§ 21.35 - Comparative evaluation of mutually exclusive applications.

(a) In order to expedite action on mutually exclusive applications in services under this rules part where the competitive bidding process or random selection process do not apply, the applicants may request the Commission to consider their applications without a formal hearing in accordance with the summary procedure outlined in paragraph (b) in this section if:

(1) The applications are entitled to comparative consideration pursuant to § 21.31;

(2) The applications have not been designated for formal evidentiary hearing; and

(3) The Commission determines, initially or at any time during the procedure outlined in paragraph (b) of this section, that such procedure is appropriate, and that, from the information submitted and consideration of such other matters as may be officially noticed, there are no substantial and material questions of fact presented (other than those relating to the comparative merits of the applications) which would preclude a grant under paragraphs (a) and (b) of § 21.32.

(b) Provided that the conditions of paragraph (a) of this section are satisfied, applicants may request the Commission to act upon their mutually exclusive applications without a formal hearing pursuant to the summary procedure outlined below:

(1) To initiate the procedure, each applicant will submit to the Commission a written statement containing:

(i) A waiver of the applicant's right to a formal hearing;

(ii) A request and agreement that, in order to avoid the delay and expense of a comparative formal hearing, the Commission should exercise its judgment to select from among the mutually exclusive applications that proposal (or proposals) which would best serve the public interest; and

(iii) The signature of a principal (and the principal's attorney if represented).

(2) After receipt of the written requests of all of the applicants the Commission (if it deems this procedure appropriate) will issue a notice designating the comparative criteria upon which the applications are to be evaluated and will request each applicant to submit, within a specified period of time, additional information concerning the applicant's proposal relative to the comparative criteria.

(3) Within thirty (30) days following the due date for filing this information, the Commission will accept concise and factual argument on the competing proposals from the rival applicants, potential customers, and other knowledgeable parties in interest.

(4) Within fifteen (15) days following the due date for the filing of comments, the Commission will accept concise and factual replies from the rival applicants.

(5) From time to time during the course of this procedure the Commission may request additional information from the applicants and hold informal conferences at which all competing applicants shall have the right to be represented.

(6) Upon evaluation of the applications, the information submitted, and such other matters as may be officially noticed the Commission will issue a decision granting one (or more) of the proposals which it concludes would best serve the public interest, convenience and necessity. The decision will report briefly and concisely the reasons for the Commission's selection and will deny the other application(s). This decision shall be considered final.