Administrative Interpretation Error?

[Oehamilton]

Here is the letter I received:


Dear Applicant,
 
Thank you for giving the Department the opportunity to respond to your email regarding your Texas Concealed Handgun license.
 
A review of our records indicates that your Texas Concealed Handgun license application was received on 2/27/2012 however it was incomplete. On 3/13/2012 the department issued a letter advising you of missing documentation. You were given 90 days from the date on the notice to submit the required documents to the department. On 7/2/2012 you application was terminated.  This means that you must now re-apply like a new applicant, including taking the training course again as a new applicant. 
 
You can reference Texas Administrative Code Rule §6.13 at this link below:
 
http://info.sos.state.tx.us/pls/pub/rea ... ch=6&rl=13" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 
 
Should you have any additional questions or need further assistance, please contact Concealed Handgun Licensing Customer Relations at 512-424-7293.
 
 
Regards,
 
Darrell
Customer Service Representative
 

Texas Department of Public Safety
Regulatory Services Division
(512) 424-7293, Direct
RSD_Customer_Relations@dps.texas.gov
http://www.dps.texas.gov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The Adinstrative code only state I have to start a new application.

Texas Administrative Code

TITLE 37 PUBLIC SAFETY AND CORRECTIONS
PART 1 TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY
CHAPTER 6 LICENSE TO CARRY HANDGUNS
SUBCHAPTER B ELIGIBILITY AND APPLICATION PROCEDURES
RULE §6.13 Application Review and Background Investigation

(a) Applications must be complete and legible. If an application is not legible or complete, the department will notify the applicant of the deficiency. The applicant will have 90 days from the date of the deficiency notification letter to amend the application. Upon written request, the department may extend the period to amend the application for one additional 90 day period. After the period to amend has expired, the application process will be terminated. An individual whose application has been terminated under this subsection will be required to submit new application materials and fees to apply for a license in the future.

(b) Time to review application and complete background investigation. The statutory time periods for the department to conduct application reviews and background investigations shall be measured from the date an application was received and complete. An application is not considered to have been received until it is complete.
Source Note: The provisions of this §6.13 adopted to be effective August 10, 2008, 33 TexReg 6148

I called and they did say I had to start like I never had a CHL license! My current license has not expired.

Thoughts?

--Othell

[AEA]

I think you need to make a phone call. And the first thing out of your mouth should be that you are trying to RENEW and you have received notice that your application has been terminated while your current license is still valid.

That should get their attention.
Then politely ask for a 90 day extension (that may be granted according to the Administrative Code). And complete the missing items within that time.

[Keith B]

An individual whose application has been terminated under this subsection will be required to submit new application materials and fees to apply for a license in the future.

--Othell

If you pass the 90 day mark and don't respond, then your renewal application is terminated and they will not process your renewal. My understanding is the 90 day extension must be requested in writing PRIOR to the end of the initial 90 day period to be granted.

The portion highlighted in red above means you can apply for a NEW license. They will not suspend your existing CHL, but once it expires it will not be renewable. You will have to apply for a new license.

[sjfcontrol]

An individual whose application has been terminated under this subsection will be required to submit new application materials and fees to apply for a license in the future.

--Othell

If you pass the 90 day mark and don't respond, then your renewal application is terminated and they will not process your renewal. My understanding is the 90 day extension must be requested in writing PRIOR to the end of the initial 90 day period to be granted.

The portion highlighted in red above means you can apply for a NEW license. They will not suspend your existing CHL, but once it expires it will not be renewable. You will have to apply for a new license.

That just doesn't sound right. What prevents him from starting another RENEWAL application and paying the renewal fee (again)? I would think the renewal training would still be valid, too -- get another CHL-100 from the instructor. Telling him he must now re-apply as a NEW applicant seems extreme to me.

Oehamilton -- Did you receive the notice?

Oh -- and welcome to the forum! Sorry to hear of your problem renewing!

[Keith B]

We were specifically told in class that if you receive a 90-day letter on your renewal, fail to respond and your app gets terminated, that you would be required to apply for a license again as a NEW CHL, meaning whole class and full fee.

[sjfcontrol]

We were specifically told in class that if you receive a 90-day letter on your renewal, fail to respond and your app gets terminated, that you would be required to apply for a license again as a NEW CHL, meaning whole class and full fee.

Well, that certainly seems extreme. Was there an explanation for the reason they would behave in such a manner? Any discussion? What if you don't receive the notice?

[Keith B]

We were specifically told in class that if you receive a 90-day letter on your renewal, fail to respond and your app gets terminated, that you would be required to apply for a license again as a NEW CHL, meaning whole class and full fee.

Well, that certainly seems extreme. Was there an explanation for the reason they would behave in such a manner? Any discussion? What if you don't receive the notice?

That was the interpretation of the administrative rule posted above.

As for not receiving the letter, you could contact DPS and argue that point if you really didn't receive one and see if they would allow you to submit the info, but would be up to them.

[sjfcontrol]

We were specifically told in class that if you receive a 90-day letter on your renewal, fail to respond and your app gets terminated, that you would be required to apply for a license again as a NEW CHL, meaning whole class and full fee.

Well, that certainly seems extreme. Was there an explanation for the reason they would behave in such a manner? Any discussion? What if you don't receive the notice?

That was the interpretation of the administrative rule posted above.

As for not receiving the letter, you could contact DPS and argue that point if you really didn't receive one and see if they would allow you to submit the info, but would be up to them.

In that case, I would also suggest the OP contact his Representative(s) to see if DPS could be convinced to allow some leeway in this issue thru pressure from those quarters.

[Oehamilton]

Called again to discuss Admin Rule 6:13; they are standing their ground on that the rule means start a New Original License not New Renewal License. And that the letter stating I was missing my CHL-100 ( I thought it was my 3rd renewal and didn't need it) and that I would have to start a new. The letter does not say that. I guess I need to call again. The email I received after I called to try to start a new renewal, then stated I had to start as a new because the renewal was terminated.

What notification are you referring to, application cancelation. That would be a no.

I do have all my paper work for a new original, including 11 hour course work, CHL-100 form. I'll be sending that off today.

I think going forward an admendment to the rule is in order to clarify; New Renewal or New Original, depending on which was terminated.

[sjfcontrol]

Called again to discuss Admin Rule 6:13; they are standing their ground on that the rule means start a New Original License not New Renewal License. And that the letter stating I was missing my CHL-100 ( I thought it was my 3rd renewal and didn't need it) and that I would have to start a new. The letter does not say that. I guess I need to call again. The email I received after I called to try to start a new renewal, then stated I had to start as a new because the renewal was terminated.

What notification are you referring to, application cancelation. That would be a no.

I do have all my paper work for a new original, including 11 hour course work, CHL-100 form. I'll be sending that off today.

I think going forward an admendment to the rule is in order to clarify; New Renewal or New Original, depending on which was terminated.

The notification I referred to is the letter stating that information was missing in your application and you had 90 days to supply the missing info.

[Oehamilton]

I did receive the missing info letter with 90 day notice of termination. Letter did not state that I would have to start over as an original license application.

[smoothoperator]

Did it say you had 90 days to respond to the letter? Did you respond within 90 days?

[infoman]

You have to start over as a new applicant, right or wrong, that's what has always happened when a person fails to comply to the 90 day letter. what dps is telling you is legit and at least consistent across the board, you're just one of many that get terminated all the time.

[Oehamilton]

I can see starting the renewal application over again, but to have to start as a new original applicant isn't right. The 90 day letter never stated that. The Texas Administrative Code Rule §6.13 doesn't say that. Throughout The legislation the verbiage distinguishing an "Orignial" vs "Renewal" specifically, except in 6.13. Which has led to an administrative interpretation.

[sjfcontrol]

I can see starting the renewal application over again, but to have to start as a new original applicant isn't right. The 90 day letter never stated that. The Texas Administrative Code Rule §6.13 doesn't say that. Throughout The legislation the verbiage distinguishing an "Orignial" vs "Renewal" specifically, except in 6.13. Which has led to an administrative interpretation.

I assumed from a previous post that you had resolved your training requirements. If you want to fight this, I would suggest seeing what your Texas congress-critters could do to help you. I doubt that anybody here can be of much help. Good luck!