Page:United States Statutes at Large Volume 92 Part 1.djvu/1193

 PUBLIC LAW 95-454—OCT. 13, 1978

92 STAT. 1139

the Director may as a matter of right intervene or otherwise participate in that proceeding before the Board. If the Director exercises his right to participate in a proceeding before the Board, he shall do so as early in the proceeding as practicable. Nothing in this title shall be construed to permit the Office to interfere with the independent decisionmaking of the Merit Systems Protection Board. "(2) The Board shall promptly notify the Director whenever the Notification. interpretation of any civil service law, rule, or regulation under the jurisdiction of the Office is at issue in any proceeding under this section. " (e)(1) Except as provided in section 7702 of this title, any decision Decisions. under subsection (b) of this section shall be final unless— "(A) a party to the appeal or the Director petitions the Board for review within 30 days after the receipt of the decision; or "(B) the Board reopens and reconsiders a case on its own motion. The Board, for good cause shown, may extend the 30-day period referred to in subparagraph (A) of this paragraph. One member of the Board may grant a petition or otherwise direct that a decision be reviewed by the full Board. The preceding sentence shall not apply if, by law, a decision of an administration law judge is required to be acted upon by the Board. "(2) The Director may petition the Board for a review under para- Petition for graph (1) of this subsection only if the Director is of the ©pinion that review, the decision is erroneous and will have a substantial impact on any civil service law, rule, or regulation under the jurisdiction of the Office. m-'Cfiih.^ss^h "(f) The Board, or an administrative law judge or other employee of the Board designated to hear a case, may— "(1) consolidate appeals filed by two or more appellants, or "(2) join two or more appeals filed by the same appellant and hear and decide them concurrently, if the deciding official or officials hearing the cases are of the opinion that the action could result in the appeals' being processed more expeditiously and would not adversely aifect any party, "(g)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this subsection, the Board, or an administrative law judge or other employee of the Board designated to hear a case, may require payment by the agency involved of reasonable attorney fees incurred by an employee or appli^/ \ cant for employment if the employee or applicant is the prevailing /'.-— iKi' party and the Board, administrative law judge, or other employee, as the case may be, determines that payment by the agency is warranted in the interest of justice, including any case in which a prohibited personnel practice was engaged in by the agency or any case in which the agency's action was clearly without merit. "(2") If an employee or applicant for employment is the prevailing party and the decision is based on a finding of discrimination prohibited under section 2302(b)(1) of this title, the payment of attorney Ante, p. 1114 fees shall be in accordance with the standards prescribed under section 706(k) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2000e^5(k)). "(h) The Board may, by regulation, provide for one or more alternative methods for settling matters subject to the appellate jurisdiction of the Board which shall be applicable at the election of an applicant for employment or of an employee who is not in a unit for which a labor organization is accorded exclusive recognition, and shall be in lieu of other procedures provided for under this section. A decision under such a method shall be final, unless the Board reopens

�