JOHN J. BAGDONAS, )
vs. ) CASE NO. 80-081
Respondent. )
A hearing was held in the above captioned matter, after due notice, at Miami, Florida, on April 28, 1980, before Thomas C. Oldham, Hearing Officer.
Whether Petitioner's application for license as an architect pursuant to Chapter 481, Florida Statutes, should be approved.
In April, 1978, Petitioner John J. Bagdonas, Miami, Florida, inquired of Respondent State Board of Architecture concerning eligibility for registration as an architect in the State of Florida. He was advised by letter of April 18, 1978, from Herbert Coons, Jr., Respondent's Executive Secretary, that he was ineligible for such registration since he lacked a degree from an accredited program in architecture. (Respondent's Exhibit 1)
On October 22, 1979, Petitioner submitted an application to Respondent for Class 13 certification as an architect pursuant to Chapter 467, Florida Statutes. He indicated in the appropriate block of the application form that he held a current registration as an architect in Massachusetts which had been issued in 1976. By letter of November 9, 1979, Petitioner was informed by Mr. Coons that his application was denied because he did not have a professional degree or ten years experience as a practicing architect, and he was advised as to his right to a hearing pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes. By
letter of November 13, 1979, Petitioner protested the decision and requested a hearing. (Petitioner's Exhibit 1, Respondent's Exhibit 1)
Further correspondence ensued wherein Petitioner maintained that he was qualified for registration pursuant to current law concerning licensure by endorsement. He was making reference to a 1979 act that became Section 481.213(3)(b), F.S., which provided that Respondent Board must certify an applicant holding a valid license to practice architecture issued by another state if the criteria for issuance of such license were substantially equivalent to the licensure criteria which existed in Florida at the time the license was issued. (Respondent's Exhibit 1)
By letter of January 23, 1980, Mr. Coons invited Petitioner to appear before the Board's Education Committee in February to "discuss your education in connection with your application for registration." The letter recommended that petitioner bring examples of his past work, letters of recommendation, and any other additional information concerning his educational background to the meeting. Petitioner, through counsel, declined the offer by letter of January 29, 1980, and elected to proceed with this administrative proceeding. (Petitioner's Exhibit 2, Respondent's Exhibit 1)
Petitioner graduated from high school in Boston, Massachusetts in 1962 and commenced employment with an architectural firm in that city. During the period May 1962 to November 1974, he was employed by five architectural firms in Massachusetts. During this twelve-year employment period, Petitioner prepared working drawings, office presentation drawings, design, detailing, construction drawings, and professional administration. At various times during his career, he handled several projects in their entirety, including the coordination of mechanical and electrical work with architectural drawings, client contact, supervising construction phase, shop drawings, project meetings, and field sketches. He was unemployed from November 1974 through December 1976. During the period January 1977 to the present, Petitioner has been employed successively by three architectural firms in Miami and Hollywood, Florida where he performed functions similar to those in prior years. He has been employed by the firm of Bouterse, Perez, and Fabrigas, Miami, Florida, since February 1979. He currently is the project manager for the Douglas Road Station for the rapid transit system in Miami. All of Petitioner's prior employers have submitted letters of reference concerning Petitioner's employment wherein they variously characterize his education, practical experience, and professional integrity as excellent or satisfactory. (Respondent's Exhibit 1)
Petitioner attended the Boston Architectural Center from 1962 to 1965 while he was employed on a full-time basis, but was unable to graduate due to his heavy schedule. During his attendance, he acquired 33 credit hours in architectural subjects with satisfactory grades. In the course of his employment, Petitioner has worked on a variety of projects including schools, office buildings, recreational facilities, nursing homes, and family housing.
He has had training and experience in site and environmental analysis, schematic design, building cost analysis, code research, design development, construction documents and graphics, specifications and material research and document checking and coordination, building procedures, construction phase observation and office procedures (Testimony of Petitioner, Respondent's Exhibit 1)
Petitioner was registered as an architect on February 5, 1976 in Massachusetts after successful completion of the National Council of Architectural Registration Board's (NCARB) equivalency examination in June 1975 and the NCARB professional examination in December 1975. At the time Petitioner
was issued registration in that state, the law provided in Section 60C of Chapter 112, General Laws, that an applicant must either submit satisfactory evidence of graduation from an accredited school of architecture and of such practical experience in architectural work as the State Board proscribed by regulation, or that an applicant could submit satisfactory evidence of such other academic experience, practical experience, or both, as the Board prescribed. Regulations promulgated by the State Board pursuant to the General Laws provided in Chapter 30A, Section 4, that an applicant who was not a graduate of an architectural school would be required to submit satisfactory evidence of having completed eight years of practical experience in architectural work and one additional such year of work for each year short of graduation, but not more than five additional years. (Testimony of Petitioner, Petitioner's Exhibit 3)
NCARB is a national organization that Sponsors registration laws in all states, formulates the standard examinations for architect registration, including Florida, establishes equivalence for its basic certificate requirements in education and training, and maintains and transmits professional records to state boards with recommendations for registration of architects who meet the organizational standards. If a registered architect in one state holds an NCARB certificate, NCARB will transmit a certified copy of his record to any state board, together with a recommendation that he be licensed as an architect without further examination. With such certification, reciprocal registration can be obtained in a great majority of the states without further examination and without making a personal appearance. Issuance of the NCARB certificate is based on the highest standards established by individual state boards. The NCARB equivalency examination is a two-day, twenty hour examination concentrating on architectural history and theory, design and construction theory and practice. It is required of non-degree applicants for NCARB certification. The Professional examination is a two-day, sixteen hour examination designed to place the candidate in areas relating to actual architectural situations whereby his abilities to exercise competent value judgments are tested and evaluated. It covers the subjects of environmental analysis, building programing, design and technology, and construction. (Testimony of Petitioner, Petitioner's Composite Exhibit 4, Respondent's Exhibit 1)
In 1978, Petitioner applied for and was granted NCARB Certification. In evaluating his record in this regard, NCARB determined that he possessed the equivalent of five years of education based on his academic credits and employment by architectural firms. On October 19, 1979, NCARB transmitted the Petitioner's record to Respondent in support of his application for state registration. (Testimony of Petitioner, Respondent's Exhibit 1)
In Respondent's Rule 21B-8.05, Florida Administrative Code, provides that applications for registration will be reviewed by Respondent's Educational Advisory Committee when requested by the Board, to determine, among other things, a comparison of standards for equivalency for applicants who do not hold an academic degree in architecture. In such instances, the Committee customarily meets with the applicant, reviews his academic credentials and experience, and makes recommendations for registration to Respondent Board of Architecture. In making such determinations in the past, the Committee has on several occasions recommended candidates for registration who have not completed their degree requirements. In several instances, they have recommended that an applicant enroll in a graduate program in a special capacity so that he could be evaluated and a determination made as to his capabilities which might justify a recommendation of registration. However, in such instances, the individual was
not required to obtain a degree prior to a favorable recommendation. In the opinion of the present chairman of the Educational Advisory Committee, Arnold F. Butt, who is presently the chairman of the Department of Architecture at the University of Florida, it is possible for the Committee to determine that an applicant has attained the required capability by work experience, but it is necessary that he demonstrate such fact to the Committee. He does not believe that providing an applicant an equivalent of one year's formal education for one year of architectural work experience is sufficient in itself to permit such a determination without evaluating the nature and extent of such experience. He is further of the opinion that, although successful completion of the NCARB equivalency examination demonstrates that a candidate has some minimal capabilities, which any candidate of a degree program would have, it is not sufficient in itself as a substitute for formal education, particularly in the area of architectural design. The Petitioner's application and NCARB record were not referred to the Educational Advisory Committee, nor did it make a recommendation to Respondent prior to the letter of denial of the application on November 9, 1979. (Testimony of Butts, Rule 21B-8.05, F.A.C.)
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Petitioner seeks a certificate of registration as an architect under the provisions of Section 481.213(3)(b) Florida Statutes, which provides as follows:
481.213 Licensure.--
The board shall certify as qualified for a license by endorsement an applicant who:
(b) Holds a valid license to practice archi- tecture issued by another state or territory of the United States, if the criteria for issuance of such license were substantially equivalent to the licensure criteria which existed in this state at the time the license was issued.
Accordingly, inasmuch as Petitioner holds a valid license to practice architecture in Massachusetts the sole question for determination in this proceeding is whether the standards applied by Massachusetts in granting Petitioner's license were "Substantially equivalent" to the standards that were applicable in Florida when the license was issued. If that question is determined in the affirmative, it is unnecessary for Petitioner to establish any other qualifications for licensure. However, if the question is answered in the negative, Petitioner's application must be denied since he does not qualify under other applicable provisions of Chapter 481, Florida Statutes, in that he does not hold an architectural degree, nor has he engaged in the practice of architecture as a registered architect in another state for not less than ten years.
Petitioner was issued a license in Massachusetts in 1976. The statutory criteria for the issuance of his license was as follows:
GENERAL LAWS -- CHAPTER 112
Section 60C Every person applying to the board
for registration shall submit with his application to the board evidence of graduation from a recog- nized high school or its equivalent. The applicant
shall also submit satisfactory evidence of graduation
from an accredited school of architecture and of such practical experience in architectural work
as the board may by regulation prescribe. In lieu of evidence of graduation from an accredited school of architecture, the applicant may submit satis- factory evidence of such other academic experience, practical experience, or both, as the board may by regulation prescribe. The board shall thereupon examine the applicant in writing, on such technical and professional subjects as are prescribed by it. A written examination may be supplemented by such oral examination as the board may determine. The board may exempt from said written examination a holder of a certificate of qualification issued
by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards.
The board may adopt as its own rules and regulations governing academic and practical experience those guidelines published from time to time by the
National Council of Architectural Registration Boards. The board may also adopt the examinations and recom- mended grading procedures of the National Council
of Architectural Registration Boards. (Emphasis added)
The pertinent regulations of the Massachusetts Board of Registration of Architects were contained in Chapter 30A, Section 4 thereof pertinently as follows:
SECTION 4 - APPLICATION PROCEDURE
4.6 Eligibility - Eligibility or ineligibility for admission to the written examination shall be determined by the Board after verification of information contained in the application.
3. An applicant who is not a graduate of an architectural school shall be required to sub- mit evidence of having completed eight (8) years of practical experience in architectural work and one (1) additional such year of work
for each year short of graduation from an archi- tectural school approved by the Board, but not more than five (5) additional years.
4.10 Practical Experience in Architectural Work
a. The norm for evaluating "practical experience in architectural work" shall be practical training in offices of practicing registered architects ....
The Massachusetts regulations further provided that non-degree applicants must pass the NCARB equivalency and professional examinations.
In 1976, the applicable Florida requirements for architect registration were set forth in Section 467.08, F.S. (1975), which provided Pertinently as follows:
467.88 Rules governing examinations.
(1) . . .
(b) Any applicant for examination shall establish by satisfactory evidence to the board with his application that:
He is 18 years of age;
He is a citizen of the United States or has pending a declaration of intention so
to become;
He is of good moral character;
He is a graduate of an accredited high school or has education equivalent thereto; and
He is a graduate of a school or college of architecture appearing upon the list of
approved schools and colleges of architecture as adopted and published by the board in its rules, with graduation from an acceptable
5 year program with a professional degree
of Bachelor of Architecture or a professional degree of Master of Architecture, evidenced by a diploma setting forth the applicant's degree; or has had education and training which shall be
found by the board to be fully equivalent to such degree. Unless such applicant has had the profess- ional degree of Master of Architecture, such applicant must also demonstrate to the board that
he has a minimum of 1 year of diversified experience in offices of registered practicing architects.
Applicants otherwise qualified who success- fully pass the examination provided herein shall be issued a certificate of registration by the board for the practice of architecture in this state, upon satisfactory completion of diversified experience in offices of registered practicing
architects, or the equivalent thereof as determined by the board for a period of time as provided in the rules of the board, not to exceed:
Three years for applicants holding the degree of Bachelor of Architecture.
Two years for applicants holding the degree of Master of Architecture. (Emphasis added)
Respondent's regulations for licensure were contained in Chapter 21B, Florida Administrative Code, in 1976. Rule 21B-1.06 f. provided:
(f) The term "Education and training which
shall be found by the Board to be fully equivalent to such degree" set forth in Section 478.08(b)5 Florida Statutes and in these rules shall mean:
formal educational training in architectural curriculum which shall be found by the Board, after receiving the recommendations of the Board's educational advisory committee, to qualify the applicant for a degree of Bachelor of Architecture
from an acceptable five year program or a degree of Master of Architecture from an institution appearing upon the list of approved schools or colleges of architecture adopted and published by the Board in its Rules, where such degree has not actually been conferred on such applicant, or
not less than ten years experience as a registered architect in another state engaged in the active practice of architecture as a principal.
It thus can be seen that Petitioner's licensure in Massachusetts was predicated upon the criteria that (a) he was a high school graduate, (b) he had submitted satisfactory evidence of sufficient academic and practical experience in architectural work, and (c) had satisfactorily passed the NCARB equivalency and professional examinations.
If Petitioner had applied for registration in Florida in 1976, the above referenced statutes and regulations show that he would have been required to establish by satisfactory evidence that (a) he was a high school graduate or had the educational equivalent thereto, and (b) education and training Fully equivalent to a degree of Bachelor of Architecture, (c) passed the requisite Professional examination (NCARB examination), and (d) completed at least three years of diversified experience in offices of registered practicing architects. In this regard, Rule 21B-3.02 provided percentage credits for such experience prior and subsequent to graduation from architectural school, but did not indicate whether a person such as Petitioner who did not have a degree could apply his prior experience to such requirement. Graduates were also required to show one year of experience prior to being permitted to take the professional examination.
In comparing the two state standards, it is readily apparent that although Massachusetts essentially followed the NCARB criteria for NCARB certification in evaluating prior education and training, by equating prior experience to formal education to arrive at degree equivalency, Florida, by rule, ostensibly disregarded such work experience and required "formal educational training" which was equivalent to the five-year architectural degree. However, the evidence establishes that Respondent did not always hue to that rigid requirement and, in practice, evaluated each non-degree applicant on a combination of factors which included formal education and the extent and quality of his prior work experience. In this connection, the First District Court of Appeals, in Burford v. Florida State Board of Architecture, 324 So 2d 853 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), considered a somewhat similar situation arising under a prior version of Section 467.08(1)(b)5 which authorized an applicant to take the examination if he had "training which shall be found by the board to be fully equivalent to such degree." In that case, the Board of Architecture had denied Burford's application for the reason that he did not have a degree. Be brought an action for declaratory judgment in the Leon County Circuit Court and the summary final judgment in that case found that the State Board had not complied with the provisions of the statutes by not recognizing the concept of equivalency. The Circuit Court defined the training requirement to mean that an applicant "shall have acquired by any combination of private study, classroom education, on the job training and/or other practical experience, proficiency which sustains the applicant's equivalency to the degree of competency of a person who holds a degree in architecture and who would be eligible to take the examination for registration as an architect administered by the defendant." Upon being ordered by the Circuit Court to consider Burford's application in the light of that language, the Board again denied the application and the District
Court of Appeal found that the decision of the Board was unsupported and ordered Burford's registration. In 1974, Section 468.08(1)(b)5 was amended to read "education and training which shall be found by the Board to be fully equivalent to such degree."
The Supreme Court recently upheld the 1973 "training" equivalency standard of Section 467.08 in Florida State Board of Architecture v. Wasserman,
377 So 2d 653 (Fla 1979) In that case, Wasserman had taken the same route as Burford to secure a declaratory judgment in Circuit Court after being denied registration by Respondent. The Circuit Court used the same definition for "training" as it had in the Burford case. After being denied licensure again by the Board under that standard, and after the First District Court of Appeal had held the statute unconstitutional (Wasserman v. Florida State Board of Architecture, 361 So 2d 792, (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)), the Supreme Court held the provision to be constitutional. In discussing the training equivalency provision of the statute, the Court stated that "the legislature intended that the board evaluate the applicant's training by comparing it to the curriculum required for graduation from a school or college of architecture." It is considered that the 1974 standard of "education and training" requires a similar, and perhaps more stringent interpretation
The above indicates that the pertinent licensing criteria in effect in Florida during 1976 were fundamentally different from that of Massachusetts. Whereas Massachusetts looked solely to the applicant's number of years of experience in determining educational equivalency, Florida was required to assess an applicant's experience by comparing it to a college curriculum. It is thus determined that Massachusetts criteria for issuance of Petitioner's license were not "Substantially equivalent" to Florida's criteria, and therefore the application should be denied.
Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order and Petitioner's Memorandum of Law have been fully considered. Those portions thereof which have not been adopted herein are considered to be either unnecessary, irrelevant, or unwarranted in fact or law, and are specifically rejected.
That Respondent Florida State Board of Architecture deny the application of Petitioner John J. Bagdonas for license by endorsement pursuant to Chapter 481, Florida Statutes.
DONE and ENTERED this 7th day of July, 1980, in Tallahassee, Florida.
THOMAS C. OLDHAM
Division of Administrative Hearings Room 101, Collins Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301
John Rimes, Esquire Assistant Attorney General The Capitol - LL04 Tallahassee, Florida 32301
State Board of Architecture Attn: Mr. Herbert Coons, Jr. 2009 Apalachee Parkway
