2005 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 8-12-2005 

# P a ckard v . Pgh T r ansp C o P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 03-3088

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2005 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion
" P a ckar d v . Pgh T r an sp C o " (2005). 2005 D e cisio n s . P ape r 612. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2005/612P RE CE DE NT I AL UNI T E D S T AT E S CO UR T OF AP P E AL S F OR T HE

T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 03- 3088 CAROL P ACKARD, J AM ES S I NCLAI R, HOW ARD BO OKE R, F L OR E NC E M AR I E CA M P , E M ANUE L A. BRATT EN, RONALD E. DOM I NI CI , CHARLE S R. RO THER T, SR. , RA YM ON D D AV I S, DO NA LD S. SP AD E, BE VE RL Y J . BE NNE T T , RA NDE R J . T HOMP S ON, D A RR Y L SI G EL, LA V ER A RA W LI N G S, LER O Y F. WI S E , DAVI D L . M OR RI S , E DWARD R
. CR OS BY , GE RA L DI NE RE I NHE I M E R, P AT RI CI A Z I L CH , SH A N N O N M C G R A T H , D A R R Y L T U R N E R , and N O R B E R T G
. A B E L , Pl ai nt i ffs
- A ppel l ees

v. P IT T S B U R G H T R A N S P O R T A T IO N C O .,

D efe ndant
- A ppel l ant
O n A ppeal fr om the U
. S. D i s t r i ctC our tforthe W e ste rn D istric t o f

P e n n sy lv a n ia ( D . C
. C i vi l N o. 02- 89) D i s t r i ctJ udge: T he H onor abl e A r t hurJ . Schw ab

______________ A r gued D ece m ber15, 2004H onor abl e Loui s H . Pol l ak, Seni orD i s t r i ctJ udge for * t he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ctC our tof the East ern D i s t r i ctof Pe n n s y l v a n i a , s i t t i n g b yd e s i g n a t i o n . * * Hon o r a b l e Ri c h a r d L. N y gaar d as s um ed s eni ors t atus on J ul y9, 2005 2 B efore: ** N Y G A A R D and G A R T H , C i rcui tJudg es,

and PO L L A K , D i s t r i ctJ udge. * ( O pi ni on Fi l ed: A ugus t12, 2005)

______________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

______________ R A Y F. M I D D L E M A N , E s q. ( ar gued) C L I FFO R D R . M E A D E , E s q. M a l o n e , La r c h u k & M i d d l e ma n P . C. 117 V I P D r i ve, Sui t e 310 W exfor d, PA 15090 A tto rn e y s fo r Ap p e lla n t P i t t s bur gh Trans por tat i on C om

pany E R N E ST B . O R SA T T I , E s q. ( ar gued) J u b e l i r e r , P a s s & I n t r i e r i , P . C. 219 For tPi t tB l vd. Pi t t s bur gh, PA 15222 A t t or ney f

orAppel l ees C a ro l P a c ka rd

, et a l.3 T H E O D O R E R . SC O T T , E s q. Lu c e , Fo r war d , Hami l t o n & Sc r i p p s LLP 11988 E l C ami no R eal , Sui t e 200 San D i ego, C A 92130 A t t or ney f

orA m i cus C ur i ae Lai dl aw Trans

por tat i on Ser vi ces , I

nc. PO L L A K , D i s t r i ctJ udge: I n t hi s appe al , appel l ant - defe ndantPi t t s bur gh T ra n sp o rta tio n C o . (“ P T C ” ) se e k s to e sta b lish th a t d riv e rs f o r its A C C E SS t r ans i ts ervi ce ( “A C C E SS dri ver s ”) , i ncl udi ng p lain tiff s-a p p e llee s, a re n o t elig ib le f o r o v e rtim e u n d e r th e F a ir L abor St andar ds A ct( “FL SA ”)
. T he pr eci s e ques t i on befor e us i s w hethert he A C C E SS dri ver s , w ho w oul d or di nar i l ybe el i gi bl e forover t i m e, become i nel i gi bl e by vi r tue of a pr ovi s i on of the M ot orC arr i erA ct( “M C A ”) thatves t s author i t yi n t he Secr et aryof Tra ns por t at i on t o reg u l at e ce r t ai n as pect s of i nt er s t at e tr ans por t . T hos e w i t hi n t he Secr et ary ’s spher e of
a u t h o r i t yu n d e rt h e M CA ar e e x c l u d e d f r o m th e o v e r t i me4 p ro v isio n s o f

th e F L S A
. T h e D istric t C o u rt c o n c lu d e d th a t th is
so -c a lled “ M C A e x e m p tio n ” f ro m th e F L S A w a s n o t ap p lica b le h e re , an d th a t th e A C C E S S d riv e rs th e re f o re re m a in e d e lig ib le f o r o v e r t i me p a y . We a g r e e wi t h th a tc o n c l u s i o n , a l t h o u g h we
r eac h i t by a di ffe r ent r out e, and w i l l aff i r m t he j udgm entof the D istric t C o u rt. I. PTC’ s AC CESS s e r v i c e , n o ta v a i l a b l e t o t h e g ener al publ i c, pr ovi des tr ans por t at i on t o el der l yand di s abl ed per s ons
w ho ar e unabl e t o us e other fo rm s o f publ i c tr ans por t at i on. U n d e r a c o n tr a c t w ith A C C E S S T ra n s p o rt a tio n S y s te m s , In c ., a fe d era l l y - funded pr ogr am t o pr ovi de s uch s ervi ces , PT C ’s A C C E SS progr am serves r oughl y5, 000 peopl e w i t h di s abi l i t i es and 125, 000 s eni o rs. M os tof thes e pas s enger s have “uncondi t i onal ” el igibil ity , w h ich re q u ir es a ce rt ifi ca ti on of nee d b a se d o n revi ew bya speci al pan el , w hil e other s ar e el i gibleD uri ng 20 01 and 20 02 , ai rporttri ps w ere al m ost 2 al w ay s m ade bya s epar at e A C C E SS provi der , A i rbus , butthe A C C E S S d r i v e r s s t i l l m a d e s u c h tr i p s o c c a s i o n a l l y. 5 b a s e d o n c e rt a in m o re te m p o ra ry c o n d itio n s . PT C pr ovi des A C C E SS servi ce w i t hi n a def i ned s ervi ce
ar ea i n A l l eghen y C o u ntyt hati ncl udes t he Pi t t s bur gh A m t r ak
a nd G r e yho un d s t a t i on s . P TC a l s o p r ov i de s s ome AC CE SS
s ervi ce t o and fr om t he Pi t t s bur gh I nt ernat i onal A i rpor t , w hi ch i s out s i de i t s r egul ars ervi ce a r ea. PT C ’ s A C C E SS servi ce oper at es ent i r el yw i t hi n Penns y l vani a, and A C C E SS dr i ver s do nott r an sp o r tpas s enger s acr os s s t at e l i nes . I ti s uncl earw hat po rt i on of A C C E S S service i n v o lv e s trai n o r bus t erm i nals
. T ri p s to the a irp o rtare a v erym ino r pa rto f A C C E S S ’s aggr egat e oper at i ons , buti ti s the cas e t hatm os t , i f notal l , of 2 t he A C C E SS dri ver s have made atl eas ta fe w tr i ps t o the
a irp o rt. B e c a u se P T C a ss ig n s th e a irp o rt trip s in d isc rim in a tely6 al ong w i t h ot hert r i ps , anyA C C E SS dri verm aybe ca l l ed upon to d ri v e s u c h tr ip s . U nl i ke c on ve nt i on a l bu s s y s t e m s, PTC ’ s A CC ESS
s ervi ce doe s nothave r eg u lar, s etr out es , ors ets t ops or schedu l es fr om dayt o d ay . R at her, P T C schedu l es passengers’ t r i p s e a c h d a yt o p r o v i d e th e mos te f f i c i e n t s e r v i c e p o s s i b l e . To
us e the s ervi ce, el i gi bl e pas s enger s m us ts chedul e t hei rtr i ps at l eas tone dayi n advanc e, byt el ephoni ng s chedul er s atei t her PT C or A C C E SS. A l t hough l i m i t ed s ame- daytr i ps m ayal s o be
s chedul ed w hen s pace i s avai l abl e, A C C E SS dr i ver s do notpi ck up ordr op off pa s s engers ex ceptas s chedul ed i n advanc e t hr ough t he ce nt r al s chedul er s . A pas s enger pur chas es a t i cket fo r t he s e r vi c e i n ad va nc e , pr e s e nt i ng the t i c ke tt o the A CC ESS dr i ver as paym ent . T i cket s forA C C E SS servi ce a r e notl i nked in a n yw a yto tick e ts f

o r in ter sta te tra v e l, or in d e e d in tra sta te tr a v e l, o n n o n -A C C E S S tr a n s it s e rv ic e s .7 B ec au se P T C co n tend s th at i ts A C C E S S d ri v ers a re
e x c lu d e d f

ro m th e F L S A ’s o v e rtim e p ro tec tio n , ith a s re f u se d to payt he dri ver s m or e t han thei ror di naryhour l yw age w hen they
w or k m or e than 40 hour s perw eek
. I ti s undi s put ed thatthe d ri v ers reg u larl y w o rk o v er 4 0 h o u rs p er w ee k , an d that theyare
en ti tl ed to rec o v er o v erti m e co m p en sati o n fo r th e e x ce ss h o u rs i f theyar e nots ubj ectt o t he FL SA ’ s M C A exempt i on. A ft er t he A C C E SS dr i ver s fi l ed thi s act i on i n t he U ni t ed St at es D i s t r i ct C o u rt forthe W es t ern D i s t r i ctof Penns y l vani a,
se e k in g to c o n f

irm th e ir e n tit lem e n t to F L S A o v e rtim e p a y , b o th par t i es fi l ed mot i ons forpart i al s um m aryj udgm en ton t he ques t i on of the dr i ver s ’ ent i t l ementt o over t i m e pr ot ect i on. T he D i s t r i c t Cour t de ni e d PTC ’ s mot i on , a nd gr a nt e d the A CC ESS d ri v e rs ’ m o tio n in p a rt . T h e D istri ct C o u rtruled th a t the A C C E S S d ri v ers w ere notexcl uded fr om t he pr ot ect i ons of the FL SA , and r emai ned8 en ti tl ed to o v erti m e, b ec au se th ey w ere n o t w ith in the S ec retary
o f T ra n sp o rta tio n ’s a u th o rity to re g u late in ter sta te tr a n sp o rt. A ccor di ng t o t he D i s t r i ctC our t , the A C C E SS dri ver s w er e not engage d i n i nt er s t at e t r ans por tbeca us e the A C C E SS servi ce ( w hi ch d o es not phy s i cal l ypr ovi de tr ans por tout s i de of Penns y l vani a) do e s n o t i n v o l v e “ t hr ough t i cket i ng”
a rr a n g e m e n ts w ith in te rs ta te tr a n s p o rt . The c ou r tt he n e nt er e d f i na l j ud gmen tfo rthe A CC ESS dr i ver s , bas ed on the par ti es’ s t i pul at i on as t o t he amountof compensa t or ydamages and the court ’ s d eter m i nat i on of
a p p ro p ria te liq u id a ted d a m a g e s a n d a tto rn e y s’ f e e s. P T C tim e ly f iled th is a p p e a l, ch a llen g in g th e u n d e r ly in g liab ili ty d e te rm in a tio n . T he i s s ues pr es ent ed her e have a l s o been r ai s ed, butnot d e c id e d , in th re e a c tio n s in th e W e ste rn D istric t o f P e n n sy lv a n ia i nvol ving A C C E SS dri ver s forPT C and foranother9 t r ans por t at i on comp anyi n the Pi t t s bur gh ar ea, L ai dl aw T ra n s p o rt a tio n , In c . (“ L a id la w ” ). O n e o f th e s e a c tio n s , E ugene J. Kot t , et al
. v. P i t t s bur gh Trans por tat i on C o. , N o. 02- 0089, has b e e n d ism iss e d w ith o u t p re ju d ice p e n d in g th e re so lu tio n o f th is appea l
. I n Spi vak v. P i t t s bur gh Trans por tat i on C o. , N o. 98- 984 ( W . D. Pa . M a y 2 8 , 1 9 9 9 ) , t h e Di s t r i c tCou r tf o u n d t h a tPTC coul d appl yt he M C A exempt i on t o pl ai nt i ff M acha l l Spi vak, an A C C E SS dri ver . H ow ever , beca us e Spi vak di d notdi s put e that h e w as e n g ag ed in interst ate tr an sp o rt ati o n w h il e m ak ing airpo rt t r i ps , t he Spi vak

deci s i on does notdi r ect l yaddr es s t he i s s ues p re s e n te d h e re . In th e th ir d a c tio n , G r eenwood v. Lai dlaw Trans i tS er vi ces , I

nc. , N o. 01- 0728, the D i s t r i ctC ourthas deni ed both par t i es ’ m ot i ons fo r sum m aryj udgm ent . L ai dl aw h a s su b m itt e d a n a m icu s b rie f su p p o rtin g P T C ’s p o sitio n o n th is
a p p e a l. II.10 O ur r e v i e w of

th e Di s t r i c tCou r t ’ s g r a n to f p a r t i al
s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t is p le n a ry. M a d is o n v . R e s .

fo rH u m a n D e v ., I nc. , 2 3 3 F .3 d 1 7 5 , 1 8 0 (3 d C ir . 2 0 0 0 ). III . A p p ell an t PT C see k s rev ersa l of the D istri ct C o u rt ’s g ra n t o f p a rtial s u m m a ry ju d g m e n t to its A C C E S S d riv e rs, a s to l i abi l i t yon t he dr i ver s ’ cl ai m s for over t i m e pay underSect i on 7
o f th e F a irL a b o r S ta n d a rd s A c t ( “ F L S A ” ), 2 9 U .S .C . § 207( a) ( 1)
. PT C cl ai m s thatthe dri ver s ar e exe m ptfr om the FL SA ’ s over t i m e r equi r ement s undert he M ot orC arr i erA ct (“ M C A ” ) e x e m p tio n , se t f o rth a t 2 9 U .S .C . § 2 1 3 (b )(1 ). It is
w el l s et t l ed thatexempt i o n s fro m t he FL SA ar e cons t rued
n a rr o w ly, a g a in s t th e e m p lo y e r. M adis on , 233 F. 3d at183. A ccor di ngl y , PT C bear s t he bur den of pr ovi n g “p la i nl yand
unm i s t akabl y ” that t he dr i ver s qual i fyfort he M C A exempt i on. See Frie dri ch v. U

. S. C om pu t er Servs. , 974 F. 2d 409, 412 ( 3d11 C ir . 1 9 9 2 ). A
. The Stat ut es Sect i on 7 of the FL SA r equi r es empl oy er s t o pay
o v e rtim e c o m p e n sa tio n to e m p lo y e e s w h o w o rk m o re th a n f o rty hour s perw eek, unl es s one or anotherof ce r t ai n exempt i ons appl i es . 29 U . S. C
. § 207. T he exempt i on s ai d b yP T C to be appl i cabl e her e, t he M C A exemp ti o n, appea r s i n Sect i on 13( b) ( 1) of the FL SA , and pr ovi des thatover t i m e payi s not req u ir ed fo r “a n yem p loy ee w ith resp ec t t o w h o m the S ec retary of Tra ns po rt at i on has pow ert o es t abl i s h qual i fi cat i ons and
m axi m um hour s of s ervi ce pur s uant t o t he pr ovi s i ons of s ect i on 3 1 5 0 2 o f T it le 49
. ” 2 9 U . S
. C
. § 2 1 3 (b)(1 ). S e c tio n 3 1 5 0 2 o f

T itle 4 9 “ a p p lie s to tr a n s p o rt a tio n . . . d e s c r i b e d i n s e c t i o n s 1 3 5 0 1 a n d 1 3 5 0 2 o f [ Ti t l e 4 9 ]
. ” 4 9 U. S
. C. § 31502. I n tur n, Sect i on 13501 of T i t l e 49 pr ovi des i n r el evant p art th at th e S ec retaryan d the S u rfa ce T ran sp o rt ati o n B o ardT he co m plet e t ext of S ect i on 13 50 1 reads as fol l ow s: 3 T he Secr et ary[of Tr ans por t at i on] and the [Sur fac e T ra n sp o rta tio n ] B o a rd h a v e ju risd ictio n , as sp e c if ied in th is par t , overt r ans por t at i on bym ot orcarr i erand the pr ocur ement o f t h a tt r a n s p o r t a t i o n , t o th e e x t e n tth a tp a s s e n g e r s , p r o p e r t y, o r bo th, are tr an sp o rt ed b ym o tor ca rri er-- (1) b etw ee n a p lace in-- ( A ) a St at e and a pl ace i n anotherSt at e; ( B ) a St at e and a not herpl ace i n t he s ame St at e thr ough anotherSt at e; ( C ) t he U ni t ed St at es and a pl ace i n a t err i t oryorpos s es s i on of the U ni t ed St at es t o t he ext entthe tr ans por t at i on i s i n t he U nit ed S t at es; ( D ) t he U ni t ed St at es and anotherpl ace i n t he U ni t ed St at es th ro u g h a f

o re ig n c o u n tryto th e e x ten t th e tra n sp o rta tio n is in t he U ni t ed St at es ; or ( E ) t he U ni t ed St at es and a pl ace i n a for ei gn countr yt o t he ext entt he tr ans por t at i on i s i n t he U ni t ed St at es ; and ( 2) i n a r es ervat i on underthe exc l us i ve j ur i s di ct i on of the U n i t e d S t a t e s o ro n a p u b l i c h i g h w a y. 12 have j ur i s di ct i on “over t r ans por t at i on by m ot orcarr i er. . . t o t he ext entt hatpasse n ger s , pr oper t y , orboth, ar e tr ans por t ed by
m o to r c a rrie r b e tw e e n a p la c e in
. . . a S tate a n d a p lac e in anotherSt at e. ” 49 U
. S. C
. § 13501. O urt as k i s t o det erm i ne 3
w hether the A C C E SS dri ver s ’ w or k br i ngs t hem w i t hi n t he13 s c o p e o f t h i s s t a tu t o r y a u t h o r i t y. 1. The D is tr i ct

C our t ’s R ul i ng T h e D istri ct C o u rt fo u n d that the A C C E S S d ri v ers w ere notw i t hi n t he author i ty of t he Secr et aryof Tra ns por t at i on. T he D istri ct C o u rt d eterm ined that, in g en era l, the S ec retary ’s author i t yext ends t o t r anspo r t at i on i n w hi ch ther e i s “pr act i cal
c o n tin u ityo f

m o v e m e n t” a c ro ss sta te lin e s. In a p p ly in g th is
conce ptt o t he A C C E SS dr i ver s ’ s i tuat i on, t hough, t he D i s t r i ct C o u rt a d o p te d a p a rt ic u la r , n a r ro w in te rp re ta tio n o f th a t te rm . T he D i s t r i ctC our tfound that“[t ] he D O L [D epart m entof L abor ] , i n cons ul t at i on w i t h t he D O T [D epart m entof T r an sp o rt at i on] , addr es s ed the i s s ue of ‘ pr act i cal cont i nui t yof
m ovement ’ as appl i ed t o i ntr as t at e bus dri ver s i n a 1999 opi ni on let ter, w h ich a d o p ted th e re aso n ing o f a 1 9 7 4 D O T ruli n g . In t he l et t er , J ohn R
. Fr as er , A ct i ng A dm i ni s t r at orof the W age a ndS e c tio n 2 0 4 o f th e M C A , lik e th e c u rr e n t 4 9 U .S .C . § 4 3 1 5 0 2 , d e f

in e d th e ra n g e o f

tra n sp o rta tio n a c tiv iti e s s u b jec t to DOT a u t h o r i t ya n d t h e r e f o r e n o tp r o t e c t e d b yth e F L S A. 14 H o u r D iv isio n , U .S . D e p a rtm e n t o f L a b o r, a ss e rts th a t in tra sta te b u s dr i v e r s wo u l d a l wa y s b e e l i g i b l e f o rF LS A o v e r t i me compensa t i on, exce pt i n one si tuat i on not appl i cabl e her e. ” T he D i s t r i ctC our tt hen quot ed t he fol l ow i ng pas s age fr om t he Fr as er let ter: S e c ti o n 2 0 4 [th e pre d ec esso r to 49 U . S
. C . § 31502] does notappl ym er el y b ecaus e the

4 oper at i on m a k es s t ops atai rpor t s , r ai l r oad s t at i ons o r bus depot s and pi cks up pas s enger s w ho have h a d o r w ill h a v e a p rio r o r su b se q u e n t in ter sta te j our ney . T h e onl ycas e i n w hi ch s ect i on 204 w oul d appl yt o a l ocal bus oper at i on t r ans por t i ng pas s enger s w ho have made orw i l l m ake a pr i oror su b se q u e n t jo u r n e ya c ro ss a S tate lin e is o n e in w hi ch ther e i s a thr ough t i cket ing a r r angement u n d e r w h ich th e p a ss e n g e rs p u rc h a se a sin g le t i cketw hi ch is good forbot h the l ocal bus r i de a n d t h e s u b s e q u e n ti n t e r s t a t e j o u r n e y. A ft eracknow l edgi ng that“the D O T , nott he D O L , hasT he D O L has no i ndepende ntauthor i t yt o i nt erpr etthe 5 M CA , e ve n tho ug h the M CA de fi ne s the s c op e of a n FLSA e x e m p tio n , b e c a u se th e D O L is n o t th e a g e n c ye n tru ste d w ith th e a d m in is tr a tio n o f

th e M C A
. See Fri edr i ch v. U
. S. C om pu t er Servs. , 9 7 4 F .2 d 4 0 9 , 4 1 1 n .3 (3 d C ir . 1 9 9 2 ). 15 t he author i t yt o i nt erpr et t he D O T ’ s pow er undert he M C A , ” t he 5 D i s t r i ctC our t w en ton t o fi nd t hat“the D O L ’ s i nt erpr et at i on
m us t b e g i v e n d e f

e r e n c e b e c a u s e t h e DO L a n d t h e DO T agr ee on t he i nt erpr et at i on. ” B eca us e t her e i s admi t t edl yno “thr ough t i cketi ng arr ang em ent” coveri ng A C C E S S passeng ers w ho al so t r a v e l i n t e r s t a t e , t h e Di s t r i c tCo u r tf o u n d t h a tt h e M CA exempt i on di d notappl y , and t hat t he A C C E SS dri ver s r emai ned
e l i g i b l e f o ro v e r t i m e p a y. I n appea l i ng t he D i s t r i ct C our t ’ s rul i ng, PT C chal l enges t he “thr ough t i cket i ng” t es t . T o as s es s the “th rough t i cket i ng” test , w e w il l exa m ine th e so u rce s o n w h ich th e D istri ct C o u rt
re lie d
.16 Fi r s t , l o o k i n g b a c k t o 1 9 7 4 , i t a p p e a r s t h a t what t he D i stri ct C ou rtreferred t o as “a 1 97 4 D O T rul i ng ” w ho se “r eas oni ng” w as “adopt ed” byt he D O L w as i n fac tan unoff i ci al i nt er agenc yl et t er . O n J ul y8, 1 9 74, one I s aac B enki n, then A ss ista n t C h ief

C o u n se l f

o r M o to r C a rrie r a n d H ig h w a yS a f e ty L aw at the D O T , w r ot e a l ett er( t he “Benki n l ett er ”) t o the D O L ’s D i vis i on of M i nim um W age and H ou r S tan dards, purpor t i ng t o ans w er s ever al ques t i ons fr om the D O L aboutthe
s cope of the D O T ’s author i ty . O ne of the ques t i ons w as t he fol l ow i ng: D oes s ect ion 204 of the M ot or

C arr i erA ct [w hi ch then def i ned the as pec t s o f t h e Se c r et ar y of T r ans por t at i on’ s author i t yr el evant her e] appl yt o pr i vat el yoper at ed t r ans i ts y s t e ms u t i l i z i ng m ot orbus es opera t i ng overfi xed r out es w hi ch m aycr os s St at e l i nes or have s t ops ort erm i nal s atai rpor t s , r ai lr oad st at i on s, or i nter st at e bu s depo t s?17 M r . B enki n’ s ans w ert o t hi s ques t i on, i n i t s ent i r ety , r ead
a s f o llo w s: Se c t i o n 2 0 4 a p p l i e s i f t h e bus

op erat i on s ar e con du ct ed across a St at e l i ne. Sect ion 204 does not appl ym er el yb eca us e the oper at or m akes s t ops atai rpor t s , r ai l r oad s t at i ons orbus depot s and pi cks up p a ss e n g e rs w h o h a v e h a d o r w ill hav e a p ri o r or s ubs equent in ter sta te jo u rn e y . T h e o n ly c a se in w hi ch s ect i on 204 w oul d appl yt o a l ocal bus oper at i on tr ans por t i ng p a ss e n g e rs w h o h a v e m a d e o r w ill m ake a pr i or or s ubs equentj our ney ac ros s a St at e l i ne i s one i n w hi ch t her e i s a t h r o ugh t i cket i ng arr angementun derw hi ch the pas s enger s pur chas e a s i ngl e t i cket w hi ch i s good forboth t he l ocal bus r i de and the pr i orors ubs equent i nt er s t at e j our neybyai r , r ai l , or bu s. M i s t akenl yr efe r r i ng t o t he B enki n l ett er as a “rul i ng by t he U
. S. D epart m entof Tra ns por t at ion ( D O T ) , ” M r . Fr as erof t he D O L r el i ed on i t t w enty - fi ve y ear s l at eri n t w o 1999 opi ni onO ne of the D O L l ett er s al s o s t at ed thatthe D O L had 6 “conf i r m ed w i t h D O T thatthi s rul i ng ha[d] nots i nce be en su p e rc e d e d .” T h is u n d o c u m e n ted re c ital c a n n o t b e e n tit led to defe r ence as an off

i ci al D O T i nt erpr et at i on.

18 lette rs s tatin g th a t ce rta in c a teg o rie s o f d riv e rs a p p a re n tlya k in t o t h e a p p e l l e e s i n t h e c a s e a tb a rwe r e n o t w i t hi n t h e M CA
e x e mp t i o n , a n d we r e th e r e f o r e s u b j e c t t o t h e F LS A’ s o v e r t i me requi rem ents . T he D i stri ct C ou rt , i n turn, rel i ed on o ne o f t hese DOL l e t t e r s b e c a u s e t h e Di s t r i c t Co u r t f o u n d t h a tt h e DOT
s har ed the D O L ’ s i nt erpr et at i on. H ow ever , nei t hert he 1974 B enki n l et t ernort he 1999 F r as er l ett er t he D i s t r i ctC our tr el i ed on has t he form al i t y an d w ei ghtthatw oul d m er i tj udi ci al defe r ence . 6 Som e age ncyi nt erpr et at i ons of s t atut es t he age ncy admi ni s t er s ar e ent i t l ed t o s ubs t ant i al j udi ci al defe r ence . H er e, t he A C C E SS dri ver s cont end t hat M r . B enki n’ s endor s ementof a “thro u g h ti ck eti n g ” t est is en ti tl ed to d ef ere n ce u n d er C hevr on19 U
. S. A
. , I nc. v. N at ur alR es our ces D ef

ens e C o u n cil, I

nc. , 467 U . S. 837 ( 1984) , w hi ch r equi r es j udi ci al defe r ence t o an
a g ency ’s reas on able i nterpret at i on of an am biguou s st atute entrus t ed t o i t s admi ni s t r at i on. H owev e r , “ [ i ] nt erpr et at i ons s uch
a s th o se in o p in io n lette rs - lik e in terp re tatio n s c o n tain e d in pol i cyst at em ents , agen cym anu al s, and enfo rcem ent gui deli nes,
a ll o f w h ich lac k th e f

o rc e o f law - d o n o t w a rra n t C hevr on -sty le defe r ence . ” C h ris ten se n v . H a rr is C o u n ty , 529 U
. S. 576, 587 (2 0 0 0 ). T h e in f

o rm a l an d c u rso ryB e n k in lette r f a lls in to th is
c a teg o ry , an d h e n c e d o e s n o t m e rit C hevr on defe r ence. The Fr as erl et t erw oul d s i m i l ar l y l ack author i t y , even i f t he D O L had
au tho ri tyto interp ret the M C A , w h ich it do es n o t. A s this co u rt h a s s a id , “[ t]o g ra n t C hevr on defe r ence t o i nform al agenc y i nt erpr et at i ons w oul d undul y val i dat e t he re s ul t s of an i nform al pr oces s . ” Madis on , 2 3 3 F .3 d a t 1 8 6
. I n t he abs ence of C hevr on de fe r e nc e , t he A CC ESS20 dr i ver s cont end thatt he B enki n l ett eri s atl eas tent i t l ed t o the l e s s e r d e g r e e o f d e f

e r e n c e c a l l e d f

o rb y Sk idm o re v . Sw ift , 323 U . S
. 1 3 4 (1 9 4 4 ). H o w e v e r, Skidm ore defe rence i s avai l able onl ybas ed on an a gencyi n terpret at i on’ s pow ert o per s uade. T he gener al rul e, w her e C hevr on d e f e re n c e is n o t w a rra n ted , is t hat “[t ]he w ei gh t of [an agency ’s ] j ud gm ent i n a p art i cularcase
w i l l depend upon the thor oughnes s evi denti n i t s cons i der at i on, t he val i di t yof i t s r eas oni ng, i t s cons i s t encyw i t h ear l i erand l at er p ro n o u n c e m e n ts, a n d a ll th o se f a c to rs w h ich g iv e it p o w e r to per s uade i f l acki ng pow ert o contr ol
. ” Skidm ore , 3 2 3 U . S
. at 140. T he m at er i al s ati s s ue her e s i m pl ypr ovi de no r eas oni ng or
a n a lysis th a t a c o u rt c o u ld p ro p e rl yf in d p e rs u a s iv e . A ccor di ngl y , w e ar e of the vi ew that the “thr ough t i cket i ng” t es t u ti li zed bythe D i s t r i ctC our ti s nota l egal
s t andar d t hats uffi ces t o det erm i ne w hether t he M C A exempt i on i s appl i cabl e t o t he A C C E SS dri ver s . W e t urn, then, t o other21 s our ces of gui dance
. B . A n a lys is S ett ing asid e the “thro u g h ti ck eti n g ” test , w e w il l i n q u ir e
w hethergui dance i s for t hcomi ng fr om ( a) D O T r egul at i ons , or la c k th e re o f

, o r ( b ) c a s e la w a d d re s s in g a n a lo g o u s q u e s tio n s . 1. R egu l atory Fra m ew ork P T C m a in tain s tha t a d e f in iti o n o f in ter sta te c o m m e rc e in D O T reg u lat ion s u n am b igu o u sly su b jects the A C C E S S d ri v ers to th e S e c re tar y ’s a u th o r it y . T h e D O T h a s d e f in e d in ter sta te
c o mm e r c e a s “ t r a d e , t r a f f i c , o rtr a n s p o r t a t i o n . . . b e t we e n two pl ace s i n a St at e a s p a r t o f t r ade, t r aff

i c, ort r ans por t at i on
or i gi nat i ng ort erm i nat i ng out s i d e the St at e ort he U ni t ed St at es . ” 49 C
. F. R . § 390. 5 ( emphasi s adde d)
. H ow ever , even if th is d ef init ion o f “interstat e c o m m erc e” m ayb e u sed as a fo rm
o f s h o rt h a n d f

o r t h e M C A ’s s p e c if

ic la n g u a g e (i n 4 9 U .S .C . §S e e te x t a t n o te 3 , supra . 7 PT C and Lai dl aw al s o r efe rus t o D O L r egul at i ons 8 d e f in in g th e sp h e re o f

in ter sta te c o m m e rc e th a t is su b jec t to th e F L S A . T h e s e re g u la tio n s c o u ld b e , a t b e s t, p e rs u a s iv e . See s upr a n o te 5 . H o w e v e r, th e re g u latio n s th e m se lv e s n o te t hatt he M C A ’ s defi ni t i on of i nt er s t at e comm er ce i s “not id e n tic a l w ith th e d e f

in itio n s in th e [ F L S A ],” 2 9 C .F .R . § 782. 7( a) , and has been mor e narr ow l yi nt erpr et ed bythe c o u rt s th a n th e p a ra lle l d e f in itio n in th e F L S A , 2 9 C .F .R . § 7 8 2 .7 (b )( 1 ). T h u s , th e yd o n o t h e lp u s h e re . 22 13501) , t he D O T ’ s r egul ati on i s notdi s pos i t i ve one w ayor

7
a n o th e r , s in c e it p ro v id e s n o in stru c tio n a s to w h a t ac tiv ityis “part of” i nt er s t at e com m er ce i n m ar gi nal s i tuat i ons s uch as that pr es ent ed her e. 8 T he A C C E SS dr i ver s cont end t hat t hey ar e notw i t hi n the M C A ex em pt i on beca us e the Secr et aryof Tra ns por t at i on has
n e v e ri n f

a c tr e g u l a t e d t h e i rwo r k
. Ho we v e r , t h e MCA
e x e m p t i o n d e p e n d s o n l y o n th e e x i s t e n c e o f s e c re ta ri a l a u th o ri ty,
n o t o n its e x e rc is e . Levi ns on v. SpectorMot orSer v. , 33 0 U. S. 6 4 9 , 6 7 8 (1 9 4 6 ); Mo rr is v . Mc Co mb , 3 3 2 U . S
. 4 2 2 , 4 3 4 (19 4 7 );23 Fr i edr i ch , 974 F. 2d at 4 1 6
. T hus , i tdoes notm att erthatthe A C C E SS dri ver s ’ v e h i c l es ar e bel ow the w ei ghtthr es hol d above
w hi ch t he Secr et ary ’ s s afe t y r egul at i ons appl y , as t he D i s t r i ct C our tfound thatt heyar e, orw h ethe r t he dr i ver s ar e exe m pt f ro m th e S e c re ta ry’s re g u la tio n s f o r a n yo th e r r e a s o n . See i d. ; Mar t i n v. C oyne I

nt ’ lE nt er . , C or

p. , 966 F. 2d 61 ( 2d C i r . 1992) ( fi ndi ng l aundryt ruc k dr i ver s excl uded fr om FL SA pr ot ect i on alth o u g h tru ck s w eigh ed 1 0 , 0 0 0 p o u n d s a n d there fo re w ere
e x e m p t f ro m H ig h w a yA d m in is tr a tio n ’s s a f e ty re g u la tio n s ). 2. Judi ci alTre atm ent

of the M C A E xem pt i on In th e o n e M C A e x e m p tio n c a se a d d re ss e d b y th is c o u rt, the o p era ti v e f

ac ts w ere fa r af

iel d fro m tho se in the c ase at ba r. I n Fr i edr i ch v. U
. S. C om put erSer vi ces , 9 7 4 F .2 d 4 0 9 (3d C ir
. 1 9 92 ), t he em ploy ees con t end i ng t hat t hey w ere enti t l ed to
over t i m e payw er e t echni ci ans pr ovi di ng i ns t al l at i on,
m ainten an ce an d rep air serv ices f o r ca b le t elev isi o n firm s. In24 carr y i ng outt hei rr es po n s i b i l i t i e s , th e t e c h n i c i a n s , headqua r t er ed in P e n n sy lv a n ia , d ro v e w ith th e ir e q u ip m e n t an d to o ls to
cus t om er s l ocat ed i n Penns y l vani a and i n al l t he st at es bor der i ng
o n P e n nsy l va n ia. A lth o u g h th e tec h n icia n s g e n e ra llyd ro v e th e ir
ow n vehi cl es , w hi ch w ei ghed l ess t han the “c om m er ci al
v e h icle s” o f o v e r 1 0 ,0 0 0 p o u n d s th a t th e D O T h a d a f f irm a tiv e ly under t ak en to r egul at e, w e conc l uded thatt he D O T ’ s none x e rc is e o f

its re g u la to ry p o w e r d id n o t u n d e rc u t th a t p o w e r. B eca us e the pl ai nt i ffs l i t er al l yfel l w i t hi n the M C A exempt i on and nei the rC ongr es s nort he D O T h a s ta k e n a c tio n to th e c o n tra ry , w e h o ld t hatempl oy ees oper at i ng pas s enge r aut om obi l es in in ter sta te a c tiv itie s w h ich re q u ire th e m to t r ans por tprop ert yes s ent i al t o thei rj ob dut i es come w i t hi n the r eac h of the Fede r al M ot or C arr i erA ctas amended and ar e ther efor e exe m pt fr om t he FL SA ’ s over t i m e compens ati on requi rem ents . I d. at419. T hus , i n Fr i edr i ch , unl i ke t he cas e atbar , t he empl oy ees
w er e i n f

a c t d r i v i n g i n t e r s t a t e a n d d o i n g s o a s a r e g u l ar and25 centr al di m ens i on of t hei r j obs
. M or eover , thei rdut i es r equi r ed t hem t o tr anspo rtpropert yas w el l as them sel ves. I n tur ni ng t o deci s i ons i n other cour t s , i t appea r s t hat , as a general m at t er , cas es s us t ai ni ng cl ai m s of M C A exempt i on fr om the FL SA over t i m e r equi r ement s i nvol ve pat terns of d i s t r i b u t i o n m a r k e d l y u n l i k e t h e A C C E S S p a t t e r n . T yp i c a l l y, t he ca r r i er ’ s act i vi t yi s a cl ear l yi dent i fi abl e elem en t of an i nt egr at ed i nt er s t at e di s t r i but i on s y s t em. A l s o , typi cal l y , the item s th e c a rrie r is tra n sp o rtin g a re n o t p a ss e n g e rs b u t f re ig h t. B ack i n 1947, i n Mo r r i s v . Mc Co mb , 332 U
. S. 422 (19 4 7 ), a sh arp lyd ivide d S u p rem e C o u rt h eld th at truc k d ri v ers and mech an ics em pl oy ed bya D etr oi tcarr i erengage d i n t he t r ans por tof s t eel came w i t hi n t he M C A exempt i on . Four per centof the tr ans por tw as “di r ect l yi n i nt er s t at e com m erce” , i d. a t 4 2 7 ; th e b a lan c e w a s (a ) ste e l tra n sp o rte d “ lar g e lyw ith in
s t eel pl ant s . . . forfur t herpr oces s i ng . . . an uns egr egat ed pot i on26 of [w hi ch] w as s hi pped ul t i m at el yi n i nt er s t at e comm er ce, ” and ( b) s t eel t r ans por t ed “betw een s t eel m i l l s and i ndus t r i al
es t abl i s hm ent s . . . [and] us ed i n connec t i on w i t h the
m anufa ctur e of a ut om obil es , a s ubs t ant i al por t i on of w hi ch ent er ed i nt er s t at e comm er ce. ” I d. I n r efe r r i ng t o t he 4% of the
c a r r i e r ’ s op e r a t i on s w hi c h ( un l i ke the op e r a t i on s of A CC ESS)
w er e “di r ect l yi n i nt er s t at e comm er ce, ” t he C our tnot ed thatthe
carr i er , i n or derful l yt o s erve i t s s hi pper s , had “a pr act i cal situ a tio n su c h a s m a y c o n f ro n t a n yc o m m o n c a rrie r e n g a g e d in
a g e n e ra l ca rta g e b u sin e ss , an d w h o is pr e p a re d a n d o f f e rin g to
se rv e th e n o rm a l tran sp o rta tio n d e m a n d s o f th e sh ip p in g p u b lic i n an i ndus t r i al m etr opol i t an ce nt er . ” I d. at434. M o r e r e c e n ti n s t a n c e s i n wh i c h c l a i ms o f M CA exempt i on have be en s us t ai ned ar e notdi s s i m i l ar . Forexampl e, i n B i l you v. D ut ches s B eerD is tr i but ors , I nc. , 300 F. 3d 217 ( 2d C i r . 2002) , t he Second C i r cui t found no FL SA pr ot ect i on foran27 i nt r as t at e dr i verw ho dr ove empt ybeerbot t l es t o a fa ci l i t yfr om
w hi ch theyw er e l at ers hi pped out of st at e. H ow ever , t he B i l you dr i ver ’s ac t i vi t i es w er e partof a c l ear l yi nt egr at ed comm er ci al
c y c le: th e b e e r d istrib u to r re c e iv e d f u ll b o ttl e s f

ro m o u t-o f

-sta te
s uppl i er s and di s t r i but ed t hem t o cus t om er s , t he pl ai nt i ff dr i ver pi cked up the em p ti es and r eturned them t o the di s t r i but or ( t hough t echni cal l yempl oy ed bya di ffe r ent company ) , and the di s t r i but ors hi pped them out of s t at e and r ece i ved cr edi t fort he
re tu rn s . Id
. at220. O thercas es l i ke B i l you s i m i l ar l yi nvol ve an i n t e g ra te d s y s te m o f

in te rs ta te s h ip m e n ts . S e e , e . g . , Kl i t z ke v. St ei nerC or

p. , 110 F. 3d 1465, 1470 ( 9th C i r . 1997) ( i nvol vi ng lo c a l d e liv e ryd riv e r f

o r lin e n se rv ice th a t o rd e re d ro u g h lyh a lf of the mat er i al s i t s uppl i ed fr om out - of- s t at e s uppl i er s , bas ed on sp e c if ic c u sto m e rs’ o rd e rs) ; Foxw or th y v . Hi la n d D ai r

y C o. , 997 F. 2d 670, 672 ( 10t h C i r . 1993) ( i nvol ving O kl ahoma t ruck d riv e r w h o re g u lar lyd e liv e re d d a iry p ro d u c ts o rd e re d f ro m h is28 e m p lo y e r’s A rk a n sa s p lan t to c u sto m e rs in O k lah o m a ); B eggs v. Kr ogerC o. , 167 F. 2d 70 0 ( 8th C i r . 1948) ( i nvol vi ng t ruck dr i ver s w ho r egu larl ydel i ver ed mer chandi s e - 89% of i tfr om
o u tsid e th e sta te - to th e ir e m p lo y e r’s re tail g ro c e rie s f ro m its
w a re h o u se , an d w h o re tu rn e d e m p tyb o ttl e s a n d u n so ld
m e rc h a n d is e to th e w a re h o u s e f o r s h ip m e n t o u t o f

s ta te ). T her e i s no gener al rul e thatonce s om ethi ng ( ei t her p a ss e n g e r o r f

re ig h t) e m b a rk s o n a jo u rn e yth a t w ill e v e n tu a lly
c a r r y i tb e t w e e n t w o s t a t e s , e v e r y m o m e n to f th a tj o u r n e y, th ro u g h th e las t co n c e iv a b le m o m e n t o f tra v e l, i s n e c e ss a rily i nt er s t at e tr ans por tundert he M C A
. A l t hough a m er e s hi ftfr om one carri ert o anotherdoes notdi s ruptan otherw ise - i nt egr at ed in te rs ta te tr ip , se e T

h e D a n iel B a ll , 77 U . S. 557 ( 1871) ( c o n s i d e r i n g t h e l i mi t s o f t h e p o we r s o f Co n g r e s s ) , t h e S u p r e me C our t has r ecogni zed t hat t hi s does not m ean t hatal l por t i ons of a tr i p i ncl udi ng s om e i nt er s t at e t r avel ar e neces s ar i l yi nt egr at ed.29 As J u s t i c e Br a n d e i s r e ma r k e d i n B a lti m o re & O h io S o u th w e ste rn R a ilro a d C o . v. S e ttl e , 2 6 0 U . S
. 1 6 6 (19 2 2 ),
w h e th e r a p a r ti c u la r p o rtio n o f tra v e l is in ter sta te o r in tra sta te “depe nds on t he es s ent i al char ac t erof the movem ent . ” Id
. at 170 ( r ej ect i ng an i nt er s t at e shi pper ’ s att empt t o payl ow ert ot al tari ff s b ysh ipp ing it s g o o d s firstfro m o n e sta te in to an o ther,
a n d then , aft er t aking possess i on of them , re- shi pp i ng t he m to t hei rul t i m at e des t i nat i on i n t he l at t ers t at e)
. T h e C o ur tm ade cl eari n t hatcas e that t he “es s ent i al char act er ” of movem entt hat det erm i nes i ncorpor at i on i nt o i nt e r s t a t e tr ans por tdepends on the i n d i v i d u a l f

a c t s o f e a c h c a s e , a n d t h a tme r e p r o x i mi t yi n t i me and s pace w i l l notnece s s ar i l ym ake a n i ntr as t at e t r i p par tof a la rg e r i n te rs ta te v o y a g e . I d. at173. R ath er, t he “e s s ent i al char act er ” of trul y i nt er s t at e t r ans por t w i l l s how s om e “e s s ent i al
c o n tin u ity of m ovement . ” I d. (em p h asis ad d ed ).30 W hen w e appl yt he “e s s ent i al char act erof the
m ovement ” i nqui r yt o t he A C C E SS dri ver s , i t i s cl earthatot her
c a s e s a p p l y i n g t h e M CA e x e mpt i o n d o n o ts u g g e s tt h e p r o p er
o u tco m e h e re . T h e A C C E S S d riv e rs a re n o t in teg ra ted in to th e ir pas s enger s ’ i nt er s t at e tr avel t o t he degr ee i n w hich m any in tra st a te c o m m e rc ial d riv e rs a re in teg ra ted in to th e in ter sta te
m ovementof comm er ci al goods
. I ndeed, t he A C C E SS servi ce lac k s a n yleg a l o r in stitu ti o n a l co n n e c tio n to th e in ter sta te
m ovementof pass enger s or goods
. A l t hough t he s ervi ce’ s pi cku p o r d ro p -o f

f p o in t so m e tim e s c o in c id e s in tim e a n d sp a c e w ith
o n e e n d p o in t o f c e rta in p a ss e n g e rs’ in ter sta te jo u rn e y s, th e re is
no w el l es t abl i s hed l ogi cal or l ogi s t i cal connec t i on betw een the tw o . T he di s t i nct i on betw een the “e s s ent i al char act er ” of the A C C E SS dri ver s ’ w or k and tha tof the comm er ci al fr ei ght op era t i on s consi dered i n o t her M C A exem pti on cases al so31 r efl ect s br oaderdi ffe r ence s i n the us ual comm er ci al t r eatm ent of fr ei ghtand pas s engert r ans por t at i on. T he Supr eme C our thas
r ecogni zed i n another cont ext t hat “w hatm ayfai r l ybe s ai d t o be t he l i m i t s of an i nt er s t at e s hi pm entof goods an d chatt el s m ay notnece s s ar i l ybe the comm on lyacc ept ed l i m i t s of an i nd i vidu al ’s i nter st at e j ou rney , ” and that the co urt s “m ust
acc or di ngl ym ark t he begi nni ng and end of a part i cul arki nd of i nt er s t a t e c o mme r c e b yi t s ow n pr act i cal cons i der at i ons . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. Y

el l ow C ab C o. , 332 U
. S. 218, 231 ( 1947)
. I n any event , unl i ke t he del i very dr i ver s i n t he ca s es canva s s ed above , t he A C C E SS dri ver s ar e notpartof a c l ear l y - defi ned, r out i ne in ter sta te c o m m e rc ial e x c h a n g e c o n tro lle d c e n tra llyb yth e ir
e m p lo y e r. B eca us e the ca s es cons i der i n g t he FL SA s t atus of
comm er ci al fr ei ght dr i ver s ar e fac tual l y unl i ke t hat p res ent ed h e r e , we wi l l l o o k o u t s i d e t h e a r r a yo f c a s e s a p p l y i n g t h e M CA32 ex em p ti o n to co n side r p ast jud ici al trea tm en t, in o ther statutory cont ext s , of pas s enger tr an s por t at i on m or e s i m i l art o t he A C C E S S s e rv ic e . 3 . In tersta te T

ra n sp o rta tio n in O th e r C o n tex ts I n t he 1940 s the S upr eme C our tt w i ce a ddr es s ed the ques t i on w hether C api t al T r ans i t , a company t hat provi ded publ i c tr ans i tal m os tent i rely w ithi n t he D i s t r i ctof C ol um bi a,
w as su b ject t o the reg u lat o ry au tho ri ty o f the IC C
. T h e C o u rt ’s appr oach, i n uphol di ng t he I C C ’ s author i t y , focus ed hea vi l yon t he m assi ve int ers t at e m ove mentof Capi t a l Tr a ns i t ’ s pa ssengers; t he fa ct s of the tw o C a p ita l T ra n sitcas es o ff

eran i ns t ruct i ve count erpoi ntt o t he fa ct s of the c ase atbar
. T hous ands of C api t al T r ans i t ’ s pas s enger s w er e comm ut i n g governm ent
e m p lo y e e s w h o ro d e th e c o m p a n y ’s s tre e tca rs o r b u se s w ith in th e D istr ic t to tra n sf

e r p o in ts w h e re th e yb o a rd e d in ter sta te tr an sp o rt ati o n to V ir g inia. In it s firsto p inion o n the m att er,33 U ni t ed Stat es v. C api talTrans i tC o. , 325 U
. S. 357 (19 45) (“ C a p ita l T ra n sit I ”) , t he C our tfound thatC api t al Tra ns i tw as
su b jec t to I C C re g u latio n in p a rt b e c a u se it p ro v id e d in ter sta te
s ervi ce on one par t i cul arr out e thatran fro m t he D i s t r i ctof Co l u mb i a i n t o Vi r g i n i a . Ho we v e r , o n a r e h e a r i ng of t he s a me
c a s e a f ter C a p ital T ra n sit h a d d isc o n tin u e d its so le in ter sta te
rou te, th e C o u rtag ain f o u n d that the IC C h ad reg u lat o ry author i t y . T he C our ts t ood byi t s ear l i erhol di ng t hatC api t al T ra n sit’ s tra n sp o rta tio n se rv ice - n o w p ro v id e d e x c lu siv e ly
w i t hi n t he D i s t r i ct - w as “par tof a c ont i nuous s t r eam of in ter sta te tra n sp o rta tio n ,” a n d “ a n in teg ra l p a r t o f a n in ter sta te
m ovement . ” U

ni t ed Stat es v. C api talTrans i tC o. , 338 U
. S. 286, 2 9 0 (19 4 9 ) (pe r cu ri am ) (“ C a p ita l Tra n sit

II ” ). T he S upr eme C our t ’ s anal y s i s i n U ni t ed Stat es v. Y

el l owY el l ow C ab has been l i m i t ed, butnotoverrul ed, on 9 g r o u n d s u n r e l a t e d t o th e m a tt e r s d i s c u s s e d h e r e . S p e c i f i c a l l y, i n C opper w eld C or

p. v. I ndepende nce Tube Corp. , 46 7 U. S. 752 ( 1984) , t he C our tr epudi at ed the i ntr a-ent erpr i se c o n s p i r a c yd o c t r i n e t h a th a d b e e n d e r i v e d f r o m Y el l ow C ab
. Y el l ow C ab has gui ded court s cons i der i ng the 10 boundar i es of i nt er s t at e movem entunders t atut es ot herthan th e S h e rm a n A c t. S e e , e.g ., A irlin e s T ra n sp . v. T

o b in , 198 F .2 d 2 4 9 , 2 5 1 (4 th C ir. 1 9 5 2 ) (f in d in g lim o u sin e se rv ice to and from ai rport , provided u nd er cont ractw i t h the ai rl i nes, w as w ith in interstat e c o m m erc e a s d ef ined u n d er the F L S A ); Mat eo v. A ut o R entalC o. , 240 F. 2d 831 ( 9th C i r . 1957) (f in d in g , u n d e r th e F L S A , tha t airp o rt d riv e rs in H o n o lu lu w e re n o t w ith in in ter sta te c o m m e rc e w h e re th e yh a d n o v a lid contr actual arr angement s w i t h t he ai r l i nes )
. A ddr es s i ng the sc o p e o f th e IC C ’s ju risd ictio n , the D .C . C irc u it ref e rre d to Y el l ow C ab , and l at erFL SA cas e l aw bas ed on i t , as e sta b lish in g a g e n e ra l “p rin c ip le
. . . thatthe degr ee of cont act 34 C ab C o. , 332 U . S. 218 ( 1947) , offe r s m or e gui dance her e than 9 the C a p ita l T ra n sit deci s i ons . A l t hough Y el l ow C ab i n v o l v ed t he Sher m an A ct , not the M C A , i tfol l ow ed C a p ita l T ra n sit I in l ooki ng t o t he “com m onl y acc ept ed sens e of t he tr ans por t at i on
c o n c e p t” to d e ter m in e w h a t tra v e l w a s p a rt o f a n in ter sta te j o u r n e y. Y

el l ow C ab , 3 3 2 U .S
. a t 2 3 1 . In d e e d , C a p ita l T ra n sit 10betw een the i nt er s t at e ca r r i erand the l ocal tr ans por t at i on i s an i m por t antfac t or[i n defi ni ng the s cope of i nt er s t at e tr avel ]
. ” P a. P ub. Ut i l
. C om m ’ n v. U ni t ed Stat es , 8 1 2 F . 2 d 8 , 1 1 ( D. C. C i r . 1987) ( uphol di ng I C C deci s i on thatcompanypr ovi di ng s hut t l e s ervi ce f

r om ai rpor tt o hot el and bac k forai r l i ne cr ew w a s e n g a g e d in in ter sta te c o m m e rc e a n d n o t su b jec t to re g u la tio n b yth e s ta te o f M a ryla n d ). 35 II late r n o ted th a t Y

el l ow C ab “does notconfl i ctw i t h ourpr i or hol di ng [i n C a

p ita l T ra n sit I ] th at [C ap it al] T ran sit ’s tra n sp o rta tio n w a s p a rt o f a c o n tin u o u s s tre a m o f in ter sta te t r ans por t at i on. ” C a

p ita l T ra n sit II, 338 U . S. at 290. I n appl y i ng t he C a p ita l T ra n sit I s t andar d t o t he Y

el l ow C ab fa ct s , w hi ch inv o lve d taxi serv ice to ra il roa d stat ion s in C h icag o , the C o u rt not ed that“i nt er s t at e comm er ce i s an i nt ens el ypr act i cal conce pt d ra w n f ro m th e n o rm a l a n d a c c e p te d c o u rs e o f b u s in e s s .” Y el l ow C ab , 332 U
. S. at231
. T her efor e, t he C our tdi r ect ed
cour t s t o “mar k t he begi nni ng and end of a part i cu lar k ind of i nt er s t at e comm er ce byi t s ow n pr act i cal cons i der at i ons . ” I d.36 T he C our t ’ s appl i cat i on of thi s appr oach i n Y el l o w C ab i s i ns t ruct i ve. T he C our tcons i der ed tw o t ypes of t axi s ervi ce, b o th in v o lv in g ta x i tran sp o rta tio n o f p a ss e n g e rs im m e d iate ly befor e oraft eran i nt er s t at e r ai l r oad tr i p. T he fi r s ttype of
s ervi ce, pr ovi ded undercontr act s w i t h t he r ai l r oads , invol ved
carr y i ng pas s enger s betw een tw o r ai l r oad s t at i ons , i n or derfor them im m ed iat elyto co n ti n u e the irinterst ate trav els. T h e C o u rt found thatt axi s pr ovi di ng t hi s s ervi ce w er e “c l ear l ya partof the
s t r eam of i nt er s t at e comm er ce. ” I d. at228. V iew ing t he i nt r as t at e por t i on of t he j our ney - t he s hut t l i ng betw een r ai l r oad sta t i on s - “i n i t s rel at i on s t o the ent i re j ou rney rather th a n in i s ol at ion , ” the C our tfound thati tw as “an i nt egr al s t ep i n t he i nt er s t at e movem ent . ” I d. a t 2 2 9
. H ow ever , t he C our tfound thatt axi s pr ovi di ng t he s econd typ e o f tax i service , w h ich m ere lyinv o lved ca rry ing p asse n g ers betw een t he rai l road st at i on s and thei r hom es, off i ces, or hotel s,37 w e re n o t e n g a g e d in in t e r s t a te c o m m e rc e . Id
. at230. “To t he t axicab dri ver, [such a t ri p to the rai l road st at i on w as] j ust another l ocal far e. ” Id
. at 232. T hos e pr ovi di ng t he s ervi ce ha d

“ n o c o n tra c tu a l o r o th e r a rra n g e m e n t w ith th e in ter sta te rai l roads, ” no r any j oint coll ect i on or pay m ent of f ares . A c c o rd in g to th e C o u rt, “th e ir re latio n sh ip to in ter sta te tra n sit [w a] s onl ycas ual and i nci dent al
. ” I d. at231. T he C our tfound,
a n d w e a g re e to d a y , tha t “ [ t]h e c o m m o n u n d e rsta n d in g is th a t a tra v e le r in te n d in g to m a k e a n in ter sta te r a il j o u rn e yb e g in s h is i nt er s t at e movem entw hen he boa r ds t he t r ai n att he s t at i on and t hathi s j our neyends w hen he di s embar ks at the s t at i on i n the ci t y of des t i nat i on. ” I

d. at231. T hus , “[w ] hathappens pr i oror
s u b s e q ue nt t o t h a tr a i l j o u r n e y , a tl e a s ti n th e a b s e n c e o f s o me sp e c ial a rra n g e m e n t, i s n o t a c o n stitu e n t p a rt o f th e in ter sta te
m ovement . ” Id . a t 2 3 2
. T he s econd t ype of Y el l ow C ab serv ice se em s m o re38 cl os el yanal ogous t o t he A C C E SS servi ce than Y el l ow C ab ’s
s hut t l i ng betw een s t at i ons ort he mass comm ut ers ervi ce f ound t o be p art o f i nt er s t at e tr avel i n C a p ita l T ra n sit . A CC ESS
s ervi ce t o i nt er s t at e t erm i nal s s i m i l ar l y i nvol ves no j oi nt far e or t i cket i ng arr angement , and no pr i orarr angementof anyki nd, contr actual orot herw i s e, w i t h the r ai l r oads , ai r l i nes , orother
com pan i es that carrya cert ai n few A C C E S S passeng ers across
s t at e l i nes . A l s o, t her e i s no s t r ong, es t abl i s hed cy cl e of r egul ar pas s engerm ovementbetw een the A C C E SS service a nd p a rticu lar in ter sta te r o u tes . T o th e A C C E S S d riv e rs a n d th e ir pas s enger s , a tr i p t o an i nt er s t at e tr avel hub i s “j us tanotherl ocal f a re .” T h is l ack of

coor di nat i on w i t h ot hert r ans por t at i on di s t i ngui s hes PT C ’ s A C C E SS servi ce notonl yfr om the Y el l ow C ab t axi s hut t l es , but al s o fr om ai rpor t s hut t l e arr angement s t hat t hi s cour t found i n Souther l and v. St
. C r oi x Taxi cab Ass oci at i on ,39 3 1 5 F .2 d 3 6 4 (1 9 6 3 ), to b e p a rt o f p a ss e n g e rs’ in ter sta te tra v e l. I n Souther l and , t he l ocal governm ent of t he V i r gi n I s l ands had
m a de an excl usi ve arrangem ent for a l ocal t axi com p a n yto p ro v id e a ll tra n sp o rta tio n f ro m th e a irp o rt to lo c a l h o tels
. T h is
cour tfound thatt he pr efe r ent i al arr angementfavor i ng t he l ocal t axi companyunr eas onabl ybur dened i nt er s t at e comm er ce b ec au se itco n fli cted w ith p ri o r arran g em en ts by the p lai n ti ff ’s tou r ag en cyto p rov ide th e sa m e se rvice fo r ce rt ain p asse n g ers
o n a n in te rs ta t e p a c k a g e to u r. I d. T h e tou r ag en cy ’s t ransport at i on services w ere fou nd t o be part of the p assengers’ i nt er s t at e tr avel , al t hough the age ncy di d not i t s el f pr ovi de di r ect i nt er s t at e tr ans po rt at i on, beca us e the s ervi ces “had be en
arr anged f

or[the pas s enger s ] a nd pai d fori n advanc e as an i nt egr al par tof thei ral l
- expens e i nt er s t at e j ourney . ” Id
. at369. T h e re f o re , th is c o u rt ru le d th a t “ it c a n n o t, u n d e r th e se fa c ts , be
s ai d t hat t he s ervi ce r ender ed byt he pl ai nt i ff unde rhi s contr act40 w a s d is ti n c t a n d se p a ra te f ro m th e in ter sta te jo u rn e yo r th a t it
w as j us tanotherl ocal far e. ” Id
. (e m p h a s is a d d e d ). Unl i ke i n Souther l and , the A C C E S S d ri v ers’ serv ices a re
n o t ar ra n g e d a s p a rt o f th e ir p a ss e n g e rs’ in ter sta te tra v e ls t hr ough a pre
- packa ged t our , orl i nked i n anyot herw ay . E ven
w h e re c e rta in o f A C C E S S p a ss e n g e rs’ tra v e ls w ill e v e n tu a lly
c a rryth e m o u t o f th e sta te, th e A C C E S S se rv ice itse lf is p u re ly in tr a s ta te . Acc o r d i n g l y , we c o n c l u d e t h a tth e r e i s n o “ p r act i cal
c on t i nu i t yof

move ment , ” i n c on nect i on w i t h the A CC ESS d r i v e r s ’ s e r v i c e s . H e n c e , th e M C A e x e m p t i o n d o e s n o ta p p l y. W h i l e “ t h r o u g h t i c k e t i n g ” i s o n e e x a mpl e o f a comm on
arr angementi nvol vi ng bot h i ntr a and i nt er s t at e por t ion s of pas s engert r ans por t , i ti s not t he onl ym eans of es t abl i s hi ng t hat pas s en g e rtr a ns por toper at i ng in tra sta te is in p ra c tica l co n tin u ity
w i t h a l ar geri nt er s t at e j ourney . I n th at s en se, the D i s t r i ct41 C our t ’ s r eas oni ng m i s s ed the mar k even thou g h it s concl us i on
w as corr ect . I n t hi s cas e, as w e have s t at ed, ther e i s no evi dence of any a rra n g em ent

betw een PTC and the othercarr i er s , t hus
r e nd e r i ng t he M CA e xe mpt i on i na pp l i c a bl e t o the A CC ESS d ri v e rs . I V. W h e n a n e m p lo y e r c o n ten d s th a t a s u b -se t o f its empl oy ees ar e exc l uded fr om FL SA over t i m e ent i t l ement s by
v irtu e o f th e M C A e x e m p tio n , “ [ i]t is th e e m p lo y e r’s b u rd e n to
a f f i r ma t i v e l yp r o v e t h a t i t s e mp l o y e e s c o me wi t h i n t h e o v e r t i me exempt i on, and any exempt i on fr om t he A ct m us t be proven pl ai nl yand unmi s t akabl y . ” Fr i edr i ch , 9 7 4 F . 2 d a t4 1 2
. We concl ude t hat PT C has not m ade t he r equi r ed sh o w i ng. A ccor di ngl y , t he j udgm entof th e D i s t r i ctC our tw i l l be aff i r m ed.N y gaar d, J . , concurr i ng i n j udgm ent ; N o. 03- 3088 A l t hough I concurw i t h t he j udgm ent r eac hed by t he maj or i t y , I w r i t e s epar at el ybeca us e I di s agr ee w i t h the
m aj or i t y ’ s anal y s i s i n Par tI I I . B . of t he O pi ni on. I n t hat Par t , t he
m a jo rityse e k s g u id a n c e f ro m re g u latio n s a n d c a se law a s to
w hetherA ppel l ees ar e enga ged i n “i nt er s t at e com m er ce. ” T hat in q u iry , alth o u g h sc h o lar lya n d in ter e stin g , is n o t n e c e ss a ryto
re so lv e th is a p p e a l.

R a th e r th a n p r o b in g th e c o n to u rs o f in ter sta te
c o m m e rc e w ith in th e m e a n in g o f th e M o to r C a rrie r A c t, I w o u ld hol d t he pl ai n l anguage of t he A ct ’ s j ur i s di ct i onal s t atut e t o be di s pos i t i ve. T hats t atut e gi ves the Secr et aryof Tra ns por t at i on t he author i t y t o es t abl i s h qual i fi cat i ons and maxi m um hour s for empl oy ees of a mot orcarr i er
— t her ebyt r i ggering the M ot or C arr i er A ctexem pti on
— on l y“t o the ext ent that pass eng ers , pr oper t y , or bot h, ar e tr ans por t ed bym ot orcarr i er. . . betw een43 a p la c e in . . . a S ta te a n d a p la c e in a n o th e r S ta te .” 4 9 U .S .C . § 1 3 5 0 1
. A s P T C A C C E S S d ri v ers, A p p ell ee s tr an sp o rt i ndi vi dual s fr om l ocat i ons w i t hi n Penns y l vani a t o other l ocati on s w i t hin Pen nsy l van i a, w itho ut cr ossi ng st at e l i nes. T h e yd o n o t tran sp o rt p a ss e n g e rs “ b e tw e e n a p lac e in
. . . a S tate and a place i n anotherSt at e. ” Id
. T hus , t he Secr et aryof T ransport at i on has no po w er t o est abli sh A pp el l ees’ q u a lif ic a tio n s a n d m a x im u m h o u rs . Id
. A bs ent t hi s pow er , t he M otorC arr i er A ctexem pti on do es not apply a n d P T C m ust
com ply w i t h the Fair L abo r S t and ards A ct ’s ov ert i m e payrul es. See 2 9 U . S
. C
. § 2 1 3 (b)(1 ).

N ei t h e rt h e Di s t r i c tCou r ti n i t s o r d e rg r a nt i ng p arti al su m m ary jud g m en t, n o r th e p arti es in their b ri ef s b ef o re
us , r el i ed upon the pl ai n l anguage of 49 U . S. C
. § 13501. T hey
assu m e ins tead , an d the m ajorityfo ll o w s su it , that itis ne ce ssary to in terp re t th e ter m “ in ter sta te c o m m e rc e .” T h is a ss u m p tio n isI r e c o g n i z e t h a tI a m r a t h e rl o n e s o me i n th i s v i e w, 11 i n t hatot herC our t s of A ppeal have a l s o expl or ed the s cope of t he M ot orC arr i erA ctexempt i on vi a i nqui r yi nt o t he pr es ence o r a b s e n c e o f

in te rs ta te c o m m e rc e . See B i l you v. D utchess B eerD is tr i b. , I

nc ., 3 0 0 F .3 d 2 1 7 , 2 2 3 (2 d C ir. 2 0 0 2 ); K l i t z ke 44 u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , a s i ti s de r i ve d f r o m l a n g u a g e i n a S u p r e me C our topi ni on. I n det erm i ni ng t he appl i cabi l i t yof the M ot or C arrier A ct ex em p ti o n u n d er d iffe ren t ci rcu m stan ce s, the C o u rt i n Levi ns on v. SpectorMot orSer vi ce h e ld th a t th e In ter sta te C om m er ce Com m i s s i on ( now the Secr et aryof Tra ns por t at i on) has t he pow ert o es t abl i s h qual i fi cat i ons and maxi m um hour s of
s ervi ce f orempl oy ees of a mot orcarr i erw hos e empl oym ent “af fec t s t he s afe t yof t r ans por t at i on . . . i n i nt ers tat e com m er ce .” 330 U
. S. 6 4 9 , 687 ( 1947) (e m p h a sis a d d e d ). R e ly in g o n th is lan g u a g e , the p a rties f o c u s o n th e d e f

in iti o n o f

“ in ter sta te
c o m m e rc e ” a n d a ttem p t to d isc e rn its m e a n in g b yre f e rrin g to
c a s e l a w a n d r e g u l a t o ryd e f i n i t i o n s . Th e ma

j o r i t y , i n P a r tI I I . B. t a k e s a s i m i l a ra p p r o a c h

— o n e I b e l i e v e t o b e u n n e c e s s a r y. 11v. Stei ner C orp . , 1 1 0 F . 3 d 1 4 6 5 , 1 4 7 0 (9th C ir
. 1 9 9 7 ); Fo x wo r thy v . Hi l a n d

Da i r y Co
. , 9 9 7 F . 2 d 6 7 0 , 6 7 2 (10 th C ir
. 1 9 9 3 ); Beg

gs v . Kr o g e rCo
. , 1 6 7 F . 2 d 7 0 0 , 7 0 2

– 0 3 (8th C ir
. 1948)
. I n s o doi ng, t he C our t s i n eac h of thes e ca s es r el i ed upon Wa l l i n gv . J

a c k s o n v i l l e Pa

p e rCo ., 3 1 7 U .S . 5 6 4 (1 9 4 3 ). I n W al l i ng , the S u p re m e C o u rt h e ld th a t p u re lyin tra sta te a c ts m aycons t i tut e i nt er s t at e comm er ce w i t hi n t he meani ng of the Fai rL aborSt andar ds A cti f the i ntr as t at e ac t s ar e partof a “ p ra c tic a l c o n tin u ity o f

m o v e m e n t” b e tw e e n s ta te s . Id
. at 568. A s t he maj or i t ypoi nt s out , how ever , the cont our s of in ter sta te c o m m e rc e u n d e r th e M o to r C a rrie r A c t an d th e F a ir L a b o r S ta n d a rd s A c t a re d if f e re n t. See 2 9 C .F .R . § 7 8 2 .7 (a ). T h u s , W al l i ng has no bear i ng upon the s cope of the M ot or C arr i erA ctexempt i on. T he C our t s of A ppeal r el y i ng upon t he case to det erm i ne the scope o f t he ex em pti on hav e do ne so in erro r. 45 T he pl ai n l anguage of the M ot orC arr i erA ct ’s j ur i s di ct i onal sta tu te g o v e rn s th e S e c re tar yo f T ra n sp o rta tio n ’s a u th o rityto
es t abl i s h A ppel l ees ’ qual i fi cat i ons and maxi m um hour s of
serv ice. I t i s u n am b ig u o u s a n d d o es n o t con tai n the term “interstate co m m erc e.” T o the ex tent the d ef init ion o f th at t erm does have a ny r el evanc e her e, i t s pr operunder s t andi ng i s found i n a s our ce notpr evi ous l ycons i der ed: the U ni t ed St at es C ode.46 I n 1947, the y eart he Supr eme C our tdeci ded Levi ns on , t he M ot orC arr i er A ct cont ai ned a st atut orydefi ni t i on
o f in te rs ta te c o m m e rc e . See 4 9 U . S
. C
. § 3 0 3 (a)(10 ) (19 4 0 ). It
w ou l d ap pear that w hen the C ou rtused the t erm , i tdid so p u rsua n t t o it s u n d erstan d ing o f th e the n -ex istin g statu tory d ef init ion. A tt he t i m e the C our tdeci ded Levi ns on , the M ot or C arr i er A ct defi ned “i nt er s t at e comm er ce” as “com m er ce b e tw e e n a n yp la c e in a S ta te a n d a n y p la c e in a n o th e r S ta te . . . w hethers uch com m erc e moves w hol l ybym ot orvehi cl e or par t l y by m ot or vehi cl e and par t l y byr ai l , expr es s , orw at er . ” Id
. I ti s w o rt h yof not e thatt hi s defi ni t i on i s s i m i l ar , al bei tnot i dent i cal , t o t he pr es entdayM ot orC arr i erA ctjuri sd i ct i onal
s t atut e found a t49 U
. S. C
. § 13501, w hi ch w as added t o the A ct aft ert he C our td ec ided Levi ns on . B ut w hetherA pp el l ees’
e m p lo ym e n t w o u ld f

a ll w ith in th e 1 9 4 7 sta tu to ry d e f in iti o n is i r r el evant , as t hat defi ni t i on no l ongerexi s t s i n the U ni t ed St at es47 C o d e . W h a t does exi s ti s t he pr es entdayj ur i s di ct i onal s t atut e, t h e p l a i n l a n g u a g e o f

whi c h r e s o l v e s th i s a p p e a l wi t h o u tthe
n e e d f o rr e s o rtt o r e g u l a t o r yd e f i n i t i o n o rc a s e l a w. B e c a u se I w o u ld d e c id e th is iss u e u p o n th e p lain l anguage of 49 U
. S. C
. § 13501, I do not join P art II I . B . of the O p in io n . W ith re sp e c t, I co n c u r in th e ju d g m e n t.