Can a Texas public school issue driver education completion certificates without DPS approval?

Plain-English summary

Texas regulates driver education through the Texas Driver and Traffic Safety Education Act (V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c)). The act covers two kinds of courses: driver education, which teaches new drivers how to drive, and driving safety, the defensive-driving courses for already-licensed drivers. A state senator asked the Attorney General two questions. First, must the Texas Education Agency supply driver education completion certificates to a public school whose course had not been separately approved by the agency or the Department of Public Safety? Second, must a driving safety course that had been approved only "conditionally" or "temporarily" before September 1, 1995, be finally approved after that date?

On the first question, the office said the agency must supply the certificates. A public school is exempt from the entire act except section 9A, which directs the agency to print and supply serially numbered driver education certificates to licensed and exempt driver education schools, to certify completion of an approved course for driver-licensing purposes. The pivotal word was "approved." The office reasoned that a public school's course is "approved by" the agency for section 9A purposes if it follows the curriculum the agency sets. Section 6(b) of the act tells the agency's commissioner to set the driver education curriculum and textbooks, and Education Code section 29.902(a) makes the agency responsible for developing the driver education and traffic safety program for public school students. So a public school that teaches the agency's program is offering an "approved driver education course," and the agency must give it the certificates students need to obtain a class C license, even if the Department of Public Safety never separately approved the course. The office noted the 1995 amendments changed little here: public school courses had always been exempt from the act, and the main new requirement was section 9A's certificate system.

On the second question, the office addressed driving safety schools (defensive-driving providers). The commissioner can revoke a driving safety school's license or impose conditions on it (section 13(f)), but the act has no "temporary license." The 1995 Legislature added a $9,000 nonrefundable fee to accompany an application for approval of a driving safety course that the State Board of Education had not evaluated (section 13(b)(1)(G)), but a course approved before September 1, 1995, did not need reapproval and owed no fee unless it was already due. The office concluded that a driving safety school whose license the commissioner had made conditional did not have to pay the $9,000 fee, which attaches to approving a course rather than to a school's license, unless it wanted to change its course, and did not have to reapply for a license, because a conditional license stays in effect unless it is revoked.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1996. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

This opinion construes V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c) and the Education Code's driver education provisions as they stood just after the 1995 amendments. Those statutes have since been recodified and amended, and responsibility for regulating driver education and driving safety schools has been reassigned since 1996. Read this page for the office's 1996 reasoning, and verify the current statutes and the current regulating agency before relying on any specific section number, fee amount, or rule here.

What the opinion meant at the time

For public schools offering driver education: The opinion meant a public school teaching the agency's adopted driver education and traffic safety program was offering an "approved" course for section 9A, so the agency had to supply it the completion certificates, even without separate Department of Public Safety approval. A public school did not have to meet the other requirements of the act that applied to private driver education schools.

For students and the Department of Public Safety: The opinion meant a student who completed a qualifying public school course was entitled to the section 9A certificate needed to apply for a class C license before age eighteen.

For driving safety (defensive-driving) schools: The opinion meant a school whose license the commissioner had made conditional did not have to pay the $9,000 course-approval fee unless it changed its course, and did not have to reapply for a license, because a conditional license stays in effect unless it is revoked.

For lawyers: The opinion is statutory construction of V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c), reading the public-school exemption (sections 3(18) and 7(c)(5)) together with the section 9A certificate duty and Education Code section 29.902(a), and construing the section 13 licensing and fee provisions for driving safety schools.

Common questions

Did a Texas public school need the Department of Public Safety to approve its driver education course before issuing completion certificates?
No, under this opinion. The office concluded that a public school teaching the Texas Education Agency's adopted driver education and traffic safety program was offering an "approved" course for purposes of section 9A, so the agency had to supply the completion certificates even without separate DPS approval.

What is section 9A and why did it matter?
Section 9A is the only part of the Driver and Traffic Safety Education Act that applies to public schools. It directs the agency to print and supply serially numbered driver education certificates to licensed and exempt driver education schools, to certify completion of an approved course. A student needs that certificate to obtain a class C license before age eighteen.

Why did the agency, not DPS, control whether a public school course was "approved"?
Because the act (section 6(b)) makes the agency's commissioner set the driver education curriculum, and Education Code section 29.902(a) makes the agency responsible for the public school driver education and traffic safety program. The office read "approved by the agency" to mean a course that follows the agency's curriculum.

Did a driving safety school with a conditional license have to pay the $9,000 fee or reapply?
No. The office concluded the $9,000 fee attaches to approving a driving safety course, not to a school's license, so a school with a conditional license owed it only if it wanted to change its course. And a conditional license stays in effect unless it is revoked, so the school did not have to apply for a new license.

Background and statutory framework

The Texas Driver and Traffic Safety Education Act (V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c)) regulates driver education schools and driving safety schools, with the Central Education Agency (renamed the Texas Education Agency) overseeing the system. Section 3(18) defines "driver education school." Section 7(c) exempts from the act, except section 9A, several courses, including one offered by a school otherwise regulated and approved under another state law; a public school is regulated under the Education Code, so it is exempt except for section 9A.

Section 9A directs the agency to print and supply serially numbered driver education certificates to licensed and exempt driver education schools, used to certify completion of an approved course for purposes of section 7(a) of V.T.C.S. article 6687b (the driver-licensing statute). The Department of Public Safety licenses a class C driver under eighteen who submits a section 9A certificate showing completion of a course approved by the Department or the agency. Section 6(b) requires the agency's commissioner to set the driver education curriculum and textbooks, and Education Code section 29.902(a) requires the agency to develop the driver education and traffic safety program for public school students. The office concluded a public school following the agency's program is offering an "approved" course for section 9A.

For driving safety schools, section 13 governs licensing. Section 13(f) lets the commissioner revoke a license or impose conditions; there is no temporary license. The 1995 Legislature added section 13(b)(1)(G), requiring a $9,000 nonrefundable fee with an application for approval of a driving safety course not yet evaluated by the State Board of Education, but a course approved before September 1, 1995, needed no reapproval and owed no fee unless already due. The office concluded a conditionally licensed school owed the fee only if it changed its course and did not have to reapply for a license.

Citations

Statutory provisions discussed:

• V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c) (Texas Driver and Traffic Safety Education Act), including section 3(18) (definition of "driver education school"), section 6(b) (curriculum and textbooks), section 7(c) and 7(c)(5) (exemptions, leaving only section 9A applicable to public schools), section 9A (serially numbered driver education certificates), and section 13, including 13(d)(1)-(2), 13(b)(1)(G) ($9,000 course-approval fee), and 13(f) (revocation or conditions on a driving safety school's license)
• V.T.C.S. article 6687b, section 7(a) (Department of Public Safety licensing of a class C driver under eighteen)
• Education Code section 29.902(a) (agency to develop the driver education and traffic safety program for public school students); Education Code title 2
• Act of May 27, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 260 (Central Education Agency means the Texas Education Agency); Act of May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 1009 (1995 amendments to the act); Act of May 30, 1993, 73d Leg., R.S., ch. 954

No cases were cited in this opinion.

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/dan-morales/dm-0386
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1996/dm0386.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain. The original opinion's footnotes (legislative-history and statutory cross-reference notes) were heavily degraded in the scan and are omitted here; the linked PDF is authoritative for them and for the full text.

Office of the Attorney General
State of Texas

DAN MORALES
ATTORNEY GENERAL

April 22, 1996

The Honorable Chris Harris
Chair
Senate Committee on Administration
Texas State Senate
P.O. Box 12068
Austin, Texas 78711

Opinion No. DM-386

Re: Whether the Texas Education Agency may, under V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c), section 9A, supply certificates of completion to a public school in the state whose driver education course does not meet the standards of and has not been approved by the Texas Education Agency or the Department of Public Safety and related questions (RQ-839)

Dear Senator Harris:

You have requested our opinion as to whether the Central Education Agency may, under article 4413(29c), section 9A, V.T.C.S., supply certificates of completion to a public school in the state whose driver education course does not meet the standards of and has not been approved by the Central Education Agency or the Department of Public Safety. You also ask whether a driving safety course that the State Board of Education has approved "conditionally" or "temporarily" prior to September 1, 1995, must be finally approved after September 1, 1995.

Your questions require us to construe the Texas Driver and Traffic Safety Education Act (the "act"), V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c). The act purports to regulate both driver training and driving safety courses. See V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 2. As you explain, a driver education course teaches a student "how to drive, including the laws applicable to operating a motor vehicle." See id. § 3(4). A driving safety course, on the other hand, teaches a licensed driver how to be a better driver. See id. § 3(6). Under the act, the Central Education Agency is authorized to regulate and oversee the system of driver education and driving safety schools. Id. § 4(a).

Preliminarily, we note that the Central Education Agency is equivalent to the Texas Education Agency. "A reference in law to the Central Education Agency means the Texas Education Agency." Act of May 27, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 260, § 80, 1995 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 2207, 2504. Accordingly, we will refer only to the Texas Education Agency (the "agency") throughout the remainder of this opinion.

Your first question assumes that a driver education course offered in a public school does not meet the standards of and has not been approved by the agency or the Department of Public Safety. We will begin by considering the law as it relates to your first question. A "driver education school" is

an enterprise that maintains a place of business or solicits business in this state, that is operated by an individual, association, partnership, or corporation for the education and training of persons at a primary or branch location in driver education or driver education instructor development, and that is not specifically exempted by this Act.

V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 3(18). Section 7(c) of the act exempts from all of the act except section 9A several types of driver education courses including a course offered by "a school that is otherwise regulated and approved under any other state law." A public school is regulated and approved under the Education Code. See generally Educ. Code tit. 2.

Section 9A of the act, the only provision of the act to which a public school is subject, provides as follows:

The agency shall print and supply to licensed and exempt driver education schools serially numbered driver education certificates to be used for certifying completion of an approved driver education course for the purposes of Section 7(a), . . . Article 6687b, [V.T.C.S.]. The agency by rule shall provide for the design and distribution of the certificates, in a manner that to the greatest extent possible prevents the unauthorized reproduction or misuse of the certificates.

Article 6687b, V.T.C.S., provides for the licensing of drivers, chauffeurs, and commercial operators. Section 7(a) of that article authorizes the Department of Public Safety, see V.T.C.S. art. 6687b, § 1(1) (defining "department"), to license as a class C driver an individual under the age of eighteen if, among other things, the individual "has submitted to the Department a driver education certificate provided for by Section 9A [of the act], indicating that the person has completed and passed a driver education course approved by the Department under Section 7A [of article 6687b] or by the" agency. Even if the Department of Public Safety has not approved a public school's driver education course, we conclude that a student successfully completing such a course is entitled to receive a certificate of completion necessary for obtaining a class C license under V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c), section 9A. Our conclusion is premised on a determination that a public school's driver education course is "approved by" the agency for purposes of section 9A if the public school's course adheres to the curriculum devised by the agency.

Section 6(b) of the act requires the commissioner of the agency to establish, by rule, the curriculum and designate the textbooks that must be used in a driver education course. The act does not otherwise provide for the approval or monitoring of a driver education course. A public school is, of course, exempt from section 6(b). See V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), §§ 3(18), 7(c)(5).

Section 29.902(a) of the Education Code requires the agency to "develop a program of organized instruction in driver education and traffic safety for public school students." In our opinion, because the agency is responsible to organize the program of instruction in driver education and traffic safety for public school students, we believe any public school that offers a course of instruction pursuant to the agency's guidelines is approved by the agency for purposes of section 9A of the act. The agency must, accordingly, supply the certificates of completion described in section 9A to a public school offering a driver education course in compliance with agency directives. The public school need not comply with any other requirements under the act to which private driver education courses are subject. Indeed, to require a public school to comply with sections of the act other than section 9A simply to receive the certificates of completion contravenes the act's express statement that a public school is exempt from all sections but section 9A.

With respect to the oversight of a public school's driver education course, the 1995 amendments to the act actually make little change in the law. Prior to the effective date of the 1995 amendments, a public school's driver education course was wholly exempt from the act. Thus, previous law did not require a public school to license its driver education course, nor was a public school's driver education course subject to monitoring by the agency. Relevant to the issue you raise, the only substantive change the amendments to the act effected is the requirement, in newly enacted section 9A, V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c), that the agency supply to "licensed and exempt driver education schools" driver education certificates. The 1995 amendments further require an applicant for a class C driver's license to present the certificate of completion to the Department of Public Safety.

We turn now to your second question: whether the commissioner of education (the "commissioner") must, after September 1, 1995, finally approve a driving safety course that the commissioner approved "conditionally" or "temporarily" prior to September 1, 1995. See V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 3(16) (defining "approved driving safety course"). Article 4413(29c), section 13(a-1), V.T.C.S., requires the commissioner to approve the application of a driving safety school if the school meets certain criteria.

Upon approval the driving safety school receives a license from the commissioner. See V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 13(d)(1); cf. Act of May 30, 1993, 73d Leg., R.S., ch. 954, § 5, 1993 Tex. Gen. Laws 4071, 4073 (codified at V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 13(d)(1)), amended by Act of May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 1009, § 15, 1995 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 5047, 5055. A license may not exceed one year in term. V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 13(d)(2).

Section 13(f) authorizes the commissioner to revoke a driving safety school's license or impose reasonable conditions on the license. The commissioner also may revoke or make conditional any license if the commissioner has reason to believe the licensee violated the act or any rule adopted pursuant to the act. V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 13(f)(2). We find no explicit authority for a temporary license.

Prior to September 1, 1995, the act required a driving safety school to submit to the commissioner an initial license fee of $1,700 plus $850 for each branch location. See Act of May 30, 1993, 73d Leg., R.S., ch. 954, § 5, 1993 Tex. Gen. Laws 4071, 4072 (codified at V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 13(b)(1)(A)), amended by Act of May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 1009, § 15, 1995 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 5047, 5054. We do not find in the act that existed prior to September 1, 1995, any requirement of a fee to accompany an application for approval of a driving safety course.

The Seventy-fourth Legislature amended article 4413(29c), section 13(b)(1)(G), to require a nonrefundable fee of $9,000 to accompany an "application for approval of a driving safety course that has not been evaluated by the State Board of Education." See Act of May 29, 1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 1009, § 15, 1995 Tex. Sess. Law Serv. 5047, 5054. Notwithstanding this section, a driving safety course that the agency approved prior to September 1, 1995, need not be reapproved, "and no fee is owed in relation to approval of the course unless the fee became due before" September 1, 1995. Id. § 32(b), at 5065.

As we understand your question, you are uncertain as to whether a licensee upon whom the commissioner of education imposed conditions prior to September 1, 1995, must again apply for a license and submit the $9,000 application fee to regain permanent licensure status after September 1, 1995. We note that the commissioner may impose conditions only on a driving safety school. See V.T.C.S. art. 4413(29c), § 13(f). On the other hand, the $9,000 application fee is to accompany an application for "approval of a driving safety course." Id. § 13(b)(1)(G) (emphasis added). Consequently, we find nothing on the face of the act that requires a driving safety school holding a license, either conditional or unconditional, to pay the application fee under section 13(b)(1)(G) unless the school desires to change the driving safety course it offers.

Moreover, we do not believe that a driving safety school upon whose license the commissioner has imposed conditions must reapply for a license. Article 4413(29c), section 13(f) provides the commissioner with a choice: either the commissioner may revoke the license of a driving safety school, or the commissioner may impose conditions upon the license. Unless a driving safety school's license is revoked, its license remains in effect, and the driving safety school need not apply for a new license.

SUMMARY

Any public school offering the program of organized instruction in driver education and traffic safety that the Texas Education Agency has adopted pursuant to section 29.902(a) of the Education Code is offering an "approved driver education course" for purposes of V.T.C.S. article 4413(29c), section 9A. The Texas Education Agency must, in accordance with article 4413(29c), section 9A, supply such a public school with "serially numbered driver education certificates to be used for certifying completion" of the course.

Nothing in article 4413(29c), V.T.C.S., requires a licensed driving safety school, upon which license the commissioner of education has imposed conditions pursuant to article 4413(29c), section 13(f), to pay an application fee under section 13(b)(1)(G) unless the school desires to change the driving safety course it offers. Additionally, a licensed driving safety school, upon which license the commissioner has imposed conditions, need not apply for a new license.

DAN MORALES
Attorney General of Texas

JORGE VEGA
First Assistant Attorney General

SARAH J. SHIRLEY
Chair, Opinion Committee

Prepared by Kymberly K. Oltrogge
Assistant Attorney General