27:0768(82)NG - NAGE Local R7-23 and Air Force HQ 357th Air Base Group (MAC), Scott AFB, IL -- 1987 FLRAdec NG

 27 FLRA No. 82
 
 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT 
 EMPLOYEES, LOCAL R7-23
 Union
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE, 
 HEADQUARTERS 357TH AIR BASE 
 GROUP (MAC), SCOTT AIR FORCE 
 BASE, ILLINOIS
 Agency
 
                                            Case No. 0-NG-837
                                             21 FLRA NO. 115
 
                            DECISION ON REMAND
 
                         I.  Statement of the Case
 
    This case is before the Authority pursuant to a remand from the
 United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
 The question involved is whether a proposal interferes with the
 management right under section 7106(a)(1) to determine internal security
 practices.
 
                             II.  The Proposal
 
    That gross negligence continue to be the standard instead of just
 negligence.
 
                             III.  Background
 
    This proposal would establish the standard to be used in determining
 whether an employee will be held "pecuniarily liable" for loss, damage,
 or destruction of Air Force property.  In the previous decision in this
 case, National Association of Government Employees, Local R7-23 and
 Department of the Air Force, Headquarters 375th Air Base Group (MAC),
 Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 21 FLRA No. 115 (1986), the Authority
 found that this proposal (Proposal 2) interfered with the Agency's right
 to determine its internal security practices.  In doing so, the
 Authority relied upon its decision in National Federation of Federal
 Employees, Local 29 and Department of the Army, Kansas City District,
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City, Missouri, 21 FLRA No. 23
 (1986).  In that case the Authority found that a proposal which would
 have limited the amount of pecuniary liability which the agency could
 impose on employees directly interfered with the right under section
 7106(a)(1) to determine internal security practices.  On appeal, the
 court remanded that case for resolution of an apparent inconsistency in
 the application to two different proposals in the case of the
 Authority's underlying finding that the Agency's internal security plan
 encompassed pecuniary liability -- a finding which the court
 characterized as reasonable.  National Federation of Federal Employees,
 Local 29 v. FLRA, No. 86-1308 (D.C. Cir. Mar. 6, 1987).  In view of the
 Authority's reliance in the initial decision in this case on the
 remanded case, we requested and the court granted remand of the decision
 in this case, also.
 
                       IV.  Analysis and Conclusion
 
    We have issued a Decision on Remand in National Federation of Federal
 Employees, Local 29 and Department of the Army, Kansas City District,
 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City, Missouri, 27 FLRA No. 56
 (1987).  Our Decision on Remand, provides no basis for changing our
 original decision in this case.  We reaffirm the finding that this
 proposal interferes with the Agency's right to determine its internal
 security practices and is not within the duty to bargain.  Accordingly,
 it is unnecessary to issue a further order in this case.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., June 25, 1987.
                                       Jerry L. Calhoun, Chairman
                                       Henry B. Frazier III, Member
                                       Jean McKee, Member
                                       FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY