Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 11, 1979, in this article 78 proceeding granting petitioner's application to amend an order of the respondent-appellant New York City Conciliation and Appeals Board which determined the initial legal regulated rent for an apartment, and directing the respondent-appellant to reconsider its determination on the basis of the owner's assertion that certain apartments were comparable to the apartment in question, unanimously reversed, on the law, the petition dismissed, and the determination of the respondent-appellant reinstated, with costs and disbursements. Despite repeated notices the petitioner failed to provide the evidence of the comparability of the other apartments that is required by the respondent-appellant's procedures. It claims that the board has no warrant to require a petitioner to submit such evidence. In applications such as this the board is required to conduct a comparability study (Matter of Bradcord Assoc. v Conciliation Appeals Bd. of City of N.Y., 52 A.D.2d 569, affg NYLJ, Aug. 14, 1975, p 6, col 2), and to this end formulated the procedures it applied to the petitioner. These requirements have heretofore been reviewed and approved by this court (Matter of Fresh Meadows Assoc. v. New York City Conciliation Appeals Bd., 92 Misc.2d 519, affd 63 A.D.2d 943; Matter of Columbia Props. v Conciliation Appeals Bd. of City of N.Y., NYLJ, Nov. 21, 1977, p 7, col 3, affd 63 A.D.2d 943).
Concur — Ross, J.P., Markewich, Bloom, Lynch and Carro, JJ.