Laurie Williams v. Union Pacific Railroad Company and Brian M. Harris (Board decision, May 23, 2016)

Plain-English summary

Laurie Williams appealed an administrative law judge's summary decision in a Federal Rail Safety Act case against Union Pacific Railroad and Brian Harris. The Board accepted her petition and set a briefing schedule. Williams then filed a written notice withdrawing the petition. The Board allowed the withdrawal and closed the appeal. It expressly stated that the judge's April 8, 2016 decision became the Secretary's final order.

Decision snapshot

• Cited authorities: Railroad whistleblower protection under 49 U.S.C. § 20109 and withdrawal under 29 C.F.R. § 1982.111(c).
• Outcome: Review petition withdrawn; appeal closed; ALJ summary decision became final.
• Key point: A written withdrawal ended Board review and left the judge's decision as the final agency order.

Full text (DOL official public release)

U.S. Department of Labor
Administrative Review Board
200 Constitution Ave., N.W.
Washington, DC 20210

IN THE MATTER OF:

LAURIE WILLIAMS,
ARB CASE NO. 16-058

COMPLAINANT,
ALJ CASE NO. 2014-FRS-153

v. DATE: May 23, 2016

UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY and BRIAN M. HARRIS,

RESPONDENTS.

BEFORE: THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD

ORDER GRANTING WITHDRAWAL OF PETITION FOR REVIEW

On April 19, 2016, Complainant Laurie Williams filed a petition for review of a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge’s Order Granting Respondent’s Motion for Summary Decision and Order Cancelling Hearing 1 in a case arising under the Federal Rail

Safety Act of 1982 (FRSA). 2 . The Administrative Review Board accepted the petition for

review and issued a briefing schedule. 3

1
Williams v. Union Pacific R.R. Co., ALJ No. 2014-FRS-153 (Apr. 8, 2016). The ALJ Case No. on the Board’s Notice of Appeal and Order Establishing Briefing Schedule is incorrect.
2
49 U.S.C.A. § 20109 (Thomson/West 2007), as amended by Section 1521 of the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (9/11 Act), Pub. L. No. 110- 53, and as implemented by federal regulations at 80 Fed. Reg. 69,115; 69,137 (Nov. 9, 2015).
3
See 80 Fed. Reg. 69,115; 69,137; § 1982.110(a) (Nov. 9, 2015).

USDOL/OALJ REPORTER
PAGE 1
On May 17, 2016, Williams filed a notification of her desire to withdraw her petition. If a case is on appeal with the ARB, a party may withdraw the party’s petition for review of an ALJ’s decision at any time before that decision becomes final by filing a written withdrawal with the ARB. 4 Accordingly, Williams’s appeal is withdrawn and the case is CLOSED. The ALJ’s

Order Granting Respondent’s Motion for Summary Decision and Order Cancelling Hearing issued on April 8, 2016 is now the Secretary of Labor’s final order in this case. 5

FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD:

Janet R. Dunlop
General Counsel

4
Id. at § 1982.111(c). We note that a party before the Board who enters into a settlement of a FRSA claim may withdraw on the basis of a settlement only after the Board approves the settlement.
Id. No settlement has been provided to the Board for approval in this case.
.
5
80 Fed. Reg. 69,115; 69,137; § 1982.111(c).

USDOL/OALJ REPORTER
PAGE 2