If a registered Professional Engineer is also a state employee or state official doing engineering work as part of their job, does the NC engineering licensing board still have disciplinary jurisdiction over them?

Plain-English summary

The Board's executive secretary asked whether it had jurisdiction over a registered Professional Engineer performing assigned duties as a state official or employee. The AG answered yes, to the extent those duties fell within the statutory "practice of engineering." Public employment did not remove a registered engineer from the Board's oversight. Source

The opinion says N.C.G.S. § 89C-10 gave the Board jurisdiction over registered Professional Engineers to review charges, enforce conduct rules, and impose discipline for specified misconduct. That jurisdiction was "unaffected by a Professional Engineer's status as a public official or employee" performing professional duties. Source

The question mentioned N.C.G.S. § 89C-25(7), which excluded certain internal engineering activities by public employees from a requirement to use a registered engineer. The AG said that exemption was "not germane" to jurisdiction over someone who was already registered and practiced engineering in the state job. The letter does not decide the Board's jurisdiction over land surveyors. Source

Currency note

This is a February 1998 opinion about Chapter 89C as then written. Check the current licensing statute and Board rules for a present question.

Background and statutory framework

The opinion cites N.C.G.S. § 89C-2 for the public-safety purpose of engineering regulation, § 89C-3 for the definition of engineering practice, and § 89C-10 for the Board's authority over registered engineers. It describes § 89C-25(7) as addressing when a registered engineer must be used for listed internal work, not as removing Board authority over a registered engineer performing professional responsibilities. Source

Common questions

Can the Board review a complaint against a registered engineer doing state-agency work?

Yes, if the assigned work constitutes the practice of engineering. The opinion says public employment does not affect the Board's stated disciplinary jurisdiction over registered Professional Engineers. Source

Does the public-employee exemption remove oversight of a registered engineer?

No. The AG says the exemption for certain internal activities does not restrict the Board's jurisdiction over registered Professional Engineers where their duties involve engineering practice. Source

Did this opinion decide the same question for registered land surveyors?

No. The Board's name includes land surveyors, but the request, statutory analysis, and conclusion concern registered Professional Engineers. Source

Citations

• N.C.G.S. § 89C-2 (legislative declaration that engineering practice is subject to regulation to safeguard life, health, property, and the public welfare)
• N.C.G.S. § 89C-3 (defines "practice of engineering")
• N.C.G.S. § 89C-10 (Board jurisdiction over registered PEs; renewal fees; review of charges; enforcement of Rules of Professional Conduct; discipline for fraud, gross negligence, misconduct, professional incompetence, certain criminal convictions, and rules violations)
• N.C.G.S. § 89C-25(7) (exemption from registration requirement for internal engineering activities performed by public employees in inspection, maintenance, and service work on listed types of public works)

Source

• Landing page: https://ncdoj.gov/opinions/state-board-of-registration-for-professional-engineers-and-land-surveyors/

Original opinion text

February 11, 1998

Mr. Jerry T. Carter, Executive Secretary
North Carolina State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors
3620 Six Forks Road, Suite 300
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609

Re: Advisory Opinion — State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors; Jurisdiction over Public Employees; N.C.G.S. Chapter 89C

Dear Mr. Carter:

In your letter dated January 14, 1998 you have asked our opinion regarding the jurisdiction of the North Carolina State Board of Registration for Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors ("Board") over a registered Professional Engineer performing assigned duties as a state official or employee.

N.C.G.S. § 89C-2 declares the practice of engineering to be subject to regulation in order to safeguard life, health, and property, and to promote the public welfare. As such, it is unlawful for any person to practice or offer to practice engineering in North Carolina without being duly registered by the Board. A person who has been duly registered and licensed becomes a Professional Engineer authorized to engage in the "practice of engineering" as that term is defined by N.C.G.S. § 89C-3.

Pursuant to N.C.G.S. § 89C-10 the Board is vested with certain jurisdiction over all persons registered as Professional Engineers. This jurisdiction includes the power to require the payment of registration renewal fees; review charges against any Professional Engineer, and; enforce rules of professional conduct. The Board may also impose disciplinary measures against any registered engineer found guilty of fraud, gross negligence or misconduct, professional incompetence, a felony or crime involving moral turpitude, or violation of the Board's Rules of Professional Conduct. In our view, the Board's jurisdiction in matters of this nature is unaffected by a Professional Engineer's status as a public official or employee performing assigned job responsibilities which constitute the "practice of engineering."

In your letter you suggest that an exemption within N.C.G.S. § 89C-25(7) may be a factor in our analysis. The provision states that Chapter 89C shall not be construed to prevent or affect internal engineering activities performed by public employees related to inspection, maintenance, and service work such as construction, installation, servicing, and maintenance of streets, street lighting, traffic-control signals, police and fire alarm systems, water works, steam, electric and sewage treatment disposal plants. This exemption is not germane to our conclusion regarding the Board's jurisdiction over registered Professional Engineers. The exclusion of certain types of engineering activities from the requirement that a registered Professional Engineer be utilized does not restrict the Board's jurisdiction over registered Professional Engineers where the practice of engineering is involved in the performance of their professional responsibilities.

It is therefore our opinion that the Board is vested with jurisdiction over state officials and employees, who are registered Professional Engineers, in the performance of their assigned duties to the extent that those duties fall within the practice of engineering.

Andrew A. Vanore, Jr.
Chief Deputy Attorney General

Grayson G. Kelley
Special Deputy Attorney General