RAYTHEON SYSTEMS COMPANY
(formerly Hughes Technical Services),
Prime Contractor and Cubic Corporation,
Subcontractor,
Re: Contract No. N613339-94-C-0027,
Ft. Irwin, California
Appearances:
For the Petitioners: Gregory D. Wolflick, Esq, Glendale, California
For the Respondent: Steven J. Mandel, Esq., Douglas J. Davidson, Esq., Ford F. Newman,
Esq., U.S. Department of Labor, Washington, DC
For Intervenor Voice and Video Control and Editing Center DOL Committee: Marcus Bunnett,
Barstow, California
ORDER TO SUPPLEMENT RECORD
This case arises under the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act of 1965,
as amended, 41 U.S.C. §§351-358 (1994), and implementing regulations at 29 C.F.R.
Part 4 (1999). Raytheon Systems Company and Cubic Corporation petition for review of
administrative action by the Acting Administrator, Wage and Hour Division, Employment Standards
Administration, U.S. Department of Labor (Administrator). The Administrator denied the
Petitioners' request for reconsideration of a conformance action adding the classifications of Audio
Visual Specialist I, II and III to a procurement contract at the National Training Center, Ft. Irwin, San
Bernardino County, California (Contract No. N61339-94-C-0027).
[Page 2]
In his Opposition to the Petition for Review, the Administrator states that the
conformed wage rates for the classifications were determined by (1) establishing the corresponding
Federal Grade Equivalencies (FGEs) for the classifications and (2) averaging the rates of
classifications with equivalent FGEs within an occupational category of the wage determination
containing comparable positions. The Petitioners complain that they have been denied adequate
process in part because the Administrator failed to disclose the calculations which resulted in the
conformed wage rates.
We agree with the Petitioners that the record contains no evidence establishing
the specific means used to derive the conformed rates. The Administrator has not explained, in any
detail, the process which resulted in adopting FGEs of GS-7, GS-9 and GS-11 or the process used
to achieve the averaging result. The record is silent, for example, as to the performance assessments
used to determine the FGEs or which classifications were averaged to determine wage rates for the
Audio Visual Specialist II and III classifications. Indeed, on the present record we are unable to
determine whether the two-step procedure described generally in the Administrator's ruling actually
was employed in conforming the rates or, if employed, whether it was employed correctly. The
Division has represented that it employed a certain procedure in the conformance process. If the
Petitioners are to have a meaningful opportunity to challenge the conformance results, the
Administrator must submit evidence substantiating that procedure and its application.
This case has been pending before the Board for a significant time, and the
Board is well aware of the need to reach a decision in this matter expeditiously. However, it is
essential that the record before us be complete, so that we can assess the Administrator's
determination and the Petitioners' appeal fairly. Accordingly, we permit the Administrator a period
of 20 days to supplement the record with evidence of specific procedures used and their application
in this matter. The Petitioners and other interested parties may file a response of no more than 15
pages in length within 15 days of their receipt of the Administrator's submission. Any response will
be limited to the following issues: whether as the result of the Administrator's submissions the
Petitioners have received adequate process; and whether the Administrator's use of the proffered
methodology is consistent with the statute and regulations, and is reasonable. Requests for
enlargements of time to meet filing schedules will be strongly disfavored.
