---

35 FLRA No. 66

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

PHILADELPHIA METAL TRADES COUNCIL

(Union)

and

PHILADELPHIA NAVAL SHIPYARD

PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

(Activity)

0-NG-1647

(33 FLRA 849)

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

April 17, 1990

Before Chairman McKee and Members Talkin and Armendariz.

I. Statement of the Case

This case is before the Authority on a petition by the Union for reconsideration of the Authority's dismissal of the Union's petition for review of negotiability issues in Philadelphia Metal Trades Council and Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 33 FLRA 849, appeal dismissed mem. sub nom. Philadelphia Metal Trades Council v. FLRA, No. 89-3292 (3d Cir. Nov. 8, 1989). The Department of the Navy, Office of Civilian Personnel Management (the Agency) filed an opposition to the Union's petition. While its petition for reconsideration was pending before the Authority, the Union filed a document, entitled "Second Verification" by the Union president, in further support of the arguments in its petition for reconsideration.

For the following reasons, we conclude that the Union's petition for reconsideration was untimely filed. Accordingly, it will be dismissed.

II. Background

By letter dated December 21, 1988, the Agency disapproved portions of 14 provisions of a collective bargaining agreement negotiated by the Activity and the Union. The disapproval was served on the Union by certified mail on that date. On January 13, 1989, the Union filed a petition for review with the Authority, contesting all but three of the matters which were disapproved by the Agency head.

On March 3, 1989, the Authority dismissed the Union's petition for review as untimely filed. The Authority noted that the Agency head's disapproval constituted an allegation of nonnegotiability for purposes of filing a petition for review. The Authority concluded that, based on 5 C.F.R. §§ 2424.3, 2429.21(b) and 2429.22, the Union's petition for review had to be filed with the Authority no later than January 10, 1989, to be timely. As the Union's petition for review was not filed with the Authority until January 13, 1989, the Authority dismissed the petition as untimely.

III. The Union's Petition for Reconsideration

The Union claims that its representative did not receive the Agency head's disapproval until January 3, 1989, because the Activity was closed from December 24, 1988, through January 2, 1989. The Union requests the Authority to consider the merits of its petition for review because the petition for review was filed only 10 days after its receipt of the Agency's disapproval.

IV. Agency Opposition to the Petition for Reconsideration

The Agency argues that the Union's petition for reconsideration was untimely filed and should be dismissed. The Agency contends further that, even if the Union's petition for review in 33 FLRA 849 was filed timely, it was deficient because it did not contain a statement setting forth the express language of the proposals sought to be negotiated or an explicit statement of the meaning attributed to the proposals by the Union, as required by 5 C.F.R. § 2424.4.

V. Analysis and Conclusion

Section 2429.17 of our Rules and Regulations permits a party that can establish "extraordinary circumstances" to request reconsideration of a final decision and order of the Authority. For the following reasons, we conclude that the Union's petition for reconsideration is untimely filed and must be dismissed.

A request for reconsideration of a final decision or order of the Authority must be filed with the Authority within 10 days after service of the Authority's decision or order. 5 C.F.R. § 2429.17. Because the Authority's decision in 33 FLRA 849 was served on the parties by mail, an additional 5 days is added to the 10-day period for filing a request for reconsideration. 5 C.F.R. § 2429.27(d).

Based on 5 C.F.R. §§ 2429.17 and 2429.27(d), the last day of the 15-day period for filing a request for reconsideration of 33 FLRA 849 was March 18, 1989, a Saturday. Where the last day of a prescribed filing period is a Saturday, Sunday or Federal legal holiday, the prescribed period is advanced until the end of the next day which is not a Saturday, Sunday or Federal legal holiday. 5 C.F.R. § 2429.21(a). Consequently, the Union had until the close of business on Monday, March 20, 1989, to file its request for reconsideration with the Authority. That is, the Union's request for reconsideration had to be either postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or received in person at the Authority no later than March 20, 1989, to be considered timely. 5 C.F.R. § 2422.21(b). The Union had, therefore, a total of 17 calendar days to file its request for reconsideration with the Authority.

The Union's petition for reconsideration was filed (postmarked) on March 21, 1989. Although the Union filed an additional document after the Agency filed its opposition to the petition for reconsideration, the Union did not address the Agency's claim that the petition for reconsideration was untimely filed.

The Union's petition for reconsideration was untimely filed. The request will, therefore, be dismissed.

VI. Order

The Union's petition for reconsideration is dismissed.

---

---

---

FOOTNOTES:
(If blank, the decision does not have footnotes.)
 

---