We first address the construction issue. In its recommended decision, the ALJ found that Presbyterian's application failed to demonstrate why its proposal for new construction was more cost-efficient than conversion of existing underutilized space. Based on this language, the ALJ determined that if a hospital had underutilized space, yet it proposed new construction, the hospital was required to justify the new construction. Having concluded from its statistics that Presbyterian had underutilized space, the ALJ determined that Presbyterian was required to show that its new construction was more cost-efficient than conversion of existing space and that Presbyterian had failed to justify its proposal for new construction in its application. The ALJ granted summary judgment, concluding that Presbyterian had also failed to present any evidence that would create a genuine issue of material fact as to Presbyterian's conformity with these criteria.
Summary judgment is only appropriate when no genuine issues of material fact exist.
Here, Presbyterian presented the deposition testimony of Richard E. Salerno, Administrator and CEO of Presbyterian. Mr. Salerno testified that Presbyterian was not able to structure the rehabilitation unit within existing space without new construction because all of the space in the hospital was dedicated to other health care purposes and moving weight-bearing walls prohibited construction in existing space. Mr. Salerno also testified that the new construction would better meet patient needs. This deposition testimony creates a genuine issue of material fact as to whether Presbyterian showed that its proposal for new construction was the most reasonable alternative for developing its rehabilitation unit. We note, however, that an application must comply with all review criteria.