Per Curiam.Harriet O’Neal filed a waiver petition with the Board of Bar Examiners on November 30, 2017, asking that she be allowed to practice law in Georgia without sitting for the Georgia bar exam and without meeting the usual requirements for admission without examination. Specifically, O’Neal based her request for a waiver on her status as the spouse of an active member of the military who had been transferred here. The Board denied O’Neal’s request,[1] and she now appeals this ruling. For the reasons set forth below, we vacate the Board’s decision and remand with direction.The record shows that O’Neal graduated from Louisiana State University Law School in 2014, took and passed the Louisiana bar exam, and was admitted to the practice of law in Louisiana in October 2014. Without more, O’Neal does not meet the general requirements for admission to the Georgia Bar on motion without examination, as outlined in the Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law, because (1) she passed the bar in Louisiana, which does not offer reciprocity with Georgia or any other state, and (2) she has not been “primarily engaged in the active practice of law” for the preceding five years, as she has only been a lawyer for three years. See Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law, Part C, Section 2 (b) and (e).[2]For this reason, O’Neal requested a waiver of these requirements, citing the Board’s waiver policy for military spouses.[3] As set forth by the Board, this waiver policy[r]ecogniz[es] that active duty military personnel are frequently transferred to duty stations in any number of states, making it extremely difficult for their attorney spouses, who, while admitted to practice in one state, may not be admitted in the state of the new duty station, [and] seeks to accommodate the bar admission needs of attorney spouses of military personnel while still maintaining the integrity of the bar admission process.By virtue of this policy, it necessarily follows that some military spouses will receive a waiver, while others may not. The goal, of course, is for the policy todelineate between those whom this State should appropriately accommodate,and those who do not meet the minimum threshold deemed necessary to protectthe Bar and public.This Court has the inherent and exclusive power to prescriberequirements for admission to the practice of law in order to promote the State’s fundamental interest in ensuring that members of the legal profession are competent. In the Matter of Oliver, 261 Ga. 850, 852 (2), (3) (413 SE2d 435) (1992). “[A]dmission to the State Bar is governed by the Rules promulgated by this Court, which place the burden on the applicant to establish the fitness to practice law.” (Citations omitted.) In the Matter of G.E.C., supra, 269 Ga. at 745 (1). However, the Board may waive any of the rules “for good cause shown by clear and convincing evidence.” See Rules Governing Admission to the Practice of Law, Part F, Section 5.[4] We have said that “good cause in this context is not
