18:0193(26)NG - NFFE Local 1332 and Army, HQ, Army Material Command -- 1985 FLRAdec NG



[ v18 p193 ]
18:0193(26)NG
The decision of the Authority follows:


 18 FLRA No. 26
 
 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF 
 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 1332 
 Union 
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, 
 HEADQUARTERS, ARMY MATERIAL COMMAND 
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-1043
 
                   ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute on a petition
 for review of a negotiability issue filed by the Union.
 
    The record before the Authority in this case indicates that during
 the course of negotiations, the Union submitted a proposal concerning
 areas of consideration.  By letter dated August 14, 1984, the Agency
 declared the Union's proposal to be nonnegotiable.  The Union then filed
 an unfair labor practice charge with the Region and the instant petition
 for review with the Authority.  Pursuant to section 2423.5 of the
 Authority's Rules and Regulations which requires a selection of
 procedures, the Union requested that processing of the negotiability
 appeal be suspended pending resolution of the unfair labor practice
 dispute.  In a letter to the Authority dated January 22, 1985, the Union
 advised that the unfair labor practice charge had been withdrawn but
 requested that the processing of the instant petition be held in
 abeyance as the parties were currently negotiating the subject proposal.
  Subsequently, the Union in a letter to the Authority dated March 12,
 1985, requested that its petition for review be reinstated.  Thereafter,
 the Agency filed its statement of position with the Authority on April
 17, 1985, and advised that the declaration of nonnegotiability had been
 withdrawn in writing by the Agency and acknowledged by the Union on
 October 10, 1984.  Accordingly, the Agency considered the issue moot.
 
    As the record indicates, /1/ the Agency has withdrawn the allegation
 of nonnegotiability concerning the Union's proposal on areas of
 consideration.  Thus, there is no longer an issue as to whether the
 proposal in this case is within the parties' duty to bargain under the
 Statute.  See e.g. National Federation of Federal Employees, Local 15
 and U.S. Department of the Army, Army Armament Munitions and Chemical
 Command, 17 FLRA No. 47 (1985).
 
    Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the petition for
 review in this case is hereby dismissed.  Issued, Washington, D.C., May
 24, 1985
                                       Harold D. Kessler,
                                       Managing Director for Case
                                       Processing
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ The U