International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 80 and U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of NOAA Corps Operations, Atlantic Marine Center, Norfolk, Virginia (Authority decision, November 30, 1999)

Final FLRA decision. This is a final order of the Federal Labor Relations Authority involving an arbitral award under 5 U.S.C. § 7122. Judicial review under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a) generally does not extend to such an order unless the order involves an unfair labor practice under 5 U.S.C. § 7116. This decision resolves exceptions to an arbitration award and does not state that it involves an unfair labor practice.

Plain-English summary

The union asked the Authority to reopen the relief issue in an earlier arbitration decision and permit comprehensive briefing. It cited the importance of the issues and the Authority's technical views. The Authority treated that request as an attempt to relitigate conclusions already reached. The union did not establish the extraordinary circumstances required for reconsideration, so its motion was denied. Member Wasserman joined the denial while reaffirming his partial dissent from the earlier decision.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: 5 C.F.R. § 2429.17.
• Outcome: Union motion for reconsideration denied.
• Key point: The importance of an issue does not by itself establish extraordinary circumstances for reopening a decision.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v55 p1107 ]

55 FLRA No. 179

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF

ELECTRICAL WORKERS, LOCAL 80

(Union)

and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC

ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF NOAA

CORPS OPERATIONS

ATLANTIC MARINE CENTER

NORFOLK, VIRGINIA

(Agency)

0-AR-3041

(55 FLRA 816 (1999))

_____

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

November 30, 1999

_____

Before the Authority: Phyllis N. Segal, Chair; Donald S. Wasserman and Dale Cabaniss, Members.

This matter is before the Authority on the Union's motion for reconsideration of the Authority's Decision in U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of NOAA Corps Operations, Atlantic Marine Center, Norfolk, Virginia and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 80, 55 FLRA 816 (1999) (Member Wasserman dissenting in part) (NOAA, Atlantic Marine Center). The Agency filed an opposition to the motion.

Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Regulations permits a party who can establish extraordinary circumstances to request reconsideration of an Authority decision. See U.S. Department of the Air Force, 375th Combat Support Group, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois, 50 FLRA 84, 85 (1995) (Scott AFB). In Scott AFB, the Authority identified a limited number of situations in which extraordinary circumstances have been found to exist. These include situations where a moving party has established that the Authority erred in its remedial order, process, conclusion of law, or factual finding. Attempts to relitigate conclusions reached by the Authority are insufficient to satisfy the extraordinary circumstances requirement. Id. at 86-87. See U.S. Department of Defense, Defense Logistics Agency, Defense Distribution Region West, Stockton, California and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 1857, 48 FLRA 543, 545 (1993) (Defense Logistics Agency).

Under section 2429.17, a party seeking reconsideration after the Authority has issued a final decision or order bears the heavy burden of establishing that extraordinary circumstances exist to justify this unusual action. See Scott AFB, 50 FLRA at 85. In this case, the Union states only that "the Authority should reopen the issue of relief and allow for comprehensive briefs to be filed on the issue of relief[,]" given the "extremely important issues raised and technical views expressed by the Authority[.]" Motion for Reconsideration at 1. Upon careful consideration of the motion and Authority precedent, the Authority concludes that the motion for reconsideration is deficient in meeting the grounds for requesting reconsideration set forth in section 2429.17. We construe the Union's request that the Authority reopen the issue of relief as an attempt to relitigate the conclusions reached by the Authority in NOAA, Atlantic Marine Center. Accordingly, the motion for reconsideration is insufficient to satisfy the extraordinary circumstances requirement. [n1] See Defense Logistics Agency, 48 FLRA at 545.

The Union's motion for reconsideration is denied.

Footnote # 1 for
55 FLRA No. 179 -

Member Wasserman joins in the Authority's decision denying the motion for reconsideration because the "extraordinary circumstances"
standard has not been met. However, Member Wasserman reaffirms his separate opinion, dissenting in part, in
NOAA, Atlantic Marine Center.