The PUC Gives the Green Light to Tuktuk Lancaster
August 31, 2017
On August 31, 2017, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (“PUC”) voted to exempt from its regulation the operations of Wenger Works, Inc., t/a Tuktuk Lancaster (“Tuktuk”) on the basis that the transportation provided in e-Tuk vehicles is incidental to Tuktuk’s primary sightseeing business. By order entered on July 12, 2017, the PUC had previously denied Tuktuk’s application for authority to operate, citing safety concerns regarding the e-Tuk vehicle, which is an open air three-wheeled battery-operated vehicle that holds six passengers.
Following the PUC’s dismissal of Tuktuk’s application, the small business owner engaged Eckert Seamans to seek reconsideration. Representing Tuktuk before the PUC, Karen Moury in the Harrisburg Office took a two-pronged approach: 1) contending, on the basis of case law dating back to 1988, that the transportation services are exempt from PUC jurisdiction because they are incidental to Tuktuk’s primary business of giving sightseeing tours; and 2) addressing the safety concerns previously expressed by the PUC by noting that the e-Tuk vehicle used by Tuktuk meets the applicable federal safety standards and is recognized as a street legal vehicle by both the United States Department of Transportation and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. The filing emphasized that the vehicles have a maximum speed of 25 miles per hour. Included with the filing was a powerful statement offered by the City of Lancaster, through its Mayor, the Chief of Police and the Director of Public Works, in support of Tuktuk’s operations.
In voting to exempt Tuktuk’s transportation services from its jurisdiction, the PUC agreed that the rides in the e-Tuk vehicles are incidental to Tuktuk’s primary sightseeing business. The PUC highlighted the circuitous nature of the tour, which begins and ends at the same point and does not provide transportation between two destinations. This result is consistent with a PUC decision from 1998 involving horse-drawn carriage operations that offered a circuitous ride around a defined area and were provided primarily for entertainment value. The PUC’s decision also referred to Tuktuk’s proposed service as involving a novel method of transportation.
While exempting the Tuktuk operations from its jurisdiction, the PUC indicated that the safety concerns previously expressed remain valid and important factors. However, the PUC emphasized that other entities, including USDOT and PennDOT, maintain sufficient safety authority over Tuktuk’s operations. The PUC further suggested that Tuktuk passengers can file a consumer complaint with the Office of Attorney General’s Bureau of Consumer Protection if they have an issue with the service.
This Eckert Seamans Energy Blog is intended to keep readers current on matters affecting businesses and is not intended to be legal advice. If you have any questions, please contact Daniel Clearfield at (717) 237-7173 – dclearfield@eckertseanans.com.
Share This Post
Author
