Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Professional Licensure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House committee advances bill to clarify that IT and computing are not 'engineering'
Summary
The House Executive Departments and Administration Committee voted to advance House Bill 435, which narrows the statutory definition of the practice of engineering so that fields such as software, IT, cybersecurity and digital systems are not treated as professions requiring a PE seal. The committee approved the bill by unanimous voice/roll call.
The House Executive Departments and Administration Committee on a unanimous vote advanced House Bill 435, legislation that would clarify that work in information technology, cybersecurity, electronics, digital systems and computing is not the practice of professional engineering under state law.
Sponsor Representative Donald McFarland told the committee the bill "seeks simply to clean up and clarify our professional licensure statutes with regard to the field of licensed professional engineering, and ensure that they accurately reflect current practice." He said the change is intended to remove a legal ambiguity that could expose IT and related practitioners to regulation they historically have not faced.
The measure would not deregulate engineering generally, McFarland said. "The bill does not deregulate engineering. Instead, it simply ensures that our laws match reality," he said, adding the change is meant to preserve licensing for disciplines that place sealed, certified plans into the public record (for example structural, civil and certain mechanical engineering work) while excluding fields that do not use PE seals in practice.
Committee members from both parties discussed technical distinctions — circuit/electronics roles, electrical engineering tied to power systems, and the licensing needs of engineers who sign and seal plans for public safety. Representative Howard, a supporter, said his partner reviewed the draft language and did not think it would affect environmental, civil or other practice-area PEs that require licensure.
After public testimony and committee discussion the committee moved the bill to the next step; clerk roll-call shows the motion passed 16-0.
Supporters said the change aligns statutory language with current practice and reduces regulatory uncertainty for technology professionals; opponents (few in written testimony) warned the language must be carefully drafted so it does not unintentionally exclude categories that should remain regulated. The bill sponsor said he had met with engineering trade groups while drafting the measure and is open to technical adjustments.
If enacted, HB 435 would instruct the Office of Legislative Services and state licensing boards to apply the clarified statutory definitions going forward. The committee placed the bill on consent for a subsequent floor report.
Votes at a glance: committee roll call recorded 16 yes, 0 no.
The committee record shows the bill will move forward to the next legislative steps; further edits are possible as the bill proceeds through subsequent committees and floor action.
