Title: STATE EX REL SAMMONS TRUCKING v BO
Citation: N/A
Docket Number: 13216
State: Montana
Issuer: Montana Supreme Court
Date: January 28, 1976

No. 13216 I N THE S U P R E M E C O U R T O F THE STATE O F M O N T A N A 1975 T H E STATE O F M O N T A N A , ex rel. S A M M O N S TRUCKING INC., a Montana corporation, et a l . , Relators, -vs - GORDON BOLLINGER, T H O M A S G. MONAHAN, P.J. GILFEATHER, JAMES R, S H E A and GEORGE T U R M A N , as members of and comprising t h e PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, e t a l . , Respondents. ORIGINAL PROCEEDING : Counsel of Record : For Relators : Scribner and Huss, Helena, Montana Lawrence D, Huss argued, Helena, Montana For Respondents: Charles Dickman and Russell Doty, Helena, Montana Charles Dickman argued, Helena, Montana Submitted: December 3, 1975 Decided : J f l N 2 6 1975 1 " 4: '?i ; ; ;?'j'E Filed : ! . J M ; ~ M r . J u s t i c e Gene R. Daly delivered the Opinion of the Court: This i s an o r i g i n a l proceeding brought by r e l a t o r s a s common c a r r i e r s operating motor vehicles engaged i n i n t e r s t a t e commerce and using Montana highways. Relators seek a declaratory judgment and w r i t of mandate adjudging invalid the s t a t e r e g i s t r a - t i o n fee imposed by the Public Service Commission upon such vehicles t o the extent t h a t such f e e imposes a g r e a t e r and conflicting requirement than t h a t imposed by federal laws and regulations. Upon hearing counsel f o r r e l a t o r s ex parte t h i s Court desired an adversary hearing. Such hearing was had on December 3 , 1975. Under T i t l e 8, Chapter 1, Revised Codes of Montana, 1947, and 49 U.S.C. 8302, t h e Public Service Commission has s t a t u t o r y authority t o regulate a l l "for hire" motor vehicles operating on t h e public highways of the s t a t e of Montana. Section 8-116(a), R.C.M. 1947, provides f o r an assessment of an annual f i v e d o l l a r fee on each commercial motor vehicle which serves t o r e g i s t e r and i d e n t i f y such vehicle. Pursuant t o t h i s authority the Public Service Commission, i n November 1975, sent a memo t o a l l i n t e r s t a t e motor c a r r i e r s operating on Montana highways. The m e m o s t a t e d t h a t due t o l e g i s l a t i v e changes i n section 8-101, R.C.M. 1947, defining motor vehicles, t h a t term now included not only t h e motor c a r r i e r but a l s o any t r a i l e r , semitrailer o r d o l l i e attached thereto and pursuant t o section 8-116(a) each such vehic.Cr9dri- u n i t is subject t o t h e f i v e d o l l a r r e g i s t r a t i o n fee. It i s upon the basis of t h i s memo t h a t r e l a t o r s seek a declaratory judgment and w r i t of mandate. With these f a c t s i n mind, the issue f o r t h i s Court's con- sideration i s whether such a f e e imposition i s contrary t o federal laws and regulations and thus nonenforceable t o the extent t h a t i t creates an undue burden on i n t e r s t a t e commerce. In State ex r e l . Sammons Trucking, Inc. v. Boedecker, 158 >font. 397, 492 P.2d 919 (1972), t h i s Court ruled t h a t a ten d o l l a r f e e imposed on motor vehicles engaged i n i n t e r s t a t e commerce pursuant t o section 8-116, R.C.M. 1947, was a burden on i n t e r s t a t e commerce and therefore could not stand. Subse- quently the l e g i s l a t u r e i n 1973 amended section 8-116 t o bring it i n t o compliance with 49 U.S.C. $302 and 49 C.F.R. 1023.33 which require only a f i v e d o l l a r fee per i n t e r s t a t e motor vehicle. However a t the same time, the l e g i s l a t u r e a l s o amended section 8-101(f), R.C.M. 1947, a s t o the d e f i n i t i o n of a motor vehicle. Prior t o amendment the d e f i n i t i o n of a motor vehicle a s s e t f o r t h i n section 8-101(f), read: he term 'motor vehicle' s h a l l include a l l vehicles o r machines propelled by any power other than muscular used upon the public highways f o r the transportation of persons and/or property. I I Subsequent t o amendment, the definition of a motor vehicle a s s e t f o r t h i n section 8-101(6), reads: " ' ~ o t o r vehicle ' includes vehicles o r machines, motor trucks, t r a c t o r s o r other self-propelled vehicles used f o r the transportation of property o r persons over the public highways of the s t a t e , and any t r a i l e r , semitrailer, d o l l i e o r other - vehicle drawn thereby. " (Emphasis supplied. ) The e f f e c t then of t h i s s t a t e ' s d e f i n i t i o n of a motor vehicle a s amended is t o require a f i v e d o l l a r r e g i s t r a t i o n fee, under section 8-116(a), on each u n i t of an i n t e r s t a t e transport. That t h i s c o n f l i c t s with federal law i s apparent upon examination of I n t e r s t a t e Commerce Commission (I.C.C.) regulations promulgated pursuant t o 49 U.S.C. §302(a). 49 C.F.R. 1023.l(h) defines a motor vehicle t o be: "* * * a self-propelled o r motor-driven vehicle operated by a motor c a r r i e r under authority issued by the I n t e r s t a t e Commerce Commission. 11 Nowhere i n the I.C.C. d e f i n i t i o n i s any mention made of d o l l i e s , t r a i l e r s , o r semitrailers a s being motor vehicles. ath her, the I . C . C . definition is similar t o the old Montana d e f i n i t i o n i n t h a t it applies only t o the vehicle containing the mechanical drive u n i t , not t o whatever i s being pulled by t h a t power u n i t . In addition, the I.C.C. regulations provide a t 49 C.F.R. 1023.33, t h a t where any s t a t e prescribes r e g i s t r a t i o n o r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n stamp fees f o r such motor vehicles: "* * * such f e e s h a l l not exceed $5." In conjunction with t h i s f i v e d o l l a r maximum fee, federal statutory law s t a t e s t h a t any s t a t e motor vehicle f e e greater than t h a t allowed by I.C.C. regulation c o n s t i t u t e s an undue burden on i n t e r s t a t e commerce. 49 U.S.C. 5 302(b)(2)(d). There- f o r e the e f f e c t of t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t i o n , i f enforced by t h e Public Service Commission, would be t o impose a f i v e d o l l a r f e e not only f o r t h e motor u n i t but a l s o each u n i t towed thereby. This would impose fees substantially i n excess of what I.C.C. regulations provide with t h e r e s u l t i n g undue burden on i n t e r s t a t e commerce. There can be no doubt t h a t w k r e a s t a t e s t a t u t e con- f l i c t s with federal l e g i s l a t i o n i n the same subject area and the federal l e g i s l a t i o n i s within the competency of Congress t o enact, the federal l e g i s l a t i o n is controlling. I n t e r s t a t e Commerce Commission v. Detroit, G.H. & M.R.Company, 167 U.S.633, 17 S.Ct. 986, 42 L.Ed. 306; Cincinnati, N.O. & T.P.R.Co. v. I n t e r s t a t e Commerce Commission, 162 U.S. 184, 16 S.Ct. 700, 40 L.Ed. 935; United A.A. & A.1.W. v. Wisconsin Emp.Rel.Bd., 351 U.S. 266, 76 S.Ct. 794, 100 L.Ed. 1162. I n the specific area of i n t e r s t a t e commerce t h i s Court i n S t a t e ex r e l . Sammons Trucking Inc. v. Boedecker, 158 Mont. 397, 399, 400, 492 P.2d 919 (1972), s t a t e d : " W e hold the federal s t a t u t e and regulations promulgated by the I n t e r s t a t e Commerce Commission i n connection therewith t o be controlling over contrary provisions of s t a t e law." Then, a s t o the specific subject of regulation of i n t e r s t a t e commercial motor vehicles t h i s Court, i n Sammons, said: I I By enacting this legislation Congress has pre-empted the filed of state regulation and identification of interstate motor vehicles using Montana highways. The laws and regulations of the United States supersede the statutes of the state of Montana on the same subject to the extent that they are in conflict therewith and impose upon the Public Service Commission the duty to carry out such provisions by registration and identifi-. ' , cation of interstate motor vehicles operated by common carriers using the highways, of Montana in the manner prescribed by the federal statutes and regulations * * . I 1 See also Eisenman Seed Co. v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St.P.& P.R,R., 161 Mont. 197, 505 P.2d 81. Accordingly, we find the provisions of 4 9 U.S.C. §302(b) and 49 C.F.R. 1023 are controlling as to the registration and identification of motor vehicles engaged in interstate commerce using the highwaysof Montana, and to the extent that Montana statutes impose greater conflicting requirements, they constitute an undue burden on interstate commerce and must yield to federal authority. This Court specifically holds the state definition of a motor vehicle in section 8-101(6), R.C.M. 1947, relied upon by the Public Service Commission, expressly conflicts with federal law and the state may require a fee no greater than five dollars per motor vehicle, with the definition of such motor vehicle not to include the dollie, trailer or semitrailer for purposes of section 8-116(a), R.C.M. 1947. This opinion constitutes a declaratory judgment. Let a peremptory writ of mandate issue. Relators seek attorney fees in this cause. We decline to grant the same as the Public Service Commission was only following the command of the legislature,