Schneider

MEMORANDUM *

Triton Marine Construction (“Triton”) petitions for review of an order of the Benefits Review Board order affirming an Administrative Law Judge’s (“ALJ”) calculation of Darin Schneider’s permanent disability benefits for injuries he suffered working for Triton repairing a Navy dry dock. Triton also appeals the Board’s award of attorney’s fees. We have jurisdiction under 33 U.S.C. § 921 (c), and we affirm.

We review the Board’s wage decision “for errors of law and for adherence to the substantial evidence standard,” Alcala v. Dir., OWCP, 141 F.3d 942, 944 (9th Cir.1998) (internal quotation marks omitted). We review de novo interpretations of the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (“LHWCA”). Gilliland v. E.J. Barbells Co., Inc., 270 F.3d 1259, 1261 (9th Cir.2001).

There was neither arbitrariness nor error in the ALJ’s wage calculation. Substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s finding that section 10(a) of the LHWCA could not be reasonably and fairly applied to calculate Schneider’s wages. See 33 U.S.C. §§ 910 (a)-(e); see also Matulic v. Dir., OWCP, 154 F.3d 1052, 1056 (9th Cir. 1998) (stating that section 10(a) is the presumptive method for calculating…