38:1180(93)NG - - IAM Lodge 67 and Navy, Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head, MD - - 1990 FLRAdec NG - - v38 p1180
[ v38 p1180 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
NAVAL ORDNANCE STATION
INDIAN HEAD, MARYLAND
December 21, 1990
ORDER TO DISMISS
The Union has filed a petition for review of negotiability issues in the above-captioned case. On November 16, 1990, the Authority issued an Order directing the Agency to Show Cause why its exceptions should not be dismissed as untimely filed. The Union filed a timely response to the Authority's Order. For the reasons set out below, the Union's petition for review is untimely and must be dismissed.
A petition for review of negotiability issues must be filed with the Authority within 15 days after service on the Union of the Agency's allegation of nonnegotiability. 5 C.F.R. 2424.3. The date of service is the date the allegation is deposited in the U.S. mail or is delivered in person. 5 C.F.R. 2429.27(d). If the allegation is served by mail, 5 days are added to the 15-day period for filing the petition for review. 5 C.F.R. 2429.22. The time limit may not be extended or waived by the Authority. 5 C.F.R. 2429.23(d). Any document filed with the Authority must be filed in the Authority's Docket Room in Washington, D.C. 5 C.F.R. 2429.24(a). See also The Association of Civilian Technicians and the Division of Military and Naval Affairs, the State of New York, 32 FLRA 96 (1988).
The Agency's written allegation of nonnegotiability was dated October 1, 1990. 1 Presuming that the allegation was deposited in the U.S. mail on that date, a petition for review of negotiability issues had to be either postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or received in person at the Authority's Docket Room no later than October 22, 1990, in order to be considered timely. 5 C.F.R. 2424.3, 2429.21(b) and 2429.22.
The Union mailed its petition for review to the Authority's Washington, D.C. Regional Office. The Regional Office forwarded the Union's petition to the Authority's Docket Room on October 23, 1990. The Union's petition was received in the Authority's Docket Room on October 23, 1990. Accordingly, the Union's petition for review was considered filed on the date it was received in the Authority's Docket Room.
In its response to the Order to Show Cause the Union states that before filing its petition for review, it spoke to an Authority agent in the Washington, D.C. Regional Office. The Union argues that the Authority agent did not indicate that the Union was required to send the petition for review to the Authority's Docket Room at 500 C Street, SW., Washington, D.C. We note however, that the Union does not assert that it requested information from the agent as to where to file the petition or that the agent gave erroneous advice.
Parties filing actions with the Authority are responsible for being knowledgeable of the statutory and regulatory filing requirements. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C. and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 476, 34 FLRA 309. Moreover, the time limit for filing a petition for review of an agency allegation of nonnegotiability may not be extended or waived by the Authority. 5 C.F.R. 2429.23(d). See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and American Federation of Government Employees, AFL - CIO. Local 476, 27 FLRA 852, 854 (1987).
Accordingly, as the Union's petition for review was not timely filed, it is dismissed.
For the Authority.
Alicia N. Columna
Case Control Office