Admin. Procedures Act- Certificate of Convenience and Necessity

I have been doing some research on the APA and have come up with a question. Does the agency dept. of Motor Vehicles and/or Secretary of State
need a certificate of convenience and necessity to grant them
permission to perform a public service for profit? If we are
challenging the elements or presumptions of the alleged crime in
traffic as many have mentioned, i.e. I am a person as defined by the
statue, my family automobile is indeed the State Motor Vehicle, I am
driving and not traveling per our constitution Right to Liberty; how
can the state prove that the automobile is a motor vehicle even if it
has been registered as such if the registration may or may not be
valid. When I looked up the term certificate of convenience in a law
dictionary, it read: "A certificate issued by an appropriate agency
of government granting a private company permission to perform a
public service for profit (Example: the construction of a power plant
for the extention of electric service; the operation of a bus or air
service as a common carrier)." Now since the state has deceived most
drivers into commerce and converted private property into a public
utility for the purpose of validifying their ability to regulate our
activity is proper to argue that by issuing registrations and license
plates they have granted the drivers of motor vehicles the status of
private companies acting for profit? Reference the federal definition
of Motor Vehicle in U.S.C. Title 18 section 31 subsection (6).

I have not pieced all of this together yet. But doesn't the validity
of the registration of our automobiles as the State Motor Vehicle
depend on Dept of Motor Vehicles having a certified copy of the
certificate of convenience? What if the distict Attorney cannot
produce the certificate of convenience in a traffic case to prove the
validity of registration of a automobile as the State motor vehicle?

Am I misunderstanding the concept? Has anyone ran across any case law
or better yet law that would substantiate this for contested traffic
cases?