Navigation Top
AGO Logo Graphic
AGO Header Image
File a Complaint
Contact the AGO
AGO 1952 No. 203 - January 03, 1952
AGO Opinion Header Image
Smith Troy | 1941-1952 | Attorney General of Washington

ELECTRICAL LICENSE FOR CONTRACTOR WORKING ON P.U.D. PROJECT.

Under § 11, chapter 169, Laws of 1935, a contractor working upon generating equipment for a P.U.D. is not exempted from filing a bond and procuring a license.

                                                                    - - - - - - - - - - - - -

                                                                  January 3, 1952

Honorable A. M. Johnson, Director
Department of Labor and Industries
Olympia, Washington                                                                                                Cite as:  AGO 51-53 No. 203

Dear Sir:

            Receipt is acknowledged of your letter asking for a clarification of § 11, chapter 169, Laws of 1935.  You state that the Okanogan P.U.D. has granted a contract to Stone and Webster, a subsidiary of the Edison Institute, and Stone and Webster has hired a private contractor to do the necessary electrical construction on Rock Island Dam.  You ask whether Stone and Webster needs an electrical license to cover its operations.

            It is our conclusion that Stone and Webster needs an electrical license in this operation as the exemption provided for in § 11, chapter 169, Laws of 1935 (Rem. Rev. Stat. 8307-11) applies to P.U.D.'s only when they themselves install or maintain lines from the source of supply to the point of contact of the premises or the property to be supplied, and that the exemption being explicit and statutory, it is conclusive.

                                                                     ANALYSIS

            Section 11, chapter 169, Laws of 1935, reads as follows:

            "No license under the provision of this act shall be required from any person, firm, corporation or municipal corporation because of work in connection  [[Orig. Op. Page 2]] with the installation and/or maintenance of lines or wires for transmission of electricity from the source of supply to the point of contact at the premises and/or property to be supplied, or for work in installing or maintaining or repairing on the premises of customers, service connections and meters, and other apparatus or appliances used in the measurement of the consumption of electricity by customers, or for work in connection with the lighting of streets, alleys, ways, or public areas or squares, or for the work of installing, maintaining or repairing wires, apparatus or appliances used in their business, or in making or distributing electricity, upon the property owned or operated and managed by them; or for the work of installing and repairing ignition or lighting systems for motor vehicles, or as exempted in section 1."

            Section 1, chapter 169, Laws of 1935, contains no exemptions which would be applicable to § 11, chapter 169, Laws of 1935.

            Heretofore, on April 20, 1922, the attorney general was called upon to construe § 5, chapter 204, Laws of 1919.  Section 5 is substantially the same as § 11, chapter 169, Laws of 1935, and the attorney general held that the section was to be construed with other sections of the law and when so construed City Light of Seattle would have to procure a license and also post a bond.

            The exemption in § 11 is in connection with installation and maintenance of lines or wires for transmission of electricity from source of supply to point of contact at premises of property supplied, or installing or maintenance on premises of customers' service connections, meters, etc.

            Here the facts show that the contract with the P.U.D. is for none of the purposes mentioned in § 11.

            Section 11 must be construed with the other portions of the act and the whole act itself must be construed together.  Section 2, chapter 169, Laws of 1935, reads as follows:

            "It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to install any electrical wiring, appliances, devices or equipment not in accordance with the standards prescribed by this act.  * * *"

             [[Orig. Op. Page 3]]

            Nowhere are contractors excluded, and the rule as to exemptions in § 11 is governed byexpressio unius est exclusio alterius.

Very truly yours,

SMITH TROY
Attorney General

HARRY L. PARR
Assistant Attorney General

Content Bottom Graphic
AGO Logo