Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion: KP-0443

CourtTexas Attorney General Reports
DecidedMay 1, 2023
DocketKP-0443
StatusPublished

This text of Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion: KP-0443 (Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion: KP-0443) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Attorney General Reports primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion: KP-0443, (Tex. 2023).

Opinion

KEN PAXTON ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

May 1, 2023

Mr. Darrel D. Spinks Executive Director Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council 1801 Congress Avenue, Suite 7.300 Austin, Texas 78701

Opinion No. KP-0443

Re: Authority of the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council to amend 22 Texas Administrative Code section 465.38(d) regarding the title of an individual holding a specialist in school psychology license (RQ-0483-KP) Dear Mr. Spinks: You ask about the authority of the Texas Behavioral Health Executive Council (“Council”) to amend an administrative rule to allow a licensed specialist in school psychology or an LSSP to use an alternate title. 1

You explain that Occupations Code subsection 501.260(a) requires a license for a licensed specialist in school psychology or “LSSP,” and that the LSSP license “is the appropriate credential for a person who provides psychological services as required by [s]ection 21.003(b) of the Education Code.” 2 Request Letter at 1. You state that an LSSP licensee has previously been permitted to use only the title Licensed Specialist in School Psychology or LSSP, but that nationally such a licensee is typically known as a school psychologist. See id. You tell us the Council has received comments that the title LSSP is confusing because it is unfamiliar, unlike the title school psychologist. Id. at 2. You point out that Education Code subsection 21.003(b) does not “use or recognize the title LSSP.” Id. at 1; see also supra note 2. You tell us the “purpose for this proposed rule change is to help address the public’s confusion regarding this license type, so the public can better understand and recognize[] who they are and what activities they are licensed

1 See Letter from Darrel D. Spinks, Ex. Dir., Tex. Behavioral Health Exec. Council, to Honorable Ken Paxton, Tex. Att’y Gen. at 1–2 (Nov. 1, 2022), https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/request-files/request/2022/ RQ0483KP.pdf (“Request Letter”); see also TEX. OCC. CODE § 501.260(a) (requiring a license for a licensed specialist in school psychology). 2 Education Code subsection 21.003(b) provides that a person may not be employed by a school district as a “school psychologist . . . unless the person is licensed by the state agency that licenses that profession and may perform specific services within th[at] profession for a school district only if the person holds the appropriate credential from the appropriate state agency.” TEX. EDUC. CODE § 21.003(b). Mr. Darrel D. Spinks - Page 2

to perform.” Request Letter at 2. You identify the following underlined language as a proposed amendment to the relevant administrative rule: (d) The correct title for an individual holding a specialist in school psychology license is Licensed Specialist in School Psychology or (LSSP), or the individual may use the title School Psychologist or Licensed School Psychologist as referenced in Section 21.003 of the Education Code. An LSSP who has achieved certification as a Nationally Certified School Psychologist (NCSP) may use this credential along with the license title of LSSP. Id. at 1 (referring to 22 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 465.38(d) (2023) (Tex. Behav. Health Exec. Council, Psychological Services for Schools). Council’s Rulemaking Authority An administrative agency may adopt only those rules that are authorized by and consistent with its statutory authority. See Railroad Comm’n of Tex. v. Lone Star Gas Co., 844 S.W.2d 679, 685 (Tex. 1992). Such authority may be either expressly conferred by statute or implied from other powers and duties given or imposed by statute. See id. Occupations Code chapter 507 provides for the Council as an umbrella entity over several behavioral health professions. 3 See generally TEX. OCC. CODE §§ 507.001–.404 (establishing and governing the Council). Relevant here, chapter 507 authorizes the Council to administer and enforce Occupations Code chapter 501, the Psychologists’ Licensing Act (“Act”). See id. §§ 507.151, 501.001. The Council has express authority to “adopt rules as necessary to perform its duties and implement [chapter 507].” 4 Id. § 507.152. Relevant to your question, the Act defines a “[l]icensed specialist in school psychology” as “a person who holds a license to engage in the practice of psychology [issued] under Section 501.260.” Id. § 501.002(2). In addition to the general rulemaking authority granted the Council in chapter 507, section 501.260 directs that the Council “by rule shall issue a license to a licensed specialist in school psychology. A license issued under this section constitutes the appropriate credential for a person who provides psychological services as required by [s]ection 21.003(b), Education Code.” Id. § 501.260(a); see supra note 2. To the extent the proposed rule is necessary

3 See Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No. KP-0426 (2023) at 1 (“In 2019, the Legislature created the Council to consolidate the regulation and administration of four behavioral health professions: the Marriage and Family Therapists, Professional Counselors, Social Worker Examiners, and Psychologists.”). 4 To the extent the rule you propose here implicates Occupations Code section 507.153, the rule must first be proposed by the Texas State Board of Examiners of Psychologists. See TEX. OCC. CODE § 507.153(a) (authorizing the Council to adopt rules relating to certain matters only if the “rule has been proposed by the applicable board for the profession”); see also id. § 501.1515 (requiring the examining board for psychologists to propose rules on certain matters to the Council); Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No. KP-0426 (2023) at 3 (discussing the Council’s rulemaking authority under section 507.153). Mr. Darrel D. Spinks - Page 3

for the Council to perform its duties to administer and enforce the Act, it is within the Council’s rulemaking authority under chapters 507 and 501. Proposed Rule Must be in Harmony with the Act In deciding whether a particular administrative agency has exceeded its rulemaking powers, the determinative factor is whether the rule’s provisions are “in harmony” with the general objectives of the statute involved. Gerst v. Oak Cliff Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 432 S.W.2d 702, 706 (Tex. 1968). Whether a rule is “‘in harmony’ with the general objectives of the legislation involved is a question of law determined through statutory construction.” Gulf Coast Coal. of Cities v. Pub. Util. Comm’n, 161 S.W.3d 706, 712 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005, no pet.). A challenger seeking to show a rule is not in harmony with the objectives of the statute must show that the rule: “(1) contravenes specific statutory language; (2) runs counter to the general objectives of the statute; or (3) imposes additional burdens, conditions, or restrictions in excess of or inconsistent with the relevant statutory provisions.” Tex. Bd. of Chiropractic Exam’rs v. Tex. Med. Ass’n, 616 S.W.3d 558, 569 (Tex. 2021) (quoting Tex. State Bd. of Exam’rs of Marriage & Fam. Therapists v. Tex. Med. Ass’n, 511 S.W.3d 28, 33 (Tex. 2017)). Proposed Rule Does Not Contravene the Act By its plain terms, section 501.260 requires the Council to issue a license and deems that license to be the appropriate credential for the employment of “a person who provides psychological services as required by [s]ection 21.003(b), Education Code.” TEX. OCC. CODE § 501.260(a).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Gulf Coast Coalition of Cities v. Public Utility Commission
161 S.W.3d 706 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2005)
Gerst v. Oak Cliff Savings and Loan Association
432 S.W.2d 702 (Texas Supreme Court, 1968)
Railroad Com'n of Texas v. Lone Star Gas Co.
844 S.W.2d 679 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)
Texas State Board of Examiners v. Texas Medical Ass'n
511 S.W.3d 28 (Texas Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion: KP-0443, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/untitled-texas-attorney-general-opinion-kp-0443-texag-2023.