Section 27.1421 - Disputes over costs and cost-sharing(a) Parties disputing a cost estimate, cost invoice, or payment or cost-sharing obligation must file an objection with the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse.(b) The Relocation Payment Clearinghouse may mediate any disputes regarding cost estimates or payments that may arise in the course of band reconfiguration; or refer the disputant parties to alternative dispute resolution fora.(1) Any dispute submitted to the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse, or other mediator, shall be decided within 30 days after the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse has received a submission by one party and a response from the other party.(2) Thereafter, any party may seek expedited non-binding arbitration, which must be completed within 30 days of the recommended decision or advice of the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse or other mediator.(3) The parties will share the cost of this arbitration if it is before the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse.(c) Should any issues still remain unresolved, they may be referred to the Bureau within ten days of recommended decision or advice of the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse or other mediator and any decision of the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse can be appealed to the Chief of the Bureau. (1) When referring an unresolved matter, the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse shall forward the entire record on any disputed issues, including such dispositions thereof that the Relocation Payment Clearinghouse has considered.(2) Upon receipt of such record and advice, the Bureau will decide the disputed issues based on the record submitted. The Bureau is directed to resolve such disputed issues or designate them for an evidentiary hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. If the Bureau decides an issue, any party to the dispute wishing to appeal the decision may do so by filing with the Commission, within ten days of the effective date of the initial decision, a Petition for de novo review; whereupon the matter will be set for an evidentiary hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.(3) Parties seeking de novo review of a decision by the Bureau are advised that, in the course of the evidentiary hearing, the Commission may require complete documentation relevant to any disputed matters; and, where necessary, and at the presiding judge's discretion, require expert engineering, economic or other reports or testimony. Parties may therefore wish to consider possibly less burdensome and expensive resolution of their disputes through means of alternative dispute resolution.85 FR 22882, 6/22/2020; 85 FR 57766, 9/16/2020