§102.26. Motions; rulings and orders part of the record; rulings not to be appealed directly to the Board without special permission; requests for special permission to appeal. — Inbound Citations

(2) If the administrative law judge decides to accept or reject the proposed settlement, any party aggrieved by such ruling may ask for leave to appeal to the Board as provided in § 102.26.

(e) Rulings of the Administrative Law Judge are reviewable by the Board only in accordance with the provisions of § 102.26.

(11) At any stage of the proceeding prior to hearing, the Respondent may submit a settlement proposal to the General Counsel, who may approve the settlement or elect to continue with the proceedings. Any formal settlement reached between the General Counsel and the Respondent, providing for entry of a Board order reprimanding, suspending, disbarring or taking other disciplinary action against the Respondent, is subject to final approval by the Board. In the event any settlement, formal or informal, is reached after opening of the hearing, such settlement must be submitted to the Administrative Law Judge for approval. In the event the Administrative Law Judge rejects the settlement, either the General Counsel or the Respondent may appeal such ruling to the Board as provided in § 102.26.

During any period when the Board lacks a quorum, any request for special permission to appeal filed or pending pursuant to § 102.26 will be referred to the Chief Administrative Law Judge in Washington, DC, for ruling. Such rulings by the Chief Administrative Law Judge, and orders in connection therewith, may not be appealed directly to the Board, but will be considered by the Board in reviewing the record if exception to the ruling or order is included in the statement of exceptions filed with the Board pursuant to § 102.46.

(2) Such individual has refused or is likely to refuse to testify or provide other information on the basis of the privilege against self-incrimination. Requests for the issuance of such an order by the Board may be made by any party. Prior to hearing, and after transfer of the proceeding to the Board, such requests must be made to the Board in Washington, DC, and the Board will take such action thereon as it deems appropriate. During the hearing, and thereafter while the proceeding is pending before the Administrative Law Judge, such requests must be made to the Administrative Law Judge. If the Administrative Law Judge denies the request, the ruling will be subject to appeal to the Board, in Washington, DC, in the manner and to the extent provided in § 102.26 with respect to rulings and orders by an Administrative Law Judge, except that requests for permission to appeal in this instance must be filed within 24 hours of the Administrative Law Judge's ruling. If no appeal is sought within such time, or if the appeal is denied, the ruling of the Administrative Law Judge becomes final and the denial becomes the ruling of the Board. If the Administrative Law Judge deems the request appropriate, the Judge will recommend that the Board seek the approval of the Attorney General for the issuance of the order, and the Board will take such action on the Administrative Law Judge's recommendation as it deems appropriate. Until the Board has issued the requested order, no individual who claims the privilege against self-incrimination will be required or permitted to testify or to give other information respecting the subject matter of the claim.

(b) The provisions of §§ 102.9 through 102.32 will, insofar as applicable, govern proceedings before the General Counsel, pursuant to this section, and the powers granted to Regional Directors in such provisions will, for the purpose of this section, be reserved to and exercised by the General Counsel. After the transfer of any charge and any proceeding which may have been instituted with respect thereto from one Region to another pursuant to this section, the provisions of this subpart will, insofar as possible, govern such charge and such proceeding as if the charge had originally been filed in the Region to which the transfer is made.

(a) An Administrative Law Judge may withdraw from a proceeding because of a personal bias or for other disqualifying reasons. Any party may request the Administrative Law Judge, at any time following the Judge's designation and before filing of the Judge's decision, to withdraw on grounds of personal bias or disqualification, by filing with the Judge promptly upon the discovery of the alleged facts a timely affidavit setting forth in detail the matters alleged to constitute grounds for disqualification. If, in the Administrative Law Judge's opinion, the affidavit is filed with due diligence and is sufficient on its face, the Judge will promptly disqualify himself/herself and withdraw from the proceeding. If the Administrative Law Judge does not disqualify himself/herself and withdraw from the proceeding, the Judge must rule upon the record, stating the grounds for that ruling, and proceed with the hearing, or, if the hearing has closed, the Judge will proceed with issuance of the decision, and the provisions of § 102.26, with respect to review of rulings of Administrative Law Judges, will apply.

After the issuance of a compliance specification and Notice of Hearing, the procedures provided in §§ 102.24 through 102.51 will be followed insofar as applicable.

If it appears to the Regional Director that the charge has merit, formal proceedings will be instituted in accordance with the procedures described in §§ 102.15 through 102.51, insofar as they are applicable, and insofar as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this subpart. If it appears to the Regional Director that issuance of a complaint is not warranted, the Director will decline to issue a complaint, and the provisions of § 102.19, including the provisions for appeal to the General Counsel, are applicable unless an election has been directed under §§ 102.77 and 102.78, in which event the provisions of § 102.81 are applicable.

If, after issuance of the determination by the Board, the parties submit to the Regional Director satisfactory evidence that they have complied with the determination, the Regional Director will dismiss the charge. If no satisfactory evidence of compliance is submitted, the Regional Director will proceed with the charge under Section 8(b)(4)(D) and Section 10 of the Act and the procedure prescribed in §§ 102.9 through 102.51 will, insofar as applicable, govern. However, if the Board determination is that employees represented by a Charged Union are entitled to perform the work in dispute, the Regional Director will dismiss the charge as to that union irrespective of whether the employer has complied with that determination.

If, either before or after service of the Notice of Hearing, the parties submit to the Regional Director satisfactory evidence that they have adjusted the dispute, the Regional Director will dismiss the charge and will withdraw the Notice of Hearing if Notice has issued. If, either before or after issuance of the Notice of Hearing, the parties submit to the Regional Director satisfactory evidence that they have agreed-upon methods for the voluntary adjustment of the dispute, the Regional Director will defer action upon the charge and will withdraw the Notice of Hearing if Notice has issued. If it appears to the Regional Director that the dispute has not been adjusted in accordance with such agreed-upon methods and that an unfair labor practice within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act is occurring or has occurred, the Regional Director may issue a complaint under § 102.15, and the procedure prescribed in §§ 102.9 through 102.51 will, insofar as applicable, govern; and §§ 102.90 through 102.92 are inapplicable, except that if an agreed-upon method for voluntary adjustment results in a determination that employees represented by a Charged Union are entitled to perform the work in dispute, the Regional Director will dismiss the charge as to that union irrespective of whether the employer has complied with that determination.