Texas Attorney General Opinion: DM-92 Page: 2 of 4
This text is part of the collection entitled: Texas Attorney General Opinions and was provided to The Portal to Texas History by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Charles E. Nemir, P.E. - Page 2
Leg., ch. 947, 1, at 4012). You ask whether the board may exercise its authority
under section 13(d) to reduce the annual renewal fee for senior engineers by the
$200 amount imposed by section 13B. We conclude that the board may take the
$200 amount into account when setting reduced fees for registered engineers who
are least 65 years of age.
As introduced, House Bill 180, the bill enacting section 13(d), gave the board
the discretion to adopt reduced fees for retired engineers. Its author testified that
the purpose of the bill was specifically to provide retired engineers relief from a
temporary $110 fee increase imposed on certain professional licenses by the 70th
Legislature. Hearings on H.B. 180 Before the House Comm. on Bus. and Com.
(Feb. 27, 1989) (testimony of Rep. Ashley Smith). The author indicated that section
13(d) would in the future allow the board flexibility in adjusting fees for registered
engineers who may no longer actually be engaged in the profession but, for personal
reasons, wish to maintain their licenses. A committee substitute removed retire-
ment as a qualification for the fee reduction, requiring instead only that the
registrant be at least 65 years of age.
The legislature thus expressly recognized the special economic circumstances
of registered engineers who are at least 65 years of age. It was presumed that
because of their age, these professionals would have fewer opportunities to absorb
the costs of licensing than younger persons. See House Comm. on Bus. and Com.,
Bill Analysis H.B. 180, 71st Leg. (1989); Testimony on H.B. 180, supra. Section
13(d) was specifically tailored to mitigate the harsh effects of future fee increases on
this class of engineers. It is thus perfectly suited to the problem presented by House
Bill 11 and section 13B of the Engineering Practice Act.
The structure and language of House Bill 11 indicates that its overall
objective was to generate revenue from reliable sources, including the practitioners
of professions regulated by the state. However, we detect no legislative intent to
eliminate the board's discretion to reduce the fees of licensees who are at least 65
years of age. Consequently, we do not believe section 13B must be read to impliedly
do so.
Finally, the result we reach here is supported by Attorney General Opinion
JM-873 (1988). There, the issue was whether the State Board of Public Accoun-
tancy could reduce the licensing fees of accountants over the age of 65 who were
affected by a $110 temporary fee increase on professional licensing fees imposed by
the 70th Legislature. The statutory language imposing the fee increase was similarp. 463
(DM- 9 2)
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: DM-92, text, February 18, 1992; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth273901/m1/2/: accessed March 28, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.