Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

October 29, 1951 Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., Director Texas Department of Public Safety Austin, Texas Opinion No. V-1334. Re: Appllcabillty of Sections 140, 141, and 142 of Artl- cle 6701d, V.C.S., requlr- ing inspection of motor vehicles, to State-owned vehicles, and the legality of selling inspection stickers to approved in- spection stations instea.d of collecting for the stickers after they are issued by the inspection Dear Sir: stations. You have,requested the opinion of this office on the following questions: "1 . May the Department of Public Safety sell official Inspection stickers to approved inspection stations instead of placing such stickers on consignment and requiring periodic transmittal of fees and audit of accounts? This might entail issuance of new stickers to replace old stickers no longer valid at the end of the year. In the event an official ln- spection station went out of business and had a small supply of stickers on hand, we would, of course, have to reimburse the station for unused certificates, "2 . The law provides that we shall col- lect $.25 for each Inspection made. What is the application of this provision as It relates to stat?-suned vehicles operated by this depart- ment, the Highway Department and other State agencies?" Your questions are con~cernedwith the provislons~ of House fill 223, Acts 52nd Leg., R.S. 1951, ch. 141, p. Hon. Eomer Gerrison, Jr., p;ge 2 (V-1334) 240, codifl.edas amendments to Sections 140, 141, and 142 of Article 670ld, V.C.S. The Act provides for com- pulsory Inspection of certain vehicles opereted on the highwa.ys. Inspection is to be evidenced by a sticker pla,cedon the vehicle, and an inspection fee of $1.00 is to be charged. The stickers are to be furnished by the Depertment,which receives one-fourth of each fee. Your first question relates to your authority to sell the inspection stickers to approved inspection stations for the fee of 25$ per sticker which the Depart- ment of Public Safety is entitled to realize, in lieu of collecting from the stations after the stickers have been issued. We find no authority for such procedure. The express provisions of the statute indicate E distin- guishable procedure for handling the funds by the De- partment. The entire inspection program is under the con- tinuing supervision of the Department. Thus It is pro- vided in Section 140 of the statute: "(c) Official -inspecticnstations ep- pointed end supervised by the State of Texas shall make all Inspections pursuant to the provisions of this Section, . . . The Depert- ment shall cause one (1) inspection to be ma~de in the year commenc:ng with the effective date of this Act, and annually thereafter. . . The Department shall have power to make rules and regulations with respect to the periods and the character and extent of the Inspections to be made." In addition to the supervlso function of the ; Department, we find that Section 141 (d "5 provides in part that: "The fee for compulsory Inspection to be made under this Section shall be one Dollar ($1). One fourth (t) of each fee shall be paid to the Department and shall be set up in a sneclal fund in the State Treasury for the pur;$se of paying the expense of the oper- ation of this la,w." It will be seen that all the Department is en- titled to under the law is one-fourth of each fee. There . . Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., page 3 (V-1334) can be no liability for any fee until an inspection is made, a.ndit necessarily follows that there is no duty to remit the State's portion of the fee prior to such liability, in the absence of some provision requiring an advance deposit or remittance. The Department, then, clearly could not require the payment of its portion of the fee until the inspection is accomplished. This would preclude the Department from selling the inspec- tion certificates to lnspecticn stations. In addition to the foregoing, the revenue Peal- ized from the one-fourth of the fees exacted~is placed in a special fund In the State Treasury. The~procedure you propose by w&y of refunding to an inspectionstation the sales receipts for stickers remaining unsold at the end of en inspection period or when the inspection sta- ticn goes out of business could not be accomplished out of the State Treasury, in the absence of statutory au- thority therefor. Manion v. Lockhart 131 Tex..175, 114 S.W.2d 216 (1938); Att'y Gen. op. O-44 (1939). Furthermore, Section 142 (b) provides that: "The Department shall furnish to inapec- tlon stations certificates mection . . .r( (Emphasis supplied.) The requirement that the Department shell "fur- nish" the certificates, without,any provision.for advance pa-ymentor deposit at the time of furnishing, neg;;tlves any Intention that they be "sold" to the inspection St.-~- tlons. The only security for compliance by inspectors with all the terms and conditions of the Act, including the remittance of fees, is a bond requirement. This in- dicates that prepayment OP a deposit was not contemplated. We therefore conclude that the statute does not authorize the Department to sell inspection'stickers to approved Inspection stations pr:or to the accomplishment of Inspections. Your second question concc‘rnsthe possibility of exempting .State-ownedvehicles from the provis.l<,ns rf the Act relating to compulsory inspection. section 140 of the Act sets outthc zf'firmatlve requirement of cecuring inspections, and provides in part: ’ . Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., page 4 (V-1334) "It shall be the duty of ~the Texas Depart- ment of Public Safety to require every owner of a motor vehicle, trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer, or house trailer, registered in this State, to have the mechanism, brakes, and equipment upon such vehicles Inspected . . . as hereinafter provided . . .I' The foregoing Section Is an amendment to, and becomes a part of, Article 6701d, V.C.S., known as the "Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways." When we turn to the provisions of Article 6701d which pertain specifically to the exemptions to be extended to the operation of that entire Act, we find in the exemption sections the following provision: "Section 24. The provisions of this Act applicable to the drivers of vehicles upon the highwa~ysshall apply to the drivers of all vehicles owned or operated by the United States, this state or any county, city, town, district, or any other political subdivision of the state, subject to such specific exceptions as are set forth in this Act with reference to authorized emergency vehicles.'! Obviously, no general exemption Is contemplated for State-owned vehicles to the operation of the "Uniform Act Regulating Traffic on Highways," of which the amend- ments to Sections 140, 141, and 142, relative to inspec- tions, are a part. However, the exaction of compulsory inspection in Section 140 is made of every "owner.'! Turning to the definitions set out in the "Uniform Act Regulating Traf- fic on Highways," we find that the word"owner" is specif- ically defined, in Section 10(d), as being 'A person who holds the legal title of a vehicle . . ." Section 10(a) defines a "person" as "Every natural person, firm, co- partnership, association or corporation." Regardless of whether State agencies, such as the Highway Department which you have mentioned, can be an "owner" within the above definitions, we think that the term "owner".as used in Sections 140, 141, and 142, as amended by House Bill 223 of the 52nd Legislature, which we have under consideration here, Is used in its generally accepted sense, and would include State agen- cies in whose name the title of the vehicle Is recorded. Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., page 5 (V-1334) To construe the,Act as exempting State-owned vehicles would be inconsistent with the purpose of as- suring safer vehicles on the highways. The definition of "owner" does not necessarily control its meaning where the context indica~testhat the word is used in Its generally accepted sense. See Motor Investment Company v. City of Hamlin, 142 Tex.-486 179 S.W.2d' 276 (19441. In that case, the Supreme tourt of Texas was construing a section of the"Certificate of Title Act," Article 1436-1, V.P.C., which refers to an "owner." ,,Thatterm is specifically defined under that law as ex- cluding manufacturers and,dealers. Neverthel,ess,the court, In construing the .statutethere in question held: "It is true that Section 45 deals with motor vehicles exposed for sale by the 'owner thereof,' and the word 'owner,' as used in its technical sense, as defined In Section 4 excludes manufacturers and dealers. But we are of the opinion that in this instance the Legislature uses the phrase,'owner there- of' in the broad or generally accepted sense, and that the section in question was intended~ to apply to every motor vehicle exposed to sale by the one to whom it belongs, regardless of whether he be manufacturer, importer, or dealer,-or a consumer who has acquired his Interest therein after the first sale . . ." Furthermore, there .is the consideration of whether the motor vehicles of the State agencies~which .are proposed to be inspected are "registered inthis State" within the provision of Section 140 which~exacts the inspection requirement only of "a-motor vehicle; trailer, semitrailer, pole trailer or house trailer, registered in this State." .We think the motor vehicles of,State agencies meet this requirement, irrespective~of the factthatthey are entitled to exempt license tags. 'They are required to register but they are exempt from the paymentof 'the fees. Thus Article 6675a-3, VIC.S.; provides in part: ,' "Owners of motor vehicles, trail&sand semi-trailers, which are the property of9 ;and used exclusively In the service of the,Unlted: States Government, the State of,Texas, or any.' County, City of School District thereof, shall Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., page 6 (V-1334) apply annually to register all such vehicles, but shall not be required to pay the regis- tration f’eesherein prescribed, . . .I’ It is therefore our conclusion that the motor vehicles and other types of vehicles described in Sec- tion 140 of Article 67Old, owned by State agencies, are required to be inspected just as the vehicles of any private owner. Raving determined that the motor vehicles and the affected vehicles owned by State agencies are subject to the inspection requirement, we turn to the question of the payment of fees by such State agencies. Section 140, as last amended, provides that the inspections may be accomplished by .two alternative ,agen- ties -- ‘at State appointed Inspection stations or by State Inspectors.’ Section 141 describes the inspections authorized to be.,doneby inspection stations and prescribes the reg- uIatl%B and administration of such ibspectlons. .This sec- tion provides thet there shall be a one dollar fee for in- speotions by inspection stations, and that one-fourth of this one dollar fee -- which, of course, would be twenty- five cents -- shall be paid to the Department of Public Safety. Quite clearly, no fee is authorized when the in- spection’ls done by State inspectors, if such are appoibted,~ because the inspection to be done by State inspectors Is authorieed by’Sectlon 140, and the inspection for which’s fee may be collected is that authorized by Section 141, un- der which latter section no reference to an inspection by State inspectors 1s found. Assuming, then, that the inspections of the motor vehicles and other .anfected,vehiclesare to be done by State inspection stations, ,in that event such State agen- cies are liable for the inspection fee. The expenditure for the inspection .of the vehicles is comparable to any other maintenance item necessary for the operation of the vehicl,e. The fact that part of the fee will .go to the’De- partment of Public Safety will not preclude its applica- tlon. In this connedtlon, this office has previously held in Opinion V-589 (1948) that the State Registrar of V tal Statistics could charge other State agencies a fee fo3,mak- lag certified copies of birth and death certificates. Hon. Homer Garrison, Jr., page 7 (V-1334) In any event, the payment of any fee by any State agency is dependent upon there being an appropria- tion out of which such payment may be made. SUMMARY The Department of Public Safety is not authorized to sell Inspection stickers required by Sections 140, 141, and 142 of Article 6701d, V.C.S., to inspection sta- tions prior to the accomplishment ,o? in- spections. The compulsory Inspection of motor vehicles and other described vehicles re- quired under Sections 140, 141, and 142 of Article 6701d, V.C.S., applies to all State agencies. Such State agencies are liable for the one doliar fee when the in- spection Is made by an inspection station, but they are not liable for any fee when the inspection is made by a State Inspector. APPROVED: Yours very truly, Ned McDaniel PRICE DANIEL State Affalrs,~,Division Attorney General Jesse P. Luton, Jr. Reviewing Assistant BY Everett Hutchinson Executive Assistant DJC:jmc