14:0109(23)CA - DOD, Air Force, Air Force Logistics Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, OH and San Antonio Air Logistics Center, Kelly AFB, TX and IAF Local F-89 -- 1984 FLRAdec CA

 14 FLRA No. 23
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE
 AIR FORCE LOGISTICS COMMAND
 WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE, OHIO
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 SAN ANTONIO AIR LOGISTICS CENTER
 KELLY AIR FORCE BASE, TEXAS
 Respondent
 
 and
 
 INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
 FIREFIGHTERS, LOCAL F-89
 Charging Party
 
                                            Case No. 6-CA-30076
 
                            DECISION AND ORDER
 
    This matter is before the Authority pursuant to the Regional
 Director's "Order Transferring Case to the Federal Labor Relations
 Authority" in accordance with section 2429.1(a) of the Authority's Rules
 and Regulations.
 
    Upon consideration of the entire record in this case, including the
 stipulation of facts and the parties' contentions, the Authority finds:
 
    The complaint alleges that the Respondents failed to comply with
 section 7131(a) in violation of section 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the
 Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute (the Statute) by
 refusing to reimburse employee Amedee N. Davila for travel and per diem
 expenses incurred while serving as the Union representative in
 negotiations conducted May 11 through 13, 1982.
 
    The facts and positions of the parties are substantially identical to
 those involved in Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms v. FLRA, 104
 S.Ct. 439(1983) wherein the United States Supreme Court concluded that
 the obligation of an agency under section 7131(a) of the Statute to
 provide official time to its employees representing an exclusive
 representative in the negotiation of a collective bargaining agreement
 does not encompass the payment of travel expenses and per diem
 allowances.  Pursuant to that decision, and for the reasons set forth by
 the Court, the Authority concludes herein that the Respondents did not
 fail or refuse to comply with the provisions of section 7131(a) of the
 Statute.  Therefore, it follows that the Respondents did not violate
 section 7116(a)(1) and (8) of the Statute.
 
                                   ORDER
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the complaint in Case No. 6-CA-30076 be,
 and it hereby is, dismissed in its entirety.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., March 23, 1984
 
                                       Barbara J. Mahone, Chairman
                                       Ronald W. Haughton, Member
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY