O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 43-15-29 (2019)

Exceptions to operation of chapter

✓ O.C.G.A. — 2019 edition (Public.Resource.Org Release 73)
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as excluding a qualified architect registered in this state from such engineering practice as may be incident to the practice of his or her profession or as excluding a professional engineer from such architectural practice as may be incident to the practice of professional engineering.

(b) The following persons shall be exempt from this chapter:

(1) An individual working as an employee or a subordinate of an individual holding a certificate of registration or license under this chapter or an employee of an individual practicing lawfully under Code Section 43-15-21, provided that such work does not include final design decisions and is done under the supervision of, and responsibility therefor is assumed by, an individual holding a certificate of registration or license under this chapter or an individual practicing lawfully under Code Section 43-15-21;

(2) Officers and employees of the government of the United States while engaged within this state in the practice of professional engineering, structural engineering, or land surveying for such government;

(3) All elected officers of the political subdivisions of this state while in the practice of professional engineering, structural engineering, or land surveying in the performance of their official duties;

(4) Officers and employees of the Department of Transportation, except as required by Title 46, while engaged within this state in the practice of professional engineering, structural engineering, or land surveying for such department;

(5) Any defense, aviation, space, or aerospace company. As used in this paragraph, the term “company” shall mean any sole proprietorship, firm, limited liability company, partnership, joint venture, joint stock association, corporation, or other business entity and any subsidiary or affiliate of such business entity;

(6) Any employee, contract worker, subcontractor, or independent contractor who works for a defense, aviation, space, or aerospace company that is not required to be licensed under the provisions of this chapter pursuant to paragraph (5) of this subsection and who provides engineering for aircraft, space launch vehicles, launch services, satellites, satellite services, missiles, rockets, or other defense, aviation, space, or aerospace related products or services, or any components thereof; and

(7) Any officer or employee of a state government agency or department, county or municipal government, regional commission, or utility authority who is engaged in the gathering, processing, managing, and sharing of geospatial and photogrammetric data for cataloging or mapping purposes for his or her respective agency.

(c) This chapter shall not be construed as requiring registration or licensing for the purpose of practicing professional engineering, structural engineering, or land surveying by an individual, firm, or corporation on property owned or leased by such individual, firm, or corporation unless the same involves the public safety or public health or for the performance of engineering which relates solely to the design or fabrication of manufactured products.

(d) This chapter shall not be construed to prevent or affect the practice of professional engineering, structural engineering, and land surveying with respect to utility facilities by any public utility subject to regulation by the Public Service Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, the Federal Power Commission, or like regulatory agencies, including its parents, affiliates, or subsidiaries; or by the officers and full-time permanent employees of any such public utility, including its parents, affiliates, or subsidiaries, except where such practice involves property lines of adjoining property owners, provided that this exception does not extend to any professional engineer, professional structural engineer, or professional land surveyor engaged in the practice of professional engineering, structural engineering, or land surveying whose compensation is based in whole or in part on a fee or to any engineering services performed by the utility companies referenced in this subsection not directly connected with work on their facilities.

(e) This chapter shall not be construed to affect the lawful practice of a person acting within the scope of a certificate of registration or license granted by the state under any other law.

(f) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require a contractor or an employee of a contractor that is performing layouts and measurements for a highway or construction project of such contractor to be licensed as a professional land surveyor; provided, however, that such individuals shall be prohibited from providing or offering to provide any other land surveying services and from performing a layout for a highway or construction project relative to a buffer, setback, or property line.

History

Ga. L. 1937, p. 294, § 20; Ga. L. 1945, p. 294, § 32; Ga. L. 1972, p. 222, § 12; Code 1933, § 84-2125, enacted by Ga. L. 1975, p. 1048, § 1; Ga. L. 1999, p. 81, § 43; Ga. L. 2015, p. 343, § 1/HB 18; Ga. L. 2018, p. 583, § 1/SB 425; Ga. L. 2020, p. 642, § 10/SB 310. The 2020 amendment, effective January 1, 2021, inserted “, structural engi-

neering,” near the end of paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(4), near the middle of paragraph (b)(3) and near the beginning of subsection (c); and, in subsection (d), inserted “, structural engineering,” twice and inserted “, professional structural engineer,”.

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS County engineer may design firehouse. - Design and supervision of building of fire station by professional engineer employee of county did not constitute unlawful practice of architecture since building of fire station falls within legislative definitions of both professions and because the Code explicitly recognizes some overlap between the professions. Georgia Ass’n of Am. Inst. of Architects v. Gwinnett County, 238 Ga. 277, 233 S.E.2d 142, 1977 Ga. LEXIS 1516 (1977). Lawful for qualified architect to engage in engineering practices. - Although it is unlawful for anyone other than a professional engineer to practice professional engineering in Georgia, a qualified architect can engage in engineer-

ing practices when such practices are incident to the practice of architecture. Tomberlin Assocs., Architects, Inc. v. Free, 174 Ga. App. 167, 329 S.E.2d 296, 1985 Ga. App. LEXIS 1774 (1985). Employee engineers not taxable if not making final design decisions. - City cannot tax engineers and architects pursuant to former Code 1933, § 92-307 (see now O.C.G.A. § 48-13-5) who, although the engineers and architects hold certificates, work as employees in firms in which principals responsible for final design decisions hold certificates. City of Atlanta v. Georgia Soc’y of Professional Eng’rs, 220 Ga. 62, 137 S.E.2d 41, 1964 Ga. LEXIS 448 (1964).

OPINIONS OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By use of word “solely” in subsection (c) of this section, the legislature’s intention was to strictly construe the exemption; an exemption contrary to the

express intention of the statute should be given a narrow construction. 1980 Op. Att’y Gen. No. 80-69.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1985–1996 · leading case: McGarr v. Gilmore, 469 S.E.2d 720 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996).
McGarr v. Gilmore, 469 S.E.2d 720 (Ga. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “The issue is resolved not by whether the individuals were professional engineers who were simply unlicensed pursuant to OCGA § 43-15-29 (b) (4) but by the form of Gilmore’s complaint and his invocation of OCGA § 9-11-9.”
Tomberlin Assocs., Architects, Inc. v. Free, 329 S.E.2d 296 (Ga. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 43-15-29 (a). In the case sub judice, appellant did not limit its services to architectural endeavors.”
City of Atlanta v. Daley, 362 S.E.2d 348 (Ga. 1987). · cites it 2× “OCGA § 43-15-29 (b) (1). No such limitation, by reason of definition or function, has been provided for the field of public accounting.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.