Opinion ID: 1258425
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 10

Heading: comparative review of otc and ash as carriers

Text: The Commission failed to make findings or conclusions regarding the comparative merits of OTC and Ash, despite the district court's instructions that the Commission should make a comparative review of the Ash and OTC applications to determine whether either or both should be awarded permits. The record supports the Commission's finding that there is a public need and necessity for the services to be rendered by Ash and OTC. It is therefore necessary that the Commission make a comparative review of the whole record. After reviewing both the Ash and OTC application proceedings and all of the evidence presented, it should make a determination of whether the grant of a certificate to OTC would be inconsistent with the public convenience and necessity and whether OTC is fit, willing and able to provide transportation to be authorized by the certificate and to comply with the Motor Carrier Act and the regulations of the commission. NMSA 1978, § 65-2-84(D)(1) (Repl.Pamp. 1981). The Commission should make additional findings of fact as may be necessary to support its decision.