanded local calling fee of up to $3.50 
per residential line and $7.00 per business line for the first five petitioned 
exchanges granted, with an additional $1.50 per line for each exchange in excess 
of five, whether obtained in one or more petitions in addition to basic local 
exchange service rates; 
   
  (-f-) (No change.) 
   
  (-g-) if more than one exchange is petitioned, a clear statement that the 
$3.50 charge per residential line and $7.00 charge per business line is for the 
first five petitioned exchanges granted, with an additional $1.50 per line for 
each exchange in excess of five, whether obtained in one or more petitions; and 
     
  (III) (No change.) 
         
  (2) (No change.) 
   
  (3)  Geographic proximity or community of interest requirement. 
 
  (A)  (No change.) 
   
  (B) The geographic proximity requirement is satisfied as to each petitioned 
exchange if: 
 
  (i) the central switching office of the petitioning exchange is located within 
22 miles of the petitioned exchange as measured by utilizing vertical and 
horizontal geographic coordinates of the nearest central switching office of the 
exchange(s) requested for expanded local calling service; or 
   
  (ii)  the petitioning exchange demonstrates in its petition that it shares a 
community of interest with the exchange requested for expanded local calling 
service. 
   
  (iii) expanded local calling service shall not include an area where the 
affected central offices are more than 50 miles apart as measured by utilizing 
vertical and horizontal geographic coordinates of the central switching offices 
of the exchanges. 
     
  (C)-(D) (No change.) 
     
  (4) Request for exemption. 
 
  (A) An incumbent LEC serving either the petitioning or petitioned exchange may 
file a request for exemption from the provisions of this subsection. Such 
requests must be filed no later than 20 days after the filing of the petition. 
The request for exemption shall be accompanied by an affidavit identifying with 
particularity which of the conditions described in this subparagraph exist. If 
the petition includes more than one petitioned exchange, the request for 
exemption shall clearly identify which conditions apply to which exchanges. 
Exemptions shall be granted and the petition shall be dismissed by the presiding 
officer, in the manner described in subparagraphs (B) and (C) of this paragraph, 
if: 
 
  (i) the incumbent LEC serves fewer than 10,000 lines; 
   
  (ii)-(v) (No change.) 
     
  (B) If the incumbent LEC's affidavit described in subparagraph (A) of this 
paragraph identifies one of the conditions described in subparagraph (A) (i)-
(iv) of this paragraph, the presiding officer shall, by order issued no later 
than 40 days after the filing of the petition, grant the exemption and dismiss 
the petition (in whole, if appropriate, or in relevant part). 
   
  (C)  If the incumbent LEC has requested an exemption based on subparagraph (A) 
(v) of this paragraph, the presiding officer shall, by order issued no later 
than 40 days after the filing of the petition, determine whether the incumbent 
LEC has made a good and sufficient showing in its affidavit that technology is 
not available in the marketplace to make the expansion of local calling service 
feasible. If the presiding officer determines that the incumbent LEC in its 
affidavit has failed to establish that such technology is not available in the 
marketplace, the exemption request shall be denied. If the presiding officer 
determines that the incumbent LEC in its affidavit has made a good and 
sufficient showing that such technology is not available to the marketplace, the 
exemption shall be granted. If the exemption request is granted, the presiding 
officer shall dismiss the petition (in whole, if appropriate, or in relevant 
part). 
   
  (D) (No change.) 
     
  (5) Balloting. If all applicable requirements contained in paragraphs (1)-(3) 
of this subsection have been met, and no exemption has been granted pursuant to 
paragraph (4) of this subsection, the presiding officer shall, by order issued 
no later than 40 days after determining that the petition and accompanying cover 
letter are sufficient or that any deficiencies have been cured, direct the 
incumbent LEC serving the petitioning exchange to begin balloting the 
subscribers in that exchange, and shall notify the designated contact person 
that balloting will take place. 
 
  (A) The cost of preparing and distributing the ballots shall be borne by the 
incumbent LEC serving the petitioning exchange, as a regulatory case expense. 
   
  (B) No later than 30 days after the presiding officer's order directing the 
incumbent LEC serving the petitioning exchange to begin balloting, that 
incumbent LEC shall distribute a ballot, in English and Spanish, to each 
subscriber in the petitioning exchange. The ballot shall require a separate vote 
for each petitioned exchange. The ballot must be in a standard form approved by 
general counsel and each ballot shall include: 
 
  (i)-(iii) (No change.) 
   
  (iv) a statement that if at least 70% of those subscribers responding vote yes 
as to any petitioned exchange: 
 
  (I) subscribers in the petitioning exchange will be temporarily required, in 
addition to the company's local exchange service rates, to pay in addition to 
the company's local exchange service rates, a monthly fee of [up to] not more 
than $3.50 per residential line and $7.00 per business line for the first five 
petitioned exchanges granted, with an additional $1.50 per line for each 
exchange in excess of five; 
   
  (II)  the amount of the temporary monthly additional fee for each subscriber 
in the petitioning exchange will depend on the toll revenue lost and the costs 
incurred by the company in providing the service, but cannot exceed the maximum 
specified above; and 
   
  (III) the temporary additional fee will be charged to all subscribers in the 
petitioning exchange until the company's next general rate case; 
     
  (v)-(ix) (No change.) 
   
  (x) a unique identification number assigned by the incumbent LEC serving the 
petitioning exchange to each subscriber in that exchange. 
     
  (C) No later than 35 days after the presiding officer's order to the incumbent 
LEC serving the petitioning exchange to begin balloting, that incumbent LEC 
shall submit to the commission staff a master list of all subscribers within the 
petitioning exchange in an electronic spreadsheet format prescribed by the 
commission staff. The incumbent LEC shall classify the master list as 
confidential, and the list will be treated as such by the commission under the 
provisions of the Government Code, Title 5, Chapter 552. The master list shall 
be arranged sequentially by billing number and shall include for each subscriber 
in the petitioning exchange: 
 
  (i)-(v) (No change.) 
   
  (vi) the unique identification number assigned to the subscriber by the 
incumbent LEC. 
     
  (D) The Office of Regulatory Affairs shall, by written pleading filed no later 
than 15 days after the final date stated on the ballot for return of the ballot, 
notify the presiding officer, the contact person, and the affected incumbent LEC 
of the results of the ballot. The pleading shall specify the results of the 
ballot for each petitioned exchange 
 
  (i) If at least 70% of those subscribers responding vote affirmatively as to 
any petitioned exchange, the incumbent LEC serving the petitioning exchange 
shall file with the Commission, no later than 30 days after the filing of the 
Office of Regulatory Affairs' pleading notifying the incumbent LEC of the 
results of the ballot, the incumbent LEC's proposed implementation schedule and 
its proposed schedule of fees described in paragraph (6)(B) of this subsection. 
The filing shall include a study justifying all of the costs incurred by the 
petitioning incumbent LEC in providing the requested expansion of local calling 
service. The implementation schedule shall be expeditious, and shall explain and 
justify the reasons for the time required. No later than 15 days after the 
incumbent LEC's filing of its proposed fees and costs, the presiding officer 
shall issue an order granting interim approval of the incumbent LEC' proposed 
fees as temporary fees, which may be charged by the incumbent LEC no sooner than 
the first billing cycle following implementation of expanded local calling 
service from the petitioning exchange. All fees given interim approval are 
subject to refund. No later than 30 days after the incumbent LEC's filing of its 
implementation plan, the presiding officer shall issue an order approving, 
modifying, or denying the incumbent LEC's implementation schedule. 
   
  (ii)  (No change.) 
       
  (6) Fees. 
 
  (A) Notwithstanding the provisions of subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, an 
incumbent LEC may not recover regulatory case expenses under this subsection by 
surcharging subscribers. 
   
  (B) An incumbent LEC serving either a petitioning or petitioned exchange, or 
serving as a transporting incumbent LEC, shall recover all of its costs incurred 
and all loss of revenue from any expansion of toll-free local calling areas. 
Clause (i) of this subparagraph applies only to the incumbent LEC serving the 
petitioning exchange. Clause (ii) of this subparagraph applies to incumbent LECs 
serving either petitioning or petitioned exchanges, and to incumbent LECs 
serving as transporting incumbent LECs in connection with the provision of 
expanded local calling service. An incumbent LEC may recover its costs and lost 
revenue by: 
 
  (i)  imposing a monthly fee for expanded local calling service of not more 
than $3.50 per line for residential customers nor more than $7.00 per line for 
business customers for the first five petitioned exchanges granted, with an 
additional $1.50 per line for each exchange in excess of five, whether obtained 
in one or more petitions, to be collected from all such residential or business 
customers in the petitioning exchange and only until the incumbent LEC's next 
general rate case. In the event a monthly fee for expanded local calling service 
for all of the incumbent LEC's local exchange service customers in the state is 
imposed, the fee imposed under this clause (i) shall, to the extent necessary, 
be reduced by the amount required to ensure that in no case shall a residential 
line in the petitioning exchange be surcharged a total of more than $3.50 or a 
business line a total of more than $7.00 if the petitioner has requested five or 
less exchanges; and/or 
   
  (ii) (No change.) 
     
  (C) Applications filed pursuant to subsection (c)(6)(B)(ii) by incumbent LECs 
serving petitioned exchanges, or by transporting incumbent LECs, to recover 
their costs and lost of revenue shall not delay implementation of expanded local 
calling service to the petitioning exchange. Paragraph (12) of this subsection 
provides the applicable procedure for the recovery of costs and lost revenue by 
incumbent LECs serving petitioned exchanges and by transporting incumbent LECs. 
     
  (7) Proceedings After Interim Approval. Within 30 days of the issuance of an 
order under paragraph (5)(D)(i) of this subsection granting interim approval of 
temporary fees to be charged by the incumbent LEC serving the petitioning 
exchange, any interested person, including the Office of Regulatory Affairs, may 
request that the presiding officer docket the petition in order to allow the 
parties to further investigate the fees proposed by the incumbent LEC or the 
cost underlying such fees. Upon receipt of any such request, the presiding 
officer shall establish a procedural schedule that allows for the issuance of an 
order finally approving or modifying such fees no later than 210 days after the 
interim approval of the temporary fees. If no such request for further 
investigation is timely filed, the presiding officer shall, within 60 days after 
the order granting interim approval of temporary fees, issue an order finally 
approving or modifying the fees to be charged by the incumbent LEC serving the 
petitioning exchange. 
   
  (8) Notice. Notice of the filing of the petition must be given to all 
subscribers in the petitioning exchange by publishing, one time in a newspaper 
of general circulation in the petitioning exchange, not less than 15 days before 
any ballots are mailed, all of the information to be included on the ballot, 
except for the information described in paragraph (5)(B)(v), (vi), and (viii)-
(x) of this subsection. Notice must be given in both English and Spanish. The 
incumbent LEC serving the petitioning exchange shall bear the cost of notice, as 
a regulatory case expense. 
   
  (9)-(10) (No change.) 
   
  (11) Petitions filed prior to April 15, 1995. Any petition that was filed with 
the Commission prior to April 15, 1995 will continue to be processed under the 
requirements of Senate Bill 632, (73rd Legislature, 1993) and the provisions of 
this rule that were in effect on April 15, 1995. The prior version of this rule 
is continued in effect for only this limited purpose. [A petition for expanded 
toll free local calling that was filed with the Commission before the effective 
date of this subsection, shall not be dismissed solely because it does not 
comply with the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection. The 
presiding officer shall ensure compliance with all requirements of Senate Bill 
632, 73rd Legislature, 1993, and may require such information from the person 
filing the petition as is necessary and appropriate to assure such compliance. 
The presiding officer assigned to such a petition shall establish a procedural 
schedule for such a petition that allows for interim approval within 205 days 
after the presiding officer obtains from the contact person all of the 
information necessary and appropriate to ensure the requirements of Senate Bill 
632 as set forth in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this subsection have been met]. 
   
  (12) Separate proceeding for incumbent LECs other than the incumbent LEC 
serving the petitioning exchange. An incumbent LEC, other than the incumbent LEC 
serving the petitioning exchange, that incurs costs or loses toll revenue from 
any expansion of local calling areas may request Commission approval to impose 
the monthly fee described in subsection (c)(6)(B)(ii) of this section. Such an 
application shall not require a revenue requirement showing. The incumbent LEC 
shall file with the Commission its proposed schedule of fees. The filing shall 
include a study justifying all of the costs incurred, and all revenue lost, by 
the incumbent LEC in providing the expansion(s) of local calling areas. The 
filing shall be assigned a project number. A presiding officer shall be assigned 
and the filing shall be reviewed administratively, under the provisions of 
Chapter 22, Subchapter C, sec.22.32 (relating to Administrative Review), unless 
the presiding officer, for good cause, determines at any point during the review 
that the petition should be docketed. No later than 45 days after the incumbent 
LEC's filing of its proposed fees and costs, the presiding officer shall issue 
an order granting interim approval of the incumbent LEC's proposed fees as 
temporary fees, which may be charged by the incumbent LEC no sooner than the 
first billing cycle following implementation of the relevant expansion(s) of 
local calling service . All fees given interim approval are subject to refund. 
Within 30 days of the issuance of an order granting interim approval of 
temporary fees to be charged by the incumbent LEC, any interested person, 
including the Office of Regulatory Affairs , may request that the presiding 
officer docket the filing in order to allow the parties to further investigate 
the fees proposed by the incumbent LEC or the underlying costs of such fees. 
Upon receipt of any such request, the presiding officer shall docket the filing 
and establish a procedural schedule that allows for the issuance of an order 
finally approving or modifying such fees no later than 210 days after the 
interim approval of the temporary fees. If no such request for further 
investigation is timely filed, the presiding officer shall, within 60 days after 
the order granting interim approval of temporary fees, issue an order finally 
approving or modifying the fees to be charged by the incumbent LEC serving the 
petitioning exchange. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516133 
  Paula Mueller 
 Secretary of the Commission 
 Public Utility Commission of Texas 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 25, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 458-0100 
         
               
  Telephone 
 
  16 TAC sec.23.94 
 
  The Public Utility Commission of Texas adopts an amendment to sec.23.94, 
concerning incumbent small local exchange carriers, with changes to the proposed 
text as published in the August 25, 1995, issue of the Texas Register  (20 
TexReg 6574). By following the procedures of amended sec.23.94, a small local 
exchange carrier may request approval of minor rate changes and may request 
approval to offer, on an optional basis, extended local calling services, new 
services and experimental services. A small local exchange carrier, also known 
as a SLEC, is defined as any incumbent certificated telecommunications utility 
as of September 1, 1995 that has fewer than 31,000 access lines in service in 
this state, including the access lines of all affiliated incumbent local 
exchange companies within the state, or a telephone cooperative organized 
pursuant to Texas Civil Statutes, Article 1528c. The proposed rule provides 
definitions of terms used in the section, filing requirements and timelines, 
notice requirements, new or experimental service requirements, rate change 
guidelines, and docketing directives. 
 The primary public benefit anticipated as a result of the section will be the 
availability of new and experimental services in a more timely manner to the 
subscribers of incumbent small local exchange carriers. A second anticipated 
benefit is that incumbent small local exchange carriers that choose to use the 
expedited practices allowed by the rule will experience a decrease in the 
economic cost of compliance; expenditures which are ultimately passed on to 
consumers. 
 The rule is adopted pursuant to the following procedures. The proposed rule was 
published in the August 25, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 6574). 
Following the publication of the proposed rule, the Commission conducted a 
workshop on September 28, 1995 to discuss issues involving the proposed 
amendments. 
 Comments submitted in response to the August 25, 1995  Texas Register 
publication were received from Consumers Union and Texas Statewide Telephone 
Cooperative, Inc. (TSTCI). Texas Telephone Association (TTA) filed a letter with 
the Commission concurring with the comments submitted by TSTCI. 
 Generally, the parties support the rule amendments, but suggest several 
modifications. 
 TSTCI seeks clarification of the word "small local exchange company" and 
recommends an additional definition for "affected local service customer." The 
Commission agrees that "affected local service customer" should be defined 
within the context of the rule and has made the necessary addition to the rule. 
The commission believes the legislature has sufficiently defined the term "small 
local exchange company" and concludes that no further clarification of the term 
is warranted. 
 TSTCI also seeks clarification with regard to the interpretation of "affiliated 
incumbent local exchange companies" and suggests that the word "incumbent" be 
removed as it relates to affiliates of SLECs. TSTCI is concerned that the term 
"incumbent" will preclude a SLEC subsidiary from using the provisions of the 
rule if it did not hold a CCN on September 1, 1995. TSTCI contends that this is 
an unintended interpretation of the language in sec.3.213 of PURA 1995. The 
commission declines to strike the term "incumbent" as it relates to affiliates 
of SLECs, because the legislature specifically refers to affiliated incumbent 
local exchange companies in the statute. The commission is sensitive, however, 
to TSTCI's concern that newly created LECs will be precluded from utilizing the 
provision of the rule if they did not hold a CCN as of September 1, 1995. 
Section 3.213(j)(2) of PURA '95 grants the commission significant general power 
to regulate the business of small local exchange companies. Pursuant to this 
authority, the commission amends the current rule in order to make the rule 
applicable to companies not holding CCNs as of September 1, 1995, but having 
less than 31,000 access lines in service, if the commission finds following a 
hearing that use by the company accomplishes the rule's purpose. 
 Addressing filing requirements, TSTCI requests that the word "may request 
approval" be changed to "may offer" to more closely tract the content and intent 
of PURA. No change was made based on this comment. 
 TSTCI also expressed concern about the rule provision limiting extended local 
calling services to optional services. TSTCI believes that the rule unreasonably 
limits the extended local calling options for the SLEC by requiring that the 
service be offered only as an optional service. TSTCI contends that the SLEC 
should not be precluded from offering non-optional extended calling services 
under the rule as long as the application complies with the definition of a 
minor rate change as defined in subsection (b)(3) of the rule. 
 The commission disagrees that the rule unreasonably limits the extended local 
calling options for the SLEC and finds that its interpretation of the statute is 
reasonable. A LEC may choose to offer optional extended local calling under this 
rule or may choose to offer mandatory extended local calling under sec.23.49 of 
this title (concerning Telephone Extended Area Service and Expanded Toll-Free 
Local Calling Areas). In order to maintain uniform treatment for all eligible 
exchanges, the commission believes that mandatory extended local calling should 
comply with sec.23.49. 
 Addressing the documentary requirements of the statement of intent, TSTCI 
believes the rule should allow an officer or general manager of a SLEC to 
certify the proposed change rather than requiring the SLEC to file a resolution 
by its board of directors approving the proposed change. TSTCI contends that the 
manager or officer are accountable to the board for their actions, that 
certification is an operational matter for the SLEC, and that expediency and 
ease of administration are realized when the officer or manager certifies the 
proposed change rather than the board. 
 Section 3.213 of PURA 1995 specifically requires a SLEC to file with its 
statement of intent a resolution of the board of directors approving the 
proposed change. The commission declines to extend this provision to allow a 
manager or officer of a SLEC to certify a proposed minor rate change, because 
this would conflict with the express statutory language. 
 TSTCI seeks clarification of the time table used for filings and notification 
under the rule and recommends adding the word "calendar" to clarify that the 
time table is based on calendar days rather than business days. 
 The commission adds the word "calendar" to clarify that filing and notification 
deadlines are based on calendar days and not business days. 
 TSTCI recommends that the published notice requirement be eliminated and in the 
alternative, that publication be required for two weeks rather than four. TSTCI 
believes that customers are more fully informed by direct mailings or bill 
inserts than published notice, and that this is particularly true in the rural 
community. TSTCI also contends that the cost of published notice can outweigh 
the perceived benefits, especially given that rate increases under the rule are 
limited to minor rate changes. Finally, TSTCI notes that requiring four weeks 
published notice will extend every filing for which there is a rate increase 
beyond 90 days. 
 The commission declines to eliminate or reduce the four week published notice 
requirement in the rule. Rates established under the rule are subject to the 
rate-setting principles of Subtitle E of PURA '95. Section 3.211(a) of PURA, 
Subtitle E, requires four week publication of a proposed rate increase in a 
newspaper of general circulation. Therefore, the commission believes that the 
publication requirement set out in subsection (d)(1)(B)(ii) of the proposed rule 
is statutorily mandated and declines to make any change to eliminate or reduce 
the publication requirements of the rule. The commission recognizes that the 
four week publication requirement will extend every filing for which there is a 
rate increase beyond 90 days if the SLEC is required to complete notice at least 
61 days prior to the proposed effective date. However, the commission believes 
that this result is unavoidable when balanced against the public interest in 
providing reasonable notice of proposed rate increases. For changes other than 
rate increases, the commission agrees to provide SLECs the option of providing 
published notice or direct notice pursuant to subsection (d)(1)(A) and (B)(i). 
 Consumers Union objects to the proposed changes to notice subsection (d)(4) 
(D). Specifically, Consumers Union objects to the requirement that a customer 
file its petition for review within 20 days following completion of notice. 
Consumers Union contends that 20 days is inadequate for a community to review a 
proposed rate change, gather the required number of signatures, and petition the 
commission for review of the proposed change. 
 The commission agrees that 20 days is no longer an adequate time period within 
which to review a proposed rate change application. In order to alleviate the 
new burdens placed on consumers and safeguard the public interest, the 
commission believes that 30 calendar days is a more reasonable time period 
within which consumers may review a proposed rate change, gather the required 
number of signatures, and petition the commission for review. The commission 
makes the necessary change to subsections (d)(4)(D) and (g)(2). 
 Addressing the customer's right to petition the commission, Consumers Union 
also recommends that the word "affected" remain in the rule and that customers 
be informed as to the correct number and class of customers required to trigger 
a commission review of the proposed change. 
 The commission agrees that the term "affected" should be retained in order to 
clarify which customers may petition the commission for review of a proposed 
change. The commission makes the necessary modifications to the rule to clarify 
that petitioning customers must be within an affected class and that the five 
percent requirement shall be calculated based upon the total number of customers 
of record as of the calendar month preceding receipt of the complaint. 
 TSTCI requests clarification on who may certify completion of notice by 
publication. TSTCI states that it is often difficult for SLECs to obtain 
affidavits from their publishers and that the rule should authorize a SLEC 
representative to certify completion of notice. Consumers Union agrees that such 
clarification is reasonable. 
 The commission agrees and modifies subsection (d)(5) of the rule to clarify 
that a SLEC representative may certify completion of notice. 
 Consumers Union believes that the rule does not sufficiently describe the rate 
setting principles of Subtitle E and recommends adding the phrase "[r] ates 
adopted under this rule shall also be in accordance with Subtitle E of PURA" 
where appropriate. The Commission believes the rate setting principles stated in 
the rule are sufficient and declines to add the suggested language. 
 Consumers Union believes that a verification requirement in the rule should be 
maintained and that such a requirement is consistent with the requirements of 
PURA. The commission has necessarily deleted certain verifying filing 
requirements from the rule that sec.3.213 does not impose. The commission 
believes that the proposed rule adequately ensures that the information and 
supporting documentation filed with the commission to support a proposed rate 
change is accurate and consistent with the requirements of Subtitle E of PURA. 
Accordingly, no change has been made to the proposed rule based on this comment. 
 TSTCI contends that the 12-month restriction on rate filings is overly 
restrictive and goes beyond the revenue limitations set forth in the 
legislation. TSTCI believes the legislation has established necessary 
protections against unreasonable rate increases through its revenue limitations, 
and in particular, the 10% cap on the basic local access line rate increases. 
TSTCI also believes that the restrictive provisions in subsection (f)(2) and (3) 
will cause the SLEC to incur unnecessary filing, notice and other processing 
costs by requiring separate filings for rate changes that should otherwise be 
combined. TSTCI urges the commission to eliminate these filing limitations. 
 Consumers Union supports a once per year restriction on rate increase 
applications. Consumers Union believes the restriction obligates SLECs to use 
sound management, reasonable planning, and is in accordance with the legislative 
intent to give SLECs rate flexibility in order to encourage service in a prompt, 
efficient, and economical manner. 
 The commission finds that the revenue restrictions of the rule and the 
restriction limiting rate increase applications to once per year, except for 
good cause shown, are sufficient to encourage SLECs to use sound management and 
reasonable planning in formulating their overall rate strategy. Amendments to 
the rule have been proposed to foster flexibility and encourage prompt, 
efficient, and economical service to customers. The commission believes that 
deletion of the restriction in proposed subsection (f)(2) will accomplish these 
goals and makes the necessary deletion. 
 Addressing extended local calling services, TSTCI recommends the deletion of 
this subsection. TSTCI states that the subsection is unnecessary since the 
service is clearly referenced in subsection (c) of the rule. The commission 
agrees and deletes this subsection as published in the Texas Register . 
 All comments, including those not specifically referenced herein, were fully 
considered by the Commission. 
 The amendment is adopted under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 1446c-o, sec.1. 
101, which provide the Public Utility Commission of Texas with the authority to 
make and enforce rules reasonably required in the exercise of its powers and 
jurisdiction, sec.3.051, which provides that the public interest requires that 
new rule, policies, and principles be formulated and applied to protect the 
public interest and to provide equal opportunity to all telecommunications 
utilities in a competitive marketplace and sec.3.213(j) etc. 
 
 
  sec.23.94. Small Local Exchange Carrier Regulatory Flexibility. 
 
  (a) Purpose and Application. 
 
  (1) Purpose. The provisions of this section establish structured procedures 
and pricing guidelines that incumbent small local exchange carriers, because of 
their special characteristics, may use to expedite commission approval of 
services and rates. Through this section the commission strives also to provide 
to all of the state's citizens adequate and efficient telecommunications service 
by facilitating the small carriers' abilities to offer, in a more timely manner, 
to subscribers those technologically advanced services that are available in 
metropolitan areas from large carriers. 
   
  (2) Application. This section applies to any incumbent small local exchange 
carrier (SLEC), as that term is defined in subsection (b) of this section. 
Nothing in this section precludes a SLEC from utilizing any other applicable 
section of the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995 or this chapter. Nor does 
anything in this section exempt a SLEC from complying with any section of the 
Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995 or this chapter not addressed by this 
section nor prohibit the commission from conducting a review in accordance with 
the Act, sec.3.210. Notwithstanding the limitations contained within subsection 
(b) of sec.23.57 of this title (relating to Telecommunications Privacy), 
sec.23.57 applies to all applications filed under this section. 
     
  (b)  Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, 
shall have the following meaning, unless the context clearly indicates 
otherwise: 
 
  (1) Custom calling-type services-Call management services available from a 
central office switching system including, but not limited to, call forwarding, 
call waiting, caller ID, or automatic recall. 
   
  (2) Experimental service-That definition given in sec.23.26(b)(2) of this 
title (relating to New and Experimental Services). 
   
  (3) Minor Change-A change, including the restructuring of rates of existing 
services, that decreases the rates or revenues of the SLEC or that, together 
with any other rate or proposed or approved tariff changes in the 12 months 
preceding the date on which the proposed change will take effect, results in an 
increase of the SLEC's total regulated intrastate gross annual revenues by not 
more than five percent. Further, with regard to a change to a basic local access 
line rate, a minor change may not, together with any other change to that rate 
that went into effect during the 12 months preceding the proposed effective date 
of the proposed change, result in an increase of more than 10%. 
   
  (4) New service-That definition given in sec.23.26(b)(1) of this title 
(relating to New and Experimental Services). 
   
  (5) Small Local Exchange Carrier-Also referred to as SLEC, any incumbent 
certificated telecommunications utility as of September 1, 1995, that has fewer 
than 31, 000 access lines in service in this state, including the access lines 
of all affiliated incumbent local exchange companies within the state, or a 
telephone cooperative organized pursuant to Texas Civil Statutes, Article 1528c. 
   
  (6) Affected local service customer-A customer that is in the class of 
customers, and in the exchange or exchanges, that is affected by the proposed 
action filed in accordance with the provisions of this subsection. 
     
  (c) Filing. By following the procedures outlined in this section, a SLEC may 
request approval of minor rate changes and may request approval to offer, on an 
optional basis, extended local calling services, new services, and experimental 
services. 
 
  (1) At least 91 calendar days before the effective date of the proposed 
change, the SLEC shall file six copies of a statement of intent with the 
commission and serve a copy upon the Office of Public Utility Counsel. Such 
statement of intent shall provide: 
 
  (A) a copy of the notice it will provide as required by subsection (d) of this 
section; 
   
  (B) a sufficient description of how notice will be provided to allow the 
presiding officer to rule on the sufficiency of the notice; 
   
  (C) any request for a good cause waiver to the notice requirements of 
subsection (d) of this section. The letter shall provide sufficient 
justification for the good cause exception to the notice requirements to allow 
the presiding officer to rule on the request; 
   
  (D)  a copy of the resolution by the SLEC's board of directors approving the 
proposed change; 
   
  (E) the effective date of the proposed change; 
   
  (F) a description of the services and the category of customers affected by 
the proposed change; 
   
  (G) a copy of the proposed tariff; 
   
  (H) the number of access lines the SLEC and each of its affiliates has in 
service in the state; 
   
  (I) the amount by which the SLEC's total regulated intrastate gross annual 
revenues will increase or decrease as a result of the proposed change, and, if 
the proposal is one for a rate change, sufficient information to justify that 
the proposed change is a minor change; 
   
  (J) a statement affirming that the rates are just and reasonable, are not 
unreasonably preferential, prejudicial, or discriminatory, and are sufficient, 
equitable, and consistent in application to each class of customers; 
   
  (K) information required by sec.23.57(c) of this title (relating to 
Telecommunications Privacy); and 
   
  (L) any other information the SLEC wants considered in connection with the 
proposed change. 
     
  (2) No later than ten calendar days after the SLEC files the statement of 
intent, the presiding officer assigned to the project shall notify the SLEC of 
any notice deficiencies, that notice is approved, and/or that a waiver has been 
granted. 
   
  (3) Notice of the SLEC's filing of the statement of intent shall be submitted 
to the Texas Register immediately following the presiding officer's approval of 
the notice. The SLEC shall complete notice as required by subsection (d) of this 
section no later than 61 calendar days before the effective date of the proposed 
change. Any notice that is not completed as required by subsection (d) of this 
section shall result in the effective date of the proposed change being 
postponed for as many days as completion of notice is delayed. 
     
  (d) Notice. A SLEC satisfies the notice requirements of this section by 
completing notice pursuant to the following requirements: 
 
  (1) Notice must be provided as set forth in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of this 
paragraph: 
 
  (A)  Extended local calling service, new service and experimental service 
require either two weeks published notice in a newspaper of general circulation 
in each county affected by this application or direct notice or, in the case of 
a cooperative, publication in the cooperative's newsletter and by mail to 
nonmember customers. 
   
  (B) Rate changes require that: 
 
  (i) for a rate decrease, notice be published for two weeks in a newspaper of 
general circulation in each county affected by the proposed change or direct 
notice or, in the case of a cooperative, publication in the cooperative's 
newsletter and by mail to nonmember customers; and 
   
  (ii)  for a rate increase that affects any ratepayer, notice be published for 
four weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in each county affected by the 
proposed change and direct notice. 
       
  (2) Newspaper notice for paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be provided in 
a newspaper of general circulation in the particular area(s) affected by the 
proposed change if a newspaper with general circulation in the entire county 
does not exist. 
   
  (3) The presiding officer may require for good cause that notice be provided 
in addition to that notice proposed by the SLEC or may waive for good cause the 
publication of notice requirement prescribed by this section for a proposed new 
service or an experimental service or proposed change that involves a rate 
decrease for all affected customers. 
   
  (4) Each notice must include: 
 
  (A) a description of the service(s) affected by the proposed change; 
   
  (B) a list of rates that are affected by the proposed application and how the 
rates affect each affected category of customers; 
   
  (C) the proposed effective date of the change; 
   
  (D)  an explanation of the affected customer's right to petition the 
commission for review under subsection (h) of this section, including the number 
of affected persons required to petition before commission review will occur and 
the date by which the petition must be received by the commission, which date 
must be 30 calendar days following the completion of notice; 
   
  (E) an explanation of the affected customer's right to obtain from the SLEC a 
copy of the proposed tariff and instructions on how to do so; and 
   
  (F) the amount by which the SLEC's total regulated intrastate gross annual 
revenues will increase or decrease as a result of the proposed service or 
change. 
     
  (5) Within seven calendar days following the completion of notice the SLEC 
must submit a publishers affidavit or an affidavit from a representative of the 
SLEC establishing the proof of publication required by this subsection and a 
copy of the published notice. 
     
  (e) New or Experimental Service. The following requirements shall apply to a 
new service or an experimental service as the terms are defined in subsection 
(b) of this section: 
 
  (1) Availability. If the proposed change concerns a service that will not be 
offered systemwide initially, the SLEC shall explain separately for each 
exchange in which that service will not be offered why the SLEC's facilities in 
that exchange do not have the technical capability to handle the service. This 
requirement does not apply to experimental services, but the SLEC shall specify 
the exchanges in which it proposes to offer the experimental service. 
   
  (2) Expiration. Any experimental service may be offered for no more than a 12-
month period. Prior to or at the conclusion of this period, the SLEC may offer 
the experimental service as a new service. Such proposed change may be filed 
pursuant to this section or to any other applicable section of this chapter. 
     
  (f) Rate Changes and Limitations on Revenues. The following requirements shall 
apply to rate changes: 
 
  (1) The proposed rate change must be a minor change as defined in subsection 
(b) of this section. 
   
  (2) Except for good cause shown, any rate shall not be changed under this 
section more than once in any 12 month period, provided that rate decreases are 
not so limited. 
     
  (g)  Review of Proposed Change. 
 
  (1) A proposed change considered under this section shall be effective on its 
proposed date, unless docketed. 
   
  (2) Within 35 calendar days of the filing of the affidavit of completion of 
notice the presiding officer shall docket the proposed change if within 30 
calendar days following completion of notice: 
 
  (A) the commission receives a complaint(s) relating to the proposed change 
signed by the lesser of 5.0% or 1,500 of the affected local service customers to 
which the proposed change applies. Five percent shall be calculated based upon 
the total number of customers of record as of the calendar month preceding 
receipt of the complaint, or 
   
  (B) the commission receives a complaint relating to the proposed change from 
an affected intrastate access customer or group of affected intrastate access 
customers that in the preceding 12 months the SLEC billed and from which the 
SLEC received more than 10% of its total regulated intrastate gross access 
revenues; or 
   
  (C) the presiding officer determines that the proposed change is not a minor 
change; or 
   
  (D) the presiding officer determines that the SLEC's proposed change is not 
consistent with the commission's written substantive policies; or 
   
  (E) the presiding officer determines that the SLEC has not complied with the 
procedural requirements of this section. 
       
  (h)  Review upon docketing. If the proposed change is docketed, the effective 
date of the proposed change shall be automatically suspended to a date 150 
calendar days after the proposed effective date. The commission shall review the 
proposed change in accordance with the commission's procedural rules applicable 
to docketed cases. 
   
  (i) Applicability of the rule to other LECs. The commission may extend 
application of this section to local exchange companies having 31,000 or fewer 
access lines in service, including access lines of affiliates of such utilities 
providing local exchange service within the state, on a company by company 
basis, if the commission determines, following a hearing, that the purpose of 
this section would be served. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516134 
  Paula Mueller 
 Secretary of the Commission 
 Public Utility Commission of Texas 
    Effective date: January 3, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 25, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 458-0100 
         
           
  16 TAC sec.23.95 
 
  The Public Utility Commission of Texas adopts new sec.23.95, with changes to 
the proposed text as published in the August 11, 1995 issue of the Texas 
Register  (20 TexReg 6069). 
 Adopted rule sec.23.95 requires any cooperative utilizing the section to 
provide each cooperative member a ballot and instructions explaining that a 
majority vote of the cooperative's members will permit the cooperative to offer 
new services on an optional basis and/or change its rates and tariffs without 
Commission approval. The rule also establishes timelines for the return of 
ballots for tabulation. The rule orders similar requirements for the reversal of 
partial deregulation. 
 The public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing the new section will be 
an increased assurance in the integrity of the voting process utilized by 
cooperatives. Further, cooperatives whose members vote for partial deregulation 
under the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995, sec.3.2135 will be encouraged 
to offer new services to its members with a minimum of delay and should also be 
more responsive to member customers in the provision of existing services 
 The following submitted comments in response to the August 11, 1995, Texas 
Register publication: Consumers Union (CU); Texas Telephone Association (TTA); 
and Texas Statewide Telephone Cooperative, Inc. (TSTCI) 
 Following the publication of the proposed rule, the Commission conducted a 
public hearing on September 19, 1995, at which the commenting parties further 
discussed the issues raised in their comments. On September 28, 1995, TSTCI 
filed additional written comments in response to matters raised at the public 
hearing. 
 All parties who commented or attended the public hearing are generally 
supportive of the proposed rule. All of the parties are in favor of either the 
rule prescribing standard language to be used in the ballot and ballot 
instructions or of the Commission approving a generic specimen ballot and 
instructions to be maintained by the Central Records department of the 
Commission for use by the cooperatives. 
 TTA endorses the comments of TSTCI, while CU has concerns beyond those of 
TSTCI. TSTCI focuses its comments on having standard ballot and instruction 
language in the rule or having the Commission adopt a generic specimen ballot 
and instructions. The Commission agrees that a standard generic specimen ballot 
and instructions will facilitate the voting and reduce challenges to the 
language used by the cooperatives. The Commission will establish a generic 
ballot and instructions as part of a separate project. 
 TSTCI also wants the rule to provide for personal delivery of the ballot and 
in-person voting at the cooperative's annual meeting if the partial deregulation 
vote coincides with the meeting. The Commission believes that by requiring that 
the ballots be returned only by U.S. mail will there be assurance of the 
integrity of the voting process. Requiring actual delivery or postmark via the 
U.S. mail within the 45 days following mailing to the cooperative's members will 
provide ready evidence of the validity of the vote taken. The Commission 
believes this is especially important since the cooperative that will be seeking 
partial deregulation will also be counting the votes. Further, the rule also 
contains a 90-day retention period provision which requires a cooperative to 
keep for 90 days and make available for inspection at the request of the 
Commission all ballots and envelopes returned by the members during voting. The 
Commission believes this provision will provide increased integrity to the 
voting process. 
 TSTCI also recommends giving the cooperatives the option to use a postcard 
ballot which would be less expensive for the cooperatives than would a ballot to 
be returned in an envelope. The printing and return postage for the postcard 
ballot are less costly than for a standard ballot and envelope with return 
postage. The Commission agrees with TSTCI and has revised the rule to allow the 
use of a postcard ballot. 
 CU does not oppose the use of a postcard ballot and agrees with TSTCI that a 
generic specimen ballot and instructions should be approved by the Commission 
and kept on file in Central Records. CU also recommends that if a cooperative 
wants to deviate from the Commission approved generic ballot or instructions it 
should have to first file its proposed ballot and instructions with the 
Commission where the Legal Administration Division would either approve, modify 
or deny the cooperative's proposed language. The Commission agrees and has 
established a procedure for a cooperative to propose alternative language for 
the ballot and/or instructions. 
 CU recommends greater clarification in the definitions and the inclusion of a 
definition for "reversal of partial deregulation". The Commission agrees and has 
added the requested definition. 
 All comments, including those not specifically referenced herein, were fully 
considered by the commission. 
 The rule is authorized by sec.3.2135(i) of the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 
1995 which requires the Public Utility Commission of Texas to promulgate rules 
prescribing the voting procedures an incumbent local exchange company that is a 
cooperative corporation must use in order to achieve partial deregulation or to 
reverse partial deregulation. 
 The new section is adopted under the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995, 
sec.1.101 and sec.3.2135, 74th Legislature, Regular Session 1995, as amended by 
House Bill 2128, which provides the Public Utility Commission of Texas with the 
authority to make and enforce rules reasonably required in the exercise of its 
powers and jurisdiction. 
 
 
  sec.23.95. Voting Procedures for Partial Deregulation or Reversal of Partial 
Deregulation of Telephone Cooperatives. 
 
  (a) Purpose. A cooperative seeking to partially deregulate or to reverse 
partial deregulation shall utilize the voting procedures required in this 
section. 
   
  (b) Definitions. The following words and terms, when used in this section, 
shall have the following meaning unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. 
 
  (1) Cooperative-An incumbent local exchange that is a cooperative corporation. 
   
  (2) Majority vote-A vote of more than 50% of the valid ballots returned by the 
cooperative's members. 
   
  (3) Partial deregulation-The ability of a cooperative to offer new services on 
an optional basis and/or change its rates and tariffs under the provisions of 
the Act sec.3.2135. 
   
  (4) Reversal of partial deregulation-The ability of a minimum of 10% of the 
members of a partially deregulated cooperative to request, in writing, that a 
vote be conducted to determine whether members prefer to reverse partial 
deregulation. Ten percent shall be calculated based upon the total number of 
members of record as of the calendar month preceding receipt of the request from 
members for reversal of partial deregulation. 
     
  (c) Balloting. Balloting by a cooperative shall comply with the requirements 
in this subsection. 
 
  (1) A ballot and a postage-paid return envelope, or a ballot on a postage-paid 
postcard addressed to the cooperative, and instructions shall be provided to 
each member of the cooperative. 
   
  (2) Materials required in paragraph (1) of this subsection may be provided as 
bill inserts or as a separate mailing. 
   
  (3) The ballot shall be printed as a separate form on paper that is a 
different color from any other paper contained in the same mailing and shall be 
contained on one page or postcard. 
   
  (4) Ballots shall be written in English and in Spanish if sec.23.6 of this 
title (relating to Spanish Language Requirements) is applicable. 
   
  (5) The ballot shall be entitled: 
 
  (A) "BALLOT SEEKING THE PARTIAL DEREGULATION OF (NAME OF COOPERATIVE)" if the 
ballot is one for partial deregulation; or 
   
  (B) "BALLOT SEEKING TO REVERSE THE PARTIAL DEREGULATION OF (NAME OF 
COOPERATIVE)" if the ballot is one to reverse partial deregulation. 
     
  (6) Each ballot shall: 
 
  (A) provide brief instructions to mark with an "X" either the box "FOR" or 
"AGAINST" the action that is the subject of the balloting; 
   
  (B) provide in boldface type that is larger than surrounding text the date 
certain by which the ballot must be postmarked for tabulation; and 
   
  (C) contain a box labeled "FOR Authorizing the Partial Deregulation of the 
(Name of the Cooperative)" and a box labeled "AGAINST Authorizing the Partial 
Deregulation of the (Name of the Cooperative)" if the ballot is one to partially 
deregulate, or contain a box labeled "FOR Authorizing the Reversal of Partial 
Deregulation of the (Name of the Cooperative)" and a box labeled "AGAINST 
Authorizing the Reversal of Partial Deregulation of the (Name of the 
Cooperative)" if the ballot is one to reverse partial deregulation. 
     
  (7) Ballots must include the statement "By signing this ballot, I affirm that 
I am the member to whom this ballot was addressed" and must provide, following 
the statement, lined spaces for the member to provide his or her printed name, 
address, telephone number, and signature. 
   
  (8) Ballots shall not contain any statement regarding how a member should cast 
a vote on the action that is the subject of the balloting. 
   
  (9) The commission shall keep a generic ballot in the Commission's Central 
Records department for use by a cooperative A cooperative that chooses to 
deviate from the generic ballot must obtain approval from the Legal 
Administration Division. 
   
  (10) If generic ballot language is not used, a cooperative shall file its 
proposed language with the Commission's Central Records clerk. A project number 
shall be established for administrative review of the ballot language. Within 15 
days of the filing, the Legal Administration Division shall notify the 
cooperative whether the proposed language is approved, modified or rejected. 
     
  (d) Instructions for balloting. Instructions for balloting by a cooperative 
shall comply with the requirements in this subsection. 
 
  (1) Instructions for balloting shall accompany each ballot provided to a 
member of the cooperative. 
   
  (2) Instructions shall be printed as a form separate from the ballot and any 
other insert provided in the same mailing and shall be provided in English and 
in Spanish , if sec.23.6 of this title (relating to Spanish Language 
Requirements) is applicable. 
   
  (3) Instructions shall be entitled: 
 
  (A) "INSTRUCTIONS FOR BALLOT SEEKING THE PARTIAL DEREGULATION OF (NAME OF 
COOPERATIVE)" if the ballot is one for partial deregulation; or 
   
  (B) "INSTRUCTIONS FOR BALLOT SEEKING TO REVERSE THE PARTIAL DEREGULATION OF 
(NAME OF COOPERATIVE)" if the ballot is one to reverse partial deregulation. 
     
  (4) Instructions shall explain in plain language the meaning of: 
 
  (A) partial deregulation and the effects of partial deregulation, if the vote 
is one to partially deregulate; or 
   
  (B) reversal of partial deregulation and the effects of reversal of partial 
deregulation, if the vote is one to reverse partial deregulation. 
     
  (5) Instructions must state in boldface type that is larger than surrounding 
text the date certain by which the ballot must be postmarked for tabulation. 
   
  (6) Instructions shall explain that a ballot must be returned for tabulation 
via U.S. mail. 
   
  (7) Instructions shall not contain any statement regarding how a member should 
cast a vote on the action that is the subject of the balloting. 
   
  (8) Instructions shall define majority vote and shall explain that a majority 
vote is required in order to achieve the action that is the subject of the 
balloting. 
   
  (9) The commission shall keep generic voting instructions for the partial 
deregulation of cooperatives and for reversal of partial deregulation of 
cooperatives in the Commission's Central Records department for use by a 
cooperative. A cooperative that chooses to deviate from the generic instructions 
must obtain approval from the Legal Administration Division. 
   
  (10) If generic voting instruction language is not used, a cooperative shall 
file its proposed language with the Commission's Central Records clerk. A 
project number shall be established for administrative review of the voting 
instruction language. Within 15 days of the filing, the Legal Administrative 
Division shall notify the cooperative whether the proposed language is approved, 
modified or rejected. 
     
  (e) Tabulation of ballots. 
 
  (1) A ballot will be tabulated if it: 
 
  (A) contains a mark in the box either "FOR" or "AGAINST" the action being 
sought; 
   
  (B) is postmarked for tabulation within 45 days following the date that 
ballots are mailed to members; and 
   
  (C) is returned via U.S. mail 
     
  (2) The following votes will not be tabulated: 
 
  (A) a ballot for which neither a "FOR" nor an "AGAINST" vote is cast; 
   
  (B) a ballot for which both a "FOR" and an "AGAINST" vote is cast; 
   
  (C) a ballot that represents a second vote for the member; 
   
  (D) a ballot for which the procedures required by this section are not 
followed; 
   
  (E) a ballot for which the envelope or postcard bears a postmark later than 
the 45th day following the date the ballot or postcard was mailed to the 
members. 
   
  (F) a ballot that represents a vote from a non-member customer. 
   
  (G) a ballot which represents a proxy vote. 
   
  (H) a ballot for which the envelope or postcard bears no legible postmark from 
the U.S. Postal Service unless it is received by the cooperative via the U.S. 
mail within 45 days following the date the ballot or postcard was mailed to the 
member. 
       
  (f) Retention of Ballots 
 
  (1) A cooperative shall retain for 90 days after the end of the 45 day voting 
period all ballots and envelopes returned by the members in the voting process. 
   
  (2) During the 90 day retention period a cooperative shall produce the ballots 
and envelopes to the commission for inspection if so requested by the 
commission. This agency hereby certifies that the Section as adopted has been 
reviewed by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal 
authority. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516140 
  Paula Mueller 
 Secretary of the Commission 
 Public Utility Commission of Texas 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 11, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 458-0100 
         
             
  16 TAC sec.23.96 
 
  The Public Utility Commission of Texas adopts new sec.23.96, concerning 
Telephone Directories, with changes to the proposed text as published in the 
September 29, 1995 issue of the  Texas Register (20 TexReg 7911). 
 The new rule is intended to implement the requirements of the Public Utility 
Regulatory Act of 1995 (PURA 95) sec. sec.3.309, 3.310. Section 3.309 of the Act 
requires that residential telephone directories published by private for-profit 
publishers must contain toll-free numbers and local telephone numbers for state 
agencies, state public services, and elected state officials who represent all 
or part of the geographical area for which the directory contains listings. The 
rule provides requirements for the inclusion of such listings in the directory 
and specifies the format. Section 3.310 of the Act requires that 
telecommunications utilities or their affiliates that publish telephone 
directories must include the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of state 
senators and representatives who represent all or part of the geographical area 
for which the directory contains listings. The new section also contains general 
directory requirements that are applicable to telecommunications utilities that 
are dominant as to local exchange telephone service, or their affiliates. 
 The Commission received written comments on the proposed rule from Southwestern 
Bell Telephone Company (SWBT), the Office of Public Utility Counsel, Consumers 
Union, GTE Southwest Incorporated and Contel of Texas, Inc., Southwestern Bell 
Yellow Pages, Inc., and the Texas Telephone Association. A public hearing on 
this proposal was held November 7, 1995 and oral comments were received from 
SWBT and Consumers Union. None of the commenters were opposed to the rule as a 
whole, although SWBT opposed the annual publication and extra copy requirements 
of subsection (b)(1) and (2), respectively. Commenters generally had suggestions 
as to detail or asked clarifying questions. 
 Two commenters generally suggested that the Commission take an active role in 
ensuring that consumers have access to all telephone numbers within a calling 
scope from a singular source, regardless of the provider, so that consumers will 
not have to access multiple directories in order to have all numbers. They also 
state that absence of a phone number from a directory decreases the value of the 
entire network. Another commenter disagreed on this point and recommended that 
subsection (b)(1) be modified to make it clear that the publishing, listing and 
delivery obligations of telecommunications utilities run only to their own 
customers and not to the competing customers of a Certificate of Operating 
Authority (COA) or a Service Provider Certificate of Operating Authority 
(SPCOA). The Commission agrees that all customers should be listed in the 
directories of dominant certificated telecommunications utilities. By listing 
just directories of its own customers the utility will be unjustly punishing its 
own customers by withholding phone numbers of subscribers to other 
telecommunications utilities. A directory containing just the phone numbers of a 
particular utility would be virtually worthless. Subsection (b)(1) requires 
utilities to list the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all customers 
other than those who request that the information be unlisted, and this section 
has been clarified to include the customers of other providers of local exchange 
service. However, the rule has also been clarified to state the utility only has 
the obligation to distribute its directory to its own customers unless the 
utility has reached an agreement with a COA or SPCOA to distribute the directory 
to the COA or SPCOA's customers. Although not referenced in the rule, an 
agreement between a telecommunications utility and other providers of local 
exchange service for the distribution of directories is contemplated by the 
Commission's proposed new sec.23.97, relating to Interconnection, Project 14440. 
 One commenter suggested that the rule be clarified to ensure that the rule's 
application to affiliates extend only those affiliates which publish the 
directories on the utilities behalf. The Commission concurs with these comments 
and has added clarifying language to subsection (b). 
 One commenter objected to subsection (b)(2) of the proposed rule which would 
require an extra copy of the directory to be provided free upon request. The 
commenter alternatively suggests that an extra copy be delivered only at a 
reasonable charge. The Commission disagrees that one directory per access line 
is adequate when a customer has determined another copy is necessary. The 
requirement of a free additional copy of a directory upon a customer's request 
is an existing requirement of the Commission's current directory rule, and the 
comments did not persuade that this requirement has been unduly burdensome. 
Because dominant certificated telecommunications utilities can charge for 
operator-provided directory assistance, reasonable access to free published 
directory assistance should be maintained at its current levels. Furthermore, 
for those incumbent local exchange companies that have elected incentive 
regulation, the current provisioning of directories is an element of basic 
network services for which rates have been frozen. 
 One commenter opposed the requirement in subsection (b)(2) that directories be 
published annually, and proposes that directories be published on a regular 
basis. The Commission disagrees with this comment because directories are 
essentially obsolete as soon as they are published and to put off republication 
even further would not be in the public interest. 
 One commenter requested that subsection (a) be modified so that the obligations 
placed upon private for-profit publishers are not imposed on telecommunications 
utilities. The Commission disagrees with this comment. In effect, 
telecommunications utilities are private for-profit publishers and it is the 
Commission's intention to have the obligations of this rule apply equally to 
telecommunications utilities and private for-profit publishers. 
 One commenter stated that provisions of this rule should apply to all 
telecommunications utilities, not just dominant certificated telecommunications 
utilities. The Commission disagrees. Because of the expense of publishing a 
directory this obligation should only be placed on telecommunications utilities 
that have been declared dominant. 
 Two commenters believed there was a possible conflict between the provisions of 
the proposed rule and the Commission's proposed new sec.23.97, concerning 
Interconnection. While there are provisions relating to telephone directories in 
sec.23.97, the Commission disagrees that there is a conflict. The adopted rule 
sets forth the minimum directory requirements applicable to dominant 
certificated telecommunications utilities and other private for-profit 
publishers. The proposed sec.23.97 sets forth requirements for cooperation 
between all certificated telecommunications utilities in the provisioning of 
directory listings and distribution of directories, which is necessary in order 
for dominant certificated telecommunications utilities or private for-profit 
publishers to comply, in part, with the adopted rule. 
 One commenter questioned whether directory listing requirements under 
subsection (d)(4) also apply to telecommunications utilities. The Commission 
intends for the requirements of subsection (d)(4) to apply to telecommunications 
utilities that publish directories because they are, in essence, private for-
profit publishers. This commenter also questioned the status of existing 
23.61(b) with the presumed adoption of the new 23.96. Section 23.61(b) should be 
viewed as superseded by the approval of sec.23.96. However, a repeal of 
sec.23.61(b) will need to be accomplished by the Commission, with a 
corresponding re-lettering of sec.23.61. 
 One commenter requested that regarding the sample long distance rates in 
subsection (b)(4), a statement be included that such Rates are subject to 
change. The Commission does not believe that additional language is necessary 
because the rule states that the published rates are effective as of the date of 
compilation. This commenter also requested that flexibility be granted when 
distinguishing state government listings from other listings. The Commission 
agrees and has modified subsection (d)(4)(C) accordingly. 
 One commenter requested that the rule be modified to allow for a 
nongeographically specific listing of numbers for state agencies, state public 
services, and state officials. Although this comment may not have been 
completely understood, the Commission declines to make this change as it 
believes that it would be contrary to the mandates of PURA 95 which this rule is 
designed to implement. 
 One commenter suggested that the rule be amended to require telecommunications 
utilities to make directory listing information (name, address, and telephone 
number) available to all publishers on reasonable terms. However, this would 
subject all certificated telecommunications utilities to a wholly new 
requirement not contained in the proposed rule. As such, this new requirement 
would require republication of this rule. Because of the time-sensitivity of 
directory publication deadlines, the Commission believes it is the public 
interest to go forward with adoption of this rule, and will consider this 
comment as a future amendment. 
 The new rule is adopted under the Public Utility Regulatory Act of 1995, 
sec.1.101, which provides the Public Utility Commission of Texas with the 
authority to make and enforce rules reasonably required in the exercise of its 
powers and jurisdiction, sec.3.309 which authorizes the Commission to promulgate 
rules applicable to private for-profit publishers of directories containing 
residential listings, and sec.3.310 which requires the inclusion of listings for 
state representatives and state senators in the directories of 
telecommunications utilities or affiliates. 
 The following statute is affected by this rule: the Public Utility Regulatory 
Act of 1995, sec.sec.1.101, 3.265, 3.309, and 3.310. 
 
 
  sec.23.96. Telephone Directories. 
 
  (a) When used in this section, the term private for profit publisher shall 
mean a publisher of a telephone directory that contains residential listings and 
that is distributed to the public at minimal or no cost. This term shall also 
include a telecommunications utility which publishes a directory, or its 
affiliate which publishes a directory on behalf of the telecommunications 
utility. 
   
  (b)  This subsection applies to any telecommunications utility found to be 
dominant as to local exchange telephone service or its affiliate which publishes 
a directory on behalf of such telecommunications utility. 
 
  (1)  Telephone directories shall be published annually. Except for customers 
who request that information be unlisted, directories shall list the names, 
addresses, and telephone numbers of all customers receiving local phone service, 
including customers of other certificated telecommunications utilities in the 
geographic area covered by that directory. Numbers of pay telephones need not be 
listed. 
   
  (2) Upon issuance, a copy of each directory shall be distributed at no charge 
for each customer access line served by the telecommunications utility in the 
geographic area covered by that directory and, if requested, one extra copy per 
customer access line shall be provided at no charge. A telecommunications 
utility shall also distribute copies of directories pursuant to any agreement 
reached with another certificated telecommunications utility. A copy of each 
directory shall be furnished to the commission. 
   
  (3) The name of the telecommunications utility, an indication of the area 
included in the directory, and the month and the year of issue shall appear on 
the front cover. Information pertaining to emergency calls such as for the 
police and fire departments shall appear conspicuously in the front part of the 
directory pages. 
   
  (4) The directory shall contain instructions concerning placing local and long 
distance calls on the network of the telecommunications utility for which the 
directory is issued, calls to the telecommunications utility's repair and 
directory assistance services, and locations and telephone numbers of the 
business offices of the telecommunications utility as may be appropriate to the 
area served by the directory. It shall also contain a section setting out sample 
long distance rates within the long distance service area, if any, on the 
network of the telecommunications utility for which the directory is issued, 
applicable at the time the directory is compiled for publication, with a clear 
statement that the published rates are effective as of the date of compilation. 
   
  (5) Each telecommunications utility shall list each customer with its 
directory assistance within 72 hours after service connection (except those 
numbers excluded from listing in paragraph (1) of this subsection) in order that 
the directory assistance operators can provide the requested telephone numbers 
based on customer names and addresses. 
   
  (6) All nonassigned telephone numbers in central offices serving more than 300 
customer access lines shall be intercepted unless otherwise approved by the 
commission. 
   
  (7) Disconnected residence telephone numbers shall not be reassigned for 30 
days and disconnected business numbers shall not be reassigned, unless requested 
by the customer, for 30 days or the life of the directory, whichever is longer, 
unless no other numbers are available to provide service to new customers. 
   
  (8) If a customer's number is incorrectly listed in the directory and if the 
incorrect number is a working number and if the customer to whom the incorrect 
number is assigned requests, the number of the customer to whom the incorrect 
number is assigned shall be changed at no charge. If the incorrect number is not 
a working number and is a usable number, the customer's number shall be changed 
to the listed number at no charge if requested. 
   
  (9)  When additions or changes in plant or changes to any other certificated 
telecommunications utility's operations necessitate changing telephone numbers 
to a group of customers, at least 30 days' written notice shall be given to all 
customers so affected even though the addition or changes may be coincident with 
a directory issue. 
   
  (10) At the customer's option the directory shall list either the customer's 
street address or post office box number. A charge can be imposed upon those 
customers who desire both listings. 
     
  (c) A telecommunications utility or an affiliate of that utility that 
publishes a residential or business telephone directory that is distributed to 
the public shall publish the name, address, and telephone number of each state 
senator or representative who represents all or part of the geographical area 
for which the directory contains listings. 
   
  (d) Any private for-profit publisher that publishes a residential telephone 
directory shall comply with the following requirements: 
 
  (1) A telephone directory shall contain a listing of each toll-free and local 
telephone number for each of the following: 
 
  (A) state agencies; 
   
  (B) state public services; and 
   
  (C)  elected state officials who represent all or part of the geographical 
area for which the directory contains listings. 
     
  (2) The directory shall include the information required in paragraph (1) of 
this subsection from the most current edition of the State of Texas Telephone 
Directory prepared and issued by the General Services Commission of the State of 
Texas and those modifications to the State of Texas Telephone Directory that are 
available upon request from the Public Utility Commission of Texas. 
   
  (3) Private for-profit publishers shall contact the secretary of the Public 
Utility Commission of Texas in writing to determine which issue of the State of 
Texas Telephone Directory is most current and to obtain the modifications 
referred to in paragraph (2) of this subsection. The contact shall refer to 
Project Number 14606. The commission shall respond within 30 days of receiving 
the request. 
   
  (4) The listings required by paragraph (1) of this subsection: 
 
  (A) may be located at the front of the directory or, if not located at the 
front of the directory, shall be referenced clearly on the inside page of the 
cover or on the first page following the cover before the main listing of 
residential and business telephone numbers; 
   
  (B) shall be labeled GOVERNMENT OFFICES - STATE in 24 point type; 
   
  (C) shall be bordered or shaded in such a way [on the three unbound sides with 
a border] that will distinguish the state listings from the other listings; 
   
  (D)  need not exceed a length equivalent to two 8-1/2-inch by 11-inch pages, 
single-spaced in eight point type, provided that if space does not permit the 
listing of all local telephone numbers for those agencies and officials with 
more than one local telephone number, the publisher shall list one local 
telephone number that the caller can use to access other local telephone numbers 
of the same agency or official; and 
   
  (E) shall be included in the directory at no cost to the agency or official. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516141 
  Paula Mueller 
 Secretary of the Commission 
 Public Utility Commission of Texas 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: September 29, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 458-0100 
         
                       
  TITLE 22. EXAMINING BOARDS 
 Part XXIII. Texas Real Estate Commission 
  Chapter 535. Provisions of the Real Estate License Act 
  
  Requirements for Licensure 
 
  22 TAC sec.535.51 
 
  The Texas Real Estate Commission adopts an amendment to  sec.535.51, 
concerning general requirements for licensure, without changes to the proposed 
text as published in the October 10, 1995, issue of the Texas Register  (20 
TexReg 8299). The amendment adopts by reference a series of application forms 
used by persons applying for a real estate broker license or for a real estate 
salesman license. Adoption of the amendment was necessary to revise the forms to 
clarify the requirement of each applicant to provide the commission with the 
applicant's social security number under the provisions of House Bill Number 
433, 74th Legislature (1995), to state increased fees collected by the 
commission for the Texas Real Estate Research Center and to request the 
applicant's electronic mail number or facsimile machine number for easier 
communication with the commission. On final adoption, nonsubstantive changes 
were made to the forms used by individuals applying for a broker license to 
clarify that assumed business names are filed with the county clerk's office. 
 No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendment. 
 The amendment is adopted under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 6573a, sec.5(h), 
which authorize the Texas Real Estate Commission to make and enforce all rules 
and regulations necessary for the performance of its duties. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 12, 1995. 
 TRD-9516255 
  Mark A. Moseley 
 General Counsel 
 Texas Real Estate Commission 
    Effective date: January 3, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 10, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 465-3900 
         
         
  Licensed Real Estate Inspectors 
 
  22 TAC sec.535.208 
 
  The Texas Real Estate Commission adopts an amendment to  sec.535.208, 
concerning application for an inspector license, without changes to the proposed 
text as published in the October 10, 1995, issue of the Texas Register  (22 
TexReg 8300). 
 The amendment adopts by reference a series of application forms used a person 
in obtaining a license as an apprentice inspector, as a real estate inspector, 
or as a professional inspector. Adoption of the amendment was necessary to 
revise the forms to clarify the requirement of each applicant to provide the 
commission with the applicant's social security number under the provisions of 
House Bill Number 433, 74th Legislature (1995) and to request the applicant's 
electronic mail number or facsimile machine number for easier communication with 
the commission. On final adoption a nonsubstantive change was made to the form 
used by applicants for a professional inspector license to clarify that assumed 
names are filed with the county clerk's office. 
 No comments were received regarding adoption of the amendment. 
 The amendment is adopted under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 6573a, sec.5(h), 
which authorize the Texas Real Estate Commission to make and enforce all rules 
and regulations necessary for the performance of its duties 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 12, 1995. 
 TRD-9516256 
  Mark A. Moseley 
 General Counsel 
 Texas Real Estate Commission 
    Effective date: January 3, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 10, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 465-3900 
         
           Chapter 537. Professional Agreements and Standard Contracts 
  
  22 TAC sec.sec.537.11, 537.43, 537.44 
 
  The Texas Real Estate Commission proposes an amendment to sec.537.11, new 
sec.537.43, and sec.537.44, concerning standard contract forms, with changes to 
the proposed text as published in the October 10, 1995, issue of Texas Register 
(20 TexReg 8300). 
 The amendment to sec.537.11 would add two forms to the list of standard 
contract forms promulgated by the commission. The forms were developed by the 
Texas Real Estate Broker-Lawyer Committee, a committee of six real estate 
brokers appointed by the commission and six attorneys appointed by the State Bar 
of Texas. Licensed real estate brokers and salesmen are generally required to 
use contract forms promulgated by the commission when negotiating the sale of 
real property. The two new forms are TREC Number 36-0, Addendum for Property 
Subject to Mandatory Membership in an Owner's Association, and TREC Number 37-0, 
Resale Certificate for Property Subject to Mandatory Membership in an Owner's 
Association. 
 New sec.537.43 would adopt TREC Number 36-0 by reference. The form is an 
addendum for use with other TREC contract forms. The form would be used to 
specify whether the buyer requires the seller of the property to deliver a 
resale certificate or other documents to the buyer; if the resale certificate is 
required but is not timely delivered, the buyer may terminate the contract 
within three days after time for the certificate to have been delivered. If the 
resale certificate is required and is timely delivered, the buyer may terminate 
the contract upon reasonable objection to the resale certificate within 72 hours 
after the certificate is delivered. The buyer would waive the right of 
termination if it is not exercised within 72 hours after the certificate is 
delivered. The addendum also addresses repairs to the property which are the 
obligation of the owners' association. The addendum sets up a process for the 
buyer to obtain the assurance of the owners' association that required repairs 
to such property will be performed or the buyer may terminate the contract. 
Transfer fees and current assessments may also be disclosed to the buyer in the 
addendum. 
 New sec.537.44 would adopt TREC Form Number 37-0 by reference. The form is a 
resale certificate to be completed by or on the behalf of the owners' 
association. The form would be used to provide the buyer with information 
concerning rights of first refusal held by the association, assessments, unpaid 
obligations of the seller, capital expenditures, reserves, pending law suits, 
insurance coverage, violations of by-laws, rules of the association or material 
physical defects in the property, violations of health of building codes, 
transfer fees and leasehold estates affecting the property. 
 Mark A. Moseley, general counsel, has determined that for the first five-year 
period the sections are in effect there will be no fiscal implications for state 
or local government as a result of enforcing or administering the sections. Any 
revenue received by the Texas Real Estate Commission from the sale of copies of 
the forms would be offset by the costs of making the copies available. There is 
no anticipated impact on local or state employment as a result of implementing 
the section. 
 Mr. Moseley also has determined that for each year of the first five years the 
sections as proposed are in effect the public benefit anticipated as a result of 
enforcing the sections will be. There will be no effect on small businesses. 
There is no anticipated economic cost to persons who are required to comply with 
the proposed sections other than the cost of the forms, estimated at $5.00 per 
pad of 50 copies. 
 Comments on the proposal may be submitted to Mark A. Moseley, General Counsel, 
Texas Real Estate Commission, P.O. Box 12188, Austin, Texas 78711-2188. 
 The amendment and new sections are proposed under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 
6573a, sec.16(e), which authorize the Texas Real Estate Commission to adopt 
rules requiring real estate brokers and salesmen to use contract forms which 
have been prepared by the Texas Real Estate Broker-Lawyer Committee and 
promulgated by the Texas Real Estate Commission. 
 The proposed sections affect Texas Civil Statutes, Article 6573a, sec.16. 
 
 
  sec.537.11. Use of Standard Contract Forms. 
 
  (a) Standard Contract Form TREC Number 2-4 is promulgated for use as an 
addendum only to another promulgated standard contract form. Standard Contract 
Form TREC Number 9-2 is promulgated for use in the sale of unimproved property 
where intended use is for one to four family residences. Standard Contract Form 
TREC Number 10-2 is promulgated for use as an addendum concerning sale of other 
property by a buyer to be attached to promulgated forms of contracts. Standard 
Contract Form TREC Number 11-3 is promulgated for use as an addendum to be 
attached to promulgated forms of contracts which are second or "back-up" 
contracts. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 12-1 is promulgated for use as an 
addendum to be attached to promulgated forms of contracts where there is a 
Veterans Administration release of liability or restoration entitlement. 
Standard Contract Form TREC Number 13-1 is promulgated for use as an addendum 
concerning new home insulation to be attached to promulgated forms of contracts. 
Standard Contract Form TREC Number 15-2 is promulgated for use as a residential 
lease when a seller temporarily occupies property after closing. Standard 
Contract Form TREC Number 16-2 is promulgated for use as a residential lease 
when a buyer temporarily occupies property prior to closing. Standard Contract 
Form 20-2 is promulgated for use in the resale of residential real estate where 
there is all cash or owner financing, an assumption of an existing loan, or a 
conventional loan. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 21-2 is promulgated for 
use in the resale of residential real estate where there is a Veterans 
Administration guaranteed loan or a Federal Housing Administration insured loan. 
Standard Contract Form TREC Number 23-1 is promulgated for use in the sale of a 
new home where construction is incomplete. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 
24-1 is promulgated for use in the sale of a new home where construction is 
completed. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 25-1 is promulgated for use in the 
sale of a farm or ranch. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 26-2 is promulgated 
for use as an addendum concerning seller financing. Standard Contract Form TREC 
Number 27-0 is promulgated for use as an addendum to be attached to promulgated 
forms of contracts where there is an inspection with a right to terminate. 
Standard Contract Form TREC Number 28-0 is promulgated for use as an addendum to 
be attached to promulgated forms of contracts where reports are to be obtained 
relating to environmental assessments, threatened or endangered species, or 
wetlands. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 29-0 is promulgated for use as an 
addendum to be attached to promulgated forms of contracts where an abstract of 
title is to be furnished. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 30-0 is promulgated 
for use in the resale of a residential condominium unit where there is all cash 
or seller financing, an assumption of an existing loan, or a conventional loan. 
Standard Contract Form TREC Number 31-0 is promulgated for use in the resale of 
a residential condominium unit where there is a Veterans Administration 
guaranteed loan or a Federal Housing Administration insured loan. Standard 
Contract Form TREC Number 32-0 is promulgated for use as a condominium resale 
certificate. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 33-0 is promulgated for use as 
an addendum to be added to promulgated forms of contracts in the sale of 
property adjoining and sharing a common boundary with the tidally influenced 
submerged lands of the state. Standard Contract Form TREC Form Number 34-0 is 
promulgated for use as an addendum to be added to promulgated forms of contracts 
in the sale of property located seaward of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. 
Standard Contract Form Number 35-0 is promulgated for use as an addendum to be 
added to promulgated forms of contracts as an agreement for mediation. Standard 
Contract Form TREC Form Number 36-0 is promulgated for use as an addendum to be 
added to promulgated forms in the sale of property subject to mandatory 
membership in an owners' association. Standard Contract Form TREC Form Number 
37-0 is promulgated for use as a resale certificate when the property is subject 
to mandatory membership in an owners' association. 
   
  (b)-(j) (No change.) 
 
     
  sec.537.43. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 36-0.  The Texas Real Estate 
Commission adopts by reference standard contract form TREC Number 36-0 approved 
by the Texas Real Estate Commission in 1995. This document is published by and 
available from the Texas Real Estate Commission, P.O. Box 12188, Austin, Texas 
78711-2188. 
 
   
  sec.537.44. Standard Contract Form TREC Number 37-0.  The Texas Real Estate 
Commission adopts by reference standard contract form TREC Number 37-0 approved 
by the Texas Real Estate Commission in 1995. This document is published by and 
available from the Texas Real Estate Commission, P.O. Box 12188, Austin, Texas 
78711-2188. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 12, 1995. 
 TRD-95126257 
  Mark Moseley 
 General Counsel 
 Texas Real Estate Commission 
    Effective date: January 3, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 10, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 465-3900 
         
             Part XXIV. Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners 
  Chapter 573. Rules of Professional Conduct 
  
  Other Provisions 
 
  22 TAC sec.573.72 
 
  The Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners adopts new sec.573.72, 
concerning Animal Reproduction, with changes to the proposed text as published 
in the August 25, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 6581). 
 This new rule is adopted to define procedures utilized in animal reproduction 
that constitute the practice of veterinary medicine. The rule as adopted differs 
from the published text in that subsection (2) was deleted. This change was made 
in response to public comment. The board emphasizes that, pursuant to  
sec.3(a)(1) of the Veterinary Licensing Act, Article 8890, the provisions of the 
Act and this rule do not apply to the treatment or caring for animals in any 
manner, either personally by the owner, by any employee of the owner or a 
designated caretaker, unless ownership, employment, or designation was 
established with the intent of circumventing this Act. Enactment of this rule 
limits performance of certain animal reproduction procedures to licensed 
veterinarians. Some persons who are not licensed veterinarians may currently be 
performing the animal reproduction activities covered by this rule. The effect 
of this rule will require that such persons continue these activities only under 
the direct supervision of a veterinarian or cease the activities. The rule 
clarifies which animal reproduction activities constitute the practice of 
veterinary medicine. It does not reclassify previously exempt activities. 
 In order to obtain input other than that received in writing, the Board held a 
public hearing on October 4, 1995. Additional comments were received during the 
Board's October 5, 1995 meeting. 
 The Board believes that in order to protect the public from costly diagnostic 
or surgical mistakes made by untrained individuals, prevent transmission of 
disease, and ensure reliable diagnoses of breeding soundness, a veterinarian 
must be involved in certain animal reproduction activities. Veterinarian 
supervision is required in embryo transfer because of the use of drugs which 
cannot be legally prescribed for use on animals by non-veterinarians. Their use 
also requires a veterinarian/client/patient relationship. 
 The Veterinary Licensing Act defines diagnosis, surgery, and the prescription 
or administration of drugs as the practice of veterinary medicine, all of which 
are involved in animal reproduction. In order to protect the public, individuals 
performing surgical invasion of the reproductive tract of an animal must be 
licensed veterinarians or under the direct supervision of a licensed 
veterinarian. Groups supporting adoption of the rule were the Texas Veterinary 
Medical Association and the Texas Veterinary Association of General 
Practitioners. Both commented that regulation of reproductive practices would 
help ensure quality treatment and prevent disease transmission. Comments were 
also received from three individuals and nine licensed veterinarians supporting 
the rule as proposed in part or in full. 
 Groups opposed to the rule as published were the Texas Southwestern Cattle 
Raisers Association, the Texas Farm Bureau and the Independent Cattlemen's 
Association. These groups were especially concerned that a prohibition against 
non-veterinarians making pregnancy diagnosis by rectal palpation would greatly 
increase the cost of cattle breeding. An individual also expressed these 
concerns. The Board determined further study of this issue was necessary and 
amended the proposed rule to delete subsection (2) referring to pregnancy 
diagnosis by rectal palpation. 
 Several commenters questions whether "needle entry" into an animal's 
reproductive tract was consistent with the definition of surgery. Two 
individuals also asserted that some technicians were better trained to perform 
laproscopic surgery than veterinarians. Due to the ever increasing 
sophistication in surgical techniques available in veterinary medicine, the 
Board believes "needle entry" is consistent with the definition of surgery. 
However, the Board agrees with the need to allow trained technicians to perform 
this procedure under the direct supervision of veterinarians and amended the 
rule as proposed to permit this practice. 
 The new section is adopted under Texas Civil Statutes, Article 8890, sec.7(a) , 
which provide the Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners with the authority 
to make, alter, or amend such rules and regulations as may be necessary or 
desirable to carry into effect the provisions of this Act. 
 This section affects sec. 2(2) and (11) of the Veterinary Licensing Act, 
Article 8890. 
 
 
  sec.573.72. Animal Reproduction.  Pursuant to the Act, sec.2(2) and sec.(11), 
any of the following activities constitute the practice of veterinary medicine: 
 
  (1) surgical invasion of the reproductive tract of an animal, including 
laparoscopy and needle entry unless performed under the direct supervision of a 
veterinarian; or 
   
  (2) obtaining, possessing or administering prescription or legend drugs for 
use in an animal without a valid prescription from a licensed veterinarian or in 
a properly labeled container dispensed by a licensed veterinarian. Nothing in 
this rule shall affect those activities exempted from the Act as defined in 
article 8890, sec.3. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516171 
  Ron Allen 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 25, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 447-1183 
         
                 Part XXV. Structural Pest Control Board 
  Chapter 591. General Provisions 
  
  22 TAC sec.591.9 
 
  The Texas Structural Pest Control Board adopts an amendment to sec.591.9, 
concerning Board Hearings, without changes to the proposed text as published in 
the September 26, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TxReg 7788). 
 The justification for the rule is the amendments will reduce the costs of 
hearing for the Agency. 
 How the rule will function is the amendments will allow default judgements to 
be taken in administrative hearings if no respondent is present. 
 No comments were received regarding the amendment. 
 There were no comments received from any groups or associations for or against 
the rule. 
 The amendment is adopted under Article 135b-6, which provides the Structural 
Pest Control Board with the authority to license and regulate persons who 
provide structural pest control services. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on November 29, 1995. 
 TRD-9516202 
  Benny M. Mathis, Jr. 
 Executive Director 
 Structural Pest Control Board 
    Effective date: January 2, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: September 26, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 835-4066 
         
             
  TITLE 30. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 
 Part I. Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 
  Chapter 317. Design Criteria for Sewerage Systems 
  
  30 TAC sec.317.1, sec.317.4 
 
  The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC or commission) 
adopts amendments to sec.317.1 and sec.317.4, relating to the general provisions 
of the design criteria for domestic sewerage systems. The amendment to sec.317. 
1 is adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the July 21, 
1995, issue of the Texas Register  (20 TexReg 5363). The amendment to sec.317.4 
is adopted without changes and will not be republished. 
 The purpose of the amendments is to clarify which plans and specifications for 
domestic wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal systems are required to 
be submitted to the TNRCC for review and approval in accordance with Texas Water 
Code  sec.26.034, as amended by House Bill (HB) 1826 (1995). The rule amendments 
also allow a qualified municipality which has its own engineering review staff 
to review and approve collection system plans for facilities within the city's 
jurisdiction if the municipality elects to do so. 
 Section 26.034 of the Texas Water Code provides that every person who proposes 
to construct or materially alter the efficiency of a domestic waste treatment 
facility, sewer system, or disposal system that transports, treats, or disposes 
of such waste must submit completed plans and specifications to the commission 
prior to commencement of construction. Section 26.034, as amended by HB 1826, 
further provides that the commission may, on a case-by-case basis, review and 
approve such plans and specifications as a pre-condition of authorization to 
commence construction. 
 Plans and specifications for which the commission has generally excluded from 
the commission's review and approval process must be submitted by a registered 
professional engineer with the engineer's express finding that the plans and 
specifications are in substantial compliance with commission standards and that 
any deviation from those standards is based upon the best professional judgement 
of the registered professional engineer. 
 The commission may not require plans and specifications to be submitted by a 
municipality to the commission for review and approval if: the municipality has 
its own engineering review staff; orthe plans and specifications are prepared by 
private engineering consultants; and the review is conducted by a registered 
professional engineer who is an employee of or consultant to the municipality 
separate from the private engineering consultant charged with the design of the 
plans and specifications. 
 An exception to this exemption may be provided for a capital improvement 
project funded wholly or in part by the municipality. 
 Regardless of whether a municipality may be qualified to perform the review and 
approval of plans and specifications, nothing in these rules requires a 
municipality to undertake the review and approval function. 
 Plans and specifications are not required to be submitted by a person to the 
commission for review and approval if the person is required by local ordinance 
or other law to submit the plans and specifications to a qualified municipality 
for review and approval. 
 The rules provide the conditions a municipality must meet to qualify to perform 
the review and approval function. The rules also provide for a commission audit 
program to ensure that the municipality is conducting its review and approval in 
accordance with commission rules. If the commission finds that a municipality's 
review and approval process does not provide for substantial compliance with 
commission standards, the municipality's review authority is voided and the 
commission shall require that applicable plans and specifications be submitted 
to the commission for review and approval. 
 The rules provide that plans and specifications for the following projects will 
not, generally, be subject to commission review and approval: projects within 
the jurisdictional boundaries of a qualified, participating municipality; 
service lateral piping or single lot service grinder pump lift stations which 
are not a part of a low pressure sewer system; conventional gravity lines, 
pressure lines, or lift stations which will transport primarily domestic waste 
and will be constructed on privately-owned land and operated and maintained by 
private funds; conventional gravity sanitary sewer collection lines which are 
extensions to existing systems, are less than 1500 feet in length, and the line 
to which the extension is being added has been completed and in operation at 
least six months; and duplex lift stations that have a firm pumping capacity of 
less than 100 gallons per minute. 
 Notwithstanding a general exclusion from the commission's review and approval 
process, the commission may subject the plans and specifications for the above-
listed projects to review and approval by the commission on a case-by-case 
basis. Factors to be used to determine which projects will be reviewed include, 
but are not limited to, the environmental sensitivity of potentially impacted 
water bodies, the use of innovative or alternative technologies, past compliance 
history, and the availability of agency resources. 
 The rules also provide that the commission may approve innovative and 
nonconforming (i.e. alternative) technologies if certain informational 
requirements and criteria are met. Additionally, the commission may condition 
any approval by providing testing, reporting, operational, installation, and 
design requirements, as well as any other condition necessary to ensure 
compliance with applicable commission standards. 
 A public hearing on these rules was held in Austin, Texas, on August 7, 1995. 
No comments were received at the public hearing. The comment period closed on 
August 21, 1995. The following entities submitted written comments on the 
proposed amendments: City of Amarillo; City of Arlington; City of Fort Worth; 
Texas Water Development Board; and Consulting Engineers Council of Texas. These 
comments were generally favorable to the adoption of the proposed rules. 
 All comments received by the public in writing on the proposed rules have been 
considered and have been incorporated into the rules where appropriate. 
 Two commenters indicated that these regulations would impose an unfunded 
mandate on municipalities. The commission disagrees with these comments. The 
rules allow qualified municipalities to voluntarily assume the responsibility to 
review plans and specifications for sewage collection and transport systems and, 
therefore, this rule does not constitute a "mandate." 
 One commenter stated that the term "consultation services" in sec.317.1(a)(2) 
was not an accurate description of the services provided by the TNRCC. The 
commission agrees and the proposed rule has been clarified to indicate that the 
role of agency technical staff is to review, rather than assist in the design, 
of facility plans and specifications. 
 One commenter stated that the requirement that engineers certify "the plans and 
specifications are in substantial compliance with the rules in Chapter 317 and 
that any deviations from Chapter 317 are based on the professional judgement of 
the registered professional sealing the cover letter and will not result in a 
threat to the public health or the environment," in sec.317.1(a)(3) is overly 
broad and is not properly descriptive of the engineer's responsibility. In 
response, the language has been modified to reflect the exact language of 
sec.26.034 of the Texas Water Code. 
 One commenter suggested that the length of sewer line which would be exempted 
by sec.317.1(a)(3)(D)(i) from routine review by the commission should be 
increased from 1500 feet to 2,500 feet or 100 connections, whichever is smaller. 
The commission has insufficient information at this time to justify extending 
the exemption to sewer lines up to 2,500 feet or 100 connections, whichever is 
smaller. However, in its current, more comprehensive review of Chapter 317, 
additional information will be sought and this issue will be reexamined. For 
this same reason, sec.317.1(a)(3)(E) has been deleted, making clear that future 
policy changes will be made by rule. 
 One commenter stated that the requirement in sec.317.1(a)(4)(C) that the system 
owner and the design engineer shall be responsible for ensuring that approval 
conditions outlined by the commission or review authority have been met places 
requirements on the design engineer which are outside the exclusive control of 
the design engineer. The commission agrees and has changed the rule to read, 
"...both the sewage system owner and the design engineer, as appropriate, shall 
be responsible..." 
 Two commenters had concerns that the proposed rule in sec.317.1(a)(5) placed 
increased liability on the review authority. These commenters recommended 
language to address this concern. The commission agrees and modified sec.317. 
1(a)(2) to incorporate these suggestions. 
 One commenter stated that the details regarding the amount of money paid to the 
private review engineer is irrelevant to the goal of these rules in sec.317. 
1(a)(5)(D). The commission agrees and has modified the rule accordingly. 
 One commenter stated that municipalities should not be required to issue 
approval letters in sec.317.1(a)(5)(E), and that municipalities should be 
allowed to demonstrate evidence of approval through the signature of an 
authorized reviewer on the engineering drawings. The commission disagrees and 
believes that a detailed written approval letter will provide a more efficient 
and more easily maintained recordkeeping system that is necessary for the agency 
to properly conduct review process audits. These detailed approval letters will 
also allow the agency to respond to inquiries regarding specific projects 
approved by the municipal review authorities. The requirement for a written 
letter is the same standard that the agency had set for itself in the past and 
will continue to use upon passage of these rules. The agency will provide sample 
TNRCC letters that can be used by a municipality under its authorization 
process. 
 The commenter also stated that the rules should make clear that the phrase 
"within the boundaries of the jurisdiction of the municipality" in sec.317.1(a) 
(5)(E) includes extraterritorial jurisdiction. The commission disagrees since 
such authority may not apply uniformly with every city in the state. Rather, the 
rule will be broad enough to allow each municipality the appropriate flexibility 
to review collection system plans within the corporate limits or other 
boundaries of jurisdiction of that municipality. 
 Several commenters opposed the requirement in sec.317.1(a)(5)(F) of submittal 
to the TNRCC of comment and approval letters on projects reviewed by a review 
authority. One of these commenters suggested that only approval letters or 
approved drawings should be submitted. The commission agrees that comment 
letters can be kept in the municipal files and are not needed by the TNRCC and 
has modified the language accordingly. However, approval letters are needed by 
the agency to adequately monitor a municipality's review process. 
 One commenter stated that if a random audit review is performed on a capital 
improvement project as described in sec.317.1(a)(5)(G) and (I), there is the 
possibility of significant delay between plan approval and the random audit 
review. To address this concern, the commenter suggested that the commission 
notify the municipality in writing within ten working days of the receipt of the 
materials. The commission agrees and has revised the rule accordingly. 
 One commenter objected to the TNRCC's ability to perform audits on both capital 
improvement projects and on a municipality's audit process as provided by 
sec.317.1(a)(5)(G) and (I). The commission disagrees because the ability to 
perform audits for both the projects and the audit process is necessary to 
ensure compliance with sec.26.034(e) of the Texas Water Code. 
 Two commenters objected to the TNRCC's ability to perform random audit reviews 
on capital improvement projects as provided by sec.317.1(a)(5)(G). One of these 
commenters also objected to the requirement that an engineering report, plans, 
and specifications be submitted for all capital improvement projects. The 
commission believes that because municipalities will potentially be reviewing 
their own work and writing themselves approval letters for capital improvement 
projects, it is necessary for the TNRCC to be able to perform random review 
audits of these projects. However, the commission has made modifications to this 
requirement to exclude some smaller capital improvement projects and to include 
notification deadlines with regard to these random audit reviews. 
 Two commenters were concerned that commission review of capital improvement 
projects provided by sec.317.1(a)(5)(H) would unnecessarily delay these 
projects. Both commenters suggested a time limit for the TNRCC review comments 
to be forwarded to the municipalities. The commission agrees and has made the 
appropriate modifications by providing in sec.317.1(a)(5)(G) for a notification 
to the submitter if a review will occur. 
 One commenter stated that the notification process outlined in sec.317.1(a) (6) 
was essentially an application process by municipalities and that the process 
should be a simple one. The commission agrees that the process should be simple 
and straightforward and believes that the notification process outlined in the 
proposed rule is consistent with this goal. 
 One commenter stated that sec.317.1(a)(7) served as a catch-all in case any 
other paragraph failed to encompass a wastewater system component. The 
commission disagrees with this assessment. The purpose of this paragraph is to 
allow design engineers the option of obtaining waivers of review in cases not 
covered in the rest of sec.317.1(a). This paragraph has not been changed 
substantively from the previous version. This paragraph has generally been used 
previously by design engineers to obtain waivers of review for routine 
maintenance, rehabilitation or replacement of existing equipment. 
 One commenter stated that the proposed changes to Chapter 317 were 
characterized by "unwarranted oversight of professional engineering judgement. " 
In order to allow some additional flexibility to municipal professional 
engineers, sec.317.1(a)(5)(A) was amended to allow for professional engineers 
employed by municipalities to obtain variances from the state's criteria in a 
municipality's standard specifications. 
 Section 317.1(a)(3)(D) is also amended to clarify submittal and review 
requirements and options for state agencies. 
 References in the rules to Watershed Management Division have been changed to 
Wastewater Permits Section to reflect the recent reorganization of the Office of 
Water Resource Management within the commission. 
 This section is adopted under the Texas Water Code, sec.26.023 and sec.26.034, 
which provide the TNRCC with the authority to make rules setting water quality 
standards for all water in the state and to review and approve the plans and 
specifications for domestic sewerage systems, respectively. The sections are 
also adopted under the Texas Water Code, sec.5.103, which authorizes the 
commission to adopt any rules necessary to carry out its powers and duties under 
the Texas Water Code and other laws of this state. 
 
 
  sec.317.1. General Provisions. 
 
  (a) Purpose. These design criteria are minimum guidelines to be used for the 
comprehensive consideration of domestic sewage collection, treatment, or 
disposal systems and establish the minimum design criteria pursuant to existing 
state statutes pertaining to effluent quality necessary to meet state water 
quality standards. These criteria are intended to promote the design of 
facilities in accordance with good public health and water quality engineering 
practices. These criteria include the minimum requirements for a preliminary 
engineering report which provides the general engineering concepts underlying 
the proposed project as well as the final engineering report detailing the fully 
developed project along with related plans and specifications. 
 
  (1) Authority for Requirement. The Texas Water Code prescribes the duties of 
the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (commission) relating to the 
control of pollution including the review and approval of plans and 
specifications for sewage disposal systems. This authority is found in Texas 
Water Code sec. sec.5. 013, 12.081-12.083, 15.104, 15.114, 26.023, 26.034, 
49.181-49.182, 54.024, and 51.333. 
   
  (2) Review of plans and specifications. Plans and specifications shall meet 
the design criteria and the operation, maintenance, and safety requirements for 
the proposed project as provided by this chapter. Approval given by the 
executive director, or a participating municipality with review authority as 
provided for in paragraphs (5) and (6) of this subsection, shall not relieve the 
sewerage system owner or the design engineer of any liabilities or 
responsibilities with respect to the proper design, construction, or authorized 
operation of the project in accordance with applicable commission rules. 
   
  (3) Submittal requirements. Except as provided for in subparagraphs (A)-(D) of 
this paragraph, plans, specifications, and engineering reports for all 
wastewater projects shall be submitted to the commission's Wastewater Permits 
Section. All submittals shall be subject to discretionary review of the 
executive director. If the executive director chooses to review any submitted 
project, the design engineer will be notified in writing not later than ten days 
from the receipt by the commission of completed plans and specifications. If a 
review of a project is performed by the executive director, any approvals 
granted for these submittals shall correspond to one of the approval types 
detailed in paragraph (4) of this subsection. All submittals to the commission 
shall include a cover letter which has the signed and dated seal of a 
professional engineer registered in the State of Texas. The cover letter shall 
state that the plans and specifications are in substantial compliance with the 
rules in Chapter 317 and that any deviations from Chapter 317 are based on the 
best professional judgement of the registered professional engineer sealing the 
cover letter. Also, the cover letter shall include information regarding the 
project scope, specifics of the project, details of any deviations from this 
chapter's requirements, and an explanation of reasons for any deviations. 
Subparagraphs (A)-(D) of this paragraph specify the following variety of project 
categories for which submittal requirements are reduced: 
 
  (A) Those projects which will be constructed within the jurisdiction of a 
qualified municipality which has review authority in accordance with paragraphs 
(5) and (6) of this subsection are not subject to the submittal requirements 
except as provided by subparagraphs (G) and (I) of paragraph (5); 
   
  (B) Submittal of plans and specifications for service lateral piping or single 
lot service grinder pump lift stations, which are not a part of a low pressure 
sewer system, will not be required; 
   
  (C) Submittals of plans, specifications, and engineering reports for any 
conventional gravity lines, pressure lines, or lift stations which will 
transport primarily domestic waste, will not routinely be required if the 
project will be constructed on privately owned lands and will be operated and 
maintained with private funds. If a submittal of plans and specifications for 
projects which fall into this category is desired by the executive director, a 
written request for plans and specifications will be sent to the design engineer 
by the executive director within ten days of receipt of this plans and 
specifications. 
   
  (D)  Except as otherwise specified in subparagraph (B) or (C) of this 
paragraph, for a wastewater project described in clauses (i), (ii) or (iii) of 
this subparagraph, a copy of the plans and specifications shall be submitted to 
the commission's regional office for the region which the proposed project is to 
be located. Except as otherwise provided, projects in the categories listed in 
clauses (i)-(iii) of this subparagraph will not routinely be reviewed by the 
executive director. If the executive director chooses to review a project which 
is covered in one of these categories, the executive director's review 
notification letter may include a request for the design engineer to submit an 
additional copy of the materials for review to the commission's Wastewater 
Permits Section. The categories include: 
 
  (i) any conventional gravity sanitary sewer collection lines which are 
extensions to existing systems and which are less than 1500 feet in length. This 
condition applies only in cases where the line to which the extension is being 
added has been completed and in operation at least six months; 
   
  (ii)  all duplex lift stations that have a firm pumping capacity of less than 
100 gallons/minute; 
   
  (iii) any domestic wastewater projects which receive a technical review and 
approval from a state agency other than the commission, if the following 
requirements of subclauses (I)-(III) of this clause or subclause (IV) of this 
subparagraph are met: 
 
  (I) the review is performed under the supervision of a professional engineer 
registered in the State of Texas; 
   
  (II) the review shall ensure that the project substantially complies with this 
chapter; 
   
  (III) the state agency has officially requested that the commission not 
perform a technical review of a wastewater project or category of projects; and 
   
  (IV) the state agency has been granted review authority pursuant to state law 
in lieu of the commission. In this case, submittal of plans and specifications 
to the commission is not required. Also, in this case the executive director 
will not perform reviews of these projects. 
         
  (4) Types of approval. Regardless of the type of approval, constructed 
facilities when in operation are required to produce the quality of effluent 
specified in their discharge permit(s). The types of approvals described in 
subparagraphs (A)-(C) of this paragraph will be utilized by the commission or 
any other review authority. the following case-by-case approvals described in 
subparagraph (D) of this paragraph apply only to commission approvals: 
 
  (A) Standard approval. Plans and specifications found to comply with all 
applicable parts of these criteria and to conform to commonly accepted sanitary 
engineering design practices shall be approved for construction. 
   
  (B) Approvals of innovative and nonconforming technologies. 
 
  (i) Technologies considered to be nonconforming or innovative include ones not 
conforming to or addressed in the design criteria of this chapter. 
   
  (ii) If an approval for nonconforming or innovative technologies is requested, 
engineering proposals for processes, equipment, or construction materials not 
covered in these criteria shall be fully described in the submitted planning 
materials and the reasons for their selection clearly outlined. Processes 
considered to be nonconforming or innovative should also be supported by results 
of pilot or demonstration studies. Where similarly designed full scale processes 
exist and are known to have operated for a reasonable period of time under 
conditions similar to those suggested for the proposed design, performance data 
from these existing full scale facilities shall be required to be submitted to 
the executive director in addition to, or in lieu of, pilot or small scale 
demonstration studies. Any warranties or performance bond agreements offered by 
the process, equipment, or material manufacturers shall be fully described in 
the request. 
   
  (iii) Approvals of processes, equipment, or construction materials which are 
considered to be innovative or nonconforming will be granted only in cases where 
the commission or review authority determines, after an engineering evaluation 
of the supporting information provided in the submitting engineer's design 
report, that the technology will not result in a threat to public health or the 
environment. 
   
  (iv)  The executive director or review authority may require the manufacturer 
or supplier to obtain and furnish evidence of an acceptable two-year performance 
bond from an approved surety which insures the performance of the innovative or 
nonconforming technology. The performance bond shall cover the cost of removal 
or abandonment of the innovative or nonconforming facility and equipment, 
replacement with previously agreed upon facilities or equipment, and all 
associated engineering fees necessary for the removal and replacement. 
   
  (v) Approval of innovative and nonconforming technologies may include a 
condition which states that after some predetermined period of time after the 
installation and startup of the innovative or nonconforming technology, 
requiring an engineering report to be submitted after start-up, detailing the 
performance of the nonconforming or innovative technology. The engineering 
report shall include unbiased calculations and data supporting the technology's 
performance; and written submittals from the design engineer and permittee which 
state that the nonconforming or innovative technology has satisfied its 
manufacturer's claims. 
     
  (C) Conditional approval. The executive director or review authority may grant 
approvals which contain detailed conditions, stipulations or restrictions. 
Examples of such conditions and stipulations include, but are not limited to, 
testing requirements, reporting requirements, operational requirements, and 
additional installation and design requirements which may be necessary to ensure 
compliance with this chapter. Any conditional approval granted may be issued for 
a specific set of flow situations, wastewater characteristics, and/or required 
effluent quality. If a conditional approval is granted, both the sewage system 
owner and design engineer, as appropriate, shall be responsible for ensuring 
that the approval conditions outlined by the commission or review authority have 
been met. 
   
  (D) Case-by-case reviews. Upon submittal of plans, specifications, and 
engineering reports (including commission-approved application forms) to the 
commission as required by this subsection, the executive director may approve of 
the submitted materials without a technical review of the submitted materials. 
In those cases where a review will not be conducted, a written approval will be 
sent to the design engineer who submitted the materials with a notice indicating 
the plans were not reviewed. Such approval is conditioned upon the design being 
in substantial compliance with the rules in this chapter. Any deviations from 
this chapter shall be disclosed and stated to be based on the best professional 
judgement of the registered professional engineer sealing the plans and the 
engineer's judgement that the design would not result in a threat to public 
health or the environment. 
     
  (5) Review and approval of collection system designs by municipalities. The 
review and approval of plans, specifications, and engineering reports prepared 
by private engineering consultants for sewer systems which transport primarily 
domestic wastewater will not be required when a municipality elects to perform 
certain project reviews. Any municipality with its own internal engineering 
review staff which performs domestic wastewater project reviews is eligible to 
perform certain reviews and grant approvals, in lieu of the commission. Any 
entity which is required by local ordinance to submit engineering reports, 
plans, and specifications for sewer systems which transport primarily domestic 
waste to an eligible municipality which provides the review and approval, is not 
required to submit these review materials to the commission. The commission will 
not require submission of plans, specifications, and engineering reports for 
executive director approval so long as the executive director finds through the 
notification process described in paragraph (6) of this subsection that a 
municipality's approval procedures will provide substantial compliance with 
commission standards and all of the following conditions are met by the 
municipality: 
 
  (A) The standard specifications of the municipality performing the plans and 
specifications reviews shall be modified as needed for full compliance with the 
minimum standards for sewage collection and transport systems, as detailed in 
this chapter. As an alternative, a municipality's standard specifications may be 
allowed to vary from these design criteria if the municipality first 
demonstrates to the executive director that the variance would not result in a 
threat to water quality or public health. Requests for variances must be 
submitted in writing, along with the notification required in paragraph (6) of 
this subsection, by a professional engineer registered in the state of Texas, 
who is under the full-time employment of the municipality requesting the 
variance. 
   
  (B)  The municipality shall be capable of timely review and approval of all 
collection system plans, specifications, and engineering reports it receives for 
review and approval. 
   
  (C) All reviews performed by an employee of the municipality shall be 
conducted by a professional engineer, registered in the State of Texas, or the 
employee conducting the review shall be under the direct supervision of a 
professional engineer, registered in the State of Texas, who is ultimately 
responsible for the review and approval of each collection system submitted and 
installed in the municipality's jurisdiction. 
   
  (D) The responsible review engineer shall be either an employee of the 
reviewing municipality or a consultant to the municipality separate from the 
private consulting firm charged with the design work under review. For purposes 
of this section, the term "separate" shall mean that the responsible review 
engineer is not employed by and does not receive compensation from the private 
consulting firm (or from any of its parent companies, subsidiaries or 
affiliates) charged with the design. If the responsible review engineer is a 
private consultant, a contract shall be maintained by the municipality which 
details all agreements that allow the private consultant to act as the 
responsible review engineer for the municipality. At a minimum, the contract 
shall be signed by an authorized representative of the municipality and the 
private consultant and include the period of time that the private consultant 
will act as the municipality's responsible review engineer. 
   
  (E) A participating municipality may review and approve engineering reports, 
plans and specifications only for projects which transport primarily domestic 
waste within the boundaries of jurisdiction of that municipality. For each 
project approved for construction, the municipality shall issue an approval 
letter which clearly details the project being approved. The letter should be 
issued to the design engineer and the system owner. 
   
  (F) To ensure adequate coordination and communication with the commission, 
copies of all approval letters, for all projects reviewed under the authority of 
the municipality shall be submitted to the commission's Wastewater Permits 
Section in Austin. Any variances from this chapter granted for projects approved 
under the authority of a municipality shall be clearly described and justified 
in the construction approval letter which is written for the project requiring 
the variance. These approval letters shall be submitted to the commission at 
least on a quarterly basis, i.e., by March 31, June 30, September 30, and 
December 31 of each year. The municipality shall maintain complete files of all 
review activities carried out under its authority and shall make these files 
available to the commission upon request or during audits performed in 
accordance with subparagraph (I) of this paragraph. The files shall include, at 
a minimum, copies of: submittal documents, correspondence related to the review 
and approval of the project, construction inspection reports, and testing 
results. 
   
  (G) If a municipality that has review authority approves its own fully or 
partially funded capital improvement project, the capital improvement project 
shall be subject to the same submittal requirements detailed in paragraph (3) of 
this subsection with the exception that the cover letter shall include the 
signed and dated seal of a professional engineer registered in the State of 
Texas, who is under the full-time employment of the municipality which has 
review authority. The executive director may perform random audit reviews on 
these capital improvement projects and shall have final decision authority in 
cases where conflict arises between a review by the executive director and the 
municipality proposing to construct the capital improvement project. If the 
executive director determines, upon receiving a submittal of plans and 
specifications for a capital improvement project, that an audit review of this 
project will be performed, and that approval will be required before 
construction may begin on this project, the executive director will notify the 
municipality within ten working days of the receipt of the plans and 
specifications that this review will occur. Additionally, the executive director 
will make every attempt to send either an approval letter or a comment letter 
within 30 days of receipt of the plans and specifications. 
   
  (H) Construction cannot begin on any project until approval has been granted 
by the municipality with review authority, and if it is a project described in 
subparagraph (G) of this paragraph, any approval required from the commission, 
should the executive director perform an audit review. 
   
  (I) The executive director may perform periodic audits of the municipality's 
review and approval process. If the executive director decides to perform an 
audit of the municipality's review and approval process, the executive director 
will provide the municipality with a minimum of five working days advance notice 
of the pending audit. The executive director may, for auditing purposes only, 
review specific projects which have previously been approved by the review 
authority. If, after a municipality begins to exercise review and approval 
authority, the executive director finds through reviews of specific projects or 
through audits of the municipality's review and approval process that a 
municipality's review and approval process does not provide for substantial 
compliance with the minimum design and installation requirements detailed in 
this chapter, the review and approval authority shall be voided for that 
municipality. If such authority is voided for a municipality, the executive 
director shall notify the municipality in writing and shall include the 
justification for voiding the authority of the municipality. If the authority of 
a municipality is voided, the commission shall require all plans and 
specifications to be submitted to the executive director for review and 
approval. 
     
  (6) Notification. At least 45 days prior to commencing design reviews as 
described in paragraph (5) of this subsection, a municipality shall submit a 
notification to the commission's Wastewater Permits Section. The purpose of the 
notification is to ensure coordination between the commission and municipality 
on matters of common jurisdiction and design review authority and to allow the 
executive director to make a finding that the municipality is in substantial 
compliance with this chapter. The notification shall include a description of 
the municipality's proposed program sufficient for the executive director to 
determine whether the review and approval process meets the provisions of 
paragraph (5)(A)-(D) of this subsection. Additionally, the notification shall 
specify the beginning date of the municipality's reviews and it shall include a 
detailed map showing the boundaries of its review authority. The exemption from 
submission to and approval by the executive director, provided in paragraph (5) 
of this subsection shall commence 45 days after notification or upon the written 
concurrence of the executive director, whichever is sooner, unless the executive 
director: 
 
  (A) requests additional information from the municipality if it believes it 
has received incomplete information on which to base a finding; or 
   
  (B) notifies the municipality that it finds that the municipality's review and 
approval process does not provide for substantial compliance with commission 
standards. 
     
  (7) Waiver of submittal or review requirements. When minor upgrade, 
rehabilitation, or maintenance work is planned for existing systems, a waiver of 
submittal or review may be granted at the discretion of the executive director 
or the review authority. If a waiver of submittal or review is desired, written 
notification to the commission, or the appropriate review authority, shall be 
made and shall include sufficient information to describe the significance of 
such modifications. If a waiver of submittal or review is requested, it shall be 
submitted by a professional engineer registered in Texas, and shall include the 
signed and dated seal of the engineer submitting the waiver request. The 
executive director or the appropriate review authority will determine whether a 
submittal or review of engineering plans and specifications will be required 
following this initial notification of the extent of the planned modifications. 
Replacement of equipment, piping or materials with like equipment, piping, or 
materials for purposes of maintenance and repair only, will not routinely 
require a submittal or a technical review by the executive director, and also 
will not routinely require a request for a waiver of submittal or a request for 
a waiver of review. 
   
  (8) Federal guidelines. Any project constructed with federal financial 
assistance may be required to conform to federal design criteria or guidelines 
if such criteria or guidelines are more stringent than those contained herein. 
     
  (b)-(f) (No change.) 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516131 
  Kevin McCalla 
 Director, Legal Division 
 Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: July 21, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 239-4640 
         
                 
  TITLE 40. SOCIAL SERVICES AND ASSISTANCE 
 Part I. Texas Department of Human Services 
  Chapter 76. Criminal History Check of Employees in Facilities for Care of the 
Aged and Persons with Disabilities 
  
  The Texas Department of Human Services (DHS) adopts the repeal of sec.sec.76. 
101-76.108 and new sec.sec.76.101-76.106, without changes. DHS adopts sec.76.102 
with a change to the proposed text as published in the October 31, 1995, issue 
of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 8995). 
 Justification for the repeals and new sections is a demonstration of the 
department's compliance with the criminal history check statute in the Health 
and Safety Code. 
 The repeals and new sections will function by complying with changes made by 
the 74th Texas Legislature amending the criminal history check statute in 
Chapter 250 of the Health and Safety Code. 
 The department received a comment from the Texas Health Care Association (THCA) 
and is responding as follows. 
 Comment: In sec.76.101(b)(4), the definition of an emergency requiring 
immediate employment concludes with a clause, "thus putting the client's health 
and safety at risk," that places a negative conclusion on a nursing facility 
employee who is hired on an emergency basis. This clause should be deleted. 
There is no need to qualify or restrict emergency employment of nursing facility 
staff for any position unless the state can expedite the process of responding 
to a criminal history check. When there is a request for acknowledging criminal 
convictions on an employment application, a nursing facility should be able to 
proceed with the hiring and training of an applicant who denies, in writing, 
past criminal convictions. 
 Response: DHS agrees with THCA's suggestion to remove "thus putting the 
client's health and safety at risk" from the emergency employment definition. 
   
  Policy and Procedures 
 
  40 TAC sec.sec.76.101-76.108 
 
  The repeals are adopted under the Human Resources Code, Title 2, Chapter 22, 
which authorizes the department to administer public assistance programs, and 
under the Health and Safety Code, Title 4, Chapter 250, which requires the 
department to perform criminal history checks on persons employed by certain 
types of facilities. 
 The repeals implement the Human Resources Code, sec.sec.22.001-22.024, and the 
Health and Safety Code, sec.sec.250.001-250.009. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 12, 1995. 
 TRD-9516214 
  Nancy Murphy 
 Section Manager, Media and Policy Services 
 Texas Department of Human Services 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 31, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 438-3765 
         
       
  40 TAC sec.sec.76.101-76.106 
 
  The new sections are adopted under the Human Resources Code, Title 2, Chapter 
22, which authorizes the department to administer public assistance programs, 
and under the Health and Safety Code, Title 4, Chapter 250, which requires the 
department to perform criminal history checks on persons employed by certain 
types of facilities. 
 The new sections implement the Human Resources Code, sec. sec.22.001-22.024, 
and the Health and Safety Code, sec.sec.250.001-250.009. 
 
 
  sec.76.102. Pre-employment Criminal History Check. 
 
  (a) A facility may not employ a person in a position with duties involving 
direct contact with a consumer in the facility if the: 
 
  (1) facility determines as a result of a criminal history check that a person 
has been convicted of an offense that is listed in Health and Safety Code, 
sec.250.006, barring employment or that a conviction is a contraindication to 
employment with the consumers a facility serves; and 
   
  (2) applicant is a nurse aide, until the facility further verifies that the 
applicant is listed in the nurse aide registry and verifies that the applicant 
is not designated in the registry as having a finding entered into the registry 
concerning abuse, neglect or mistreatment of a consumer of a facility, or 
misappropriation of a consumer's property. A person licensed under another law 
of this state is exempt from the criminal history check requirements of this 
chapter. 
     
  (b) If a facility believes that a conviction under Health and Safety Code, 
sec.250.006, bars a person from employment in the facility or believes that a 
criminal conviction may be a contraindication to a person's employment, a 
facility shall notify the applicant or employee. 
   
  (c) A facility will immediately discharge any employee whose duties involve 
direct contact with a consumer in the facility if his criminal history check 
reveals conviction of a crime that bars employment or a criminal conviction that 
the facility determines is a contraindication to employment as provided in this 
chapter or who is designated in the nurse aide registry as having committed an 
act of abuse, neglect or mistreatment of a consumer of a facility or 
misappropriation of a consumer's property. 
   
  (d) Applicants to provide adult foster care are subject to criminal history 
checks before enrollment in the adult foster care program. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 12, 1995. 
 TRD-9516215 
  Nancy Murphy 
 Section Manager, Media and Policy Services 
 Texas Department of Human Services 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 31, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 438-3765 
         
                 Part IV. Texas Commission for the Blind 
  Chapter 159. Administrative Rules and Procedures 
  
  The Texas Commission for the Blind adopts the repeal of  sec.159.13 and adopts 
new sec.159.13, concerning public opportunities to appear before the 
Commission's board, without changes to the proposed text as published in the 
October 24, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 8786). 
 The Commission adopts the repeal and new section to expand from once a year to 
several times a year the opportunities persons may speak to the board in regular 
meetings without giving advance notice. The new section will serve as notice to 
the public that public comments will be a regular agenda item on each regular 
meeting. 
 The Commission received no comments regarding the proposed repeal and new 
section. 
   
  40 TAC sec.159.13 
 
  The repeal is adopted under the Human Resources Code, Title 5, Chapter 91, 
which authorizes the commission to adopt rules prescribing the policies and 
procedures followed by the commission in the administration of its program and 
requires the agency to implement policies that will provide the public with a 
reasonable opportunity to appear before the board and to speak on any issue 
under the jurisdiction of the commission. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516252 
  Pat D. Westbrook 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Commissin for the Blind 
    Effective date: January 3, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 24, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 459-2611 
         
     
  The new section is adopted under the Human Resources Code, Title 5, Chapter 
91, which authorizes the commission to adopt rules prescribing the policies and 
procedures followed by the commission in the administration of its program and 
requires the agency to implement policies that will provide the public with a 
reasonable opportunity to appear before the board and to speak on any issue 
under the jurisdiction of the commission. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516251 
  Pat D. Westbrook 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Commission for the Blind 
    Effective date: January 3, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: October 24, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 459-2611 
         
           Part XII. Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
  Chapter 362. Definitions 
  
  40 TAC sec.362.1 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.362.1, concerning Definitions, without changes to the proposed text as 
published in the August 8, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 6007). 
 This amended section is being adopted to clarify requirements for two types of 
licenses which are issued by the board. 
 This amended section allows a provisional license to be issued to an individual 
who is AOTCB certified and who has either been employed in a non-licensing state 
or foreign country, or who has been employed in a licensing state and holds a 
valid license in good standing from that state. It also specifies that one kind 
of temporary license can be issued to an individual with AOTCB certification who 
has not worked within five years of receipt of current, complete application for 
licensure. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516182 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900 
         
         Chapter 365. Types of Licenses 
  
  40 TAC sec.365.1 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.365.1, concerning Types of Licenses, without changes to the proposed text as 
published in the August 8, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 6007). 
 This amended section is being adopted to specify requirements for licensure for 
two categories of licensure. 
 This amended section specifies that an applicant for an Extended Temporary 
License must be AOTCB certified but has not been employed for five years or more 
from receipt date of current, complete application. It also specifies that a 
Provisional License may be issued to individuals who are AOTCB certified and who 
have either been employed in a licensing state within five years of receipt of 
current, complete application, or who have been employed in a non-licensing 
state or foreign country within six months or five years of receipt of current 
complete application. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516183 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900 
         
         Chapter 366. Application for License 
  
  40 TAC sec.366.1 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.366.1, concerning Application for License, without changes to the proposed 
text as published in the August 8, 1995, issue of the Texas Register  (20 TexReg 
6008). 
 This amended section is being adopted to clarify which documents are sent to 
applicants of the board. 
 This amended section no longer requires the board to send a copy of the 
Occupational Therapy Practice Act and a copy of the current TBOTE rules to every 
applicant to the board; only an instruction sheet, an application form, and any 
other information deemed necessary by the board. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516184 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900 
         
         Chapter 367. Continuing Education 
  
  40 TAC sec.367.1 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.367.1, concerning Continuing Education, without changes to the proposed text 
as published in the August 8, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 
6008). 
 This amended section is being adopted to clarify the time frames during which 
licensees must earn continuing education contact hours for annual and biennial 
renewals. 
 This amended section specifies for annual renewals continuing education must be 
earned in the 12 months immediately preceding the licensee's renewal month, and 
for biennial renewals continuing education must be earned in the 24 months 
immediately preceding the licensee's renewal month. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516185 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900 
         
         Chapter 369. Display of License 
  
  40 TAC sec.369.2 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.369.2, concerning Changes of Name or Address of Licensees, without changes 
to the proposed text as published in the August 8, 1995, issue of the Texas 
Register  (20 TexReg 6009). 
 This amended section is being adopted to require supporting documentation of 
change in name of a licensee or applicant. 
 This amended section requires that a licensee or applicant to the board must 
submit a court document evidencing a legal change in name along with any written 
request notifying the board of a name change. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516186 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900 
         
         Chapter 370. License Renewal 
  
  40 TAC sec.370.1 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.370.1, concerning License Renewal, without changes to the proposed text as 
published in the August 11, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 6108). 
 This amended section is being adopted to establish a biennial license renewal 
system, including continuing education requirements, for all regular license 
holders. 
 This amended section establishes a biennial renewal system to be implemented in 
two phases beginning with January 1996 license renewals. Licensees with even 
license numbers will renew licenses for two years; submit 15 contact hours of 
continuing education in 1996; and submit 30 contact hours of continuing 
education in 1998 and each subsequent biennial renewal. Licensees with odd 
license numbers will initially renew licenses for one year, submit 15 contact 
hours of continuing education in 1996; submit 15 contact hours of continuing 
education in 1997; and submit 30 contact hours of continuing education in 1999 
and each subsequent biennial renewal. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516187 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900 
         
         Chapter 374. Disciplinary Actions/Complaints 
  
  40 TAC sec.374.1 
 
  The Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners adopts an amendment to 
sec.374.1, concerning Disciplinary Actions, without changes to the proposed text 
as published in the August 8, 1995, issue of the Texas Register (20 TexReg 
6009). 
 This amended section is being adopted to define illegal remuneration as it 
relates to detrimental practice. 
 This amended section specifies that direct or indirect payment or receipt of 
remuneration of any kind is prohibited and constitutes detrimental practice, 
unless the business arrangement or payment is acceptable under either state or 
federal statute. 
 No comments were received regarding amendment of this section. 
 The amendment is adopted under the Occupational Therapy Practice Act, Texas 
Civil Statutes, Article 8851, which provide the Texas Board of Occupational 
Therapy Examiners with the authority to adopt rules consistent with this Act to 
carry out its duties in administering this Act. 
 
  This agency hereby certifies that the rule as adopted has been reviewed by 
legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's authority. 
 Issued in Austin, Texas, on December 11, 1995. 
 TRD-9516188 
  John P. Maline 
 Executive Director 
 Texas Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners 
    Effective date: January 1, 1996 
 Proposal publication date: August 8, 1995 
 For further information, please call: (512) 305-6900