Harrisburg Taxicab & Baggage Co. v. Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

I respectfully dissent.

The compliance reports issued by the PUC Enforcement Officers in this case state, inter alia, that Petitioner’s taxicabs were in violation of the PUC regulation found at 52 Pa.Code § 29.402(1).1 The compliance reports that indicated violations of Section 29.402(1) of the PUC’s regulations also referenced the DOT regulation found at 67 Pa.Code § 175.62.2

In affirming the PUC’s order denying Petitioner’s exceptions to these violations, the majority states “[t]he PUC’s decision to incorporate DOT’s regulations in an area where the two agencies possess overlapping authority…