TO: /
The Honorable the Members of the Board of Regents
FROM: / Frank MuñozSUBJECT: / Report of the Committee on the Professions Regarding Licensing Petitions
DATE: / August 29, 2007
STRATEGIC GOAL: / Goal 3
AUTHORIZATION(S):
SUMMARY
Issue for Decision (Consent Agenda)
Should the Regents approve the recommendations of the Committee on the Professions pertaining to licensing petitions as listed on the attachment?
Proposed Handling
This question will come before the full Board at its September 2007 meeting where it will be voted on and action taken.
Procedural History
Section 6506(5) of the Education Law and Section 24.7 of the Rules of the Board of Regents authorize the Regents to waive education, experience and examination requirements for a professional license as well as to confer the degree Doctor of Medicine.
Background Information
There are 25 licensing petitions and 19 requests for the conferral of the degree Doctor of Medicine for review and approval.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the Regents approve the recommendations of the Committee on the Professions regarding licensing petitions.
Timetable for Implementation
Approval of the Committee on the Professions’ recommendations will be effective September 10, 2007.
Cases Presented to Board of Regents on: September 11, 2007 SUMMARY REPORTPROFESSION / EDUCATION / EXAMINATION / Experience / Confer Degree Doctor of Medicine / Three-Year
Limited License
Pre-Professional / Professional / Post-Graduate / Proficiency / Licensing
Architecture / 07-19-03
to
07-25-03
Certified Public Accountancy / 07-07-07
To
07-12-07
Dentistry / 07-07-50
07-08-50 / 07-07-59
Medicine / 07-116-60C
to
07-134-60C
Professional Engineering / 07-03-16
Veterinary Medicine / 07-09-74
To
07-16-74
OTHER: / Total for fiscal year to date: 151
Total for calendar year to date: 217
Board of Regents: September 11, 2007
ARCHITECTURE
Petition for: Waiver of New York State requirements pertaining to acceptability of licensing examinations for licensure by endorsement.
Summary Statement: The petitioners listed below are all graduates of professionally accredited architecture programs who have applied for licensure in New York. All have achieved, at a minimum, a Bachelor of Architecture degree. All petitioners have substantial documented licensed experience in other states.
Prior to 1983, certain states did not require the Equivalency Examination (EE) or the Qualifying Test (QT) if a candidate had a degree from an accredited architecture program, and granted licensure upon passage of the Professional Examination (PE). Prior to 1975, most states recognized the Examination Syllabus (ES). The petitioners passed either the national Professional Examination (PE) given prior to 1983, or portions of the national Examination Syllabus (ES) given prior to 1975. Prior to 1983, New York State required passage of the Equivalency Examination (EE), or passage of the Qualifying Test (QT) in addition to passage of the national Professional Examination. Each of the petitioners satisfied the examination requirement in his/her initial state of licensure by passing an acceptable licensing examination and attained licensure in that state.
Section 7304(4) of Education Law and Section 69.3 of the Commissioner’s Regulations require for endorsement that “… an architect licensed in another state or jurisdiction as the result of successful completion of only the professional examination in use before 1983 may be granted licensure upon presentation of evidence of two years of work experience of a grade and character satisfactory to the State Board for Architecture and passage of a practical examination satisfactory to the State Board for Architecture …”
Each petitioner satisfied the examination requirement in his/her initial state of licensure and has extensive professional practice satisfactory to the State Board. Since the above information illustrates evidence of competence within the profession, and in lieu of the practical examination, the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Architecture recommends that the examination requirement be considered satisfied and each applicant’s licensure in another state be accepted for endorsement in New York State.
NAME OF PETITIONER / LICENSURE07-19-03
J. Thomas Chandler
Orlando, FL 32801 / Indiana, 1982; also licensed in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wyoming.
07-20-03
Dale P. Glenn
Lawrence, KS 66044 / Kansas, 1974; also licensed in Arkansas, Colorado, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, and Texas.
07-21-03
Michael S. Gouloff
Fort Wayne, IN 46802 / Indiana, 1975; also licensed in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington, and Wisconsin.
07-22-03
Charles J. Maira
Morrisville, PA 19067 / Massachusetts, 1983; also licensed in Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
07-23-03
Peter M. Bloomfield
Philadelphia, PA 19102 / Pennsylvania 1983; also currently licensed in Kansas and Maryland. Other states with confirmed previous licenses and good moral character; FL, NJ, WI, SC, LA, NC, KY, HI, AL, CO, WA, and MA.
07-24-03
Gary Frank Shirley
Houston, TX 77006 / Texas 1982; also currently licensed in IL, MD, NC, PA, VA, IN, WV, and OH.
07-25-03
Richard Wilson Wright
Dallas, TX 75226 / Texas 1982; also currently licensed in CA, FL, and PA.
Recommendation: The Committee on the Professions, in concurrence with the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Architecture, recommends that each applicant’s licensing examination requirement be considered satisfied for licensure through the endorsement route.
Board of Regents: September 11, 2007
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY
07-07-07
James L. Mannello
Brooklyn, New York
Petition for: Waiver of the Business Law and Professional Responsibility (LPR) Section of the Uniform Certified Public Accountancy Examination.
Statement of Problem: Mr. Mannello is an applicant for licensure by endorsement of a CPA license issued by the State of Connecticut in January 1996. He is also an attorney in the State of Connecticut. At the time that his CPA license was issued, Connecticut did not require attorneys to sit for the Business Law and Professional Responsibility (LPR) Section of the Uniform CPA exam. He did pass the other three sections of the exam in Connecticut within the time frame allowed by New York.
Mr. Mannello is petitioning to waive the requirement that an applicant sit for and pass the LPR section of the Uniform CPA Exam. Mr. Mannello’s passing of three sections of the CPA examination and the Connecticut Bar Exam was deemed by the State of Connecticut to be substantially equivalent to passing all four sections of the CPA examination when they issued his CPA license in 1996. Based on the above and the fact that Mr. Mannello has continued as a CPA in good standing in Connecticut since that time, the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Public Accountancy supports his petition.
APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS: / QUALIFICATIONS:Section 7404 of Education Law and Part 70 of the Commissioner’s Regulations:
(1) 15 years of experience acceptable to the State Board for Public Accountancy. / Applicant has twenty years of acceptable experience and has been licensed in Connecticut since1996.
(2) Passing scores on the Uniform CPA Examination. / November 1982: Accounting and Reporting and Financial Accounting and Reporting (passing scores); May 1983: Auditing (passing score); Business Law and Professional Responsibility (exempt).
RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on the Professions, in concurrence with the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Public Accountancy, recommends that the applicant’s petition to waive the Business Law and Professional Responsibility (LPR) Section of the Uniform Certified Public Accountancy Examination be accepted.
Board of Regents: September 11, 2007
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY
07-08-07
Svetlana Khenina
Brooklyn, New York
(Pace University, New York, New York, Bachelor of Business Administration and Master of Business Administration in Accounting, June 2001)
Petition for: Acceptance of passing grades on the Uniform Certified Public Accountancy Examination.
Statement of Problem: Svetlana Khenina, an applicant for licensure as a CPA, recently passed the four parts of the Uniform CPA Examination. Commissioner’s Regulations required her to pass all fourt parts of the examination within 36 months. Due to a series of medical issues, however, she exceeded the 36-month conditioning requirement by 19 months.
Ms. Khenina received conditional credit for passing the paper-based ARE and LPR sections of the examination in November 2002. She needed to pass the remaining two sections of the examination by November 30, 2005 to retain credit for the ARE and LPR sections. She passed the paper-based AUD section in November, 2003, well within the conditioning time period and the computer-based FAR section in June 2007, 19 months outside of conditioning.
Beginning in April 2002, however, and continuing through April 2007, Ms. Khenina, a primary care giver for her family, was faced with a series of family medical issues that made it difficult for her to adequately prepare and sit for the remaining sections of the CPA exam. During this period, Ms. Khenina did make a good faith effort at finishing the exam, attempting and failing the FAR section four times before passing it in June 2007.
Based on the strength of the documentation provided by several physicians who attended her family, the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Public Accountancy supports Ms. Khenina’s request to waive the 36-month requirement to pass all four parts of the Uniform CPA Examination.
APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS: / QUALIFICATIONS:Section 7404 of Education Law and Part 70 of the Commissioner’s Regulations require:
(1) A bachelor’s or higher degree based on a program in accountancy. / (1) Master of Business Administration in Accountancy, Pace University, New York, June 2001.
(2) Passing scores on the Uniform CPA Examination. / (2) (a) November 2002: Accounting and Reporting and Law (passing score.)
(b) November 2003: Auditing (passing score)
(c) June 2007: Financial Accounting and Reporting (passing score)
(3) Two years of satisfactory experience. / (3)
RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on the Professions, in concurrence with the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Public Accountancy, recommends that the applicant’s petition for acceptance of passing grades on the Uniform CPA Examination be accepted.
Board of Regents: September 11, 2007
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY
07-09-07
Mark D. Orlic
West Hempstead, NY
(Binghamton University, Vestal, New York, Bachelor of Science in Accounting, August 2003)
Petition for: Acceptance of passing grades on the Uniform Certified Public Accountancy Examination.
Statement of Problem: Commissioner's Regulations require that an applicant must pass all parts of the Uniform CPA examination within 36 months. Mr. Orlic originally received conditional credit for passing the Regulation (REG) and Law and Professional Responsibility (LPR) sections of the examination in May 2003. He subsequently passed the Financial Accounting & Reporting (FAR) section in May 2006. Mr. Orlic needed to pass the Auditing and Attestation (AUD) by May 2006 to retain credit for the REG and LPR sections passed in May 2003.
Mr. Orlic attempted to pass AUD in May 2006; however, he scored a 70, five points below a passing grade. He sat for AUD again and passed it in May 2007, 12 months outside of the conditioning period. Mr. Orlic’s attempts to pass all parts of the Uniform CPA Examination within the 36-month time period were complicated by examination administration and employment issues. In his letter requesting a waiver, Mr. Orlic explains and documents that he had extenuating technological difficulties with the examination that resulted in his being granted a free re-test in December 2006; however, prior commitments required that he be out of the country until mid-April 2007.
The Executive Secretary for the State Board for Accountancy supports Mr. Orlic’s request to waive the 36-month requirement to pass all four parts of the Uniform CPA Examination.
APPLICABLE REQUIREMENTS: / QUALIFICATIONS:Section 7404 of Education Law and Part 70 of the Commissioner’s Regulations require:
(1) A bachelor’s or higher degree based on a program in accountancy. / (2) Binghamton University, Bachelor of Science in Accounting, August 2003.
(2) Passing scores on the Uniform CPA Examination. / (2) (a) May 2003: Regulation and Law and Professional Responsibility (passing scores).
(b) May 2006: Financial Accounting & Reporting (passing score); Auditing and Attestation (failing score).
(c) May 2007: Auditing and Attestation (passing score).
(3) Two years of satisfactory experience. / (3)
RECOMMENDATION: The Committee on the Professions, in concurrence with the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Public Accountancy, recommends that the applicant’s petition for acceptance of passing grades on the Uniform CPA Examination be accepted.
Board of Regents: September 11, 2007
CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANCY
07-10-07
Alan Lorman
Brooklyn, New York
(Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, New York, Bachelor of Science, February 2001)
Petition for: Acceptance of passing grades on the Uniform Certified Public Accountancy Examination.
Statement of Problem: Alan Lorman, an applicant for licensure as a CPA, recently passed the four parts of the Uniform CPA Examination. Commissioner’s Regulations required him to pass all four parts of the examination within 36 months. Due to a series of medical issues, however, he exceeded the 36-month conditioning requirement by 6 months.
Mr. Lorman received conditional credit for passing the paper-based AUD and LPR sections of the examination in November 2003. He needed to pass the remaining two sections of the examination by November 30, 2006 to retain credit for the AUD and LPR sections. He passed the computer-based REG section in May, 2004, well within the conditioning time period and the computer-based FAR section in May 2007, six months outside of conditioning.
Beginning in February 2006, however, and continuing through the present, Mr. Lorman was faced with a series of family medical issues that made it difficult for him to adequately prepare and sit for the remaining section of the CPA exam. Despite these issues, Mr. Lorman made a good faith effort to pass the exam, sitting for the FAR section a number of times before passing it in May 2007.
Based on the strength of the documentation provided by several physicians who attended his family, the Executive Secretary of the State Board for Public Accountancy supports Mr. Lorman’s request to waive the 36-month requirement to pass all four parts of the Uniform CPA Examination.