Rule Review Chapter 51: Proposed Repeal of San Jacinto Historical Advisory Board Rules

Comment online through 09:00 a.m. November 10, 2020.

Required Information

Please enter your name and county.



I currently hold:         

Please limit submissions to one per person.


LEGISLATIVE RULES REVIEW

CHAPTER 51. EXECUTIVE

SUBCHAPTER O – ADVISORY COMMITTEES

PROPOSAL PREAMBLE

1. Introduction.

        The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department proposes the repeal of §51.642, concerning the San Jacinto Historical Advisory Board (SJHAB). House Bill 1422, enacted by the most recent session of the Texas Legislature, transferred the San Jacinto Battleground State Historic Site from the administrative jurisdiction of the department to the administrative jurisdiction of the Texas Historical Commission; therefore, the advisory board created by the department is no longer necessary in department rules. The proposed amendment is a result of the department’s review of its regulations under the provisions of Government Code, §2001.039, which requires each state agency to review each of its regulations no less frequently than every four years and to re-adopt, adopt with changes, or repeal each rule as a result of the review.

2. Fiscal Note.

        Kevin Good, Special Assistant to the Parks Division Director, has determined that for each of the first five years that the repeal as proposed is in effect, there will be no fiscal implications to state or local governments.

3. Public Benefit/Cost Note.

        Mr. Good also has determined that for each of the first five years that the repeal as proposed is in effect:

        (A) The public benefit anticipated as a result of enforcing or administering the proposed repeal will be the elimination of unnecessary regulations.

        There will be no adverse economic effect on persons required to comply with the repeal.

        (B) Under the provisions of Government Code, Chapter 2006, a state agency must prepare an economic impact statement and a regulatory flexibility analysis for a rule that may have an adverse economic effect on small businesses, micro-businesses, or rural communities. As required by Government Code, §2006.002(g), the Office of the Attorney General has prepared guidelines to assist state agencies in determining a proposed rule’s potential adverse economic impact on small and microbusinesses and rural communities. Those guidelines state that an agency need only consider a proposed rule’s direct adverse economic impacts to determine if any further analysis is required. The department considers “direct economic impact“ to mean a requirement that would directly impose recordkeeping or reporting requirements; impose taxes or fees; result in lost sales or profits; adversely affect market competition; or require the purchase or modification of equipment or services.

        (C) The department has determined that proposed repeal would result in no direct economic effect on any small businesses, micro-businesses, or rural community. Therefore, neither the economic impact statement nor the regulatory flexibility analysis described in Government Code, Chapter 2006, is required.

        (D) The department has not drafted a local employment impact statement under the Administrative Procedures Act, §2001.022, as the agency has determined that the repeal as proposed will not impact local economies.

        (E) The department has determined that Government Code, §2001.0225 (Regulatory Analysis of Major Environmental Rules), does not apply to the proposed repeal.

        (F) The department has determined that there will not be a taking of private real property, as defined by Government Code, Chapter 2007, as a result of the proposed repeal.

        (G) In compliance with the requirements of Government Code, §2001.0221, the department has prepared the following Government Growth Impact Statement (GGIS).  The repeal as proposed, if adopted, will not create a government program, but will a government program; not result in an increase or decrease in the number of full-time equivalent employee needs; not result in a need for additional General Revenue funding; not affect the amount of an existing fee; not create or expand an existing regulation but will repeal an existing regulation; not increase or decrease the number of individuals subject to regulation; and not positively or adversely affect the state’s economy.

4. Request for Public Comment.

        Comments on the proposal may be submitted to Robert Macdonald at (512) 389-4775, e-mail: robert.macdonald@tpwd.texas.gov. Comments also may be submitted via the department’s website at http://www.tpwd.texas.gov/business/feedback/public_comment/.

5. Statutory Authority.

        The repeal is proposed under the authority of Government Code, §2110.005 and §2110.008.

        The proposed repeal affects Parks and Wildlife Code, §11.0162.

6. Rule Text.

        §51.642. San Jacinto Historical Advisory Board (SJHAB).

        This agency hereby certifies that the proposal has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the agency’s authority to adopt.

Comment on Rule Review Chapter 51: Proposed Repeal of San Jacinto Historical Advisory Board Rules
  •   
  •   
  •   

  •  
    The comment limit is 5,000 characters per item.

Submit Your Comments
  • Make sure that you filled in your name and county of residence near the top of the page.
  • When you are finished making your choices, click the Submit button below.
  • Please limit submissions to one per person.

Clear the form and start over.