[ v49 p519 ]
The decision of the Authority follows:
49 FLRA No. 43
FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS AUTHORITY
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
CHEMAWA INDIAN BOARDING SCHOOL
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS
March 11, 1994
The Union has filed exceptions to the award of Arbitrator Gary L. Axon, in the above-captioned case. On February 7, 1994, the Authority directed the Union 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 exceptions must be dismissed.
The time limit for filing exceptions to an arbitration award is 30 days beginning on the date the award is served on the filing party. 5 C.F.R. § 2425.1(b). The date of service is the date the arbitration award is deposited in the U.S. mail or is delivered in person. 5 C.F.R. § 2429.27(d). See Oklahoma City Air Logistics Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma and American Federation of Government Employees, Local No. 916, 32 FLRA 165, 167 (1988). If the award is served by mail, 5 days are added to the period for filing exceptions to the award. 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).
The Arbitrator's award was served on the Union on December 15, 1993. Therefore, an exception to the award had to be either postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or received in person at the Authority no later than January 18, 1994, in order to be considered timely. 5 C.F.R. §§ 2425.1(b), 2429.21(b), and 2429.22. The Union's exceptions were filed (postmarked) with the Authority on January 20, 1994.
The Union states in its response that it miscalculated the due date for filing its exceptions with the Authority. As the time limit for filing exceptions may not be extended or waived by the Authority, the Union's exceptions are dismissed.
For the Authority.
Alicia N. Columna
Director, Case Control Office
(If blank, the decision does not have footnotes.)
*/ The grievant filed a response to the Authority's February 7, l994, Order. The grievant does not have standing in this case. 5 C.F.R. § 2421.11. Therefore, the grievant's response was not considered.