The Texas Real Estate Commission (TREC) adopts amendments to 22 TAC §535.60, Definitions; §535.61, Approval of Providers of Qualifying Courses; §535.62, Approval of Qualifying Courses; §535.63, Approval of Instructors of Qualifying and Non-Elective CE; §535.64, Content Requirements for Qualifying Real Estate Courses; §535.65, Responsibilities and Operations of Providers of Qualifying Courses; and §535.66, Credit for Courses Offered by Accredited Colleges or Universities, with changes to the proposed text as published in the September 4, 2015, issue of the Texas Register (40 TexReg 5693).

The amendments to Chapter 535, Subchapter F align the rules with statutory changes to Chapter 1101, Texas Occupations Code, adopted by the 84th Legislature in Senate Bill 699, and clarify and improve performance and delivery standards for real estate and inspector education providers, courses and instructors recommend by the Commission's Education Standards Advisory Committee (ESAC) and Texas Real Estate Inspector Committee (TREIC).

Changes made to the text as published are as follows and were made in response to comments received or staff recommendations for greater clarity:

Throughout the chapter, "salesperson" was changed to "sales agent" to be consistent with the new statutory terminology.

In §535.62(b)(7), the number of "multiple versions" examinations was specifically named as "four"; language was added to quantify how each version of the examination had to be different; and the number of examination bank questions required was reduced from six to four per course credit hour.

In §535.62(e), language was added to allow the Commission, at the time new course requirements are adopted, to permit a course to be supplemented instead of resubmitted for a new approval within the same 12-15 month period.

In §535.65(c)(1)(G), a correction was made to remove the extra words "course and" where they appeared in the section.

In §535.65(f)(1), the revision clarified that the mandatory delivery of materials to a student online was only an option if the student had online access.

In §535.65(g)(2),subsection (E) was deleted because delaying the delivery of a certificate by the provider to a student is not required by the new statutory 60 hour waiting period, which applies only to delivery to the Commission.

In §535.65(h)(4), language was revised to clarify that the multiple versions of the final examination had to be rotated throughout the approval period for the course and proctoring requirements were modified to allow more flexibility in the use of technology in proctoring examinations and to clarify acceptable third party proctors.

In §535.65(i), the word "make-up" was replace with "subsequent" for a second final examination for greater clarity and more specific language was added to ensure that the subsequent examination was a different version than the first examination.

In §535.66(c)(1), clarifying language was added to specify that to receive credit, a course must be in "substantial compliance" with the Commission statute and rules.

In §535.66(g), subsection (3) was deleted since such scenario was highly unlikely since the rules as adopted no longer require an approved provider to offer correspondence courses through an accredited college or university.

Eighteen comments were received on the proposed amendments, the majority were from providers. Twelve commenters did not want third party proctoring to be required for distance education courses or wanted more flexibility in the use of technology to proctor remotely. Both ESAC and TREIC believe that some proctor standard needed to remain in place to ensure the integrity of the final examinations, but did recommend a modification to the amendments to allow more flexibility in the type of proctoring that could occur with the use of technology. The Commission agreed to this change.

Seven commenters did not like the new statutory requirement of not permitting submission of a course completion certificate to the Commission until twice the number of course credit hours had elapsed since registration for the course and the requirement in the amendments prohibiting providers from issuing a certificate to students during that time period. They pointed out the practical problem that could ensue for providers upon course completion if providers had to wait to issue certificates. After reviewing the statute ESAC determined that the restriction applied to delivery to the Commission and not the students and recommended deletion of §535.65(g)(2). The Commission agreed.

Two providers commented that an examination bank with 6 questions per credit hour was too onerous. ESAC and TREIC recommended that the number of questions be reduced to 4. The Commission agreed.

One commenter requested that §535.66(g)(3) be clarified or deleted. ESAC and TREIC recommend deletion since the rules as adopted no longer require an approved provider to offer correspondence courses through an accredited college or university so the need to deny credit to whole programs of study was highly unlikely. The Commission agreed.

Single comments were received on the following issues: Change the definition of "distance education"; allow a 60 hour course to remain; don't have a requirement that the broker course be taken within 2 years of an application for a broker's license, do not allow any online course; permit related credit for a broker's license to be given for courses not given by an accredited college or approved for continuing education by the Commission; don't require subsequent approval of a course every four years; and a grace period should be given to students when a course expires.

ESAC and TREIC respectfully declined to make changes based on these comments since they did not serve to advance the purpose of higher standards for qualifying education or were already adequately addressed in the current rules. The Commission agreed.

One comment was received in favor of no longer requiring correspondence courses to be offered in association with accredited colleges and universities and one comment was received in favor of a single application for multiple delivery methods.

The revision to the rules as adopted does not change the nature or scope so much that the rules as adopted could be deemed a different rule. The rules as adopted do not affect individuals other than those contemplated by the rules as proposed. The rules as adopted do not impose more onerous requirements than the proposed rules.

The reasoned justification for the amendments is greater consumer protection and clarity.

The amendments are adopted under Texas Occupations Code, §1101.151, which authorizes the Texas Real Estate Commission to adopt and enforce rules necessary to administer Chapters 1101 and 1102; and to establish standards of conduct and ethics for its license holders to fulfill the purposes of Chapters 1101 and 1102 and ensure compliance with Chapters 1101 and 1102.

The statutes affected by this amendment are Texas Occupations Code, Chapters 1101 and 1102. No other statute, code or article is affected by the amendments.