PUC staff seeks revocation of multiple motor‑carrier permits for lacking insurance; judge to issue written decision

DENVER — Staff for the Colorado Public Utilities Commission asked an administrative law judge on Feb. 11 to revoke the operating permits of multiple motor carriers that, staff said, do not have required proof of financial responsibility on file.

The hearing, 26CDash0049-INS, was opened by Administrative Law Judge Kelly Rosenberg, who oversaw appearances and the admission of staff exhibits documenting notifications to carriers with lapses in insurance. "This is the commission's standing show cause insurance hearing set by notices and complaints to individual respondents," Rosenberg said as the proceeding began.

Markita Riley, the PUC transportation program assistant sworn in as staff's witness, told the court that PUC rules require motor carriers to electronically file evidence of financial responsibility and that the agency uses its authorized database to identify carriers with canceled or lapsed policies. "Per rule 6008, and rule 6812b requires that motor carriers file and maintain evidence of financial responsibility with the commission," Riley testified.

Staff moved Exhibits 1–5 into evidence; those documents include the initial hearing-cycle listing (dated Jan. 26, 2026), notice letters sent by first-class mail, an attachment explaining how to join the electronic hearing, and an updated hearing-cycle listing created Feb. 9, 2026. Riley said the notice letters explained that operations are suspended when insurance expires and that a respondent's authority may be permanently revoked unless proper evidence is filed.

Based on the updated list, staff said it would recommend revocation of the permits and certificates listed in Exhibit 5 for lack of financial responsibility, but Riley identified four carriers staff would dismiss from the current hearing because they had provided documentation or filed cancellation forms: Tic Tac Toe LLC (doing business as TOEKO; PUC TDash0933), Aspen Peak Transportation LLC (LLDash04295), LazyKay Coach Co., LLC (CSBDash00166), and Rapti LLC (LLDash04077).

Several respondents who remained on the list provided testimony and documents during the hearing. Lee Cole of Zay Global LLC submitted a bill of sale (admitted as Exhibit 100), a letter to insurance companies (Exhibit 101), and a carrier permit cancellation request (Exhibit 102); Cole said he sold the vehicle registered with the PUC on Jan. 24 and had carried commercial insurance through that date. The judge admitted those exhibits and staff agreed to cancel Cole's permit administratively rather than pursue a revocation against him.

Mohammed Baba, listed for Royal Fleet LLC, told the hearing he had moved back to California and never operated the company; staff agreed to send and process a cancellation form once returned. David Hernandez of Transport Guardian Services said he was still waiting on an underwriter and that high insurance costs and slow business had strained his finances; staff and the judge noted that if Hernandez filed proof of insurance before the recommended decision becomes final — roughly a 30-day window from issuance — the decision would not apply to him.

Rosenberg closed the hearing by saying she would take the matter under advisement and issue a written recommended decision. "I will take this matter under advisement, and I will issue a written decision on the matter," the judge stated.

Next steps: the judge will circulate a recommended decision in writing; under the process described in the hearing, that recommended decision becomes final 20 days after issuance unless exceptions are timely filed. Respondents who can file proof of proper insurance before the decision becomes final may avoid revocation.

Authorities and evidence in the record include PUC rules cited by staff, the hearing-cycle listings (Exhibits 1 and 5), notice letters and attachments (Exhibits 2–4), and respondent filings (Exhibits 100–102).