Whether the penalty matches a perceived violation is often the debate in matters of adjudication and discipline, and that's exactly what played out in a disciplinary matter brought before the State Architecture Licensure Board this spring.

The Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs instituted a formal prosecution against an architectural firm based upon the delinquent payment of the firms' annual registration fee.  Thanks largely to AIA Pennsylvania, its Licensure Committee and AIA Pennsylvania's counsel, Powell, Trachtman, Logan, Carrle & Lombardo P.C., the bureau was compelled to withdraw the prosecution.

The bureau sought to impose disciplinary action including imposition of civil penalties that would have resulted in a disciplinary record for the architectural firm. This was the wrong penalty, one too severe for the delinquent payment, which as AIA Pennsylvania has long asserted was subject only to an administrative reactivation fee, rather than formal discipline, said Bruce Johnson, Chairman of the Licensure Committee and an architect with the firm Murphy & Dittenhafer Architects in York.

"Happily," he said, "we have some institutional memory now with AIA's state association and Powell Trachtman."

This is a case study of how the state association keeps track of regulations and laws effecting the practice of architecture to ensure state actions toward the profession are appropriate.

The Bureau alleged that anarchitectural firm had not renewed their registration in six years, missing three biennial registrations. Under the law, firms are required to pay the renewal fee every two years. According to the firm, the failure to renew their registration was simply a clerical error due to the firm moving to a new location. The bureau learned of the non-renewal status when a new architect at the firm submitted a license application.

The purpose of registering is to essentially ensure no fly-by-night firms operate without licensed architects actively managing and controlling the entity. The registration also allows the Board to keep track of the state's qualified architectural firms.

Registered Architects also are required to renew their license every two years. The fee is $100, the same cost that firms pay to renew their registration.

The bureau's legal staff decided to prosecute the firm for an alleged violation of the Licensure Law. The firm's principal decided to fight the allegation because, he argued, unlike a license, a registration does not qualify a firm's professional status. "You cannot get licensed as an architectural firm," he said. "It makes no sense. A license lies with the architect. It always comes down to the individual."

Under the law, professional responsibility - (i.e. ensuring that a design of a project satisfies standards necessary to protect health, safety and welfare of the public) - is up to the individual Architect. An Architect cannot avoid professional responsibility or liability on to his or her firm, said Tony Potter, counsel at Powell Trachtman. "In Pennsylvania, it is the individual Architect who must sign and seal construction documents and their signature and seal may only be affixed if the design documents were prepared by the Architect or under the Architect's direct supervision."

Registration is to ensure a firm's ownership is controlled by licensed architects. The architect's attorneys argued that if the architects at a long-standing firm are duly licensed, which they were and are, then why prosecute for forgetting to pay the renewal fee on time?

This was not a new situation to AIA Pennsylvania, which six years earlier went to bat for Pennsylvania architectural firms for the same reasons submitting comments on regulations proposing to impose discipline based solely on the delinquent payment of the firm registration fee. In response to the proposed regulations, and again in the friend-of-the-court brief AIA Pennsylvania filed on behalf of the firm, AIA Pennsylvania argued that a disciplinary action and imposition of a civil penalty for untimely payment causes a "black mark" on a reputable firm's record that can adversely affect a firm's ability to compete for public contracts.

In 2006, the State Architects Licensure Board agreed with AIA Pennsylvania's comments and deleted the regulation, a precedent of which the bureau's legal staff apparently was unaware. Once reminded, though, the prosecution withdrew its charges.

"If the health safety and welfare of the public is protected because the architectural firm's ownership and control complies with the law and licensed individuals are in control, then what is the purpose of prosecuting," Potter said.

Moreover, AIA Pennsylvania argued, imposing a penalty for paying your registration renewal late would have put firms in Pennsylvania at a disadvantage with out-of-state firms and individuals.

The significance of the case, Johnson said, is that AIA Pennsylvania, its Harrisburg staff and its Licensure Committee follow legislation, attend board meetings and keep abreast of proposed amendments to laws and regulations to "track what the state does and make sure what it does is appropriate."