Michigan Trucking Ass'n v. Michigan Public Service Com'n, Docket No. 195240

• Court: Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
• Writing for the Court: Before CORRIGAN; PER CURIAM
• Citation: 571 N.W.2d 734,225 Mich.App. 424
• Parties: , Fed. Carr. Cas. P 59,007, Fed. Carr. Cas. P 84,055 MICHIGAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION, Appellant, v. MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, Appellee. (On Remand)
• Decision Date: 16 September 1997
• Docket Number: Docket No. 195240

Page 734

571 N.W.2d 734 225 Mich.App. 424, Fed. Carr. Cas. P 59,007,
Fed. Carr. Cas. P 84,055 MICHIGAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATION, Appellant,
v.
MICHIGAN PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, Appellee. (On Remand) Docket No. 195240. Court of Appeals of Michigan. Submitted Aug. 6, 1997, at Lansing.
Decided Sept. 16, 1997, at 9:05 a.m.
Released for Publication Dec. 23, 1997.

Page 735

[225 Mich.App. 425] Foster, Swift, Collins & Smith, P.C. by Glen A. Schmiege and Robert E. McFarland, Farmington Hills, for Michigan Trucking Association.

Frank J. Kelley, Attorney General, Thomas L. Casey, Solicitor General, and Don L. Keskey and Henry J. Boynton, Assistant Attorneys General, for Public Service Commission.

Before CORRIGAN, C.J., and MARKEY and MARKMAN, JJ.

ON REMAND

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to a remand from the Supreme Court, appellant Michigan Trucking Association (MTA) appeals as of right from an order of appellee Public Service Commission (PSC) implementing a safety rating system for motor carrier vehicles pursuant[225 Mich.App. 426] to the Motor Carrier Act, M.C.L. § 475.1 et seq.; M.S.A. § 22.531 et seq. Michigan Trucking Co. v. Public Service Comm., 451 Mich. 906, 550 N.W.2d 527 (1996). Appellant claims that the PSC was without authority to issue the order because the act was preempted by Congress when it enacted the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA), P.L. 103-305. Appellant also contends that even if the PSC had authority to implement the safety rating system, its action is invalid because it failed to follow proper procedures for the promulgation of rules before issuing the order. We affirm.

The Motor Carrier Act was amended by the Legislature with the enactment of 1993 P.A. 352, effective January 13, 1994. One of the changes, codified at M.C.L. § 479.43; M.S.A. § 22.587(103), provides as follows:

The public service commission, in cooperation with the department of state police, will develop and implement by rule or order a motor carrier safety rating system within 12 months after the effective date of this article. In the rating system, an unsatisfactory rating shall not be imposed without an on-site safety review being conducted by the department of state police.

Following enactment of this statute, representatives of the PSC Motor Carrier Regulation Division and the Motor Carrier Division of the Michigan State Police met to develop a system of safety ratings. On December 19, 1994, they recommended that the PSC adopt

Page 736

a safety rating system based on the United States Department of Transportation safety ratings and supplemented by additional information from the Secretary of State's office and the state police with regard to driving records, accidents, citations, and vehicle [225 Mich.App. 427] inspections. On January 11, 1995, the PSC issued an order immediately implementing the safety rating system, finding that "the process proposed by the Motor Carrier Division and the State Police ... meets the requirements of M.C.L. § 479.43." The PSC also found that the proposed system was in the "public interest" and that a public hearing was unnecessary.

Initially, we reject the PSC's argument that appellant lacks standing to challenge the order because it is not an aggrieved party. "A party is aggrieved by a judgment or order when it operates on the party's rights and property, or bears directly on the party's interest." Midland Cogeneration Venture Ltd. Partnership v. Public Service Comm., 199 Mich.App. 286, 304, 501 N.W.2d 573...