In re Petition of Golden Plains Servs. Transp.
297 Neb. 105
| Neb. | 2017Background
- Golden Plains Services Transportation, Inc. (Golden Plains) is certified in Nebraska to provide “open class” passenger service.
- The Nebraska Public Service Commission (Commission) investigated and accused Golden Plains of operating "on a taxi basis," then ordered it to cease taxi operations and sought clarification of what services open class carriers may provide.
- Golden Plains petitioned for a declaratory ruling; the Commission treated the matter as an investigative proceeding and issued an order interpreting 291 Neb. Admin. Code, ch. 3, § 010.01C (Rule 010.01C).
- The Commission’s order interpreted Rule 010.01C to mean open class carriers may provide passenger transportation for hire only on a prearranged basis and may not provide on‑demand (taxi‑style) services.
- Golden Plains appealed, arguing the rule does not limit open class carriers to prearranged service and also invoked past service history (grandfathering/color of right).
- The Nebraska Supreme Court reviewed de novo and concluded the Commission’s interpretation was not supported by the plain language of Rule 010.01C, reversing and vacating the Commission’s order.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Golden Plains) | Defendant's Argument (Commission) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Rule 010.01C limits open class carriers to prearranged service only | Rule 010.01C’s plain language permits both prearranged and on‑demand service | The rule should be read to allow only prearranged, not on‑demand, passenger service | Court held the rule does not limit open class carriers to prearranged service; Commission’s interpretation is unsupported and clearly erroneous |
| Whether the Commission lawfully issued its interpretation rather than promulgating a new rule under APA | Golden Plains argued the Commission read a restriction into the rule without statutory or regulatory basis | Commission argued § 75‑118.01 authorizes it to determine scope and meaning of regulations | Court held the Commission effectively created a new rule without rulemaking procedures; § 75‑118.01 did not justify the unsupported interpretation |
| Whether the Commission’s prior practice and rule history support its new interpretation | Golden Plains pointed to contemporaneous Commission comments and past practice showing allowance of demand service | Commission relied on its authority and past interpretive orders to justify its reading | Court noted historical Commission comments initially allowed both prearranged and demand service, undermining the Commission’s new restrictive interpretation |
| Whether Golden Plains was entitled to grandfathering/color of right protections for past operations | Golden Plains argued past service history justified protection from enforcement | Commission did not apply grandfathering and enforced a uniform restriction | Court did not need to resolve grandfathering because it found the restriction unsupported; reversed enforcement based on faulty interpretation |
Key Cases Cited
- Shaffer v. Nebraska Department of Health & Human Services, 289 Neb. 740 (stating de novo review and interpretation principles for statutes and regulations)
- Chase 3000, Inc. v. Nebraska Public Serv. Comm., 273 Neb. 133 (agency authority to interpret regulations discussed)
- In re Proposed Amendments to Title 291, 264 Neb. 298 (Commission may interpret existing rules but cannot create new rules without APA procedures)
- Utelcom, Inc. v. Egr, 264 Neb. 1004 (rules of construction for administrative regulations)