The Attorney General of Texas
July 25, 1983
JIM MATTOX
AttorneyGeneral
Supreme Court Building
Mr. Roger D. Shipman Opinion No. JM-46
P. 0, Box 12548 Executive Secretary
Austin. TX. 78711- 2546 Texas Board of Veterinary Re: Construction of article
5121475-2501 Medical Examiners 7465a, V.T.C.S., the Veterinary
Telex 9101674.1367 3810 Medical Parkway, Suite 119 Practice Act
Telecopiet 512/475-0266
Austin, Texas 70756
1607 Main St.. Suite 1400 Dear Mr. Shipman:
Dallas. TX. 75201-4709
214,742.8944
You have asked two questions concerning section 10 of article
7465a. V.T.C.S., of the Veterinary Licensing Act. As amended in 1981,
4624 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 this section provides:
El Paso. TX~ 79905~2793
9151533-3484 (a) Any person not previously licensed in this
State is qualified to be licenseh, provided:
J Dallas Ave.. Suite 202
Hous!~~. TX. 77002-6986 (1) he has attained the age of majority;
7 131650-0666
(2) he is a graduate of a reputable school
college of veterinary medicine as approved
606 Broadway. Suite 312
Lubbock. TX. 79401-3479
the Board [of Veterinary Medical Examiners];
8061747-5238
(3) he successfully completes the examination
conducted by the Board: and
4309 N. Tenth. Suite B
McAllen. TX. 78501-1665
5121662.4547
(4) the Board does not refuse issuance of the
license as provided in Section 14 (Refusing
Examination, License or Renewal).
200 Main Plaza, Suite 400
San Antonio. TX. 76205-2797 (b) The Board may waive any license
5121225-4191
requfrement for an applicant with a valid license
from another state having license requirements
substantially equivalent to those of this State.
You ask:
Under [section 10(b)], is it mandatory for the
board to grant licenses to out of state
veterinarians without successful completion of the
examination if they otherwise qualify? Also, what
may the board consider when processing an
application for licensure under this provision?
p. 200
Mr. Roger D. Shipman - Page 2 (JM-46)
we answer your first question in the negative. We understand
that the board currently requires all applicants for a license to
practice veterinary medicine in Texas to pass a qualifying
examination. Your first question, therefore, may be restated as
follows: If an applicant for a Texas license received a license in
another state that, in the board's opinion, has license requirements
"substantially equivalent to those of this state," and if the
applicant "otherwise qualif[ies]" for a Texas license, e the board
exempt him from its examination requirement? We understand that by
"otherwise qualify," you mean that the applicant satisfies the license
requirements of subsections (a)(l), (a)(2), and (a)(4) of section 10.
Section 10(b) is couched in permissive terms. It provides that
the board "may" waive any license requirement in certain instances,
not that it "must" do so. "May" is not generally construed as a word
of command. Cf. Thomas v. Groebl, 212 S.W.2d 625, 630 (Tex. 1948).
On its face, therefore, section 10(b) does not require the board to
waive any particul~ar requirement for any particular applicant.
“May” should be interpreted as "must," of course, when it is
apparent that this interpretation was intended by the legislature.
National Surety Corporation v. Ladd, 115 S.W.2d 600, 602 (Tex. 1938).
The scant legislative history of section 10(b), however, discloses no
such intent. On the contrary, to the extent that this history, which
consists of,a statement concerning section 10(b) made by its author
during a committee meeting, suggests anything regarding the
legislature's intent, it suggests that the section should be
construed, not as a command, but simply as a grant of authority. This
statement is as follows:
[Section 10(b)] authorizes the board to adopt a
system of out of state licensing having license
requirements substantially equivalent to those in
Texas, a reciprocal type of situation. (Emphasis
added).
Tape of State Affairs Committee hearing on Senate Bill No. 232, held
on February 23, 1981. A statement indicating that the author's intent
was to authorize the board to adopt a reciprocal licensing system if
it wishes to do so cannot, in our opinion, reasonably be construed as
evidence of an intent to require the board to do so.
To answer your question in the affirmative, moreover, we would
have to conclude that the legislature intended that applicants who
possess a valid license issued by a state with "substantially
equivalent" licensing requirements and who satisfy the requirements of
subsections (a)(l), (a)(2), and (a)(4) of section 10 must, as a matter
of law, be deemed competent to practice veterinary medicine in Texas.
We do not believe that this was the legislature's intent. An
applicant could possess a license issued by such a state, satisfy the
three license requirements enumerated above, and still not be
p. 201
Mr. Roger D. Shipman - Page 3 (~~1-46)
competent to practice in Texas. The applicant could, for example, be
unfamiliar with diseases or animals peculiar to Texas. In our
opinion, the legislature did not intend to compel the board to issue a
license to an out-of-state applicant until the board determines to its
own satisfaction that the applicant is competent to practice in this
state. The board may well conclude, as it apparently has, that a
qualifying examination affords the best way to make this
determination.
We therefore conclude that section 10(b) merely authorizes the
board to work with states with "substantially equivalent" licensing
requirements to structure a reciprocal licensing system. It does not
require the board automatically to exempt from its examination
requirement applicants who possess a license issued by such a state
and satisfy the requirements of section 10(a)(l), (a)(2), and (a)(4).
We therefore answer your first question in the negative.
In answer to your second question, we are aware of no express or
implied parameters within which the board must operate when
determining whether an out-of-state applicant is competent to practice
veterinary medicine in this state. Depending upon the requirements of
any reciprocal licensing system that may be created, we believe that
the board is free to consider any reasonable factors it deems relevant
in making this determination.
S DMMARY
Section 10(b) of article 7465a, V.T.C.S.. does
not require the Board of Veterinary Medical
Examiners to exempt from its examination
requirement applicants with a license issued by
another state who "otherwise qualify" for a Texas
license under section 10(a) thereof. In
processing an application for licensure under
section lo(b), the board w consider any
reasonable factors it deems relevant to the
determination of whether the applicant is
competent to practice veterinary medicine in
Texas. ,
L.LJf*
Very truly your
-J I M
.
MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney General
p. 202
Mr. Roger D. Shipman - Page 4 (JM-46)
DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Jon Bible
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
Rick Gilpin, Acting Chairman
Jon Bible
Colin Carl
Patricia Hinojosa
Jim Moellinger
Nancy Sutton
Bruce Youngblood
?
p. 203