1 On April 17, 1996,
the Secretary of Labor redelegated authority to issue final agency decisions under this statute and
the implementing regulations from the Board of Service Contract Appeals to the newly created
Administrative Review Board. Secretary's Order 2-96 (Apr. 17, 1996), 61 Fed. Reg. 19978, May
3, 1996. Secretary's Order 2-96 contains a comprehensive list of the statutes, executive order,
and
regulations under which the Board now issues final agency decisions.
2 It is axiomatic
that the implementing regulations are binding upon this Board. Collectively-Bargained
Premium Wage Rates at Clear Air Force Base, Alaska, BSCA Case No. 94-07, Oct. 31,
1994, at p. 5.
3 The
Association's reliance on subsections (g) and (h) of 29 C.F.R. § 4.163 is misplaced.
Subsection (g) explains that the protection of Section 4(c) extends to new or consolidated
contracts
created through reconfiguration of functions. The phrase in Section 4.163(h),
"full term successor contract," refers to contract periods which may have been
interrupted for one reason or another. Neither subsection requires application of Section 4(c) to
the
new contracts described in Section 4.145(b), which are created by wage reviews. Nor do they
supplant the clear directive in Section 4.145(b). The Association's reference to a variance
hearing
is also misplaced. A variance hearing may afford a party relief from the terms of a CBA where,
unlike here, Section 4(c) is applicable. 41 U.S.C. § 353; see 29 C.F.R. §
4.163(c).
4 In a letter
dated October 24, 1995, responding to an inquiry by Senator Phil Gramm on behalf of the
Association, the Department stated that the wage rates contained in Revision 11 were based on
those being paid by GME due to the lack of survey data for the barber occupation in the locality.
It
explained that this practice was consistent with the Department's actions under similar non-4(c)
barber shop contracts, and that the absence of fringe benefits also was consistent with those other
barber shop contracts.