Texas law on any date › Attorney General opinions
Attorney General Opinion JM-1103
Issued September 26, 1989
Re: Which state agency is responsible for interpreting the provi- sions of Insurance Code article 5.33A regarding homeowners premium re- ductions and related questions
Cites: IN §6, IN §3, IN §7, IN §8, IN §5, CN §5.1
The Attorney General's page · official PDF
September 26, 1989
Mr. Fred Toler
Executive Director
Texas Commission on Law Enforcement
Officer Standards and Education
1606 Headway Circle, Suite 100
Austin, Texas
78754
Opinion No. JM-1103
Re: Which state agency
is
responsible
for
interpreting the provi-
sions of Insurance Code
article 5.33A regarding
homeowners premium
re-
ductions
and
related
questions
(RQ-1758)
Dear Mr. Toler:
You ask two questions about article 5.33A of the Insu-
rance Code.
Article 5.33A provides for reductions in homeowners'
insurance premiums.
Section
6 of the article
provides
minimum specifications
that the homeowner's property
must
meet to qualify for the premium reduction.
The
specifica-
tions relate
to the types of doors, windows
and
locks
contemplated to increase the security of the property.
Section 3 provides
that the person
seeking
the premium
reduction shall apply to the city or county
where
the
property is located and that the city or county shall assign
an inspector to inspect the property to determine whether it
meets
the
requisite
specifications
for
the
premium
reduction.
Section 7 provides that the Commission on Law
Enforcement Officer Standards and Education shall establish
standards for the inspection program and certify inspectors.
Section 8 provides the requirements for certification as an
inspector.
You ask which
state agency, the State Board of Insu-
rance (the board)
or the Commission
on Law Enforcement
Officer
Standards
and Education
(the commission),
has
"primary responsibility" for "interpreting" the provisions
of Insurance Code article 5.33A.
Insurance Code article 1.10(l) provides that the board
shall
"[s]ee that all
laws respecting
insurance
and
insurance companies are
faithfully executed."
Clearly,
in
order to "see that all laws respecting insurance . . . are
p. 5784
Mr. Fred Toler - Page 2
(JM-1103)
faithfully executed" under article 1.10(l), the board
would
have to determine what those laws provided for.1
Also, we think that the legislature
would have
con-
templated that interpretation of the provisions in question
in article 5.33A would
be more effectively accomplished
by
the board than by the commission, given the board's
primary
concern with insurance matters.
Notably, in.this respect, a
1985 amendment to article 5.33A, section 6(e), empowered the
board to "set standards for alternative specifications
to
protect a person's property that are at least as effective
Q
as those listed in" section
6.
Acts 1985, 69th beg.,
ch.
744, 5 1, at 2568. It would be anomalous, we think, for the
legislature
to authorize
the board to set alternative
specifications to those set out in section 6 if it intended
that the "primary responsibility I1 for determining the import
of the provisions
of section 6 should
fall on another
agency.
See also
Ins. Code art.
5.33A,
§ 5
(board to
establish by rule the amount by which
premiums
may be
reduced under the article).
Section 7 of article 5.33A provides for the duties
of
the commission under the article as follows:
The commission
shall establish
standards
for the
inspection
program
under
this
article, shall adopt rules to carry out the
inspection
program,
and
shall
certify
inspectors who do the
inspections,
except
such certificate
shall be limited
to the
specification set forth in Section 6 hereof
for which
the
inspector
has
received
instruction under Section (8)(b)(3) hereof.
We think
that the
legislature intended
in section
7
that the commission's role in implementing article 5.33A be
limited to setting standards
for the inspection of doors
rather than their composition.
Inspectors are assigned
to
inspect the properties of applicants for premium
reductions
by the city or town where the property is located.
Id. 5 3.
Inspectors must be certified by the commission and in order
to receive certification must be peace officers licensed
by
the commission
or building
inspectors or other
officials
1. Of course,
under
our constitution,
the ultimate
responsibility for interpreting
laws falls, with
certain
limited
exceptions,
on the courts.
See senerallv
Tex.
Const. art. V, § 1, and authorities cited therein.
P. 5785
Mr. Fred Toler - Page 3
(JM-1103)
designated by
They must also
commission or
the city or county where they will
serve.
have received classroom instruction from the
an agent of the commission.
Id.
58.
We
think that the articles'
provisions empower the commission
to assure
that inspectors
are qualified to make factual
determinations
in
accordance
with
the boardjs
interpretations of the article's requirements
and to %E
rules governing the procedures for inspection.
We do not
think that the commission's duties under the above-mentioned
provisions can be said to include the "primary
responsibil-
ity" for "interpreting" the provisions of article 5.33A,
in
light of the general provision
in article 1.10(l) that the
board shall "[s]ee that all laws respecting
insurance . . .
are faithfully executed."
You also ask whether an exterior
door may have glass
panels and still qualify under the requirements of article
5.33A for the reduction in homeowners' insurance
premiums
provided for in the article.
Article 5.33A provides
in
section 6:
(a) A person's property
qualifies for a
homeowners insurance premium reduction if the
property meets the following minimum specifi-
cations:
(1) exterior doors must be solid core
doors that are 1 3/8 inches thick and must be
secured by dead-bolt locks;
(2) metal doors must be secured by dead-
bolt locks:
(3) double doors must meet the specifica-
tions provided
by Subdivision (1) of this
subsection,
must have the inactive
door
secured by header and threshold bolts
that
penetrate metal
strike plates, and in the
case of glass located within 40 inches of
header and threshold
bdlts, must have
the
bolts flush-mounted in the edge of the door:
(4) sliding glass doors must be secured
by secondary
locking devices
to
prevent
lifting and prying;
(5) dutch doors
must have
concealed
flush-bolt locking devices to interlock upper
and lower halves and must be secured by a
dead-bolt lock;
P. 5786
Mr. Fred Toler - Page 4 (JM-1103)
(6) garage doors must be equipped
with
key-operated locking devices: and
(7) windows must be secured by auxiliary
locking devices.
(b) A dead-bolt
lock required
by Sub-
section (a) of this section must lock with
a minimum
bolt throw
of one inch
that
penetrates a metal strike plate.
If a door
secured by a dead-bolt lock has breakable
glass within 40 inches of the lock, the lock
must be key-operated
from both sides unless
prohibited by life safety codes.
(c) An auxiliary locking device
required
q;cl~~~section
(a) of thi;owI;;tion
must
screws,
wooden
pinning
devices, and key-operated locks. in areas in
which life safety codes permit, metal bars or
grating, if mounted to prevent easy removal,
may be substituted
for auxiliary
locking
devices.
(d) Jalousie or louvered windows do not
meet
the specifications
of this
section
unless they have metal grating
mounted
as
provided by Subsection (c) of this section.
(e) The Board may adopt
rules that
set
standards for alternative specifications
to
protect a personIs property that are ate least
as effective as those listed in this section.
Such alternative specifications shall entitle
a person's property
meeting such specifica-
tions to a similar homeowners premium
reduc-
tion under this article.
Id. 5 6.
The construction of section 6 of article 5.33A presents
difficulties.
For example, subsection (a)(l) provides
that
"exterior doors must be solid core doors" of a certain
thickness and
Qecured
by dead-bolt
locks."
Subsections
(a)(2) through
(a)(6) provide
requirements
for "metal,"
"double,"
"sliding glass,"
"dutch,"
and "garage"
doors
without indicating
whether
such requirements
apply
only
where the doors in question are exterior doors.
Upon reviewing
the provisions
in their
entirety,
we
would be
inclined
to conclude that the requirements
of
p. 5787
Mr. Fred Toler - Page 5 (JM-1103)
subsections (a)(2) through
(a)(6) for "metal,1' "double,"
"sliding glass,** "dutch,"
and "garage" doors
apply
only
where such doors are exterior doors. The requirements
for
each of such types of door
include provisions for locking
devices.
As a practical
matter,
we do not think
the
legislature would have intended
such requirements to apply
to other than exterior doors.
Clearly, the overall
purpose
of article 5.33A is to allow homeowners8 insurance
premium
discounts to a homeowner for the installation of security
equipment that would
reduce the risk of forced entry
into
the house. a
Bill Analysis, H.B.
764, 67th Leg.
(1981)
(adding the article):
Bill Analysis, H.B.
1861, 69th Leg.
(1985) (amending the article).
Since sliding glass exterior doors might qualify
for
premium reductions under article 5.33A, section 6(a)(4),
if
they meet the other requirements
of that section, it would
seem unlikely
that
the legislature
intended
that
an
exterior door would not qualify if it had glass panels.
We
also note that the provisions of subsection (b), requiring
particular locking devices where
'Ia door secured
by a
dead-bolt lock has breakable glass within 40 inches of the
lock," id. 5 b, and suggest that an exterior door may have
glass panels and still meet the premium reduction
reguire-
ments.
Also, you inform us that the State Board of Insurance
has taken the position that glass in an exterior door does
not disqualify
a homeowner
from receiving
an insurance
premium reduction.
Because the board has factual knowledge
of the effectiveness
of various
security
measures
'
reducing the risks to be insured against,
we would
it:
hesitant to challenge their
administrative
determination.
Under such circumstances
courts ordinarily
defer
to the
construction of a statute's term by the appropriate adminis-
trative agency.
See,
e.a
(construction of provisions'of
Letter Opinion
88-78
(1988)
article 179d, V.T.C.S.
that
"fraternal organizationsl' as defined
in that article
are
eligible for licensure by the comptroller to conduct
bingo
games).
SUMMARY
Of the two agencies, the State Board
of
Insurance and the Commission on Law Enforce-
ment Officer
Standards
and Education,
the
State Board of Insurance has the
"primary
responsibility" for "interpreting" the pro-
visions of article
5.33A of the
Insurance
Code relating
to reductions
in homeowners'
insurance
premiums
on
property
meeting
p. 5788
Mr. Fred Toler - Page 6
(JM-1103)
certain security specifications.
An exterior
door may have glass panels and still qualify
under the provisions of section 6 of article
5.33A
if the
property
meets
the
other
specifications provided for in that section.
JIM
MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
MARY KELLER
First Assistant Attorney General
LOU MCCREARY
Executive Assistant Attorney General
JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLSY
Special Assistant Attorney General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared by William Walker
Assistant Attorney General
P. 5789
Attorney General opinions are persuasive, not binding on courts, and answer questions of law, not fact. Text extracted from the official PDF. Not legal advice.