1. The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) Delivered at a UAP-IAPOA Induction/ Oath-taking Ceremony August 2009 for the PRC Professional Regulatory Board of Architecture (PRBoA) Archt. Armando N. ALLÍ fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar Chairman, PRBoA (Resource Person) PRBoA

2. PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 and the Stream of Laws, Rules & Regulations LOWER than International Agreements and the 1986 Philippine Constitution PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 and the Stream of Laws, Rules & Regulations LOWER than International Agreements and the 1986 Philippine Constitution Note: Laws do not Operate in Isolation but in Full Interaction with Other Laws that are in Place. Laws/ Regulations (Local Level) _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person ) Annotations: Only the R.A. is the national law i.e. a product of the collaboration between the legislative and executive branches of government. LGU ordinances must conform to what is stated under national laws such as R.A.s, P.D.s and B.P.s. IRRs are not laws but tools to implement the law. IRRs and all other regulations are mere executive issuances that could be amended or repealed by the executive branch as the needs arise. Most national laws do not go beyond IRRs.

3. PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 Primary Stakeholders: +/- 24,000 Registered Architects or RAs (Natural Persons/ NPs, including the deceased and retired); +/- 14,000 Registered & Licensed Architects or RLAs (NPs with renewed, valid and current PRC ID cards/ licenses; +/- 9,000 UAP-IAPOA Members (NPs including +/-300 College of Fellows/CoF Members, excluding GA & SA ); (+/-2,000) PIA Members (NPs); (+/-200) AAIF Members (NPs); +/-60 CODHASP Member Schools (Juridical Persons/ JPs made up of RLAs in a collaborative activity); +/-35 Alumni Associations; Student Associations; and No Association of Firms (to succeed the CCAPP which folded up in late 2006). PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 Primary Stakeholders: +/- 24,000 Registered Architects or RAs (Natural Persons/ NPs, including the deceased and retired); +/- 14,000 Registered & Licensed Architects or RLAs (NPs with renewed, valid and current PRC ID cards/ licenses; +/- 9,000 UAP-IAPOA Members (NPs including +/-300 College of Fellows/CoF Members, excluding GA & SA ); (+/-2,000) PIA Members (NPs); (+/-200) AAIF Members (NPs); +/-60 CODHASP Member Schools (Juridical Persons/ JPs made up of RLAs in a collaborative activity); +/-35 Alumni Associations; Student Associations; and No Association of Firms (to succeed the CCAPP which folded up in late 2006). _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

4. PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 & Architectural Laws -Brief History: Took effect 10 April 2004; Signed into law by PGMA on 17 March 2004; Crafted from 2001 through 2004 in Congress by the UAP, PIA and AAIF with the participation of the Phil. Inst. of Civil Engineers (PICE); Effort to amend R.A. 1581 at the Batasang Pambansa in the early 1980s by the UAP; R.A. No. 1581 (amended Architecture Law) signed June 1956 together with R.A. No. 1582 (amended civil engineering/CE law); R.A. No. 545 (organic Architecture Law) signed June 1950 together with R.A. No. 544 (organic CE law). PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 & Architectural Laws -Brief History: Took effect 10 April 2004; Signed into law by PGMA on 17 March 2004; Crafted from 2001 through 2004 in Congress by the UAP, PIA and AAIF with the participation of the Phil. Inst. of Civil Engineers (PICE); Effort to amend R.A. 1581 at the Batasang Pambansa in the early 1980s by the UAP; R.A. No. 1581 (amended Architecture Law) signed June 1956 together with R.A. No. 1582 (amended civil engineering/CE law); R.A. No. 545 (organic Architecture Law) signed June 1950 together with R.A. No. 544 (organic CE law). _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

5. PRBoA P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP)-Brief History: Took effect 1977 after it was signed into law by PFEM in February 1977; Extensive IRR promulgated by the DPWH in 1979; initial IRR revisions in the early 1990s; Revised IRR revisions promulgated by DPWH on 29 October 2004, published thrice in April 2005 and took effect on 01 May 2005; 2004 Revised IRR in effect over the period 01 – 24 May 2005; 2004 Revised IRR effectivity interrupted by TROs and Injunction of 24 May 2005 on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR; May 2005 Injunction on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR lifted/ dissolved by Court Order on 29 January 2008; Lifting/ dissolution of the May 2005 Injunction on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR affirmed by Court Order; and Copy of the 04 May 2009 Court Order delivered to DPWH by the RTC Manila Branch 22 Court Sheriff. PRBoA P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP)-Brief History: Took effect 1977 after it was signed into law by PFEM in February 1977; Extensive IRR promulgated by the DPWH in 1979; initial IRR revisions in the early 1990s; Revised IRR revisions promulgated by DPWH on 29 October 2004, published thrice in April 2005 and took effect on 01 May 2005; 2004 Revised IRR in effect over the period 01 – 24 May 2005; 2004 Revised IRR effectivity interrupted by TROs and Injunction of 24 May 2005 on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR; May 2005 Injunction on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR lifted/ dissolved by Court Order on 29 January 2008; Lifting/ dissolution of the May 2005 Injunction on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR affirmed by Court Order; and Copy of the 04 May 2009 Court Order delivered to DPWH by the RTC Manila Branch 22 Court Sheriff. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

6. PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 in relation to p.d. no. 1096 (1977 NBCP) and its 2004 R-IRR Sec. 302 of P.D. No. 1096 (the 1977 NBCP) does NOT state that Civil Engineers (CEs) can sign or seal ARCHITECTURAL Documents was again Reconfirmed in June 2009 by the National Printing Office (NPO) and the Malacañang Records Office as Authentic & Un-amended since February 1977 PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 in relation to p.d. no. 1096 (1977 NBCP) and its 2004 R-IRR Sec. 302 of P.D. No. 1096 (the 1977 NBCP) does NOT state that Civil Engineers (CEs) can sign or seal ARCHITECTURAL Documents was again Reconfirmed in June 2009 by the National Printing Office (NPO) and the Malacañang Records Office as Authentic & Un-amended since February 1977 _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

7. PRBoA Section Nos. No. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of p.d. no. 1096 (1977 NBCP) HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE FEBRUARY 2008 1) The May 2005 Injunction (based on a clear misrepresentation of Sec. 302 of P.D. No. 1096 and the supposed right of the CEs to sign and seal ARCHITECTURAL documents ) on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR (R-IRR) of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP) was LIFTED/ DISSOLVED by the Court (RTC Mnaila Branch 22) in its Order (cum Decision) signed 29 January 2008; the Court Order was to take effect automatically in accordance with the Rules of Court and with Philippine jurisprudence, notwithstanding the CEs’ Motion for Reconsideration (resolved by the Court on 04 May 2009) and all the issued 2005, 2007 and 2008 DPWH Memoranda; all national and local government officials had to comply with the 29 January 2008 Court Order; this meant that the 2004 R-IRR implementation interrupted by the May 2005 Injunction had already RESUMED effectivity automatically; as early as February 2008, the DPWH and its Building Officials had to LIMIT the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs and clearly abide by the DEFINITION of the ARCHITECTURAL documents; all these officials who refused to abide by the Court Order have clearly violated the 29 January 2008 Court Order and are clearly LIABLE; 2) The 04 May 2009 Court Order AFFIRMING its 29 January 2008 lifting/dissolution of the Injunction on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 R-IRR confirms that these are in full effect! the DPWH and its Building Officials have to LIMIT the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs and clearly abide by the DEFINITION of the ARCHITECTURAL documents. While the CEs may have the right to appeal the Court Orders/ Decision at the Court of Appeals (CA), the 29 January 2008 and the 04 May 2009 Court Orders have to be followed in the absence of any Order form the CA. Should the CA issue a TRO/Injunction again based on the possible misrepresentations of Sec. 302 of P.D. No. 1096 by the CEs, the case must be elevated soonest by the RLAs to the Supreme Court on a question of law (petitions for certiorari and mandamus). PRBoA Section Nos. No. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of p.d. no. 1096 (1977 NBCP) HAVE BEEN IN EFFECT SINCE FEBRUARY 2008 1) The May 2005 Injunction (based on a clear misrepresentation of Sec. 302 of P.D. No. 1096 and the supposed right of the CEs to sign and seal ARCHITECTURAL documents ) on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR (R-IRR) of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP) was LIFTED/ DISSOLVED by the Court (RTC Mnaila Branch 22) in its Order (cum Decision) signed 29 January 2008; the Court Order was to take effect automatically in accordance with the Rules of Court and with Philippine jurisprudence, notwithstanding the CEs’ Motion for Reconsideration (resolved by the Court on 04 May 2009) and all the issued 2005, 2007 and 2008 DPWH Memoranda; all national and local government officials had to comply with the 29 January 2008 Court Order; this meant that the 2004 R-IRR implementation interrupted by the May 2005 Injunction had already RESUMED effectivity automatically; as early as February 2008, the DPWH and its Building Officials had to LIMIT the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs and clearly abide by the DEFINITION of the ARCHITECTURAL documents; all these officials who refused to abide by the Court Order have clearly violated the 29 January 2008 Court Order and are clearly LIABLE; 2) The 04 May 2009 Court Order AFFIRMING its 29 January 2008 lifting/dissolution of the Injunction on Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 R-IRR confirms that these are in full effect! the DPWH and its Building Officials have to LIMIT the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs and clearly abide by the DEFINITION of the ARCHITECTURAL documents. While the CEs may have the right to appeal the Court Orders/ Decision at the Court of Appeals (CA), the 29 January 2008 and the 04 May 2009 Court Orders have to be followed in the absence of any Order form the CA. Should the CA issue a TRO/Injunction again based on the possible misrepresentations of Sec. 302 of P.D. No. 1096 by the CEs, the case must be elevated soonest by the RLAs to the Supreme Court on a question of law (petitions for certiorari and mandamus). The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

8. PRBoA Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP) are in full effect! These sections LIMIT the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs and clearly DEFINE the ARCHITECTURAL documents; NO Temporary Restraining Order (TRO); and NO Writ of Preliminary Injunction; Very Important Notes: The May 2005 Injunction secured by the PICE was lifted/ dissolved on 29 January 2008 by a Court Order/ Decision. The Order/ Decision was affirmed by the Court on 04 May 2009. The 04 May 2009 Court Order was served by personal service today (10 August 2009) to the DPWH and the OSG by the Sheriff of RTC Manila Branch 22. PICE has already appealed to the CA. PRBoA Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP) are in full effect! These sections LIMIT the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents only to RLAs and clearly DEFINE the ARCHITECTURAL documents; NO Temporary Restraining Order (TRO); and NO Writ of Preliminary Injunction; Very Important Notes: The May 2005 Injunction secured by the PICE was lifted/ dissolved on 29 January 2008 by a Court Order/ Decision. The Order/ Decision was affirmed by the Court on 04 May 2009. The 04 May 2009 Court Order was served by personal service today (10 August 2009) to the DPWH and the OSG by the Sheriff of RTC Manila Branch 22. PICE has already appealed to the CA. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) 10 August 2009 UAP Taytay Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person ) PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 in relation to p.d. no. 1096 (1977 NBCP) and its 2004 R-IRR PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 in relation to p.d. no. 1096 (1977 NBCP) and its 2004 R-IRR

9. PRBoA What is the Effect of the 10 August 2009 Serving of the 04 May 2009 Court Order by Personal Service (by the Sheriff of RTC Manila Branch 22) to DPWH Sec. Ebdane & his Counsel? The event means that the interrupted implementation and enforcement of Secs. 302.3 & 4 (already in effect from 01 through 24 May 2005) have RESUMED as of 10 August 2009. All Building Officials (BOs) nationwide must now implement and enforce Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP). There may be no need for a DPWH Memorandum Order as the Court Order is immediately executory under the Rules of Court and Phil. Jurisprudence. PRBoA What is the Effect of the 10 August 2009 Serving of the 04 May 2009 Court Order by Personal Service (by the Sheriff of RTC Manila Branch 22) to DPWH Sec. Ebdane & his Counsel? The event means that the interrupted implementation and enforcement of Secs. 302.3 & 4 (already in effect from 01 through 24 May 2005) have RESUMED as of 10 August 2009. All Building Officials (BOs) nationwide must now implement and enforce Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP). There may be no need for a DPWH Memorandum Order as the Court Order is immediately executory under the Rules of Court and Phil. Jurisprudence. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

10. PRBoA Why did the UAP-IAPOA Intervene in the 2005 Petition Filed by the PICE vs. DPWH Sec. Ebdane? 1) While purportedly about Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP), the 2005 PICE Petition was an indirect attack on R.A. No. 9266; it appeared to be an attempt to amend R.A. No. 9266 through a court decision; 2) The RLAs through the UAP-IAPOA had to protect R.A. No. 9266 in the subject civil case only through intervention i.e. the UAP was not originally a party to the civil case; and 3) An uncontested lower court decision favoring CEs and with a certificate of finality could have the effect of changing the provisions of R.A. No. 9266 that LIMIT to RLAs the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents and that DEFINE ARCHITECTURAL documents i.e. just as Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 did. PRBoA Why did the UAP-IAPOA Intervene in the 2005 Petition Filed by the PICE vs. DPWH Sec. Ebdane? 1) While purportedly about Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 (1977 NBCP), the 2005 PICE Petition was an indirect attack on R.A. No. 9266; it appeared to be an attempt to amend R.A. No. 9266 through a court decision; 2) The RLAs through the UAP-IAPOA had to protect R.A. No. 9266 in the subject civil case only through intervention i.e. the UAP was not originally a party to the civil case; and 3) An uncontested lower court decision favoring CEs and with a certificate of finality could have the effect of changing the provisions of R.A. No. 9266 that LIMIT to RLAs the signing and sealing of ARCHITECTURAL documents and that DEFINE ARCHITECTURAL documents i.e. just as Secs. 302.3 & 4 of the 2004 Revised IRR of P.D. No. 1096 did. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

11. PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 Implementation Successes: Some LGUs are already fully or partially implementing/ enforcing R.A. No. 9266 via Administrative Orders (AOs); Some National Government Agencies (NGAs) and LGUs require RLAs or registered architectural firms (RAFs) in their procurement activities under R.A. No. 9184/GPRA; HLURB now requires temporary/ special permits (TSPs) for Foreign Architects (FAs) preparing plans for subdivision and condominium projects; BID now also requires TSPs from PRC for Foreign Architects (FAs) preparing plans for Philippine projects; PRBoA R.A. No. 9266 Implementation Successes: Some LGUs are already fully or partially implementing/ enforcing R.A. No. 9266 via Administrative Orders (AOs); Some National Government Agencies (NGAs) and LGUs require RLAs or registered architectural firms (RAFs) in their procurement activities under R.A. No. 9184/GPRA; HLURB now requires temporary/ special permits (TSPs) for Foreign Architects (FAs) preparing plans for subdivision and condominium projects; BID now also requires TSPs from PRC for Foreign Architects (FAs) preparing plans for Philippine projects; _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

12. PRBoA +/- 2-Year Due Process Flow of Criminal Complaints for R.A. No. 9266 Violations: 1) Complaint filed at the PRC; 2) PRBoA establishes prima facie finding; 3) Complaint Endorsed to DoJ Secretary; 4) after review, DoJ Secretary endorses to either the NBI or Local Prosecutor/Fiscal; 5) Local Fiscal investigates and either files informat- ion with the Court (if there is probable cause) or reverse- endorses the complaint to either the DoJ Secretary or the PRC/ PRBoA (in case of no finding of probable cause) i.e. STILL NO CRIMINAL CASE FILED IN COURT AFTER +/-2 YEARS!!! PRBoA +/- 2-Year Due Process Flow of Criminal Complaints for R.A. No. 9266 Violations: 1) Complaint filed at the PRC; 2) PRBoA establishes prima facie finding; 3) Complaint Endorsed to DoJ Secretary; 4) after review, DoJ Secretary endorses to either the NBI or Local Prosecutor/Fiscal; 5) Local Fiscal investigates and either files informat- ion with the Court (if there is probable cause) or reverse- endorses the complaint to either the DoJ Secretary or the PRC/ PRBoA (in case of no finding of probable cause) i.e. STILL NO CRIMINAL CASE FILED IN COURT AFTER +/-2 YEARS!!! _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

13. PRBoA Continuing Threats to Philippine registered & licensed architects (RLAs) & their practice: GOVERNMENT in general (National & LGUs); MEDIA in general; BIG BUSINESS in general; OTHER PROFESSIONALS in general; FOREIGN CONSULTANTS/ BPO Firms; UNREGISTERED PERSONS; (including persons with some knowledge of architecture e.g. students, apprentices, etc.) RLAs themselves, Apathy, Complacency, etc. PRBoA Continuing Threats to Philippine registered & licensed architects (RLAs) & their practice: GOVERNMENT in general (National & LGUs); MEDIA in general; BIG BUSINESS in general; OTHER PROFESSIONALS in general; FOREIGN CONSULTANTS/ BPO Firms; UNREGISTERED PERSONS; (including persons with some knowledge of architecture e.g. students, apprentices, etc.) RLAs themselves, Apathy, Complacency, etc. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

14. PRBoA Urgent and Special Concerns: 1) legal initiatives to fully implement and enforce R.A. No. 9266 e.g. addressing the continuing illegal practices by firms and individuals, acts by other state-regulated professions to co-opt the practice of architecture, continuing violations by national and local government officials, etc.; 2) the Standards of Professional Practice; 3) the GATS, APEC Architect Registry and ASEAN MRA; 4) the CPE/ CPD program; 5) harmonize laws directly affecting practice under R.A. No. 9266 (P.D. No. 1096, R.A. No. 9514, B.P. No. 344, P.D. No. 957, B.P. No. 220, R.A. No. 9184, R.A. No. 7160, etc.) and their IRRs/ derivative regulations; 6) the B.S. Architecture curriculum; 7) media campaign for the architectural profession; and 8) volunteerism at community level and a civic face for RLAs. PRBoA Urgent and Special Concerns: 1) legal initiatives to fully implement and enforce R.A. No. 9266 e.g. addressing the continuing illegal practices by firms and individuals, acts by other state-regulated professions to co-opt the practice of architecture, continuing violations by national and local government officials, etc.; 2) the Standards of Professional Practice; 3) the GATS, APEC Architect Registry and ASEAN MRA; 4) the CPE/ CPD program; 5) harmonize laws directly affecting practice under R.A. No. 9266 (P.D. No. 1096, R.A. No. 9514, B.P. No. 344, P.D. No. 957, B.P. No. 220, R.A. No. 9184, R.A. No. 7160, etc.) and their IRRs/ derivative regulations; 6) the B.S. Architecture curriculum; 7) media campaign for the architectural profession; and 8) volunteerism at community level and a civic face for RLAs. _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )

15. Mabuhay ang mga Arkitektong Pilipino! Mabuhay ang mga tamang batas na nararapat lamang ipatupad ng pamahalaan! Thank You and a Pleasant Evening to You All! PRBoA _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ The Implementation & Enforcement of R.A. No. 9266 (as of August 2009) August 2009 UAP-IAPOA Induction for the PRC PRBoA (Archt. Armando N. ALLI, fuap, hfpia, aaif, apec ar, PRBoA Chairman as Resource Person )