In any event, because the most recent Boston area wage determination of record was revised to reflect only an eight percent hourly wage rate increase for the Paralegal/Legal Assistant II job classification, the Administrator's policy to cap succeeding wage determination rate increases at ten percent is not at issue in this case.
For the reasons stated above, we find that the Administrator's final ruling, denying the Petitioners' request for review and reconsideration of Area Wage Determination No. 1994-2255, is in accordance with the SCA and its implementing regulations and is reasonable. Dep't of the Army, slip op. at 15-16.
Conclusion
The Petitioners failed to provide any sufficient evidence to justify an adjustment to the wage determination rate for a Paralegal/Legal Assistant II in the Boston area. Accordingly, since the Administrator's determination was reasonable and in accordance with the SCA and its implementing regulations, the Petition for Review is DENIED and the Administrator's final ruling letter of December 2, 2005 is AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED.
WAYNE C. BEYER
Administrative Appeals Judge
DAVID G. DYE
Administrative Appeals Judge
[ENDNOTES]
1 See 41 U.S.C.A. § 351 et seq. (West 1994) and its implementing regulations at 29 C.F.R. Parts 4, 6 and 18 (2007).
2 See also Secretary's Order 1-2002, 67 Fed. Reg. 64,272 (Oct. 17, 2002).
3 29 C.F.R. § 8.1(d).
4 29 C.F.R. § 8.9(b).
5 United Gov't Sec. Officers of America, Loc. 114, ARB Nos. 02-012 to 02-020, slip op. at 4-5 (ARB Sept. 29, 2003); United Kleenist Org. Corp. & Young Park, ARB No. 00-042, ALJ No. 1999-SCA-018, slip op. at 5 (ARB Jan. 25, 2002).
6 See Dep't of the Army, ARB Nos. 98-120/-121/-122, slip op. at 15-16 (ARB Dec. 22, 1999).
7 See 41 U.S.C.A. § 351(a)(1)-(2).
8 29 C.F.R. § 4.3(a).
9 41 U.S.C.A. § 351(a)(1) and (2); 29 C.F.R. §§ 4.50, 4.54.
10 29 C.F.R. § 4.51.
11 29 C.F.R. § 4.56(a)(1) and (2).
12 L-3 Commc'ns Joint Operations Group, ARB No. 02-120, slip op. at 2 (Jan. 30, 2004); D.B. Clark III, ARB No. 98-106, slip op. at 9 (ARB Sept. 8, 1998).
13 29 C.F.R. § 4.56(b); 29 C.F.R. Part 8.
14 See Administrative Record Tabs (Tab) C and E.
15 See Tab K.
16 See Tab E.
17 Id.; see also Tab F and 29 C.F.R. § 4.56 ("[a]ny such request [for review and reconsideration] must be accompanied by supporting evidence").
18 Id.
19 See Tab C.
20 Id.
21 See Tab A.
22 Tab A at 1; see also 41 U.S.C.A. § 351(a)(1)-(2); 29 C.F.R. §§ 4.50, 4.54.
23 Tab A at 1; see also 29 C.F.R. § 4.51.
24 Tab A at 1.
25 See Area Wage Determination No. 1994-2255 (Rev. 24)(May 23, 2005).
26 Tab A at 1.
27 Id.
28 Tab A at 1-2.
29 29 C.F.R. § 4.56(a).
30 29 C.F.R. § 4.56(a)(2).
31 29 C.F.R. § 4.51(c); see also Court Sec. Officers, ARB No. 98-001, slip op. at 5 (Sept. 23, 1998); D.B. Clark III, slip op. at 4-5.
32 D.B. Clark III, slip op. at 5.
33 See e.g., 29 C.F.R. § 4.51(a) (pertinent information as to wage rates and fringe benefits "is most frequently derived from area surveys made by [BLS]"); 29 C.F.R. § 4.54 ("[l]ocality is ordinarily limited geographically to a particular county or cluster of counties comprising a metropolitan area"); see also L-3 Commc'ns Joint Operations Group, slip op. at 4.
34 See Tab M.
35 See Tabs E and F (Criteria for Data Submitted for Review and Reconsideration, including any survey or information the Petitioners gather); see also 29 C.F.R. § 4.56 ("[a]ny such request [for review and reconsideration] must be accompanied by supporting evidence").
36 See 29 C.F.R. § 4.54 ("[l]ocality is ordinarily limited geographically to a particular county or cluster of counties comprising a metropolitan area").
37 See Court Sec. Officers, slip op. at 5-6.
38 29 C.F.R. § 4.55(a).
39 See 29 C.F.R. § 8.6(d); L-3Commc'ns Joint Operations Group, slip op. at 4; D.B. Clark III, slip op. at 9.
40 L-3 Commc'ns Joint Operations Group, slip op. at 5.
41 See Tab F.
42 See Tabs A, M-P.
43 See Tab A; compare Tabs M and N.
44 See Tab A; compare Tabs N and O.
45 See Flightsafety Serv. Corp., ARB Nos. 02-085 and 03-075, slip op. at 14-15 (Oct. 31, 2004); D.B. Clark III, slip op. at 7-8.