September 21. 1976 

The Honorable Barry Read 

Executive Secretary 

Opinion No. H-879 

Texas State Board of Examiners Re: Applicability of 

of Psychologists Psychologists Certifica108 West 15th Street tion and Licensing Act to 

Austin, Texas 78701 state-supported institutions,of higher education. 

Dear Mr. Read: 

You have requested our opinion regarding the applicability 

of the Psychologists Certification and Licensing Act, article 

4512c, V.T.C.S., to state-supported institutions of higher 

education. Article 4512~ requires "any person who offers 

psychological services . . . for compensation" to have a 

license issued by the Texas State Board of Examiners of 

Psychologists. sec. 21. The statute specifically exempts 

from licensing, however, 

the activities, services and use of 

official title on the part of a person 

employed as a psychologist by any: (1) 

governmental agency, (2) public school 

district, (3) institution of higher 

education approved by the Board or any 

hospital licensed by the Texas State 

Department of Health . . . .V.T.C.S. art. 

4512c, S 22(a). 

You ask whether a state-supported institution of higher 

education is exempted as a "governmental agency" or as an 

"institution of higher education." If the latter, the statute 

would require that the institution be "approved by the Board" 

in order to qualify for the exemption for its employees. 

p. 3702 
. 

The Honorable Barry Read - Page two (H-979) 

It is clear that the usual definition of "governmental 

agency" includes the governing board of a state-supported 

institution of higher education. Allis-Chalmers Mf 

Curtis Electric Co., 264 S.W.2d 706, 101 (Tex. SU$?~%.~ 

But since the term also includes public school districts 

specifically exempted by section 22(a)(2), it might be 

argued that the Legislature here deemed state-supported 

institutions of higher education to be included within the 

third category of exemption. In our opinion, however, such 

a construction raises serious constitutional questions 

regarding the authority of the Board, in the absence of any 

statutory standards, to confer its "approval" upon, or 

withhold it from, a state-supported entity over which it 

exercises no general regulatory supervision. See Housin 

Authority of City of Dallas 5 Higginbotham, 1rS.W. ---n-39 

a7 (Tex. sup. 194oK Southwestern Savin s & Loan Associati& 

of - Houston v 2 Falkner, 331 s.w.zd d1-(= Sup. 1960). 

It is well established that when a statute is susceptible 

of more than one interpretation, the courts will prefer that 

construction which renders it constitutional. State v. Shoppers 

World, Inc., 380 S.W.2d 107, 111 (Tex. Sup. 1964);eEom v. 

State, 372 S.W.Zd 681, 693 (Tex. Crim. App. 1963). Since - 

any classification of a state-supported institution of higher 

education which would require Board approval without providing 

any standards for the granting of such approval would raise 

substantial doubt as to the constitutionality of section 22, 

and since a state-supported institution is in any event a 

"governmental agency," it is our opinion that, for purposes of 

article 4512c, a state-supported institution of higher education 

should be deemed a governmental agency. As such, its employees 

are exempted from the licensing requirements of section 21. 

SUMMARY 

For purposes of article 4512c, a statesupported institution of higher education 

is a "governmental agency," and, as such, 

its employees are exempted from the 

licensing requirements of that statute. 

Attorney General of Texas 

p. 3703 
. . 

, 

The Honorable Barry Read - page three W-879) 

APPROVED: 

DAVID M. KENDALL, First Assistant 

c. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

jwb 

p. 3704