CO Code § 40-10.1-112 (2021)
2021 Colorado Code|Title 40 - Utilities|Article 10.1 - Motor Carriers|Part 1 - General Provisions|§ 40-10.1-112. Commission May Take Action Against Certificate or Permit

  Except as specified in subsection (3) of this section, the commission, at any time, by order duly entered, after hearing upon notice to the motor carrier and upon proof of violation, may issue an order to cease and desist or may suspend, revoke, alter, or amend any certificate or permit issued to the motor carrier under this article for the following reasons:   A violation of this article or of any term or condition of the motor carrier's certificate or permit;    Exceeding the authority granted by a certificate or permit;    A violation or refusal to observe any of the proper orders or rules of the commission;    For a towing carrier, a violation of any of the provisions set forth in part 18 or 21 of article 4 of title 42, C.R.S., or a conviction, guilty plea, or plea of nolo contendere to a felony;    For a mover, failure or refusal to abide by the terms of an arbitrator's award under section 40-10.1-507, or failure to satisfy the requirements for a new or renewed permit under section 40-10.1-502.       Any person may file a complaint against a motor carrier for a violation of this article or a rule adopted under this article. The complainant may request any relief that the commission, in its authority, may grant, including an order to cease and desist, suspension or revocation of the motor carrier's certificate or permit, or assessment of civil penalties. Upon proof of violation, the commission may issue an order to cease and desist, suspend or revoke the motor carrier's certificate or permit, assess civil penalties as provided in article 7 of this title, or take any other action within the commission's authority. In assessing civil penalties under this subsection (2), the commission is not constrained by the procedural requirements of section 40-7-116.    Notwithstanding the notice and hearing provisions of subsection (1) of this section, the commission shall summarily suspend the certificate or permit of any motor carrier for failure to maintain effective insurance or surety bond coverage and file evidence of the same in accordance with section 40-10.1-107 and rules adopted pursuant thereto. The commission shall reinstate such summarily suspended certificate or permit within a time period specified in, and in accordance with, the rules of the commission.    A motor carrier whose certificate or permit has been revoked for cause more than twice is not eligible for another such certificate or permit for at least two years after the date of the third such revocation. In the case of an entity, the two-year period of ineligibility also applies to all principals, officers, and directors of the entity, whether or not any such principal, officer, or director applies individually or as a principal, officer, or director of the same or a different entity. As used in this subsection (4), “revoked for cause” does not include a revocation for failure to carry the required insurance unless it is shown that the person knowingly operated without insurance.    Any commission action under subsection (1) or (2) of this section must conform to the provisions and procedures specified in article 6 of this title. The motor carrier has all the rights to the opportunity for a hearing, review, and appeal as to such order or ruling of the commission as are now provided by articles 1 to 7 of this title. No appeal from or review of any order or ruling of the commission supersedes or suspends such order or rulings unless specifically ordered by the proper court.     History. Source: L. 2011: Entire article added,(HB 11-1198), ch. 127, p. 403, § 1, effective August 10.    ANNOTATION   Annotator's note. Since § 40-10.1-112 is similar to §§ 40-10-112 , 40-11-110 , and 40-13-103 as they existed prior to the 2011 reorganization of the motor carrier statutes, relevant cases construing those sections have been included in the annotations to this section.   This section empowers the public utilities commission (PUC) to order a revocation or to alter or to amend a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a violation of its rules and regulations. Colo. Transf. & Storage, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 180 Colo. 327 , 505 P.2d 370 (1973).   Procedural due process requires that in addition to a fair and open hearing, there must be due notice and an opportunity to be heard, and the procedure must be consistent with the essentials of a fair trial, and the agency must act upon evidence and not arbitrarily. Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. Colo. Motorway, Inc., 165 Colo. 1 , 437 P.2d 44 (1968).   Facts determine what is proper notice. The question of what is proper notice, or, as here, of what constitutes a specific designation of the issue raised or charges made, depends necessarily upon the facts of each case, the type of investigation being conducted, the violation alleged, and the penalty or order sought to be imposed. Where the purpose of the investigation by the PUC is only to determine the reasonableness of rates charged by a utility, a different standard would seem to apply than where the franchise of the utility is sought to be revoked for violation of the utility laws and a penalty or fine imposed. Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. Colo. Motorway, Inc., 165 Colo. 1 , 437 P.2d 44 (1968).   Authority to revoke permit. If the evidence supports a finding that the statutes governing the regulation of the particular carrier and the rules and regulations of the commission have in fact been violated, it is clear that the commission has the statutory authority to revoke the violator's PUC permit. Rumney v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 172 Colo. 314 , 472 P.2d 149 (1970).   This section requires before revocation, alteration, or amendment of a private permit, a hearing after notice of alleged violations of law, rules, and regulations or the terms of the permit. Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. Colo. Motorway, Inc., 165 Colo. 1 , 437 P.2d 44 (1968).   Commission cannot revoke a contract carrier permit without compliance with the notice and hearing provisions of this section. Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 185 Colo. 438 , 525 P.2d 439 (1974).   Where the commission did not give notice or hold a hearing, it had no authority to revoke a contract carrier's certificate. Miller Bros. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 185 Colo. 414 , 525 P.2d 443 (1974).   A hearing must be held before the commission can take administrative action regarding alteration of previously granted permits to provide contract carrier service. J.C. Trucking v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 776 P.2d 366 (Colo. 1989).   Cancellation of “occasional service” portion of carrier's certificate held no abuse of commission's discretion. Colo. Transf. & Storage, Inc. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 180 Colo. 327 , 505 P.2d 370 (1973).   The commission has no authority to impose a monetary fine as an alternative to revoking a permit or certificate. Haney v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 194 Colo. 481 , 574 P.2d 863 (1978) (decided prior to amendment authorizing imposition of a civil penalty).   Right of review upon cancellation of certificate. The penalty ordered by the commission was that the carrier's certificate and permit be cancelled unless he elected to accept certain restrictions. The carrier had the right to have the propriety of the commission's decision, which includes findings and conclusions, as well as an order, reviewed by the courts and was not required to make an election until he has obtained such judicial review. Pub. Utils. Comm'n v. Tucker, 167 Colo. 130 , 445 P.2d 901 (1968).   No property right to be on tow list. Towing carriers do not have an unqualified property right to be included on the rotation tow list of the Colorado state patrol by virtue of their permits issued as required by this section. Jam Action, Inc. v. Colo. State Patrol, 890 P.2d 210 (Colo. App. 1994).   Enforcement action against airport limousine service was subject to federal pre-emption and violated the commerce clause, art. 1, § 8, of the U.S. constitution. E. W. Resort Tranps., LLC v. Binz, 494 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (D. Colo. 2007 ).