17:0017(8)NG - AFGE Local 2303 and Metropolitan Washington Airports, FAA,Transportation -- 1985 FLRAdec NG

 17 FLRA No. 8
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 2303
 Union
 
 and
 
 METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON
 AIRPORTS, FEDERAL AVIATION
 ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT
 OF TRANSPORTATION
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-1064
 
                   ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW
 
    This case comes before the Authority pursuant to section ,
 7105(a)(2)(E) of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute
 (the Statute), and section 2424.1 of the Authority's Rules and
 Regulations on a petition for review of negotiability issues filed by
 the Union.  For the reasons indicated below, it has been determined that
 the Union's petition for review was untimely filed and must be dismissed
 on that basis.
 
    Under section 7117(c)(2) of the Statute and section 2424.3 of the
 Authority's Rules and Regulations, the time limit for filing a petition
 for review of negotiability issues is 15 days after the Agency's
 allegation that the duty to bargain in good faith does not extend to the
 matter proposed to be bargained is served on the Union.
 
    From the record before the Authority, it appears that by letter dated
 August 24, 1984, the Union requested a negotiability determination on
 one three part proposal and on a second proposal.  It appears further
 that by letter dated August 31, 1984, the Agency responded, alleging
 that these two proposals, as well as a third proposal not involved
 herein, are nonnegotiable.  The Union states that it did not appeal the
 Agency's August 31st allegation but rather, sought to resolve the issues
 through additional negotiations.  The Union states further that when an
 additional negotiation session failed to resolve the issues, the Union,
 by letter dated October 15, 1984, requested a negotiability
 determination on what it characterizes as a "clarified" proposal.  The
 Agency responded by letter of October 23, 1984, reiterating its
 declaration of nonnegotiability dated August 31, 1984.  The Union then
 filed the instant negotiability appeal on October 29, 1984, or within 15
 days from the date of service of the Agency's letter of October 23,
 1984.
 
    It is well settled that a petition for review must be filed within 15
 days from the date of service on the Union of an Agency nonnegotiability
 allegation.  See, e.g., National Treasury Employees Union, Chapter 226
 and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Nutrition Service, 15
 FLRA No. 19 (1984).  In this case, the Agency, in response to a written
 request from the Union, determined on August 31, 1984, that two
 proposals concerning the designation of a "post of duty," and the
 providing of compensation and travel expenses when an employee is
 detailed or reassigned from one designated post of duty to another were
 inconsistent with Government-wide regulations and therefore,
 nonnegotiable.
 
    Although the Union contends that its letter of October 15, 1984,
 constitutes a separate request for a negotiability determination on a
 "clarified" proposal resulting from the additional negotiation session
 of October 1, 1984, such contention cannot be sustained.  The record
 clearly indicates that the proposal set forth in the October 15, 1984,
 request is merely a recombination of some of the parts of the original
 three part proposal which the Agency previously determined, on August
 31, 1984, to be nonnegotiable.  The recombination of those parts
 effected no changes in the substance or language of the parts.
 
    Thus, while the Union's petition filed with the Authority on October
 29, 1984, was filed within 15 days from the date of service of the
 Agency's letter of October 23, 1984, that letter was, in essence, only a
 restatement of the earlier allegation.  It is therefore clear that the
 Union's petition in this case seeks review of the Agency's allegation of
 August 31, 1984.  As already indicated, the Union's petition was not
 filed with the Authority until October 29, 1984, or more than one month
 later.  Thus, the Union's petition was untimely filed under the
 Authority's rules of procedure.
 
    Accordingly, as the Union's petition for review was untimely filed,
 and apart from other considerations, it is hereby dismissed.  For the
 Authority.  Issued, Washington, D.C., February 21, 1985
                                       Harold D. Kessler
                                       Managing Director for Case
                                       Processing