Proposed Rules Title 1

TITLE 1. ADMINISTRATION

PART 12. COMMISSION ON STATE EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

The Commission on State Emergency Communications (CSEC) proposes amendments to §252.8, concerning CSEC's Emergency Communications Advisory Committee.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

CSEC proposes amendments to §252.8 (Title 1, Part 12, Chapter 252 of the Texas Administrative Code) relating to its Emergency Communications Advisory Committee (ECAC). Health and Safety Code §771.0511(b) authorizes CSEC to establish ECAC to assist in the "development, implementation, and management of an interconnected, state-level emergency services Internet Protocol network (State-level ESInet)." Section 252.8 establishes and governs ECAC in accordance with Government Code Chapter 2110, State Agency Advisory Committees. ECAC is abolished by §252.8 on September 1, 2023, if that date is not revised.

As required by the rule and statute, CSEC has completed its review of ECAC's work, usefulness, and costs and determined that it is in CSEC's best interests to continue receiving advice and assistance from ECAC regarding the State-level ESInet.

SECTION-BY-SECTION EXPLANATION

Section 252.8(p) is amended to replace the current year ECAC is abolished (2023) with a new abolishment year (2029).

FISCAL NOTE

Kelli Merriweather, CSEC's executive director, has determined that for each year of the first five fiscal years (FY) that amended §252.8 is in effect there will be no foreseeable cost or revenue implications to the state or local governments, including as a result of enforcing or administering the amended section.

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS

Ms. Merriweather has determined that for each year of the first five years the amended section is in effect, the public benefits will come from having a committee composed of representatives from the Texas 9-1-1 Entities whose purpose is to advise and make policy recommendations to CSEC on transitioning to Next Generation 9-1-1 service. Ms. Merriweather has also determined that for each year of the first five years the proposed section is in effect there are no probable economic costs to persons required to comply with the section, except for the unreimbursed costs of ECAC members who are not part of CSEC staff.

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT

CSEC has determined that this proposal does not directly affect a local economy and therefore has not drafted a local employment impact statement as would otherwise be required under Government Code §2001.022.

COSTS TO REGULATED PERSONS

Government Code §2001.0045 precludes a state agency from adopting a proposed rule if the fiscal note states that the rule imposes a cost on regulated persons, including another state agency, a special district, or a local government, unless the state agency: (a) repeals a rule that imposes a total cost on regulated persons that is equal to or greater than the total cost imposed on regulated persons by the proposed rule; or (b) amends a rule to decrease the total cost imposed on regulated persons by an amount that is equal to or greater than the cost imposed on the persons by the rule. There are exceptions for certain types of rules under §2001.0045(c).

Section §2001.0045(b) applies to the proposed amended rule and no exceptions are applicable. The proposed amended rule fiscal note does not impose or increase costs on regulated persons, including another state agency, a special district, or a local government. Accordingly, no repeal or amendment of another rule to offset costs is required.

GOVERNMENT GROWTH IMPACT STATEMENT

Per Government Code § 2001.0221, CSEC has determined that during the first five years the proposed rule would be in effect it does not: (1) create or eliminate a government program; (2) require the creation of new employee positions or the elimination of existing employee positions; (3) require an increase or decrease in future legislative appropriations to the agency; (4) require an increase or decrease in fees paid to the agency; (5) does not create a new regulation; (6) expand, limit, or repeal an existing regulation; (7) increase or decrease the number of individuals subject to the rule's applicability; and (8) positively or adversely affect this state's economy.

REGULATORY ANALYSIS OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RULES

CSEC has determined that this proposal is not a "major environmental rule" as defined by Government Code §2001.0225(g)(3).

SMALL, MICRO-BUSINESS, AND RURAL COMMUNITY IMPACT ANALYSIS

In accordance with Government Code §2006.002, CSEC has determined that there will be no adverse economic effect on small businesses and micro-businesses as the rule being amended affects only the relationship between CSEC and Texas 9-1-1 Entities, all of whom are governmental bodies. Accordingly, CSEC has not prepared an economic impact statement or regulatory flexibility analysis, nor has it contacted legislators in any rural communities regarding this proposal.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT:

CSEC has determined that the proposal does not restrict or limit an owner's right to their property that would otherwise exist in the absence of government action and, therefore, does not constitute a taking under Government Code §2007.043.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Comments on the proposal may be submitted in writing to Patrick Tyler, Commission on State Emergency Communications, 1801 Congress Avenue, Suite 11.100, Austin, Texas 78701, by facsimile to (512) 305-6937, or by email to patrick.tyler@csec.texas.gov. Please include "Rulemaking Comments" in the subject line of your letter, fax, or email. Comments will be accepted for 30 days following publication of the proposal in the Texas Register.

STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY

The amended section is authorized by Texas Health and Safety Code §771.051(a)(1), (2), (4), (7), (8), (9), (10), §771.0511, and §771.052; and Government Code Chapter 2110.

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

§252.8.Emergency Communications Advisory Committee.

(a) Purpose. The purpose of this rule is to establish an Emergency Communications Advisory Committee (Committee) to assist the Commission in coordinating the development, implementation, interoperability, and internetworking of interconnected emergency services Internet Protocol networks (ESInets). Interconnected, interoperable ESInets providing Next Generation Core Services covering all of Texas constitute the State-level ESInet. As defined in Health and Safety Code §771.0511(a)(2), the State-level ESInet is used for communications between and among public safety answering points (PSAPs) and other entities that support or are supported by PSAPs in providing emergency call handling and response, and will be a part of the Texas Next Generation Emergency Communications System.

(b) Policy. It is Commission policy that the development, implementation, interoperability, interconnection, and internetworking of ESInets be done on a cooperative basis with the state's 9-1-1 Entities. It is Commission policy that the Committee:

(1) advise the Commission on matters regarding the interoperability and interconnection of ESInets, specifically including but not limited to Statewide Interoperability & Standards development for planning for interconnectivity, interoperability, and internetworking of ESInets as reflected in the Commission's Next Generation 9-1-1 Master Plan (Appendix 1 to the Commission Strategic Plan for Statewide 9-1-1 Service for Fiscal Years 20xx-20xx); and

(2) provide for 9-1-1 Entity collaboration on issues regarding ESInets, particularly regarding interoperability and interconnection of ESInets, to ensure that the requirements of the state's 9-1-1 Entities are met.

(c) Composition of Committee. Each Committee member must have appropriate training, experience, and knowledge of Next Generation 9-1-1 technology and services and/or emergency services other than 9-1-1 services to effectively advise the Commission.

(1) the Committee is appointed by the Commission and includes, at a minimum, the following members:

(A) The Executive Director of the Commission or designee as an ex-officio, non-voting member;

(B) two representatives from the Regional Planning Commissions (RPCs);

(C) two representatives from the Emergency Communication Districts (ECDs), as that term is defined in Health and Safety Code §771.001(3)(A); and

(D) two representatives from the ECDs, as that term is defined in Health and Safety Code §771.001(3)(B).

(2) No two Committee members may be from the same state 9-1-1 Entity.

(3) The Commission may add to the composition of the Committee including members representing emergency services other than 9-1-1 service.

(4) In appointing members to the Committee except under paragraph (3) of this subsection, the Commission shall consult with the RPCs and ECDs. RPCs may designate responsibility for consulting with the Commission to the Texas Association of Regional Councils. ECDs defined in Health and Safety Code §771.001(3)(A) and (B) may designate responsibility for consulting with the Commission to the Municipal Emergency Communication Districts Association and the Texas 9-1-1 Alliance, respectively.

(d) Bylaws. Draft bylaws for approval by the Commission. The bylaws shall, at a minimum, provide for the following:

(1) selection from among the members a presiding officer and an assistant presiding officer whose terms may not exceed two years; and

(2) establish standing committees.

(e) Terms of Office for Voting Members. Each member shall be appointed for a term of 3 years, except for the initial member terms under paragraph (4) of this subsection.

(1) Member terms begin on January 1st.

(2) Members shall continue to serve after the expiration of their term until a replacement member is appointed by the Commission.

(3) If a vacancy occurs, a person shall be appointed by the Commission to serve the unexpired portion of the vacating member's term.

(4) Members serve staggered terms. Initial member terms are as follows:

(A) one member from each 9-1-1 Entity represented on the Committee expires on December 31, 2013; and

(B) one member from each 9-1-1 Entity represented on the Committee expires on December 31, 2014.

(f) Committee Meeting Attendance. Members shall attend scheduled Committee meetings.

(1) A member shall notify the presiding officer or Commission staff if the member is unable to attend a scheduled meeting.

(2) The Commission may remove a member if it determines that a member cannot discharge the member's duties for a substantial part of the member's appointed term because of illness or disability, is absent from more than half of the Committee meetings during a fiscal year, or is absent from at least three consecutive Committee meetings. The validity of an action of the Committee is not affected by the fact that it is taken when a ground for removal of a member exists.

(g) Committee Roles and Responsibilities. The Committee is to assist the Commission in coordinating the development, implementation, and management of interoperable and interconnected ESInets. The Committee will seek state 9-1-1 Entity input and collaboration regarding the interoperability and interconnection of ESInets, specifically including but not limited to Statewide Interoperability & Standards development for planning for interconnectivity, interoperability, and internetworking of ESInets as reflected in the Commission's Next Generation 9-1-1 Master Plan (Appendix 1 to the Commission Strategic Plan for Statewide 9-1-1 Service for Fiscal Years 20xx-20xx).

(h) Reporting to the Commission. The Committee, through its presiding officer, will submit by September 1 of each year, or according to the schedule established by the commission, written reports advising the Commission. The reports shall include the following:

(1) an update on the Committee's work, including:

(A) Committee and sub- or standing-committee meeting dates;

(B) member attendance records;

(D) description of how the Committee has accomplished or addressed the tasks and objectives of this section and any other issues assigned to the Committee by the Commission; and

(E) anticipated future activities of the Committee;

(2) description of the usefulness of the Committee's work; and

(3) statement of costs related to the Committee, including the cost of Commission staff time spent in support of the Committee.

(i) Statement by a Member.

(1) The Commission and the Committee shall not be bound in any way by any statement or action by a member except when the statement or action is in pursuit of specific instructions from the Commission.

(2) The Committee and its members may not participate in legislative activity in the name of the Commission or the Committee without Commission approval.

(j) Advisory Committee. The Committee is an advisory committee in that it does not supervise or control public business or policy. As an advisory committee, the Committee is not subject to the Open Meetings Act (Government Code, Chapter 551).

(k) Reimbursement for Expenses.

(1) In accordance with the requirements in Government Code, Chapter 2110, a Committee member may receive reimbursement for the member's expenses incurred for each day the member engages in official Committee business if authorized by the General Appropriations Act or budget execution process.

(2) No compensatory per diem shall be paid to Committee members unless required by law.

(3) A Committee member who is an employee of a state agency, other than the Commission, may not receive reimbursement for expenses from the Commission.

(4) A nonmember of the Committee who is appointed to serve on a committee may not receive reimbursement for expenses from the Commission.

(5) Each Committee member whose expenses are reimbursed under this section shall submit to Commission staff the member's receipts for expenses and any required official forms no later than 14 days after conclusion of the member's engagement in official Committee business.

(6) Requests for reimbursement of expenses shall be made on official state travel vouchers.

(l) Commission Staff. Support for the Committee will be provided by Commission staff.

(m) Applicable law. The Committee is subject to Government Code, Chapter 2110, concerning state agency advisory committees.

(n) Commission Evaluation. The Commission shall annually evaluate the Committee's work, usefulness, and the costs related to the Committee, including the cost of Commission staff time spent supporting the Committee's activities.

(o) Report to the Legislative Budget Board. The Commission shall report to the Legislative Budget Board the information developed in subsection (n) of this section on a biennial basis as part of the Commission's request for appropriations.

(p) Review and Duration. On or before September 1, 2029 [~~2023~~], the Commission will initiate and complete a review of the Committee to determine whether the Committee should be continued or abolished. If the Committee is not continued, it shall be automatically abolished on September 1, 2029 [~~2023~~].

The agency certifies that legal counsel has reviewed the proposal and found it to be within the state agency's legal authority to adopt.

Filed with the Office of the Secretary of State on June 1, 2023.

TRD-202302033

Patrick Tyler

General Counsel

Commission on State Emergency Communications

Earliest possible date of adoption: July 16, 2023

For further information, please call: (512) 305-6915

CHAPTER 254. REGIONAL POISON CONTROL CENTERS

1 TAC §254.2

The Commission on State Emergency Communications (CSEC) proposes the repeal of rule §254.2, concerning CSEC's Poison Control Coordinating Committee (PCCC).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

CSEC proposes to repeal §254.2 (Title 1, Part 12, Chapter 254 of the Texas Administrative Code) relating to its PCCC. Health and Safety Code § 777.008 authorizes a coordinating committee to "coordinate the activities of the regional poison control centers designated under Section 777.001(a) and advise the [CSEC]." Section 254.2, establishing the Poison Control Coordinating Committee (PCCC) was established by §254.2, was proposed and adopted in accordance with Government Code Chapter 2110, State Agency Advisory Committees. If not extended by rule, the PCCC is abolished on September 1, 2023. Per §254.2(o), CSEC conducted a review of the rule and voted to propose repealing the rule at its May 31, 2023, open meeting.

CSEC has determined that the PCCC would best serve the coordinating interests of the CSEC Poison Control Program as a standing working group created per CSEC's bylaws. CSEC's approach mirrors that of the Department of State Health Services which established the PCCC as an advisory committee from 1995 - 2003. In 2003 DSHS repealed its PCCC rule stating in the preamble: "Issues relating to the type of advice previously provided by the committee are better addressed through the establishment of ad hoc workgroups." CSEC's proposed repeal was presented to and considered by the PCCC whose members voted in favor of repealing the rule.

SECTION-BY-SECTION EXPLANATION

Section 254.2 is proposed to be repealed and replaced by a standing CSEC working group.

FISCAL NOTE

Kelli Merriweather, CSEC's executive director, has determined that for each year of the first five fiscal years (FY) that repealed §254.2 is in effect there will be no foreseeable cost or revenue implications to the state or local governments, including as a result of enforcing or administering the amended section.

PUBLIC BENEFITS AND COSTS

Ms. Merriweather has determined that for each year of the first five years the repealed section is in effect, the public benefits will come from having a PCCC working group coordinating the activities of the CSEC Poison Control Program, including the delivery of poison control services to the public and health care professionals. Ms. Merriweather has also determined that for each year of the first five years the repealed section is in effect there will be no economic costs to persons required to comply with the section as the section is being repealed. Costs of complying with the rule have been borne by CSEC directly through staff time spent supporting the PCCC's activities and indirectly through grants to each Regional Poison Control Center comprising the PCCC; and by PCCC members volunteering their time.

LOCAL EMPLOYMENT IMPACT STATEMENT

COSTS TO REGULATED PERSONS

Under Government Code §2001.0045, a state agency may not adopt a proposed rule if the fiscal note states that the rule imposes a cost on regulated persons, including another state agency, a special district, or a local government, unless the state agency: (a) repeals a rule that imposes a total cost on regulated persons that is equal to or greater than the total cost imposed on regulated persons by the proposed rule; or (b) amends a rule to decrease the total cost imposed on regulated persons by an amount that is equal to or greater than the cost imposed on the persons by the rule. There are exceptions for certain types of rules under §2001.0045(c).

Section §2001.0045(b) applies to the proposed repeal and no exceptions are applicable. The proposed repeal fiscal note does not impose or increase costs on regulated persons, including another state agency, a special district, or a local government. Accordingly, no (additional) repeal or amendment of another rule to offset costs is required.

GOVERNMENT GROWTH IMPACT STATEMENT

Per Government Code § 2001.0221, CSEC has determined that during the first five years the proposed repeal of the rule would be in effect it does not: (1) create or eliminate a government program; (2) require the creation of new employee positions or the elimination of existing employee positions; (3) require an increase or decrease in future legislative appropriations to the agency; (4) require an increase or decrease in fees paid to the agency; (5) does not create a new regulation; (6) expand, limit, or repeal an existing regulation; (7) increase or decrease the number of individuals subject to the rule's applicability; and (8) positively or adversely affect this state's economy.

REGULATORY ANALYSIS OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RULES

CSEC has determined that this proposal is not a "major environmental rule" as defined by Government Code §2001.0225(g)(3).

SMALL, MICRO-BUSINESS, AND RURAL COMMUNITY IMPACT ANALYSIS

In accordance with Government Code §2006.002, CSEC has determined that there will be no adverse economic effect on small businesses, micro-businesses, or rural communities as the rule being proposed for repeal affects only the relationship between CSEC, its PCCC, and the CSEC Poison Control Program. Accordingly, CSEC has not prepared an economic impact statement or regulatory flexibility analysis, nor has it contacted legislators in any rural communities regarding this proposal.

TAKINGS IMPACT ASSESSMENT

PUBLIC COMMENT

STATEMENT OF AUTHORITY

The proposed repeal of the section is proposed under Health and Safety Code §777.008 and Government Code Chapter 2110. The former establishes the PCCC, the latter requires state agencies to prescribe by rule an advisory committee's purpose and tasks, the manner in which the advisory committee reports to CSEC, and the duration of the advisory committee.

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

§254.2.Poison Control Coordinating Committee.