Case Title: MATTER OF GALT

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: montana

Court: Montana Supreme Court

Date: 1982-01-21T00:00:00Z

Document:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA In the Matter of the Application of O.J. Galt, Stanford, Montana, for Authority to Sell Certificate of Public Convenience No. 1390, Sub. A, To Marvin E.Mintyala d/b/a City Garage and Mr. "M" Disposal, Lewistown, Montana. Appeal from: District Court of the First Judicial District, In and for the County of Lewis and Clark Hon. Gordon Bennett, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: William E. O'Leary argued, Helena, Montana For Respondent : Alexander and Baucus, Great Falls, Montana Neil Ugrin argued, Great Falls, Montana Rob Smith, PSC, Helena, Montana Submitted: December 3, 1981 ~ecided: January 21, 1982 M r . J u s t i c e Frank B. Morrison, Jr., d e l i v e r e d the Opinion of t h e Court. Appellants, 0. J. G a l t and Marvin E. Mintyala appeal from an order of t h e F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , entered October 15, 1980. This o r d e r affirmed a previous order of August 1, 1980, which declared t h a t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e No. 1390(A) issued by t h e Public Service Commission (PSC) t o 0. J. G a l t on November 18, 1977, was n u l l and void f o r a l l purposes. O n May 15, 1936, t h e PSC granted G a l t a Class "C" C e r t i f i c a t e , No. 1390, authorizing motor t r a n s p o r t of "property" i n t h e town of Stanford, Montana, and within a 70-mile radius. This c e r t i f i c a t e was issued pursuant t o s e c t i o n 3847.2, R.C.M., 1935 ( r e c o d i f i e d a s s e c t i o n 8-102, R.C.M., 1947), of t h e Montana Motor C a r r i e r s Act. I n 1977, s e c t i o n 8-102, R.C.M., 1947 ( s e c t i o n 69-12- 301, MCA), w a s amended t o include an a d d i t i o n a l c l a s s i f i c a - t i o n of motor c a r r i e r , C l a s s " D , " f o r t h e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and d i s p o s a l of garbage, waste and refuse. The l e g i s l a t u r e a l s o enacted a new provision, s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947 (never c o d i f i e d i n MCA). This was an implementation s e c t i o n providing t h a t : "All C l a s s D motor c a r r i e r s , whether property c a r r i e r s o r otherwise, who have conducted a motor c a r r i e r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e f o r h i r e u t i l i z i n g motor v e h i c l e equipment and appro- p r i a t e d i s p o s a l sites c o n s i s t e n t with t h e laws of t h i s s t a t e and r u l e s of t h e commission and t h e department of h e a l t h and environmental sciences s h a l l , upon w r i t t e n proof c o n s i s t i n g of p r i o r business records r e f l e c t i n g a trans- p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e f o r 1 year p r i o r t o t h e e f f e c t i v e d a t e of t h i s a c t , which business records s h a l l be submitted t o t h e commission i n an informal manner, r e c e i v e a c e r t i f i c a t e of public convenience and n e c e s s i t y a s a Class D c a r r i e r authorizing t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of t h e above-described commodities w i t h i n t h e geo- graphical a r e a described i n t h e w r i t t e n proof submitted. Such proof must be submitted t o t h e commission within 4 months following t h e e f f e c t i v e d a t e of t h i s a c t ; and t h e commis- s i o n s h a l l i s s u e such C l a s s D c e r t i f i c a t e s w i t h i n an a d d i t i o n a l 90 days, and t h e r e a f t e r , no Class A, B, o r C c a r r i e r w i l l be authori- zed o r permitted t o t r a n s p o r t ashes, t r a s h , waste, r e f u s e , rubbish, garbage, o r organic and inorganic matter within t h e S t a t e of Montana." I n response t o t h i s provision, t h e PSC mailed a form t o c e r t i f i c a t e holders t o determine whether t h e holder d e s i r e d t o haul garbage and i f s o , requesting business records e s t a b l i s h i n g p a s t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of garbage. Galt answered t h e PSC on t h e form provided, s t a t i n g t h a t he d i d want t o haul garbage. G a l t l i s t e d f i v e business names on t h e l e t t e r a s a response t o t h e requested business records. N o business records w e r e supplied. O n November 18, 1977, t h e PSC issued G a l t C l a s s "D" C e r t i f i c a t e No. 1390(A), authorizing t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of garbage i n t h e same geographical a r e a a s t h e p r i o r Class "C" c e r t i f i c a t e , i . e . , t h e town of Stanford and a 70-mile radius. On May 3, 1978, Galt applied t o t h e PSC f o r a u t h o r i t y t o t r a n s f e r t h e Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e t o Marvin Mintyala. The a p p l i c a t i o n was noticed and a June 7, 1978 deadline set f o r p r o t e s t s . O n June 5, 1978, F. L. Green, owner of a c e r t i f i c a t e t o haul garbage i n Great F a l l s and a 1 0 - m i l e r a d i u s t h e r e o f , joined by t h e P a l a g i s who proposed t o buy t h e Green c e r t i f i c a t e , f i l e d a p r o t e s t with t h e PSC on t h e grounds t h a t t h e G a l t c e r t i f i c a t e c o n f l i c t e d with t h e Green operating area. A hearing was set f o r September 7, 1978. O n September 5, 1978, Green and P a l a g i s f i l e d a motion t o quash t h e hearing and any f u r t h e r proceedings on t h e G a l t t r a n s f e r , and a motion t o i n v a l i d a t e G a l t ' s Class "D" c e r t i - f i c a t e . Both motions were made on t h e ground t h a t G a l t had n o t complied with s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947, supra, with regard t o t h e f i l i n g of p r i o r business records t o support t h e a p p l i c a t i o n .  he hearing was held on September 7 , 1978. The PSC subsequently i s s u e d o r d e r No. 2657, d e c l a r i n g t h e G a l t c e r t i f i c a t e n u l l and void a s t o p o i n t s beyond t h e municipal l i m i t s of S t a n f o r d , Montana. G a l t was g r a n t e d t i m e t o submit p r o o f , v i a b u s i n e s s r e c o r d s , r e f l e c t i n g garbage t r a n s p o r t a t i o n f o r one year p r i o r t o J u l y 1, 1977 ( t h e e f f e c t i v e d a t e of s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947). G a l t ' s proposed t r a n s f e r was held i n abeyance. G a l t f i l e d a motion f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t h i s o r d e r w i t h t h e PSC on January 1 5 , 1979. Reconsideration w a s granted. A f t e r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n , t h e PSC i s s u e d Order No. 2657a g r a n t i n g a u t h o r i t y t o t r a n s f e r t h e G a l t c e r t i f i c a t e t o Mintyala. This o r d e r was i s s u e d on November 27, 1979. On December 10, 1979, t h e P a l a g i s ( t o whom F. L. Green had s o l d h i s b u s i n e s s and t r a n s f e r r e d h i s C l a s s "D" c e r t i f i - c a t e w i t h PSC approval on February 2, 1979) f i l e d a p e t i t i o n f o r j u d i c i a l review and a motion t o temporarily s t a y t h e t r a n s f e r of t h e G a l t c e r t i f i c a t e . The s t a y was g r a n t e d . The F i r s t J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t Court d e c l a r e d t h e G a l t C l a s s "D" C e r t i f i c a t e No. 1390(A) t o be n u l l and v o i d f o r a l l purposes. I s s u e s p r e s e n t e d on appeal a r e : (1) Whether t h e District Court lacked j u r i s d i c t i o n t o review t h e i s s u a n c e of t h e G a l t C l a s s "D" C e r t i f i c a t e ? ( 2 ) Whether t h e G a l t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e i s s u e d by t h e PSC on November 1 8 , 1977, is void? ( 3 ) Whether t h e o r d e r of t h e D i s t r i c t Court d e p r i v e s G a l t and Mintyala of due process of law? ( 4 ) Whether t h e D i s t r i c t Court usurped t h e a u t h o r i t y of t h e PSC t o c a n c e l motor c a r r i e r c e r t i f i c a t e s ? ( 5 ) Whether t h e D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d i n granting a permanent s t a y a g a i n s t t h e proposed t r a n s f e r of t h e G a l t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e ? W e f i n d i s s u e s one and two t o be d i s p o s i t i v e of t h i s appeal. Appellants, G a l t and Mintyala, contend t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court lacked j u r i s d i c t i o n t o decide t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e G a l t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e f o r two reasons. F i r s t , t h e implementa- t i o n provision, s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947, contains a seven month timetable beginning J u l y 1, 1977, and ending on January 31, 1978. G a l t and Mintyala argue t h a t s e c t i o n 2-4- 702, MCA, a provision of t h e Montana Administrative Procedure Act, required appeals r e l a t i n g t o c e r t i f i c a t e s issued pursuant t o s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947, t o be perfected w i t h i n 30 days of t h e termination of t h e seven month time l i m i t a t i o n . G a l t and Mintyala contend t h a t s i n c e no such a c t i o n was taken within t h e 30 day period beginning January 31, 1978, t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e c e r t i f i c a t e could n o t later be r a i s e d before and decided by t h e D i s t r i c t Court. Secondly, G a l t and Mintyala argue t h a t t h e s o l e i s s u e before t h e PSC regarding t h e proposed t r a n s f e r of t h e G a l t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e was t h e f i t n e s s of Mintyala t o o p e r a t e under t h a t c e r t i f i c a t e . A l l testimony received by t h e PSC a t t h e hearing on September 7, 1978, r e l a t e d only t o t h e f i t n e s s of Mintyala. G a l t and Mintyala argue t h a t , a s a r e s u l t of t h e l i m i t e d n a t u r e of t h i s hearing, t h e only i s s u e t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t Court could properly review on appeal was Mintyala's f i t n e s s . Both contentions a r e without m e r i t . Section 2-4-702, MCA, r e l a t i n g t o appeals from a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n s , p e r t a i n s t o t h e i n i t i a t i o n of j u d i c i a l review i n contested cases. The c e r t i f i c a t e i s s u i n g process conducted by t h e PSC with regard t o t h i s new C l a s s "D" C e r t i f i c a t e d i d n o t c o n s t i t u t e a contested case. Therefore, t h e 30-day appeal l i m i t a t i o n contained i n s e c t i o n 2-4-702 ( 2 ) ( a ) , d i d n o t apply t o t h e issuance of t h e G a l t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e and t h e D i s t r i c t Court was n o t precluded j u r i s d i c t i o n t o decide t h e v a l i d i t y of t h a t c e r t i f i c a t e when t h e i s s u e was r a i s e d a t a l a t e r date. Section 2-4-702 (1) (b) , MCA, provides t h a t a ". . . p a r t y may not r a i s e any o t h e r question not r a i s e d before t h e agency . . ." A review of t h e record c l e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e s t h a t t h e i s s u e of t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e G a l t C l a s s "D" C e r t i f i c a t e was r a i s e d before t h e PSC p r i o r t o t h e hearing on September 7, 1978, w a s taken under advisement by t h e PSC, was thoroughly b r i e f e d by counsel f o r a l l p a r t i e s , and was, i n f a c t , t h e b a s i s f o r t h e o r i g i n a l PSC decision i n t h e matter. The v a l i d i t y question p l a i n l y w a s r a i s e d before t h e PSC and became an i s s u e which could be heard and decided by t h e D i s t r i c t Court upon j u d i c i a l review. The D i s t r i c t Court d i d n o t exceed i t s scope of j u d i c i a l review. The i s s u e of t h e v a l i d i t y of t h e G a l t Class "D" C e r t i f i - c a t e , hinges upon t h e requirements s e t f o r t h i n t h e implementa- t i o n provision, s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947. This s t a t u t e required submission of ". . . w r i t t e n proof c o n s i s t i n g of p r i o r business records r e f l e c t i n g a t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e f o r one year p r i o r t o t h e e f f e c t i v e d a t e of t h i s a c t ( ~ u l y 1, 1977) . . ." These records were t o be submitted i n an informal manner within four months of J u l y 1, 1977. Upon completion of t h i s requirement p a r t i e s received ". . . a c e r t i f i c a t e of p u b l i c convenience and n e c e s s i t y a s a c l a s s "D" c a r r i e r authorizing t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of t h e above-described commodities within t h e geographical a r e a described i n t h e proof submitted." To implement t h i s s t a t u t e , t h e PSC mailed a form t o motor c a r r i e r s . G a l t returned h i s form completed a s follows: II NAME : ADDRESS : TELEPHONE NUMBER: AUTHORITY NO: " I V . A r e you p r e s e n t l y operating under t h e c e r t i f i c a t e issued t o you by t h e Montana Public Service Commission ( t h i s means each and every c e r t i f i c a t e ) ? YES " 1 I I . I f you do NOT intend t o a c t i v e l y p a r t i c i p a t e i n garbage hauling we w i l l r e s t r i c t your c u r r e n t Class C and/or B a u t h o r i t y a g a i n s t t r a n s p o r t i n g garbage. I do NOT - want t o t r a n s p o r t garbage. D o n o t i s s u e m e Class D a u t h o r i t y . You may r e s t r i c t m y c u r r e n t c e r t i f i c a t e ( s ) a g a i n s t t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of garbage. I DO want t o t r a n s p o r t garbage. L i s t e d below a r e b u s i n e s s records proving t h a t I have hauled o r attempted t o haul garbage. Pump Bar L y l e ' s Bar Presbyterian Church G a l t ' s Hardware G a l t ' s Garage "We haul f o r anyone who wants us t o b u t most people h e r e haul t h e i r own now. I n p a s t years w e hauled f o r a l l t h e businesses & a l o t of t h e l o c a l people. "IN ANY EVENT (REGARDLESS O F WHAT YOU CHECK ABOVE), SUBMIT THE APPROPRIATE CERTIFICATE(S) OR AN AFFIDAVIT STATING THAT I T H A S BEEN LOST, BY NOVEMBER 1, 1977. "Oliver J. G a l t C e r t i f i c a t e Holder" O n t h e b a s i s of t h i s answer, t h e PSC issued G a l t C l a s s "DM C e r t i f i c a t e No. 1390(A), authorizing t r a n s p o r t a t i o n of garbage i n Stanford and a 70-mile r a d i u s t h e r e o f . W e hold t h a t t h i s answer submitted by G a l t d i d n o t s u f f i c i e n t l y comply with t h e requirements of s e c t i o n 8- 1 0 2 . 1 , R.C.M., 1947. The l i s t i n g of f i v e business names without designation of l o c a t i o n , s e r v i c e provided, o r d a t e s of s e r v i c e c l e a r l y i s not t h e submission of business records required by t h e s t a t u t e . Admittedly, t h e s t a t u t e c a l l e d f o r informal submission, b u t G a l t ' s answer f a i l s t o achieve t h e s t a t u s of even informal response. The f a i l u r e t o comply with s e c t i o n 8-102.1, R.C.M., 1947, n e c e s s i t a t e s a f i n d i n g t h a t Class "D" C e r t i f i c a t e No. 1390(A), issued by t h e PSC on November 18, 1977, i s void. I n accordance with t h e foregoing opinion, t h e judgment of t h e D i s t r i c t Court i s affirmed. W e Concur: ~ ~ 4 9 , W , @ Chief J u s t i c e