ALJDEC decisions subject to certification as final

21A-2021.004-ACY · State Board of Accountancy · 2021-11-08

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

In the Matter of the Appeal of Denial

of Application for Certification:

Ravi Chaliki,

Appellant.

No. 21A-2021.004-ACY

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

DECISION

HEARING: August 31 and October 19, 2021

APPEARANCES: Ravi Chaliki on his own behalf; Scott Donald, Esq. for the Board of Accountancy

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Thomas Shedden

FINDINGS OF FACT

The Arizona State Board of Accountancy (“Board”) is the authority for regulating Certified Public Accountants in the State of Arizona. The Board’s role is to protect the public, which requires ensuring that each applicant meets the standards for certification as a CPA.

On July 15, 2021, the Board issued a Notice of Hearing setting this matter for hearing on August 31, 2021 at the Office of Administrative Hearings.

The issue for hearing is Appellant Ravi Chalk’s appeal of the Board’s June 10, 2021 Order of Denial of his application for Certified Public Accountant certification by examination.

Mr. Chaliki appeared and testified on his own behalf.

The Board presented the testimony of Andrea Byrd, its assistant director of certification, and Vicki Rios, CPA, who has been a member of the Board’s Certification Advisory Committee for about sixteen or seventeen years and is currently the chairperson.

Ms. Rios has practiced as an accountant and taught classes at Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University, and Glendale Community College.

As pertinent to this matter, Mr. Chaliki has filed two applications for certification, both of which were denied. Only the second application is directly at issue.

The Board denied Mr. Chaliki’s second application because it determined that two classes Mr. Chaliki took at Carnegie Mellon University, CM 45700 Financial and Managerial Accounting I, and CM 45701 Financial and Managerial Accounting II, were lower-level classes, which left him four semester hours short of the required thirty hours of upper level classes.

When the Board receives an application for certification, its staff reviews the application to determine whether the applicant appears to meet the statutory requirements.

Applications that meet those requirements are forwarded to the Board’s Certification Advisory Committee, where two Committee members conduct independent reviews of the application and related material to determine whether the applicant has the requisite qualifications for certification.

The Committee then votes on the applications and makes a recommendation to the Board regarding each applicant. The Board determines whether the applicant qualifies for certification.

Mr. Chaliki filed his first application for certification on or about December 18, 2020 (the first application).

Mr. Chaliki’s first application was reviewed by Ms. Rios and a committee member, SEW.

Ms. Rios and SEW each found that Mr. Chaliki did not meet the qualifications for certification when his submitted this first application because he had only twenty-seven hours of upper-level accounting classes.

Ms. Rios’s worksheet shows that all Mr. Chaliki’s Carnegie Mellon courses were counted as upper-level, non-duplicative classes.

The Committee voted to deny Mr. Chaliki’s first application.

Through an Order dated February 28, 2021, the Board denied Mr. Chaliki’s first application finding that he had taken only twenty-seven hours of upper-level accounting classes.

Mr. Chaliki did not appeal the Board’s denial of his first application.

Mr. Chaliki subsequently took ACC/423T Intermediate Financial Accounting III at University of Phoenix and then filed his second application.

Committee members Ms. Rios and JAN reviewed Mr. Chaliki’s second application. Both recommended denying the application, finding that Carnegie Mellon classes CM 45700 and 45701 were lower level classes.

At the hearing, Ms. Rios explained that when she reviewed Mr. Chaliki’s first application she had only the title of CM 45700 and CM 45701, but during her review of his second application, Ms. Rios had Carnegie Mellon’s course descriptions. Based on those course descriptions she and JAN recommended denial of the application, which conclusion the Committee agreed and recommended denial.

The Board agreed and denied Mr. Chaliki’s second application.

In upper level accounting classes, introductory or basic information from lower level classes is applied to complex problems of a broad range.

The Carnegie Mellon course descriptions for CM 45700 and CM 45701 show that these classes provide foundation and introduce concepts, leading Ms. Rios to determine that these are lower level classes.

Ms. Rios testified to the effect that the Carnegie Mellon classes were geared toward MBA students who need to gain an understanding of basic accounting concepts and that in her opinion the course descriptions describe introductory concepts.

On August 31st, after hearing Ms. Rios’s testimony, Mr. Chaliki requested the opportunity to submit supplemental exhibits. The matter was adjourned and reconvened on October 19, 2021.

At the further hearing, Mr. Chaliki had entered into evidence the tables of contents from the text books that were used in CM 45700 and 45701.

Ms. Rios testified that this information supported her determination that CM 45700 and 45701 were not upper level accounting classes.

Mr. Chaliki also had entered into evidence other documents in which courses that the Committee has accepted as upper level were being described using words such as “introductory.”

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Mr. Chaliki bears the burden of persuasion. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.07(G)(1); § 32-721.

The standard of proof on all issues is that of the preponderance of the evidence. Ariz. Admin. Code § R2-19-119.

A preponderance of the evidence is:

The greater weight of the evidence, not necessarily established by the greater number of witnesses testifying to a fact but by evidence that has the most convincing force; superior evidentiary weight that, though not sufficient to free the mind wholly from all reasonable doubt, is still sufficient to incline a fair and impartial mind to one side of the issue rather than the other.

Black’s Law Dictionary 1373 (10th ed. 2014).

Among other requirements, an applicant for certification must show that he has taken thirty semester hours of upper level accounting classes. Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 32-721(B)(2).

Ms. Rios has substantial experience evaluating applications to determine whether the applicant meets the statutory requirements for certification. Her opinion is that CM 45700 and 45701 do not meet the definition of upper level classes because these were classes focusing on introductory accounting concepts for MBA students. Although when reviewing Mr. Chaliki’s first application, she had considered these classes to be upper level, she provided credible testimony that when reviewing the second application she had information that she did not have when reviewing the first application, which additional information was sufficient to warrant a change in her opinion.

Mr. Chaliki did not present sufficient evidence to show that CM 45700 and 45701 are upper level accounting classes or that Ms. Rios’s opinion was in error.

Consequently Mr. Chaliki has not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that he meets the statutory requirement for certification.

Mr. Chaliki’s appeal should be dismissed.

RECOMMENDED ORDER

IT IS ORDERED that Ravi Chaliki’s appeal is dismissed and that the Board’s Order of Denial is affirmed.

In the event of certification of the Administrative Law Judge Decision by the Director of the Office of Administrative Hearings, the effective date of the Order will be five days after the date of that certification.

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000Done this day, November 8, 2021.

/s/ Thomas Shedden

Thomas Shedden

Administrative Law Judge

Transmitted electronically to:

Monica L. Petersen, Executive Director

Arizona State Board of Accountancy

-54864001

001

-137160-45720000