Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules  
Administrative Rules Division (ARD)  
REQUEST FOR RULEMAKING (RFR)  
1. Department:  
Licensing and Regulatory Affairs  
2. Bureau:  
Corporations, Securities, & Commercial Licensing  
3. Promulgation type:  
Full Process  
4. Title of proposed rule set:  
Limousine, Taxicab, and Transportation Network Companies  
5. Rule numbers or rule set range of numbers:  
R 339.4001 - R 339.4011  
6. Estimated time frame:  
12 months  
Name of person filling out RFR:  
Mitchell Page  
E-mail of person filling out RFR:  
Phone number of person filling out RFR:  
517-241-6659  
Address of person filling out RFR:  
2407 N Grand River Ave, Lansing, MI 48906  
7. Describe the general purpose of these rules, including any problems the changes are intended  
to address.  
The purpose of these rules is to clarify the background check requirements, record retention  
requirements, and insurance form requirements of the limousine, taxicab, and transportation  
network company act (“act”), 2016 PA 345, MCL 257.2101 to 257.2153. The rules are intended to  
assist the public and registrants in better understanding the parameters of the act, such as the zero-  
tolerance policy posting requirement, and to ensure that the department is receiving standard  
forms and records in its administration of the act.  
8. Please cite the specific promulgation authority for the rules (i.e. department director,  
commission, board, etc.).  
General rulemaking authority is conferred upon the Department of Licensing and Regulatory  
Affairs under Section 3 of the act, 2016 PA 345, MCL 257.2103.  
A. Please list all applicable statutory references (MCLs, Executive Orders, etc.).  
Section 3 of 2016 PA 345, MCL 257.2103.  
B. Are the rules mandated by any applicable constitutional or statutory provision? If so, please  
explain.  
The rules are not mandated by a constitutional or statutory provision, however, there are numerous  
sections of the act that the Department believes can better serve the public and registrants through  
the clarification of a ruleset, which is authorized under Section 3, MCL 257.2103.  
MCL 24.239  
RFR-Page 2  
9. Please describe the extent to which the rules conflict with or duplicate similar rules,  
compliance requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
The rules do not conflict with nor duplicate similar rules, compliance requirements, or other  
standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
10. Is the subject matter of the rules currently contained in any guideline, handbook, manual,  
instructional bulletin, form with instructions, or operational memoranda?  
Yes. The Department’s website for Taxicabs, Limousines, and Transportation Network Companies  
“Quick Links”, links and instructions to obtain, renew, and verify a license, and to file a  
complaint. The link to obtain a license is labelled “MiCLEAR – Licensing – Apply/Renew”. To  
verify a license, there is a link labeled “Verify a License”. There are also 3 paragraphs describing  
the 3 license and registration types.  
Further down this webpage are links to the relevant statute, consumer information, and online  
application information.  
11. Are the rules listed on the department’s annual regulatory plan as rules to be processed  
for the current year?  
Yes.  
12. Will the proposed rules be promulgated under Section 44 of the Administrative Procedures  
Act, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.244, or under the full rulemaking process?  
Full Process  
13. Please describe the extent to which the rules exceed similar regulations, compliance  
requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
The rules do not exceed similar regulations, compliance requirements, or other standards adopted  
at the state, regional, or federal level.  
14. Do the rules incorporate the recommendations received from the public regarding any  
complaints or comments regarding the rules? If yes, please explain.  
The Licensing Division has received a range of complaints filed against registrants in recent years  
(which may be filed by the public) that has informed the drafting of these rules and the need to  
establish a ruleset under the act. The Department plans to present the rules to the public through  
the public hearing format prescribed under the Administrative Procedures Act.  
15. If amending an existing rule set, please provide the date of the last evaluation of the rules  
and the degree, if any, to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed  
the regulatory activity covered by the rules since the last evaluation.  
MCL 24.239  
RFR-Page 3  
The rules are to be a newly established ruleset. Since the act was signed into law in 2016, the  
proliferation of ride-hailing applications, point-to-point transportation services, etc. has only  
continued in Michigan. The department has been administering the act without rules since it went  
into effect. In that time, the need for clarifying rules has emerged as registrants, and Licensing  
Division staff, have encountered confusion and inefficiencies in the interpretation of certain  
provisions of the act.  
Given the realities of an industry, which has changed dramatically by the introduction of disrupters  
like “Uber” and “Lyft”, rules are necessary make administration of the act clearer. The rules  
therefore consider this evaluation of the regulatory scheme and changes in the industry in the past  
decade. They seek to reduce confusion as it pertains to proper paperwork to be provided and  
retained, and compliance with background check and vehicle inspection requirements. They seek  
to increase efficiency as it pertains to the processing of initial and renewal applications for licenses  
and registrations, and the auditing and enforcement provisions of the act.  
16. Are there any changes or developments since implementation that demonstrate there is no  
continued need for the rules, or any portion of the rules?  
There have been no changes or developments that demonstrate no continued need for the rules.  
17. Is there an applicable decision record (as defined in MCL 24.203(6) and required by MCL  
24.239(2))? If so, please attach the decision record.  
No  
Based on the information provided in this RFR, MOAHR concludes that there are sufficient  
policy and legal bases for approving the RFR. The RFR satisfies the requirements of the  
Administrative Procedures Act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, and Executive  
Order No. 2019-6.  
MCL 24.239  
;