PUC hearing recommends revoking certificates for carriers lacking proof of insurance; four dismissed after updates

DENVER — An administrative law judge at the Colorado Public Utilities Commission on Feb. 25, 2026, heard staff recommendations to revoke the operating certificates of motor carriers that have not filed required evidence of financial responsibility, while noting four respondents were dismissed after providing updated insurance or canceling a permit.

Marquita Riley, program assistant for the commission’s transportation unit, told the hearing that staff compiled an updated hearing list on Feb. 23, 2026, and that the notice letters sent on Feb. 9 explain that “all operations under its authority are suspended as of the date the insurance expires” and warn that a failure to submit proof of insurance could lead the commission to revoke authority. Riley testified that PUC rules (identified on the record as rule 6008 and rule 6812(b)) require motor carriers and vehicle-booting companies to file evidence of financial responsibility, typically by electronically submitting forms such as Form E and a cargo Form H.

Justin Larson of the Colorado Attorney General’s Office appeared for commission staff and moved to admit staff exhibits documenting the initial and updated hearing cycle listings, the notice letters, participation instructions and a certificate of service; Administrative Law Judge Kelly Rosenberg admitted the exhibits into the record.

Riley told the panel staff had identified four respondents to dismiss from the enforcement list because their filings were updated or their permits were canceled: Fox Limousine Inc. (PUC no. LL-00896), Carolina Carrillo Hernandez LLC (PUC no. LL-04616; permit canceled), Mile High Chauffeurs Inc. (PUC no. LL-02416) and MAC Towing and Recovery LLC (PUC no. T-05510). For the remaining respondents on Exhibit 5, staff recommended that the commission revoke the listed certificates for lack of the required financial responsibility documentation.

One respondent who spoke at the hearing, Miguel Huerta, representing Prestige Moving and Storage LLC, said staff had confirmed the commission received his company’s Form E but not Form H from his insurer. Huerta said he had emailed his insurer and planned to have the required form sent promptly: “I’ll get it done this week, if not by the end of today,” he said. Judge Rosenberg told Huerta that if proper proof of insurance is filed before she issues her recommended decision, the recommended revocation would not be enforced against that respondent.

Rosenberg explained procedural timing: she will issue a recommended decision after taking the matter under advisement; that recommended decision becomes a final commission order 20 days after issuance if no exceptions are filed. The hearing record will include the admitted staff exhibits and the witness testimony on the record.

The judge adjourned the proceeding after taking the matter under advisement. The recommended decision and any further actions will be reflected in the commission’s orders if and when they become final.