|
You can of the Alaska Court of Appeals opinions.
|
|
NOTICE
The text of this opinion can be corrected before the
opinion is published in the Pacific Reporter. Readers
are encouraged to bring typographical or other formal
errors to the attention of the Clerk of the Appellate
Courts.
303 K Street, Anchorage, Alaska 99501
Fax: (907) 264-0878
E-mail: corrections@appellate.courts.state.ak.us
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF ALASKA
| DAVID T. BOYD, | ) |
| ) Court of Appeals No. A-10058 | |
| Appellant, | ) Trial Court No. 3PA-07-9236 CR |
| ) | |
| v. | ) |
| ) O P I N I O N | |
| STATE OF ALASKA, | ) |
| ) | |
| Appellee. | ) |
| ) No. 2220 June 26, 2009 | |
Appeal from the
District Court, Third Judicial District,
Palmer, John W. Wolfe, Judge.
Appearances: Jason L. Bergevin, Law Offices
of Royce & Brain, Anchorage, for the
Appellant. Shawn D. Traini, Assistant
District Attorney, Roman J. Kalytiak,
District Attorney, Palmer, and Talis J.
Colberg, Attorney General, Juneau, for the
Appellee.
Before: Coats, Chief Judge, and Mannheimer
and Bolger, Judges.
BOLGER, Judge.
David T. Boyd was convicted of operating an oversized
vehicle on the state highway system without a permit.1 He
contends that the district court erred when it concluded that the
permit requirements of 17 AAC 25.011 applied to the road grader
he was operating. For the reasons explained here, we affirm the
district courts decision.
Background facts and proceedings
On August 20, 2007, Boyd was operating a road grader
on the Palmer-Wasilla highway. A commercial vehicle enforcement
officer stopped Boyd to determine if the road grader was
oversized, and, if so, whether Boyd had a permit to operate it on
the state highway system. Under the Alaska Administrative Code,
permits are required for all vehicles wider than eight and a half
feet.2 Boyds road grader was nine and a half feet wide. He was
consequently cited for operating the road grader without a
permit.
At a bench trial, Boyd presented evidence that he was
using the road grader as part of a road maintenance contract with
the Matanuska-Susitna Borough. Boyds position was that the
permit requirements in 17 AAC 25.011 did not apply to the road
grader because it was special mobile equipment and not a
commercial vehicle.
District Court Judge John W. Wolfe found that 17 AAC
25 applied to both commercial and non-commercial vehicles and
that the regulation required a permit for any oversized vehicle
that was driven or moved on the state highway system, unless the
vehicle fell under an exception. He found that a road grader was
a vehicle and that no exception applied. Consequently, Judge
Wolfe found Boyd guilty of operating an oversized vehicle on the
state highway system without a permit.
Why we conclude that 17 AAC 25 applies to road graders
On appeal, Boyd renews his claim that the regulations
in 17 AAC 25 do not apply to road graders. He contends that the
regulations in this chapter apply only to the operation of
commercial motor vehicles on state highways, not road maintenance
equipment or other vehicles classified as special mobile
equipment.3
Boyds claim presents a question of statutory
construction. Our goal when interpreting a statute or regulation
is to ascertain and implement the intent of the legislature or
agency that promulgated the statute or regulation.4 Under
Alaskas sliding scale approach to statutory interpretation, the
plainer the language of the statute, the more convincing any
contrary legislative history must be. . . . to overcome the
statutes plain meaning.5
The regulation Boyd was convicted of violating, 17 AAC
25.011, by its plain language regulates all wheeled vehicles,
including vehicles defined as special mobile equipment.6 Boyd
has cited no legislative or administrative history to support his
claim that 17 AAC 25 as a whole regulates only commercial
vehicles. Given the plain language of the regulations and the
authorizing statutes, we reject Boyds interpretation.
The regulations in 17 AAC 25 are authorized by Title
19 of the Alaska Statutes. These statutes make the Department of
Transportation and Public Facilities responsible for the
maintenance, protection, and control of the state highway
system.7 Among other things, the Department is authorized to
control access to the states highways and to exercise any other
power necessary to carry out this responsibility.8 Additionally,
the Department may limit the weight, size, and load of vehicles
that travel the highways, except for certain farm equipment.9
The Department is required to issue special permits authorizing
the operation of overweight and oversized vehicles.10
These statutes give the Department broad authority to
regulate vehicle operations on state highways and to impose
restrictions on any aspects of vehicle operation.11 Nothing in
the authorizing statutes restricts the Departments authority to
the regulation of commercial vehicles.
Moreover, a road grader fits the legal definition of
vehicle that is, it is a wheeled device capable of transporting
persons or property on a highway.12 In contrast, a road grader
does not fit the legal definition of a commercial motor vehicle:
a self-propelled or towed vehicle that is used to transport
passengers or property for commercial purposes, upon a highway or
vehicular way, that has a gross vehicle weight rating or gross
combination weight rating greater than 10,000 pounds, or is
designed to transport more than fifteen passengers, including the
driver.13 The regulations thus define vehicle more broadly than
commercial motor vehicle. While the regulations in 17 AAC 25
mainly govern this broader category of vehicles, some provisions
regulate only commercial motor vehicles.14 Consequently, we
reject Boyds claim that 17 AAC 25, as a whole, regulates only
commercial vehicles.
This conclusion is supported by the Departments own
interpretation of 17 AAC 25. When interpreting a regulation,
courts normally give effect to an administrative agencys
interpretation of its own regulation, unless that interpretation
is plainly erroneous or plainly inconsistent with the authorizing
statute or the regulation itself.15 In 1989, the Department
issued an Administrative Permit Manual for oversize and
overweight permits. This manual is still in force and portions
of it have been adopted in 17AAC 25.16 This manual shows that
the Department has also interpreted 17 AAC 25 to apply to more
than just commercial motor vehicles.
The manual applies to all vehicles traveling in
Alaska. It requires a permit for any vehicle of a size that
exceeds the maximum dimensions listed in 17 AAC 25. As examples
of the types of vehicles that require permits, the manual lists
self-propelled cranes, off road construction equipment, or other
road maintenance equipment. The manual also has permit
provisions for equipment engaged in snow removal.17 None of
these vehicles fits the definition of a commercial motor
vehicle.18
In short, the regulations in 17 AAC 25 apply in large
part to all wheeled vehicles, and 17 AAC 25.011 in particular
requires that all oversized wheeled vehicles obtain permits.
There are no other regulations that apply to the use of oversized
or overweight vehicles on state highways. Hence, Boyds argument
that 17 AAC 25 applies only to commercial vehicles leads to an
unreasonable result that the Department does not regulate non-
commercial vehicles in any way, regardless of the damage or
destruction to the highway system caused by their size or weight,
or the threat posed to the safety of the public using those
highways. This interpretation defeats the obvious administrative
purpose behind the regulations.19
Boyd notes that the section of the regulation he was
cited for violating is titled Commercial Motor Vehicles: Size
and Weight. But under the rules of statutory construction, where
the meaning of a statute or regulation is clear and unambiguous,
a court will not consider the heading of the statute or
regulation.20 The regulation governing permit requirements for
oversized vehicles unambiguously applies to all wheeled vehicles,
including vehicles that are considered special mobile equipment.
We conclude that, except where otherwise specified, 17
AAC 25 regulates all wheeled vehicles operating on the state
highway system, not just commercial motor vehicles. The road
grader Boyd was operating was an oversized wheeled vehicle.
Accordingly, under 17 AAC 25 he needed a permit to operate the
road grader on the state highway system.
Conclusion
The district courts judgment is AFFIRMED.
_______________________________
1 17 AAC 25.011.
2 17 AAC 25.011.
3 See 13 AAC 40.010(52) (special mobile equipment is a
vehicle which is not designed or used primarily for the
transportation of persons or property and only incidentally
operated or moved over a highway[.]).
4 Millman v. State, 841 P.2d 190, 194 (Alaska App. 1992);
see also State, Dept of Highways v. Green, 586 P.2d 595, 603 n.24
(Alaska 1978) (Administrative regulations which are legislative
in character are interpreted using the same principles applicable
to statutes.).
5 Peninsula Mktg. Assn v. State, 817 P.2d 917, 922 (Alaska
1991).
6 See 17 AAC 25.900(50) (defining vehicle); 17 AAC 25.250
(defining commercial motor vehicle as the meaning given in AS
19.10.399).
7 AS 19.05.010.
8 AS 19.05.040(5) & (13).
9 AS 19.10.060(a).
10 AS 19.10.060(b).
11 See also 17 AAC 25.100 (The Department . . . may
prohibit the operation of vehicles upon any highway or may impose
restrictions on any aspect of vehicle operation on any highway
whenever the highway . . . may be damaged or destroyed . . . or
whenever . . . necessary . . . in the interests of safety . . .
.).
12 17 AAC 25.990(50).
13 17 AAC 25.250.
14 See 17 AAC 25.200 (transportation of hazardous
materials); 17 AAC 25.210 (safe operation); 17 AAC 25.220 (hours
of service); 17 AAC 25.230 (inspections); 17 AAC 25.240 (unsafe
or defectively equipped commercial motor vehicles); 17 AAC 25.310
(weigh stations and traffic stops).
15 Green, 586 P.2d at 602 n.21; see also Wilson v. State,
Dept of Corrections, 127 P.3d 826, 829 (Alaska 2006) (explaining
that an agencys interpretation of a law within its area of
jurisdiction can help resolve lingering ambiguity in a challenged
regulation).
16 See 17 AAC 25.320(b), 17 AAC 25.380(b).
17 The regulations set out permit fees for snow removal
equipment. 17 AAC 25.380(b)(7).
18 See AS 19.10.399.
19 See 2A Norman J. Singer & J.D. Shambie Singer,
Sutherland Statutes and Statutory Construction 46:7, at 253-58
(7th ed. 2007) (stating that statutes should be construed to
avoid absurd results).
20 See id. 47:14, at 341-42.
 |
| Case Law Statutes, Regs & Rules Constitutions Miscellaneous |
|
