14:0309(57)NG - Tidewater Virginia FEMTE and Navy, Naval Public Works Center, Norfolk, Virginia -- 1984 FLRAdec NG

 14 FLRA No. 57
 
 TIDEWATER VIRGINIA FEDERAL
 EMPLOYEES METAL TRADES COUNCIL
 Union
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
 NAVAL PUBLIC WORKS CENTER,
 NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
 Activity
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-880
 
                   ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to section 7105(a)(2)(E1
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute on a petition
 for review of a negotiability issue filed by the Union.  For the reasons
 stated below, the Union's petition for review must be dismissed.
 
    The record before the Authority in this case indicates that during
 negotiations between the parties over the impact and implementation of
 the Omnibus Reconciliation Act of 1982 (Public Law 97-253), a dispute
 arose over a provision for military pension cost-of-living increases to
 be deducted from the civilian pay of affected employees.  The Activity
 informed the Union that it intended to deduct the required amount as a
 one-time, lump-sum payment.  The Union submitted a proposal essentially
 seeking an arrangement whereby the Activity would advance the amount of
 the lump-sum payment to the affected employees to be repaid over a three
 month period.  The Activity alleged that the Union's proposal was
 nonnegotiable.  The Union then filed the instant petition for review
 with the Authority.
 
    In its statement of position, the Agency informed the Authority that
 the deduction was made as a one-time, lump-sum deduction on or about
 July 14, 1983, and contends, among other things, that the proposal at
 issue in this case has been rendered moot.
 
    Upon careful consideration of the submissions of the parties, it has
 been determined that since the deduction described above has been made,
 the instant negotiability dispute has been rendered moot.  Further, to
 decide the issue presented in the instant case under the circumstances
 described would be tantamount to issuing an advisory opinion, which is
 precluded by section 2429.10 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.
 
    Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the Union's
 petition for review is hereby dismissed.  For the Authority.  Issued,
 Washington, D.C., April 26, 1984
                                       Harold D. Kessler, Director, Case
                                       Management