The Architects Practice Act provides for licensing and regulation of persons engaged in the practice of architecture by the California Architects Board, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and defines the term architect for those purposes. That act requires an applicant for licensure as an architect to, among other things, take an examination. Existing regulations require an applicant for licensure to take the Architect Registration Examination.

This bill would authorize a person to use the title architect-in-training while he or she is enrolled in the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards Architectural Experience Program, as specified. The bill would prohibit the use of an abbreviation or derivative of that title and would prohibit a person from using that title to independently offer or provide services to the public. The bill would authorize the board to disclose a persons authorization to use that title to a member of the public upon request. The bill would provide that the use of that title in violation of these provisions may constitute unprofessional conduct and subject the user of the title to administrative action, including, but not limited to, citation. The bill would repeal this provision on January 1, 2020.

The Architects Practice Act provides for licensing and regulation of persons engaged in the practice of architecture by the California Architects Board, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and defines the term architect for those purposes. That act requires an applicant for licensure as an architect to, among other things, take an examination. Existing regulations require an applicant for licensure to take the Architect Registration Examination.

This bill would define the term architect-in-training, for purposes of that act, as a person who has received board confirmation of eligibility for the Architect Registration Examination and is employed under the direct supervision of a licensed architect, and would authorize a person to use the title architect-in-training for purposes of employment in the state if he or she meets the definition of that term. authorize a person to use the title architect-in training while he or she is enrolled in the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards Architectural Experience Program, as specified. The bill would prohibit the use of an abbreviation or derivative of that title and would prohibit a person from using that title to independently offer or provide services to the public. The bill would authorize the board to disclose a persons authorization to use that title to a member of the public upon request. The bill would provide that the use of that tittle in violation of these provision may constitute unprofessional conduct and subject the user of the title to administrative action, including, but not limited to, citation. The bill would repeal this provision on January 1, 2020.

The Architects Practice Act provides for licensing and regulation of persons engaged in the practice of architecture by the California Architects Board, which is within the Department of Consumer Affairs, and defines the term architect for those purposes. That act requires an applicant for licensure as an architect to, among other things, take an examination. Existing regulations require an applicant for licensure to take the Architect Registration Examination.

This bill would define the term architect-in-training, for purposes of that act, as a person who has received board confirmation of eligibility for the Architect Registration Examination and is employed under the direct supervision of a licensed architect, and would authorize a person to use the title architect-in-training for purposes of employment in the state if he or she meets the definition of that term.

 VETO  

Bill No: SB 1132

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE BUS., PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE: 8-0, 4/4/16

AYES: Hill, Bates, Berryhill, Block, Galgiani, Hernandez, Jackson, Mendoza

NO VOTE RECORDED: Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/27/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0, 5/31/16

AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0, 8/30/16

AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 8/22/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: American Institute of Architects, California Council

DIGEST: This bill permits a person to use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in the Architectural Experience Program (AXP), which is administered by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB).

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Architects Board (CAB) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), which licenses and regulates professional architects under the Architects Practice Act. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 5500, et seq.)
2. Defines “architect” as a person who is licensed to practice architecture in this state under the authority of the Architects Practice Act. (BPC § 5500)

This bill:

1. Specifies that a person may use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in the AXP, which is administered by the NCARB.
2. Specifies that no abbreviations or derivatives of the title may be used.
3. Prohibits a person using the title from independently offering or providing services to the public.
4. Provides that a violation of the use of the title may constitute unprofessional conduct and subject the user to administrative action, including, but not limited to, citation, discipline, and denial of a license.
5. Sunsets the provisions above on January 1, 2020, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2020, deletes or extends that date.

Background

This bill authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title "architect-in-training." This bill is sponsored by the American Institute of Architects, California Council (AIACC). According to the Author, "This bill simply allows individuals who are working hard to become licensed architects in California to use the job title 'architect-in-training'. [This bill] seeks to recognize those who are on path to becoming licensed architects or offer architectural services. This title will not harm the public because it is clear the title does not imply licensure."

Architectural Experience Program. On June 29, 2016, the Intern Development Program (IDP) was updated to reflect six broad areas of current architectural practice—and renamed the AXP. According to the CAB Web site, the CAB "implemented the AXP requirement for the purpose of ensuring that all interns gain uniform, broad, and comprehensive experience in areas of architectural training that are essential for competent practice, thus benefiting interns, architects, firms, and the public in general.

"In addition, all other states require completion of [the] AXP for initial licensure. The NCARB AXP Council Record is the only record keeping method that is recognized by all United States jurisdictions and Canadian provinces. [The] AXP is also the primary method used to meet the training requirement for NCARB Certification, which is a compilation of an architect’s education, training/work experience, and examination history that is used as a tool to facilitate reciprocity. The [CAB] believes completion of [the] AXP not only helps ensure the minimal competence of architectural candidates but also helps facilitate interstate and international practice."

According to the NCARB Web site, "Most licensure candidates will complete the AXP by reporting hours. [A participant] will need to document a minimum of 3,740 required hours under the six experience areas to complete the program. Some tasks may be easier to complete early in [his or her] career, while others may take more time and experience to complete. …At least half of [the] experience must be completed under the supervision of a qualified architect; however, there are many ways to complete the remainder of [the] AXP hours outside the employment of an architect. These opportunities will be covered in the experience settings section."

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee Analysis dated on April 25, 2016, this bill “would provide title protection for architects-in-training, but does not specify what level of licensing and enforcement the California Architects Board would provide.” The analysis highlights that costs would be associated with processing applications, tracking licenses, developing oversight, outreach, and enforcement of this new license category, and developing an examination. While the bill is similar in concept, it has been amended significantly since it passed out of the Senate.

SUPPORT: (Verified 10/11/16)

American Institute of Architects, California Council

OPPOSITION: (Verified 10/11/16)

California Council for Interior Design Certification

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The American Institute of Architects, California Council writes in support, “[This bill] would allow individuals to have the job title “architect-in-training” during their internship once they are eligible to take the licensing examinations and if they work under the direct supervision of a licensed architect. This job title does not harm the public as it does not imply licensure or grant any of the authority of a licensed architect. Importantly, it is helpful as it describes the qualifications of the individual to clients of an architectural firm. Finally, the granting of an “in-training” paraprofessional title has precedent. California law allows the titles “engineer-in-training” and “land surveyor-in-training” to qualified candidates in those professional fields.”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The California Council for Interior Design Certification writes that this title “has no proven consumer demand [and] is designed to purchase more territory in the pursuit of legitimization without justification, cause, or merit.”

GOVERNOR'S VETO MESSAGE:

I am returning Senate Bill 1132 without my signature.

This bill would allow a person to use the title architect-in-training if they have earned a high school diploma and are enrolled in the National Council of Architectural Registration Board's Experience Program.

In May 2015, this very same Board discouraged the use of any title that implied a person was an architect, stating "architects are those who have met all the requirements to become licensed everyone else is not an architect." I agree with this assessment.

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 8/22/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Melendez

Prepared by:

10/17/16 14:51:05

**** END ****

 UNFINISHED BUSINESS  

Bill No: SB 1132

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE BUS., PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE: 8-0, 4/4/16

AYES: Hill, Bates, Berryhill, Block, Galgiani, Hernandez, Jackson, Mendoza

NO VOTE RECORDED: Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/27/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0, 5/31/16

AYES: Allen, Anderson, Bates, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, De León, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani, Glazer, Hall, Hancock, Hernandez, Hertzberg, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Lara, Leno, Leyva, Liu, McGuire, Mendoza, Mitchell, Monning, Moorlach, Morrell, Nguyen, Nielsen, Pan, Pavley, Roth, Stone, Vidak, Wieckowski, Wolk

NO VOTE RECORDED: Runner

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 8/22/16 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: American Institute of Architects, California Council

DIGEST: This bill permits a person to use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in the Architectural Experience Program (AXP), which is administered by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB).

Assembly Amendments permit a person to use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in NCARB’s AXP, prohibit a person using the title from independently offering or providing services to the public, and sunset the specified provisions on January 1, 2020.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Architects Board (CAB) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), which licenses and regulates professional architects under the Architects Practice Act. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 5500, et seq.)
2. Defines “architect” as a person who is licensed to practice architecture in this state under the authority of the Architects Practice Act. (BPC § 5500)

This bill:

1. Specifies that a person may use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in the AXP, which is administered by the NCARB.
2. Specifies that no abbreviations or derivatives of the title may be used.
3. Prohibits a person using the title from independently offering or providing services to the public.
4. Provides that a violation of the use of the title may constitute unprofessional conduct and subject the user to administrative action, including, but not limited to, citation, discipline, and denial of a license.
5. Sunsets the provisions above on January 1, 2020, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2020, deletes or extends that date.

Background

This bill authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title "architect-in-training." This bill is sponsored by the American Institute of Architects, California Council (AIACC). According to the author, "This bill simply allows individuals who are working hard to become licensed architects in California to use the job title 'architect-in-training'. [This bill] seeks to recognize those who are on path to becoming licensed architects or offer architectural services. This title will not harm the public because it is clear the title does not imply licensure."

Architectural Experience Program. On June 29, 2016, the Intern Development Program (IDP) was updated to reflect six broad areas of current architectural practice—and renamed the AXP. According to the CAB Web site, the CAB "implemented the AXP requirement for the purpose of ensuring that all interns gain uniform, broad, and comprehensive experience in areas of architectural training that are essential for competent practice, thus benefiting interns, architects, firms, and the public in general.

"In addition, all other states require completion of [the] AXP for initial licensure. The NCARB AXP Council Record is the only record keeping method that is recognized by all United States jurisdictions and Canadian provinces. [The] AXP is also the primary method used to meet the training requirement for NCARB Certification, which is a compilation of an architect’s education, training/work experience, and examination history that is used as a tool to facilitate reciprocity. The [CAB] believes completion of [the] AXP not only helps ensure the minimal competence of architectural candidates but also helps facilitate interstate and international practice."

According to the NCARB Web site, "Most licensure candidates will complete the AXP by reporting hours. [A participant] will need to document a minimum of 3,740 required hours under the six experience areas to complete the program. Some tasks may be easier to complete early in [his or her] career, while others may take more time and experience to complete. …At least half of [the] experience must be completed under the supervision of a qualified architect; however, there are many ways to complete the remainder of [the] AXP hours outside the employment of an architect. These opportunities will be covered in the experience settings section."

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee Analysis dated on April 25, 2016, this bill “would provide title protection for architects-in-training, but does not specify what level of licensing and enforcement the California Architects Board would provide.” The analysis highlights that costs would be associated with processing applications, tracking licenses, developing oversight, outreach, and enforcement of this new license category, and developing an examination. While the bill is similar in concept, it has been amended significantly since it passed out of the Senate.

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/22/16)

American Institute of Architects, California Council

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/22/16)

California Council for Interior Design Certification

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The American Institute of Architects, California Council writes in support, “[This bill] would allow individuals to have the job title “architect-in-training” during their internship once they are eligible to take the licensing examinations and if they work under the direct supervision of a licensed architect. This job title does not harm the public as it does not imply licensure or grant any of the authority of a licensed architect. Importantly, it is helpful as it describes the qualifications of the individual to clients of an architectural firm. Finally, the granting of an “in-training” paraprofessional title has precedent. California law allows the titles “engineer-in-training” and “land surveyor-in-training” to qualified candidates in those professional fields.”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION: The California Council for Interior Design Certification writes that this title “has no proven consumer demand [and] is designed to purchase more territory in the pursuit of legitimization without justification, cause, or merit.”

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 79-0, 8/22/16

AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker, Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke, Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley, Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto, Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Harper, Roger Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey, Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes, McCarty, Medina, Mullin, Nazarian, Obernolte, O'Donnell, Olsen, Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago, Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber, Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon

NO VOTE RECORDED: Melendez

Prepared by:

8/29/16 10:34:43

**** END ****

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 1132

Author:(Galgiani)

As Introduced Ver:August 18, 2016

Majority vote

SENATE VOTE: 39-0

SUMMARY: Permits a person to use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in the Architectural Experience Program (AXP), which is administered by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB). Specifically, this bill:

1. Specifies that a person may use the title "architect-in-training" while enrolled in the AXP, which is administered by the NCARB.
2. Specifies that no abbreviations or derivatives of the title may be used.
3. Prohibits a person using the title from independently offering or providing services to the public.
4. Provides that a violation of the use of the title may constitute unprofessional conduct and subject the user to administrative action, including, but not limited to, citation, discipline, and denial of a license.
5. Sunsets the provisions above on January 1, 2020, unless a later enacted statute, that is enacted before January 1, 2020, deletes or extends that date.

FISCAL EFFECT: None. This bill has been keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

Purpose. This bill authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title "architect-in-training." This bill is sponsored by the American Institute of Architects, California Council (AIACC). According to the author, "This bill simply allows individuals who are working hard to become licensed architects in California to use the job title 'architect-in-training'. [This bill] seeks to recognize those who are on path to becoming licensed architects or offer architectural services. This title will not harm the public because it is clear the title does not imply licensure."

Background: The California Architects Board (CAB) was created in 1901 by the Legislature to fulfill the mission of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public through the regulation of the practice of architecture in California. The CAB administers the licensing and enforcement programs and establishes regulations for examination and licensing of the profession of architecture in California, which today numbers approximately 21,000 licensed architects and approximately 11,000 candidates who are in the process of meeting examination and licensure requirements.

State licensing boards and bureaus enforce both practice restrictions and title restrictions in the licensing of professions. Practice acts require licensed professionals to obtain a professional license by meeting certain educational and experience requirements, while title acts simply permit professionals to meet certain requirements to use a title and prohibit those who have not met those standards from using the specified title.

Path to Licensure. According to the CAB website, obtaining a license involves requirements that a candidate can meet in multiple ways. Although each candidate's path to licensure may differ, all candidates ideally will complete the process with the necessary knowledge, skills, and ability to be a licensed architect.

The CAB looks at three separate aspects of an individual's architectural development (education, experience, and examination) to assess a candidate's knowledge, skills, and ability to perform the architectural services. Once a candidate has fulfilled all the necessary requirements, he or she is eligible to receive a license to practice architecture in California.

Architectural Experience Program. On June 29, 2016, the Intern Development Program (IDP) was updated to reflect six broad areas of current architectural practice—and renamed the AXP. According to the CAB Web site, the CAB "implemented the AXP requirement for the purpose of ensuring that all interns gain uniform, broad, and comprehensive experience in areas of architectural training that are essential for competent practice, thus benefiting interns, architects, firms, and the public in general.

"In addition, all other states require completion of [the] AXP for initial licensure. The NCARB AXP Council Record is the only record keeping method that is recognized by all United States jurisdictions and Canadian provinces. [The] AXP is also the primary method used to meet the training requirement for NCARB Certification, which is a compilation of an architect’s education, training/work experience, and examination history that is used as a tool to facilitate reciprocity. The [CAB] believes completion of [the] AXP not only helps ensure the minimal competence of architectural candidates but also helps facilitate interstate and international practice."

According to the NCARB website, "Most licensure candidates will complete the AXP by reporting hours. [A participant] will need to document a minimum of 3,740 required hours under the six experience areas to complete the program. Some tasks may be easier to complete early in [his or her] career, while others may take more time and experience to complete. …At least half of [the] experience must be completed under the supervision of a qualified architect; however, there are many ways to complete the remainder of [the] AXP hours outside the employment of an architect. These opportunities will be covered in the experience settings section."

Engineer-In-Training and Land Surveyor-In-Training. Business and Professions Code (BPC) Section 6756 of the Professional Engineers Act and BPC Section 8747(a) of the Professional Land Surveyors Act, requires the respective professionals to obtain an "in-training" certificate prior to licensure. These certificates do not authorize the holder of the certificate to practice or offer to practice engineering or land surveying work. Many employers look to see if an applicant has an "in-training" certificate prior to employment.

Applicants for certification as an engineer-in-training are required to successfully pass the first of two divisions of the licensure examination. The applicant must be eligible to sit for the first division of the examination after satisfactory completion specified education and experience requirements. Applicants for certification as a land surveyor-in-training must similarly pass the first of two divisions of the licensure examination in order to be granted certification.

NCARB Future Title Task Force. In 2014, the NCARB created the Future Title Task Force to discuss what professionals who are on the path to become licensed architects should be called. Over the course of many months, the task force carefully debated the issue, and finally came to the conclusion that there is no agreed-upon terminology for professionals on the path to licensure. NCARB stated, "The Task Force recommended that any title held by those pursuing licensure does not need to be regulated. In other words, it is recommended that NCARB discontinue the use of the word intern, intern architect, or any other regulatory 'title' describing those pursuing licensure."

The CAB's Position. The CAB convened a working group on July 13, 2016 to review staff's research, potential models, and to develop proposed language. The working group, with participation from AIACC, agreed on a model and finalized language, ultimately recommending that this bill be amended to: 1) authorize individuals who are actively participating in the AXP to use the title "architect-in-training," but no other abbreviations or derivatives of that title; 2) prohibit the use of the title to independently offer or provide services to the public; 3) allow the CAB to disclose an individual's authorization to use the title to the public; 4) delineate penalty provisions for misuse of the title; and 5) include a sunset provision. This bill reflects that recommendation.

Analysis Prepared by: Gabby Nepomuceno / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301 FN: 0004242

SENATE THIRD READING

STR Bill Id:SB 1132

Author:(Galgiani)

As Introduced Ver:February 18, 2016

Majority vote

SENATE VOTE: 39-0

SUMMARY: Authorizes a person who has received confirmation of eligibility for the Architect Registration Examination (ARE) and who are seeking licensure to use the job title "architect-in-training." Specifically, this bill:

1) Defines "architect-in-training" as:

• 1. A person who has received confirmation of eligibility for the ARE; and,
  2. A person who is employed under the direct supervision of an architect licensed under the Architects Practice Act.

2) Authorizes professionals to use the title "architect-in-training" if the above definitional requirements are met.

FISCAL EFFECT: None. This bill has been keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

Purpose. This bill authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title "architect-in-training." This bill is sponsored by the American Institute of Architects, California Council (AIACC). According to the author, "This bill simply allows individuals who are working hard to become licensed architects in California to use the job title 'architect-in-training'. [This bill] seeks to recognize those who are on path to becoming licensed architects or offer architectural services. This title will not harm the public because it is clear the title does not imply licensure."

Background: The California Architects Board (CAB) was created in 1901 by the Legislature to fulfill the mission of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public through the regulation of the practice of architecture in California. The CAB administers the licensing and enforcement programs and establishes regulations for examination and licensing of the profession of architecture in California, which today numbers approximately 21,000 licensed architects and approximately 11,000 candidates who are in the process of meeting examination and licensure requirements.

State licensing boards and bureaus enforce both practice restrictions and title restrictions in the licensing of professions. Practice acts require licensed professionals to obtain a professional license by meeting certain educational and experience requirements, while title acts simply permit professionals to meet certain requirements to use a title and prohibit those who have not met those standards from using the specified title.

Path to Licensure. According to the CAB website, obtaining a license involves requirements that a candidate can meet in multiple ways. Although each candidate's path to licensure may differ, all candidates ideally will complete the process with the necessary knowledge, skills, and ability to be a licensed architect.

The CAB looks at three separate aspects of an individual's architectural development (education, experience, and examination) to assess a candidate's knowledge, skills, and ability to perform the architectural services. Once a candidate has fulfilled all the necessary requirements, he or she is eligible to receive a license to practice architecture in California.

Eligibility to Sit for the ARE. According to the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) website, NCARB serves a variety of roles in the licensure process, including the development and administration of the Individual Development Program, the ARE, and NCARB certification, which facilitates reciprocal registration. The ARE is the national computerized architectural licensing examination, which consists of seven divisions that include multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank, and check-all-that-apply questions as well as graphic vignettes.

The ARE tests candidates' knowledge, skills, and ability to provide the various services required in the design and construction of buildings. Candidates may apply for an ARE eligibility evaluation at any time they believe the requirements have been met. NCARB will send eligible candidates an email confirmation of eligibility once testing authorizations have been granted by the CAB. Testing eligibility remains valid as long as a candidate is active in the examination process. The CAB's regulations define an active candidate as one who takes (regardless of the result) at least one ARE division within five years of being determined eligible or since the last exam.

To be eligible for the ARE, a candidate is required to meet one of the following requirements, which are outlined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Section 116, and possess an active Council Record with the NCARB:

1. Have a degree in architecture accredited by the National Architectural Accrediting Board from a school of architecture as approved by CAB;
2. Have at least sixty net months of architectural training and experience under the direct supervision of an architect in private practice or the equivalent as evaluated by CAB; or,
3. Have a combination of educational and experience credit as evaluated by CAB such as to total sixty net months. 


Engineer-In-Training and Land Surveyor-In-Training. Business and Professions Code (BPC) Section 6756 of the Professional Engineers Act and BPC Section 8747(a) of the Professional Land Surveyors Act, requires the respective professionals to obtain an "in-training" certificate prior to licensure. These certificates do not authorize the holder of the certificate to practice or offer to practice engineering or land surveying work. Many employers look to see if an applicant has an "in-training" certificate prior to employment.

Applicants for certification as an engineer-in-training are required to successfully pass the first of two divisions of the licensure examination. The applicant must be eligible to sit for the first division of the examination after satisfactory completion specified education and experience requirements. Applicants for certification as a land surveyor-in-training must similarly pass the first of two divisions of the licensure examination in order to be granted certification.

NCARB Future Title Task Force. In 2014, the NCARB created the Future Title Task Force to discuss what professionals who are on the path to become licensed architects should be called. Over the course of many months, the task force carefully debated the issue, and finally came to the conclusion that there is no agreed-upon terminology for professionals on the path to licensure. NCARB stated, "The Task Force recommended that any title held by those pursuing licensure does not need to be regulated. In other words, it is recommended that NCARB discontinue the use of the word intern, intern architect, or any other regulatory 'title' describing those pursuing licensure."

The CAB's Position. Although the board has not submitted a formal letter to this committee, the CAB voted at its June 2016 Board Meeting to oppose this bill unless it amended to address enforcement issues and other implementation details. However, the CAB has indicated that it is amendable to working with the sponsor to develop a proposal.

POLICY ISSUES:

This bill as drafted leaves many questions unanswered. The NCARB has stated that pre-licensure titles do not need to be regulated and has discontinued their use. However, if the "architect-in-training" title is to be used by the industry in this state, there should be some level of oversight as to when it can be used, what qualifications a pre-licensure candidate must meet in order to become an "architect-in-training" and the ramifications, if any, that should be in place for a professional who uses the title but does not meet the minimum qualifications for it.

It is important to note that engineers-in-training and land surveyors-in-training must successfully pass one of two divisions of their respective licensure examinations in order to become certified. As drafted, the current version of the bill does not allow for a direct parallel to be drawn for potential architects-in-training who do not need to pass an examination in order to become eligible for the ARE. As noted above, the CAB's regulations state that eligibility for the ARE remains active so long as a candidate is active in the examination process, regardless of passing a division of the examination or not.

Analysis Prepared by: Gabby Nepomuceno / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301 FN: 0003536

Date of Hearing: June 21, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONS

Rudy Salas, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 1132

Author:(Galgiani) – As Introduced Ver:February 18, 2016

SENATE VOTE: 39-0

SUBJECT: Architects: architects-in-training

SUMMARY: Authorizes a person who has received confirmation of eligibility for the Architect Registration Examination (ARE) and who are seeking licensure to use the job title “architect-in-training.”

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the California Architects Board (CAB) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), which licenses and regulates professional architects under the Architects Practice Act. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) Section 5500, et seq.)
2. Defines “architect” as a person who is licensed to practice architecture in this state under the authority of the Architects Practice Act. (BPC Section 5500)

THIS BILL:

1. Defines “architect-in-training” as:
   1. A person who has received confirmation of eligibility for the ARE; and,
   2. A person who is employed under the direct supervision of an architect licensed under the Architects Practice Act.
2. Authorizes professionals to use the title “architect-in-training” if the above definitional requirements are met.

FISCAL EFFECT: None. This bill has been keyed non-fiscal by the Legislative Counsel.

According to the Senate Committee on Appropriations, the bill as drafted would provide title protection for architects-in-training, but does not specify what level of licensing and enforcement the California Architects Board would provide. The following fiscal estimates assume that the level of oversight is comparable to that provided for engineers-in-training currently provided by the Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.

• One-time information technology costs of $100,000 to allow the Board to process applications and track licenses .
• Ongoing costs of about $120,000 per year for initial program development, licensing oversight, outreach, and enforcement
• Potential one-time costs of about $300,000 for the development of an examination. As noted above, the Board has looked at the program for licensing engineers-in-training for comparison. Applicants for licensure as engineers-in-training are required to take an examination. If the California Architects Board were to decide to require an examination for licensure as an architect-in-training, it would need to conduct an occupational analysis and develop such a test (there is no existing test of this kind to the CAB’s knowledge).
• Unknown potential increase in state employment costs (various funds). Under the current civil service system, state employee compensation sometimes depends upon license status. Some civil service employees can receive higher compensation if the individual has a professional license in his or her field. At this time it is not known how many state employees could seek licensure as an architect-in-training or whether gaining such a license would increase their compensation.

COMMENTS:

Purpose. This bill authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title “architect-in-training.” This bill is sponsored by the American Institute of Architects, California Council (AIACC). According to the author, “This bill simply allows individuals who are working hard to become licensed architects in California to use the job title ‘architect-in-training’. [This bill] seeks to recognize those who are on path to becoming licensed architects or offer architectural services. This title will not harm the public because it is clear the title does not imply licensure.”

Background: The CAB was created in 1901 by the Legislature to fulfill the mission of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public through the regulation of the practice of architecture in California. The CAB administers the licensing and enforcement programs and establishes regulations for examination and licensing of the profession of architecture in California, which today numbers approximately 21,000 licensed architects and approximately 11,000 candidates who are in the process of meeting examination and licensure requirements.

State licensing boards and bureaus enforce both practice restrictions and title restrictions in the licensing of professions. Practice acts require licensed professionals to obtain a professional license by meeting certain educational and experience requirements, while title acts simply permit professionals to meet certain requirements to use a title and prohibit those who have not met those standards from using the specified title.

Path to Licensure. According to the CAB website, obtaining a license involves requirements that a candidate can meet in multiple ways. Although each candidate’s path to licensure may differ, all candidates ideally will complete the process with the necessary knowledge, skills, and ability to be a licensed architect.

The CAB looks at three separate aspects of an individual’s architectural development (education, experience, and examination) to assess a candidate’s knowledge, skills, and ability to perform the architectural services. Once a candidate has fulfilled all the necessary requirements, he or she is eligible to receive a license to practice architecture in California. These requirements are:

1. Provide verification of five years of education equivalents and three years of architectural practice experience for a total of eight years of experience as evaluated by the CAB, including:
   1. One year of work experience under the direct supervision of an architect licensed in a US jurisdiction; or,
   2. Two years of experience under the direct supervision of an architect registered in a Canadian province;
2. Successful completion of the ARE;
3. Completion of the Intern Development Program (IDP); and,
4. Successful completion of the California Supplemental Examination (CSE).

Eligibility to Sit for the ARE. According to the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) website, NCARB serves a variety of roles in the licensure process, including the development and administration of the IDP, the ARE, and NCARB certification, which facilitates reciprocal registration. The ARE is the national computerized architectural licensing examination, which consists of seven divisions that include multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank, and check-all-that-apply questions as well as graphic vignettes.

The ARE tests candidates’ knowledge, skills, and ability to provide the various services required in the design and construction of buildings. Candidates may apply for an ARE eligibility evaluation at any time they believe the requirements have been met. NCARB will send eligible candidates an email confirmation of eligibility once testing authorizations have been granted by the CAB. Testing eligibility remains valid as long as a candidate is active in the examination process. The CAB’s regulations define an active candidate as one who takes (regardless of the result) at least one ARE division within five years of being determined eligible or since the last exam.

To be eligible for the ARE, a candidate is required to meet one of the following requirements, which are outlined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Section 116, and possess an active Council Record with the NCARB:

1. Have a degree in architecture accredited by the National Architectural Accrediting Board from a school of architecture as approved by CAB;
2. Have at least sixty net months of architectural training and experience under the direct supervision of an architect in private practice or the equivalent as evaluated by CAB; or,
3. Have a combination of educational and experience credit as evaluated by CAB such as to total sixty net months. 


Engineer-In-Training and Land Surveyor-In-Training. BPC Section 6756 of the Professional Engineers Act and BPC Section 8747(a) of the Professional Land Surveyors Act, requires the respective professionals to obtain an “in-training” certificate prior to licensure. These certificates do not authorize the holder of the certificate to practice or offer to practice engineering or land surveying work. Many employers look to see if an applicant has an “in-training” certificate prior to employment.

Applicants for certification as an engineer-in-training are required to successfully pass the first of two divisions of the licensure examination. The applicant must be eligible to sit for the first division of the examination after satisfactory completion specified education and experience requirements. Applicants for certification as a land surveyor-in-training must similarly pass the first of two divisions of the licensure examination in order to be granted certification.

NCARB Future Title Task Force. In 2014, the NCARB created the Future Title Task Force to discuss what professionals who are on the path to become licensed architects should be called. Over the course of many months, the task force carefully debated the issue, and finally came to the conclusion that there is no agreed-upon terminology for professionals on the path to licensure. NCARB stated, “The Task Force recommended that any title held by those pursuing licensure does not need to be regulated. In other words, it is recommended that NCARB discontinue the use of the word intern, intern architect, or any other regulatory ‘title’ describing those pursuing licensure.”

The CAB’s Position. Although the board has not submitted a formal letter to this committee, the CAB voted at its June 2016 Board Meeting to oppose this bill unless it amended to address enforcement issues and other implementation details. However, the CAB has indicated that it is amendable to working with the sponsor to develop a proposal.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

The American Institute of Architects, California Council writes in support, “[This bill] would allow individuals to have the job title “architect-in-training” during their internship once they are eligible to take the licensing examinations and if they work under the direct supervision of a licensed architect. This job title does not harm the public as it does not imply licensure or grant any of the authority of a licensed architect. Importantly, it is helpful as it describes the qualifications of the individual to clients of an architectural firm. Finally, the granting of an “in-training” paraprofessional title has precedent. California law allows the titles “engineer-in-training” and “land surveyor-in-training” to qualified candidates in those professional fields.”

POLICY ISSUES:

As noted in the Senate Committee on Appropriations analysis, this bill as drafted leaves many questions unanswered. The NCARB has stated that pre-licensure titles do not need to be regulated and has discontinued their use. However, if the “architect-in-training” title is to be used by the industry in this state, there should be some level of oversight as to when it can be used, what qualifications a pre-licensure candidate must meet in order to become an “architect-in-training” and the ramifications, if any, that should be in place for a professional who uses the title but does not meet the minimum qualifications for it.

It is important to note that engineers-in-training and land surveyors-in-training must successfully pass one of two divisions of their respective licensure examinations in order to become certified. As drafted, the current version of the bill does not allow for a direct parallel to be drawn for potential architects-in-training who do not need to pass an examination in order to become eligible for the ARE. As noted above, the CAB’s regulations state that eligibility for the ARE remains active so long as a candidate is active in the examination process, regardless of passing a division of the examination or not.

REGISTERED SUPPORT:

American Institute of Architects, California Council

REGISTERED OPPOSITION:

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Gabby Nepomuceno / B. & P. / (916) 319-3301

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: SB 1132

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE BUS., PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE: 8-0, 4/4/16

AYES: Hill, Bates, Berryhill, Block, Galgiani, Hernandez, Jackson, Mendoza

NO VOTE RECORDED: Wieckowski

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 5/27/16

AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: The American Institute of Architects, California Council

DIGEST: This bill authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title “architect-in-training.”

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Architects Board (CAB) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), which licenses and regulates professional architects under the Architects Practice Act. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 5500 et seq.)
2. Defines “architect” as a person who is licensed to practice architecture in this state under the authority of this chapter. (BPC § 5500)

This bill:

1. Defines “architect-in-training” as:
   1. A person who has received board confirmation of eligibility for the Architect Registration Examination; and
   2. A person who is employed under the direct supervision of an architect licensed under the Architects Practice Act.
2. Authorizes professionals to use the title “architect-in-training” if the above definitional requirements are met.

Background

The California Architects Board. The CAB was created in 1901 by the Legislature to fulfill the mission of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public through the regulation of the practice of architecture. The CAB establishes regulations for the examination and licensing of the architecture profession in California, which today numbers approximately 21,000 licensed architects and approximately 11,000 candidates who are in the process of meeting examination and licensure requirements.

National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB) Ruling. In 2014, NCARB created the Future Title Task Force to discuss what professionals who are on the path to become licensed architects should be called. Over the course of many months, the task force carefully debated the issue, and finally came to the conclusion that there is no agreed-upon terminology for professionals on the path to licensure. NCARB states:

“The Task Force recommended that any title held by those pursuing licensure does not need to be regulated. In other words, it is recommended that NCARB discontinue the use of the word intern, intern architect, or any other regulatory ‘title’ describing those pursuing licensure.”

No Official Position by the CAB. The CAB states “at its most recent meeting (March 2016), the Board voted to accept its Regulatory and Enforcement Committee’s (REC) recommendation: ‘to table the matter until AIACC presents a comprehensive proposal with supporting data that has been reviewed and analyzed by Board staff for REC and the Board’s consideration.’ (No new material has been submitted by AIACC.) Unfortunately, testimony in the B & P committee hearing alleged that the ‘Board did not table the matter’ and such statement is untrue.”

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

According to the Senate Appropriations Committee Analysis dated on April 25, 2016, this bill “would provide title protection for architects-in-training, but does not specify what level of licensing and enforcement the California Architects Board would provide.” The analysis highlights that costs would be associated with processing applications, tracking licenses, developing oversight, outreach, and enforcement of this new license category, and developing an examination.

SUPPORT: (Verified 5/27/16)

The American Institute of Architects, California Council (source)

OPPOSITION: (Verified 5/27/16)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT: The American Institute of Architects, California Council writes that “SB 1132 would allow individuals to have the job title ‘architect-in-training’ during their internship once they are eligible to take the licensing examinations. This job title does not harm the public as it does not imply licensure or grant any of the authority of a licensed architect. Importantly, it is helpful as it describes the qualification of the individual to clients of an architectural firm.”

Prepared by:

5/28/16 17:15:14

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Senator Ricardo Lara, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular Session

SB 1132 (Galgiani) - Architects: architects-in-training

This bill meets the criteria for referral to the Suspense File.

Bill Summary:

SB 1132 would authorize certain individuals in training to be licensed as an architect to use the professional title “architect-in-training”.

Fiscal Impact:

The bill, as drafted, would provide title protection for architects-in-training, but does not specify what level of licensing and enforcement the California Architects Board would provide. The following fiscal estimates assume that the level of oversight is comparable to that provided for engineers-in-training currently provided by the Board of Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors, and Geologists.

• One-time information technology costs of $100,000 to allow the Board to process applications and track licenses (California Architects Board Fund).
• Ongoing costs of about $120,000 per year for initial program development, licensing oversight, outreach, and enforcement (California Architects Board Fund).
• Potential one-time costs of about $300,000 for the development of an examination. As noted above, the Board has looked at the program for licensing engineers-in-training for comparison. Applicants for licensure as engineers-in-training are required to take an examination. If the California Architects Board were to decide to require an examination for licensure as an architect-in-training, it would need to conduct an occupational analysis and develop such a test (there is no existing test of this kind to the Board’s knowledge).
• Unknown potential increase in state employment costs (various funds). Under the current civil service system, state employee compensation sometimes depends upon license status. Some civil service employees can receive higher compensation if the individual has a professional license in his or her field. At this time it is not known how many state employees could seek licensure as an architect-in-training or whether gaining such a license would increase their compensation.

Background:

Under current law, the California Architects Board licenses and regulates the profession of architecture. In order to become licensed as an architect, an applicant must have five years of architectural training. The applicant is then required to pass a seven part registration examination. After undergraduate training, a prospective licensee usually spends two to three years working under the supervision of a licensed architect while preparing for and taking the registration examinations.

Proposed Law:

SB 1132 would authorize certain individuals in training to be licensed as an architect to use the professional title “architect-in-training”. Specifically, the bill would allow anyone who has received confirmation from the Board that he or she is eligible for the registration exam and is employed under the supervision of a licensed architect to use the title “architect-in-training”.

Staff Comments:

Under current law, state licensing boards and bureaus enforce both “practice acts” and “title acts” in the licensing of professions. Practice acts require licensed professionals to obtain a professional license (generally by meeting certain educational requirements and/or passage of examinations). In addition, practice acts impose requirements on the practice of the profession by licensees. For example, practice acts may impose professional responsibilities, requirements for protection of the public, continuing education responsibilities, and other requirements. On the other hand, title acts simply permit professionals to meet certain requirements to use a title and prohibit those who have not met those standards from using the specified title. Title acts do not impose professional requirements on the licensed professionals.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Senator Jerry Hill, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: SB 1132 Hearing Date: April 4, 2016

Subject: Architects: architects-in-training

SUMMARY:

Authorizes professionals on the path to licensure to use the job title

“architect-in-training.”

Existing law:

1. Establishes the California Architects Board (CAB) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA), which licenses and regulates professional architects under the Architects Practice Act. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 5500 et seq.)
2. Defines “architect” as a person who is licensed to practice architecture in this state under the authority of this chapter. (BPC § 5500)

This bill:

1. Defines “architect-in-training” as:
2. A person who has received board confirmation of eligibility for the Architect Registration Examination; and
3. A person who is employed under the direct supervision of an architect licensed under the Architects Practice Act.
4. Authorizes professionals to use the title “architect-in-training” if the above definitional requirements are met.

FISCAL EFFECT:

None. This bill is keyed “non-fiscal” by Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The American Institute of Architects, California Council (AIACC) is the sponsor of the bill. According to the Author, “current law does not allow those who are on the path to becoming licensed architects to use a job title that clearly states that they are eligible for and working towards becoming licensed. SB 1132 grants those individuals the ability to use such a title, under very limited and controlled circumstances. Additionally, the public would not be confused as the proposed title, “architect-in- training”, is clear that the individual using that title is not yet a licensed architect.”
2. Background. The CAB was created in 1901 by the Legislature to fulfill the mission of protecting the health, safety, and welfare of the public through the regulation of the practice of architecture. The CAB establishes regulations for the examination and licensing of the architecture profession in California, which today numbers approximately 21,000 licensed architects and approximately 11,000 candidates who are in the process of meeting examination and licensure requirements.
3. Architect Registration Exam. To be eligible for the Architect Registration Examination (ARE), a candidate is required to meet one of the following requirements below and possess an active Council Record with the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards (NCARB):
   1. Have a degree in architecture accredited by the National Architectural Accrediting Board from a school of architecture as approved by CAB, or
   2. Have at least sixty (60) net months of architectural training and experience under the direct supervision of an architect in private practice or the equivalent as evaluated by CAB, or
   3. Have a combination of educational and experience credit as evaluated by CAB such as to total sixty (60) net months.

These requirements are outlined in the California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 2, Article 3, Section 116.

The ARE consists of seven divisions that include multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank, and check-all-that-apply questions as well as graphic vignettes.

1. Engineer-In-Training and Land Surveyors-In-Training. In BPC § 6756 of the Professional Engineers Act and BPC § 8747(a) of the Professional Land Surveyors Act, professionals are required to obtain an “in-training” certificate prior to licensure. These certificates do not authorize the holder of the certificate to practice or offer to practice engineering or land surveying work. It is also important to note that many employers look to see if an applicant has an “in-training” certificate prior to employment.
   
2. NCARB Ruling. In 2014, NCARB created the Future Title Task Force to discuss what professionals who are on the path to become licensed architects should be called. Over the course of many months, the task force carefully debated the issue, and finally came to the conclusion that there is no agreed-upon terminology for professionals on the path to licensure. NCARB states:

“The Task Force recommended that any title held by those pursuing licensure does not need to be regulated. In other words, it is recommended that


NCARB discontinue the use of the word intern, intern architect, or any other regulatory ‘title’ describing those pursuing licensure.”

1. No Official Position by the CAB. The CAB states “at this time, it is unclear to the Board that the proposal would address any identified risk to consumer health, safety and welfare. It is also difficult to justify the regulation and enforcement of a title appropriated to unlicensed individuals who do not yet come under the regulatory purview of the Board. At its most recent meeting (March 2015), the Board voted to accept REC’s recommendation to table the matter until AIACC presents a comprehensive proposal with supporting data that has been reviewed and analyzed by Board staff for REC and the Board’s consideration. The Board has not received such a proposal to date.”
   
2. Arguments in Support. The American Institute of Architects, California Council writes that “SB 1132 would allow individuals to have the job title ‘architect-in-training’ during their internship once they are eligible to take the licensing examinations. This job title does not harm the public as it does not imply licensure or grant any of the authority of a licensed architect. Importantly, it is helpful as it describes the qualification of the individual to clients of an architectural firm.”

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support:

The American Institute of Architects, California Council (Sponsor)

Neutral:

California Architects Board

Opposition:

None on file as of March 29, 2016.

-- END --