RULES AND REGULATIONS
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
[52 PA. CODE CH. 30]
[26 Pa.B. 5816] [L-940092]
Taxicab Medallion Program At a public meeting held May 23, 1996, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (Commission) adopted an order which promulgated a final rulemaking to provide a medallion system of regulation for call or demand carriers (taxicabs) in cities of the first class under the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 2401--2416. These amendments provide for specific equipment and reporting requirements and contains enforcement and administrative provisions. The contact person is John Herzog, Assistant Counsel, Legal Division, Bureau of Transportation and Safety, (717) 783-3173.
Executive Summary
Under the act of April 4, 1990 (Medallion Act) (P. L. 93), the Public Utility Code was amended to provide a medallion system of regulation for call or demand carriers (taxicabs) in cities of the first class under Chapter 24 to the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 2401--2416. The Medallion Act became effective July 3, 1990. The purpose of the Medallion Act was to upgrade and improve the operations of taxicabs in cities of the first class.
The amendments are in response to that Legislation. They provide for specific equipment and reporting requirements and contain enforcement and administrative provisions.
Regulatory Review
Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)), the Commission submitted a copy of the final rulemaking, which was published as proposed at 25 Pa.B. 1517 (April 22, 1995) and served on April 11, 1995, to the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) and the Chairpersons of House Committee Consumer Affairs and the Senate Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure for review and comment. In compliance with section 5(b.1) of the Regulatory Review Act, the Commission also provided IRRC and the Committees with copies of the comments received, as well as other documentation.
In preparing these final-form regulations, the Commission has considered the comments received from IRRC, the Committees and the public.
These final-form regulations were deemed approved by the House Committee on Consumer Affairs on October 2, 1996, and were approved by the Senate Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure on September 25, 1996, and were approved by IRRC on October 3, 1996, in accordance with section 5(c) of the Regulatory Review Act.
Public meeting held
May 23, 1996Commissioners Present: John M. Quain, Chairperson; Lisa Crutchfield, Vice Chairperson; John Hanger; David W. Rolka; and Robert K. Bloom
Order By the Commission:
By order entered November 9, 1994, the Commission initiated a proposed rulemaking to amend and supplement its regulations regarding taxicab service in cites of the first class. Under the Medallion Act, the Public Utility Code was amended to provide for a medallion system of regulation for taxicabs in cities of the first class. The purpose of the Medallion Act was to upgrade and improve the operations of taxicabs in cities of the first class.
Section 2404(a) of the Medallion Act, 66 Pa.C.S. § 2404(a), directs the Commission to establish regulations pertaining to taxicab inspection and recording requirements in cities of the first class. Section 2409 of the Medallion Act, 66 Pa.C.S. § 2409, provides for the establishment of a driver certification program for drivers of taxicabs in cities of the first class. Further, section 2412 of the Medallion Act, 66 Pa.C.S. § 2412, provides that the Commission may prescribe such rules and regulations as it deems necessary to govern the regulation of taxicabs in cities of the first class. In accordance with 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 2404(a), 2409 and 2412, the Commission instituted this rulemaking to propose additional regulations which apply specifically to call or demand carriers operating in cities of the first class.
On March 31, 1995, the Office of Attorney General issued a conditional approval of the proposed amendments as to form and legality. On April 11, 1995, copies of the proposed amendments were delivered for review and comment to the designated standing committees of both houses of the General Assembly and IRRC. The proposed rulemaking was published at 25 Pa.B. 1517.
Despite service of the proposed rulemaking on all medallion holders, comments to the amendments were limited to IRRC and the Democratic and Majority Chairpersons of the House Consumer Affairs Committee. We will address these comments seriatim, citing the specific section of the proposed amendments and the accompanying comment.
§ 30.13. Notices of lien.
* * * * * (e) A person who obtains a judgment against a medallion holder may substitute a certified copy of the judgment for a Notice of Lien. The copy of the judgment shall be supplied with the names of the medallion holder and the judgment creditor, and address of the judgment creditor from which information concerning the judgment may be obtained, a mailing address of the medallion holder and the medallion number held by the medallion holder. The judgment creditor shall serve a copy of the judgment upon the medallion holder. The certified copy of judgment shall act as a Notice of Lien for Commission purposes only and shall not relieve a person from the requirements set forth under 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 3101--3260 (relating to the enforcement of money judgments for the payment of money).IRRC commented that the Medallion Act may preclude the substitution of a certified copy of a judgment for a notice of lien. IRRC also submited that a certified copy of a judgment is not the same as a notice of lien since the application of a lien does not automatically follow the issuance of a judgment. IRRC supported the Commission's efforts to streamline the administrative process, but believed that this particular proposal is precluded by the Medallion Act.
The Medallion Act provides, in pertinent part: . . . . All lenders or creditors who accept a medallion as security shall file with the commission a notice of lien which describes the transaction. A lien on a medallion is void by operation of law unless a notice of lien is filed with the commission. . . .66 Pa.C.S. § 2403(a). (Emphasis added.) We agree with IRRC that a certified copy of a judgment is not identical to a notice of lien, as contemplated by the Medallion Act. Further, a lien does not necessarily attach to personalty by virtue of a judgment. 42 Pa.C.S. § 4303. Therefore, we withdraw this particular provision. A judgment creditor can make appropriate filings under the existing statutory and regulatory provisions.
§ 30.31. Vehicle equipment requirements.
* * * * * (6) A vehicle shall be equipped with a sealed meter that satisfies the requirements stated in § 29.314 (relating to vehicle and equipment requirements)[,] and is calibrated in accordance with the approved tariff [and is]..(i) The meter shall be able to pass an accuracy test given by a Commission enforcement officer.(ii) Upon passing the accuracy test, a Commission numbered seal will be placed on the meter by a Commission enforcement officer. A taxicab may not operate without this Commission seal. If the seal become broken or damaged, carriers are required to immediately have the seal replaced by the Commission.* * * * * (11) A vehicle shall be marked, painted and designed in accordance with §§ 29.71(a) and (c) and 29.103 (relating to marking of vehicles; and simulating color or design). A vehicle shall also have painted or securely affixed on each side its medallion number in the same dimensions as that prescribed by § 29.71(a). Vehicle markings shall be removed in accordance with § 29.72 (relating to removal of markings).IRRC commented that the word ''immediately'' in the proposed section in paragraph (6)(ii) is vague and may be difficult to comply with in the event that the seal would be broken during late evening hours or weekend hours when the Commission's office is likely to be closed for business. IRRC suggested that ''immediately'' be replaced with the phrase ''no later than the next day of business at the PUC.'' IRRC also commented that paragraph (11) is vague to the extent that ''securely'' is capable of various interpretations.
We disagree with IRRC's commented regarding paragraph (6)(ii) of the proposed regulation. To adopt IRRC's proposal would invite fraud on the public by unscrupulous operators. The word ''immediately'' is not vague and accomplishes our purpose. However, we will modify this provision somewhat to reflect our concern that a taxicab with a broken seal on its meter be immediately removed from service. As for paragraph (11) we agree with IRRC's comment and modify the regulation accordingly.
§ 30.33. Inspection of vehicles.
* * * * * (c) Inspection after issuance, reissuance or transfer of a medallion. Vehicles bearing medallions shall be subject to additional inspections to ensure continued compliance with the vehicle equipment safety requirements of §§ 30.31 and 30.32, as follows:* * * * * (6) A Commission enforcement officer or a police officer employed by a city of the first class may order a vehicle which has been placed out-of-service for safety violations to be reinspected by a Commission enforcement officer to ensure compliance with §§ 30.31 and 30.32. If the vehicle is not in compliance with § 30.31 or § 30.32, the medallion will be removed from the vehicle and held by the Commission until the vehicle does comply with the requirements of §§ 30.31 and 30.32. If the vehicle does not comply within 6 months, the Commission may suspend the certificate of public convenience of that medallion holder and issue an Order to Show Cause why that certificate of public convenience should not be cancelled.IRRC questioned the Commission's authority to remove the medallion and suspend the certificate prior to notice and hearing. IRRC stated the Medallion Act provides that medallions are property and therefore protected by due process principles. Likewise, a certificate of public convenience is a valuable privilege or right in the nature of property and is safeguarded by due process principles. IRRC believed that removing the medallion and suspending the certificate prior to notice and hearing could be violative of procedural due process.
In order to provide taxicab service in cities of the first class, one needs to obtain a certificate of public convenience from the Commission. See 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 2402--2404. A medallion is then issued which corresponds to that certificate. See 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 2402--2404. The Medallion Act provides that medallions are property. See 66 Pa.C.S. § 2403(a). The medallion is a piece of metal attached to the hood of a taxicab. See 52 Pa.Code § 30.2. Its primary function is to provide ready identification of a vehicle as being authorized to provide call or demand service. It has no intrinsic value beyond the licensing right it represents.
The Commission may suspend the operating privileges of any carrier without a hearing if its continued operations pose an immediate threat to the public safety. The primary concern of the Commission is to remove unsafe vehicles from public utility service immediately. However, suspending the operating privileges of a carrier is different from suspending the carrier's certificate of public convenience. We agree with IRRC that notice and hearing should be provided prior to suspension of a carrier's certificate of public convenience.
We disagree with IRRC's comment regarding the Commission's authority to remove a medallion from a vehicle that has already been placed out-of-service due to safety violations.1 As noted above, the medallion, albeit property, has no intrinsic value beyond the licensing right it represents. A medallion holder has no use for a medallion beyond its affording him the opportunity to provide call or demand service. In the situation when a vehicle has been placed out-of-service, the medallion holder has no immediate or legitimate use for the medallion since he cannot operate the vehicle, with or without a medallion. By removing the medallion until the vehicle meets Commission safety requirements, the medallion holder loses nothing.
The removal of a medallion from a vehicle that's been deemed unsafe and placed out-of-service aids the Commission in its enforcement efforts. The vehicle in question will be readily identifiable to Commission enforcement officers and the public as not being authorized to provide taxicab service. The removal of the medallion will prevent unscrupulous operators from continuing to operate equipment that is unsafe.
We are cognizant that, as a general rule, an individual must be given the opportunity for a hearing before he is deprived of any significant property interest. Shah v. State Board of Medicine, 139 Pa.Cmwlth. 94, 589 A.2d 783 (1991). However, there are situations when a predeprivation hearing is not required when it is not practical under the circumstances to provide such predeprivation relief. Shah. In Parratt v. Taylor, 451 U.S. 527, 539, 101 S.Ct. 1908, 1915, 68 L.Ed.2d 420 (1981), the Supreme Court stated that it is permissible to dispense with the ordinarily required predeprivation hearings due to:
[E]ither the necessity of quick action . . . or the impracticability of providing any meaningful pre-deprivation process can, when coupled with the availability of some meaningful means by which to assess the propriety of the state's action at some time after the initial taking, satisfy the requirements of procedural due process.In North American Cold Storage Co. v. Chicago, 211 U.S. 306, 29 S.Ct. 101, 53 L.Ed 195 (1908), the Supreme Court upheld the right of a state to seize and destroy unwholesome food without a preseizure hearing. The possibility of erroneous destruction of property was outweighed by the fact that the public health emergency justified immediate action and the owner of the property could recover his damages in an action at law after the incident. In Ewing v. Mytinger & Casselberry, Inc., 339 U.S. 594, 70 S.Ct. 870, 94 L.Ed. 1088 (1950), the Supreme Court upheld under the Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause the summary seizure and destruction of drugs without a preseizure hearing.2
In light of the threat to public safety presented by continued operation of a vehicle that has been placed out-of-service for safety violations, we believe that removal of the medallion from that vehicle, prior to hearing, is not violative of the medallion holder's due process rights. First, as we stated previously, the medallion is not a significant property interest once a vehicle has been placed out-of-service. Second, the Commission is not revoking or cancelling the medallion, but only removing it from the vehicle. The medallion holder retains his inherent rights associated with his ownership of the medallion. Removal of the medallion from the vehicle simply precludes the medallion holder from operating an unsafe vehicle in taxicab service, a restriction already in place by virtue of the vehicle being placed out-of-service. Third, even if the medallion does represent a significant property interest, we believe that the threat to the public safety posed by continued operation of an unsafe vehicle justifies dispensing with the necessity of a predeprivation hearing. We will, however, provide for a postdeprivation hearing within ten (10) days of removal. We believe that providing a timely postdeprivation hearing satisfactorily protects the interests of the medallion holder, since the duration of the deprivation prior to hearing is relatively short.
We note that we have deleted the last portion of the proposed regulation since those issues contained therein will be dealt with in the postdeprivation hearing.
§ 30.72. Standards for obtaining a taxi driver's certificate.
* * * * * (i) Disqualification for failure to be truthful on application. A taxi driver's certificate will not be issued to an individual who knowingly makes any false statement on a driver's certificate application. If, after issuance of a certificate, it is determined that an applicant knowingly made a false statement on the driver's certificate application, or provided false information on any documents submitted, the certificate will be suspended or cancelled.(j) Immediate disqualification. The Commission will immediately disqualify an individual and confiscate their taxi driver's certificate when the individual's driver's license has been suspended or revoked, their taxi driver's certificate has expired, or their certificate has been obtained in a fraudulent manner. In addition, the certificate of a driver who has Commission penalties outstanding will be confiscated by a Commission enforcement officer or by a police officer employed by a city of the first class and held by the Commission's District Office until the penalties are satisfied in full.IRRC commented that § 30.72(i) may be violative of a driver's right to procedural due process since it allows for the suspension or cancellation of a certificate without notice and an opportunity to be heard prior to the suspension or cancellation. IRRC also commented that § 30.72(j) may be violative of a taxi driver's due process rights, since it provides for immediate disqualification when a taxi driver obtained the certificate in a fraudulent manner.3 IRRC argued that since the issue of fraud is factual in nature, confiscation prior to notice and hearing may be violative of due process. Further, the Attorney General questioned whether immediate confiscation of a driver's certificate is permissible for a driver's failure to pay outstanding penalties.
These comments highlight the delicate position the Commission is in to balance the due process rights of the taxi driver against the need to ensure the public's health and safety. Sometimes, predeprivation hearings are not possible due to the immediate and clear dangers that continued operation poses to the health or safety of the public. While we hoped that our proposed amendments had properly balanced these concerns, we are persuaded that some modification is necessary. However, we reiterate that due process is not perfect process, and our modifications do not call for predeprivation hearings in all circumstances.
The final regulations continue to call for immediate suspension of a taxi driver's certificate when the certificateholder made a false statement on the application which impacts upon the public health or safety. We recognize that this determination may involve factual issues. However, the presence of factual issues does not, in and of itself, require a predeprivation hearing in circumstances that would otherwise warrant immediate suspension. For instance, if the Commission is advised by the State Police that a driver submitted a false criminal records history with his application, the Commission may be compelled to act swiftly if the fraud was serious; such as, the driver tried to hide a murder conviction. Under these circumstances, while factual issues may be present, the Commission does not believe that predeprivation hearings would be required. Further, factual issues may be present in those situations which IRRC agreed that the Commission may dispense with predeprivation hearings; that is, when a certificateholder's driver's license has been suspended or revoked or when a certificateholder's taxi driver's certificate has expired. These circumstances necessarily involve resolution of factual issues, yet do not require predeprivation hearings.
We note that we have deleted that portion of the proposed amendments which confiscated a driver's certificate from an individual who failed to pay outstanding Commission penalties. The rationale for the deletion is that the Commission would, in light of the comments, only confiscate the driver's certificate following hearing. This is a procedure already available to the Commission and need not be specifically delineated by regulation.
We note that despite receiving no comments, we have also amended proposed § 30.76(e) to be consistent with due process considerations discussed above.
§ 30.73. Expiration and renewal of certificate.
(a) A taxi driver's certificate shall expire [2 years from the date of issuance] in the month of the licensee's birth date at intervals of no more than 2 years from previous issuance. A taxi driver's certificate is renewable on or [before] within 60 days of its expiration date upon submission of an application, a fee and satisfactory records as required by § 30.72(a)--(c) (relating to standards for obtaining a taxi driver's certificate).IRRC commented that this provision may be vague, since the phrase, ''within 60 days,'' may mean prior to or subsequent to expiration. We agree with IRRC's comment and modify the section accordingly.
Although we received no comments on the proposed revision to § 30.55, we have decided that the proposed revision needs further modification. The original revision to this provision was designed to give the Commission more discretion to adjust default penalties. Upon further reflection, we believe that it is not necessary to escalate the amount of the penalty in the case of default beyond the amount of the original proposed fine. The section is modified accordingly.
Finally, we note that the Democratic Chairperson and the Majority Chairperson of the House Consumer Affairs Committee encourage the inclusion of a fine schedule in this rulemaking. We have considered this comment and will incorporate a fine schedule. The fine schedule presents a range of allowable fines for particular violations. This flexibility is essential to effective enforcement of the Medallion Act and Commission regulations. Repeat offenders may be more severely punished than first-time offenders. We believe that providing the fine-range satisfies the industry's need to know the consequences of various violations as well as the Commission's need to have some flexibility in its enforcement endeavors.
Having considered all comments filed to the proposed rulemaking, we believe the regulations as set forth in Annex A should be adopted as the final rulemaking.
Accordingly, under sections 501, 2404(a), 2409 and 2412 of the Public Utility Code, 66 Pa.C.S. §§ 501, 2404(a), 2409, 2412 and the Commonwealth Documents Law (45 P. S. § 1201 et seq.), and regulations promulgated thereunder at 1 Pa. Code §§ 7.1--7.4, we find that regulations governing taxicab service in cities of the first class shall be amended. Therefore,
It is Ordered that:
1. The regulations of the Commission, 52 Pa. Code Chapter 30, are amended by amending §§ 30.31, 30.33, 30.54, 30.55, 30.72--30.76; and by adding §§ 30.34 and 30.77 to read as set forth in Annex A with ellipses referring to the existing text of the regulations.
2. The Secretary shall submit this order and Annex A to the Office of Attorney General for approval as to the legality.
3. The Secretary shall submit this order and Annex A to the Governor's Budget Office for review of fiscal impact.
4. The Secretary shall submit this order and Annex A for formal review by the designated standing committees of both Houses of the General Assembly, and for formal review by IRRC.
5. The Secretary shall deposit this order and Annex A with the Legislative Reference Bureau for publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
6. The Secretary shall serve copies of this order and Annex A upon each of the commentators.
7. These amendments shall become effective January 29, 1997.
(Editor's Note: The proposal to amend § 30.13 (relating to notices of lien), included in the proposal at 25 Pa.B. 1517, has been withdrawn by the Commission. The addition of §§ 30.34 and 30.77 was not included in the proposal at 25 Pa.B. 1517.)
JOHN G. ALFORD,
Secretary(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission relating to this document, see 26 Pa.B. 5181 (October 26, 1996).)
Fiscal Note: Fiscal Note 57-153 remains valid for the final adoption of the subject regulations.
Annex A
TITLE 52. PUBLIC UTILITIES
PART I. PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION
Subpart B. CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS OR PROPERTY
CHAPTER 30. MEDALLION PROGRAM
Subchapter C. VEHICLE REQUIREMENTS § 30.31. Vehicle equipment requirements.
Vehicles operated in citywide call or demand service in cities of the first class shall comply with the following requirements:
* * * * * (3) A vehicle shall have door hinges, latches and door locks in working order, and doors shall operate easily and close securely.
* * * * * (6) A vehicle shall be equipped with a sealed meter that satisfies the requirements in § 29.314 (relating to vehicle and equipment requirements) and is calibrated in accordance with the approved tariff.
(i) The meter shall be able to pass an accuracy test given by a Commission enforcement officer.
(ii) Upon passing the accuracy test, a Commission numbered seal will be placed on the meter by a Commission enforcement officer. A taxicab may not be operated without this Commission seal. If the seal becomes broken or damaged, the vehicle shall be removed from service immediately by either the medallion holder or the operator.
* * * * * (11) A vehicle shall be marked, painted and designed in accordance with §§ 29.71(a) and (c) and 29.103 (relating to marking of vehicles; and simulating color or design). A vehicle shall also have painted or permanently affixed on each side its medallion number in the same dimensions as that prescribed by § 29.71(a). Vehicle markings shall be removed in accordance with § 29.72 (relating to removal of markings).
* * * * * (13) A taxicab may not be equipped with a device that has the capability of allowing the meter to register a nonapproved rate. If found, this device will be confiscated by a Commission enforcement officer or by a police officer employed by a city of the first class and disposed of by the Commission's District Office.
§ 30.33. Inspection of vehicles.
* * * * * (c) Inspection after issuance, reissuance or transfer of a medallion. Vehicles bearing medallions shall be subject to additional inspections to ensure continued compliance with the vehicle equipment safety requirements of §§ 30.31 and 30.32, as follows:
* * * * * (6) A Commission enforcement officer or a police officer employed by a city of the first class may order a vehicle which has been placed out-of-service for safety violations to be reinspected by a Commission enforcement officer to ensure compliance with §§ 30.31 and 30.32. If the vehicle is not in compliance with § 30.31 or § 30.32, the medallion will be removed from the vehicle and held by the Commission. A hearing on the matter will be held within 10 days following the date of removal.
* * * * * § 30.34. Fines for violations.
Fines for violations of this subchapter range from $250 to $1,000 per violation.
Subchapter D. FIRST CLASS CITY COMPLAINT PROCEDURES § 30.54. Proceedings on complaints.
(a) A complaint instituted under this subchapter will be assigned to a special agent or an administrative law judge who will serve as the presiding officer in the case.
(b) A presiding officer will conduct hearings on a public complaint within 15 days after the filing of an answer to a public complaint. This 15-day time limitation does not apply to the scheduling of hearings on a private complaint which will be scheduled by the Commission within 90 days after the initiation of the proceeding consistent with 66 Pa.C.S. § 332(g) (relating to procedures in general).
(c) Telephone hearings may be held in the presiding officer's discretion.
(d) Hearings may be tape recorded unless the presiding officer determines that the hearing should be transcribed by a stenographer. Requests for stenographic transcription and the reasons therefor shall be presented in the complaint or answer. In the event of an appeal of the Commission's order, a transcription of the tape recorded hearing shall be made by a court reporter approved by the Commission.
(e) The presiding officer may require the filing of briefs prior to the issuance of a decision although briefs will only be required in extraordinary circumstances upon the express direction of the presiding officer. Proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law may, at the presiding officer's discretion, be submitted to the presiding officer within 5 days after the close of the record.
(f) The presiding officer will render a decision within 30 days after the hearing or within 30 days after receipt of the proposed findings, if any are filed. The decision will be in writing, and will contain a brief description of the subject matter of the proceedings, findings of fact and conclusions of law.
(g) The presiding officer's decision will not be subject to exception or administrative appeal, although the Commission may exercise a right of review of a presiding officer's decision within 15 days of issuance. A party may not file an exception or appeal before the Commission, and the Commission will exercise its right of review solely at its own discretion. If the Commission does not review a decision, the decision will become a final order without further Commission action. If the Commission does exercise its right of review, that review shall be exercised subject to 66 Pa.C.S. § 332(h) (relating to procedures in general).
§ 30.55. Default orders.
(a) If an answer to a public complaint, instituted under § 30.52(b) (relating to commencement of complaints) is not filed within 15 days after the service of the complaint, the Commission will issue a default order sustaining the complaint and assessing the fine, as proposed in the complaint, against the respondent.
(b) Default orders will not be issued by the Commission in private complaint proceedings. When no answer to a private complaint has been filed, the Commission will schedule a hearing to determine the penalty to be imposed on the respondent.
Subchapter F. DRIVER REGULATIONS § 30.72. Standards for obtaining a taxi driver's certificate.
* * * * * (j) Disqualification for failure to be truthful on application. A taxi driver's certificate will not be issued to an individual who knowingly makes any false statement on a driver's certificate application.
(k) Suspension of taxi driver's certificate. A taxi driver's certificate will be immediately suspended and confiscated when the certificateholder's driver's license has been suspended or revoked, the certificateholder's taxi driver's certificate has expired, or the certificateholder made a false statement on the application which impacts upon the public health or safety. A hearing on the suspension will be held within 30 days of the date of suspension.
§ 30.73. Expiration and renewal of certificate.
(a) A taxi driver's certificate shall expire in the month of the licensee's birth date at intervals of no more than 2 years from previous issuance. A taxi driver's certificate is renewable on or within 60 days prior to its expiration date upon submission of an application, a fee and satisfactory records as required by § 30.72(a)--(c) (relating to standards for obtaining a taxi driver's certificate).
(b) A certified taxi driver whose certificate has not expired or has not been suspended or cancelled will not be required to retake the certification examination required by this subchapter at the time of biannual renewal.
(c) A certified taxi driver shall comply with § 30.72(a)--(c) and will be liable to the disqualifications in § 30.72(f)--(i).
§ 30.74. Display of current certificate.
(a) A certified taxi driver shall carry and display an original taxi driver's certificate on the protective shield (dividing the front from the rear of the cab) of the taxicab on the driver's side with the front of the certificate (picture) facing the rear seat at all times during operation.
(b) A certified taxi driver may not operate with a mutilated, damaged or unreadable certificate.
(c) No more than one taxi driver's certificate may be displayed at one time.
§ 30.75. Driver standards.
* * * * * (h) Drivers responsible for administrative paperwork. A driver is responsible for the timely and accurate completion of the passenger log to be maintained in each taxicab as well as for the forms and documents required to be maintained in the taxicab.
(1) A driver as well as the medallion holder, is responsible for the posting of maps of service areas, a schedule for fares with letters and numbers at least 1/2 inch in size, and the driver standards as described in subsections (b)--(d) and (f) in plain sight of the passengers at all times in the taxicab that the driver operates.
* * * * * (m) Report of change of address required. A certificated taxi driver or taxi driver's certificate applicant shall notify the Commission's District Office within 15 days after a change of the address recorded on the certificate application. The notice shall be in writing and shall contain the old and current address and the number of any taxi driver's certificate then held by the person.
(n) Report of change of legal name required. A certificated taxi driver or taxi driver's certificate applicant shall notify the Commission's District Office within 15 days after a change of the legal name recorded on the certificate application. This notice shall be in writing and shall contain the old and current legal name and the number of any taxi driver's certificate then held by the person.
§ 30.76. Violations.
(a) General. This subchapter is equally applicable to owner-drivers, wage-drivers and lease-drivers. A medallion holder is responsible for compliance with this subchapter by the drivers employed by the medallion holder or to whom the medallion holder leases taxicabs.
(b) Character of offenses. A violation of this subchapter is, for the first offense, a nontraffic summary offense, and a misdemeanor of the third degree for each offense thereafter.
(c) Duration of suspension or cancellation. A violation of this subchapter may result in the suspension or cancellation of a taxi driver's certificate or the assessment of a civil penalty, or both. Suspension of a taxi driver's certificate shall be of a duration that the Commission or the presiding officer will determine upon the facts and circumstances of each case. Cancellation of a taxi driver's certificate is final.
(d) Mandatory cancellation. A driver will have his taxi driver's certificate cancelled in the following circumstances:
(1) An individual who operates a taxicab in a city of the first class while his taxi driver's certificate is then under suspension by the Commission shall have his certificate cancelled.
(2) A certified taxi driver who has been twice suspended under this chapter shall have his taxicab driver's certificate cancelled upon a third violation occurring within 3 years of the date of entry of the first suspension.
(3) A certified taxi driver who operates a taxicab in a city of the first class while under the influence of alcohol, an amphetamine or a formulation of an amphetamine, a narcotic drug or a derivative of a narcotic drug shall have his taxicab driver's certificate cancelled.
(4) A certified taxi driver who operates a taxicab and who knowingly transports, possesses or unlawfully uses a drug or narcotic proscribed by The Controlled Substance, Device and Cosmetic Act (35 P. S. §§ 780-101--780-144) shall have his taxicab driver's certificate cancelled.
(5) A certified taxi driver who leaves the scene of a motor vehicle accident involving that taxicab prior to rendering reasonable assistance to injured persons and who fails to report that accident to the police shall have his taxicab driver's certificate cancelled.
(6) A certified taxi driver who is convicted of a felony involving the use of a motor vehicle shall have his taxi driver's certificate cancelled.
(7) A certified taxi driver who is convicted of driving while his motor vehicle license is suspended or revoked shall have his taxicab driver's certificate cancelled.
(e) Offenses by medallion holder. Operation of a taxicab by an individual not holding a current and valid taxi driver's certificate may result in cancellation of the medallion holder's taxi driver's certificate or cancellation of the medallion holder's certificate of public convenience.
(f) Aiding or abetting violations. A person may not aid, abet, encourage or require a driver to violate this title or 66 Pa.C.S. (relating to the Public Utility Code).
* * * * * § 30.77. Fines for violations.
Fines for violations of this subchapter range from $50 to $1,000 per violation.
1 IRRC did not challenge the Commission's authority to place an unsafe vehicle out-of-service without a hearing. Further, IRRC agreed that the Commission may take property or licensing rights without a hearing. For example, IRRC agreed that the Commission may confiscate a taxi driver's certificate in certain instances without a predeprivation hearing. Likewise, IRRC agreed that the Commission may confiscate and dispose of property without a predeprivation hearing. See 52 Pa. Code § 30.31(13).
2 In Ewing, there was no claim that the ingredients of the preparation were harmful or dangerous to health. The sole claim was that the labeling was misleading to the injury or damage of the consumer.
3 IRRC agreed that the Commission has the authority to immediately confiscate a driver's certificate when a taxi driver is driving with a suspended or revoked license or when the taxi driver's certificate has expired.
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 96-2012. Filed for public inspection November 29, 1996, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
