The Attorney General of Texas 

July 25, 1983 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General 

Supreme Court Building 

P. 0, Box 12548 

Austin. TX. 78711- 2546 

5121475-2501 

Telex 9101674.1367 

Telecopiet 512/475-0266 

1607 Main St.. Suite 1400 

Dallas. TX. 75201-4709 

214,742.8944 

4624 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 

El Paso. TX~ 79905~2793 

9151533-3484 

J Dallas Ave.. Suite 202 

Hous!~~. TX. 77002-6986 

7 131650-0666 

606 Broadway. Suite 312 

Lubbock. TX. 79401-3479 

8061747-5238 

4309 N. Tenth. Suite B 

McAllen. TX. 78501-1665 

5121662.4547 

200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 

San Antonio. TX. 76205-2797 

5121225-4191 

Mr. Roger D. Shipman 

Executive Secretary 

Texas Board of Veterinary 

Medical Examiners 

3810 Medical Parkway, Suite 119 

Austin, Texas 70756 

Dear Mr. Shipman: 

Opinion No. JM-46 

Re: Construction of article 

7465a, V.T.C.S., the Veterinary 

Practice Act 

You have asked two questions concerning section 10 of article 

7465a. V.T.C.S., of the Veterinary Licensing Act. As amended in 1981, 

this section provides: 

(a) Any person not previously licensed in this 

State is qualified to be licenseh, provided: 

(1) he has attained the age of majority; 

(2) he is a graduate of a reputable school 

college of veterinary medicine as approved 

the Board [of Veterinary Medical Examiners]; 

(3) he successfully completes the examination 

conducted by the Board: and 

(4) the Board does not refuse issuance of the 

license as provided in Section 14 (Refusing 

Examination, License or Renewal). 

(b) The Board may waive any license 

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. , 

Very truly your L.LJf* . 

-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 

?