.- 

Col. Homer Garrison, Jr. 

Director 

Texas Department of Public 

Safety 

Box 4087, North Austin Station 

Austin, Texas 

Opinion No. C-191 

Re: Whether a motor vehicle 

traneportlng 011 field 

equipment from one lease 

to another leaa?, wherein 

a public highway is 

crossed at right angle8 

Is operating over a public 

highway and related 

question. 

Dear Cal. Garrison: 

In your recent Setter you,requeated an opinion of this 

office on the following questions: 

"(1) I8 a motor vehicle transporting 011 

field equipment from one lease to another lease 

wherein a public highway is croesed at right 

angles considered to be operating over 8 public 

highway? 

"(2) In view of the descriptive phrase 

'Irrespective of whether in the course of such 

transportation a highway between two (2) or 

more incorporated cities, towns or villages 18 

traversed' doe8 House Blll #31 seek to regulate 

as a motor carrier or a specialized motor carrier 

a motor vehicle which croa8es a highway at right 

angles to and from private property while transporting property for hire?" 

Houee Bill No. 31, Act8 

7 

th Leg., 1963, ch. 359, P. 

929 (codified a8 glib Sec. lc provides In part a8 follows: 

'Sec. lc. The term6 'Motor Carrier' and 

~Speclallzed Motor Carrier,' as u,8ed in Sec. 1 

of thla Act, shall apply to and Include all for 

hire tranaportatlon of 011 field equipment, a8 

defined In eubdlvlelon (I) of Section 1 of this 

Act, over the public highway8 of this State out8ide the corporate limit8 of Cltle8 or towns, 

irrespective of whether in the course of such 

transportation a highway between two (2) or more 
Col. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 2, .(C-191 ) 

Incorporated cities, towns or villages is 

traversed." 

We can flnSf. no Texas cases defining the term "over the 

public hlfhways 

the word over." 

nor can we find any case8 In Texas defining 

However, in Illlnola Central Railway Company 

v. City of ChiCaRO, 141 Ill. 'jBm82), 30 N . E . 1044 e 

at page 1046: 

, th 

Court said 

I, . . .The two words toverl and 1acros81 may be 

used Interchangeably, and as having the same meaning. ,Webster thus define8 the word 'across:' 'From 

side to side; athwart; crosswise; quite over.' He 

defines the word 'over' as follow8: 'Above, or 

higher than, In place or position, with the Idea 

of covering; across; from side to 8lde of; upon 

the surface of.'. , .' 

Also in White v. Bevler Coal Co., 364 MO. 313'(1953), 

261 S.W.2d 81, 84, the Court used the following language: 

II 

2d Ed5.i.; 

.Webster's New International Dictionary, 

tells us that the word lover' Indicate8 

lpaasage either above the substance or thing, or 

on the surface of it, and beyond; speclf.: across; 

from one side to the other of; to or at a place 

beyond;* * *,I and the word lacro88' mean8 'From 

one side to the oppoelte side of.'. . ." 

Article glib, Sec. l(d), Vernon's Civil Statutes, provides a8 fOllOW8: 

"The term 'public highway' means every 

street, road or highway in this State." 

Putting the definition of "over" with the term "public 

highway" a8 defined by the Act, we must conclude that a motor 

vehicle transporting 011 field equipment from one lease to 

another lease, where a public highway is crossed at rightangles, would be considered as operating over a public highway. 

We point out that had the Legislature desired to exempt 

such travel it could have so provided, a8 it did In Article 

6675a-2, Vernon's Civil Statutes which provides: 

II 

. . .mrovlded, that where a public highway 

-925- 
. . L 

col. Homer Garrison, Jr., Page 3, (C-191 ) 

separates lands under the dominion or control of 

the owner, the operation of such a motor vehicle 

by such owner; his agent or employee, across 8Uch 

highway shall not constitute a use of such motor 

vehicle upon a public highway of this State." 

Inasmuch a8 no such provision appear8 In Rouse Bill No. 31, we 

believe that the Leglalature Intended none. 

In answer to your second question, it is the opinion of 

thla office that the Legislature Intended to regulate all 

transportation of '011 field equipment for compensation or hire 

except that 8peclflcally exempted by paragraphs 2 and 3, Sec. 

lc of Article ~gllb, Vernon's Civil Statutea, which provide as 

follows: 

"Sec. lc . . , 

"The provisions of this Section lc shall 

not apply to or Include vehicle8 used exclusively 

in the Stringing Of pipe for pipellne8, nor Shall 

this Section lc apply to or Include the transporta-. 

tlon of water, drilling mud, petroleum and petroleum 

prOdUCt8 in bulk, in tank trucks, when such substances are used In connectlon.wlth the servicing 

of 011 and gas wells, unless In the course of such 

transportation a highway between two (2) or more 

Incorporated cities, tOwII8 or village6 18 traversed. 

"Nothing In thl8 Section lc shall In anywise 

repeal, alter, amend or affect any of the provision8 of Chapter 290, Acts, Reg. Sea. Fortyseventh Legislature (being Sections la and lb of 

thls Act and now codified a8 Sections la and lb 

of Article glib, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes)." 

It Is, therefore our opinion that Article glib, Section 

lc (House Bill No. 3lj doe8 seek to regulate a8 a motor 

carrier or specialized motor carrier any motor vehicle which 

croasea a Nghway at right angles to and from private property 

tranaportlng,property for compensation or hire provided that 

the transportation'18 of 011 field equipment and 18 not 

covered by the exemptions set out in paragraphs 2 and 3 of 

Section lc, Article glib, Vernon's Civil Statutes. 

-926- 
. . . 

col. Homer Garrison, Jr., Pam 4, (c-191 ) 

1. A motor vehicle transporting 011 field 

equipment from one lease to another leaae when 

a public highway 18 crossed at right-angles 18 

considered to be operating "over a public hlghway." 

2. Transportation of oil field equipment 

for hire by a motor carrier or specialized motor 

carrier which crosaea a public highway at rlghtangle8 to and from private property fall8 within 

the definition of the term 'motor carrier" and 

"speclallzed motor carrier" and the operator of 

such equipment would require authority from the 

Railroad Commls8lon unless exempt under the 

provIsIon of Article glib, Vernon's Civil 

Statutea. 

Very truly yours, 

WAGGONER CARR 

ney General of Texas 

I n 

NVS:aj 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMNITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

Gordon Zuber 

Arthur Sandlln 

V. F. !l'aylor 

APPROVEDBOR TRE A!C!CORNEXGENERAL 

BY: Stanton Stone 

-927-