IAM Lodge 67 and Naval Ordnance Station, Indian Head (Authority decision, December 21, 1990)

Final FLRA decision. The Authority dismisses a negotiability petition as untimely under its filing rules. An aggrieved person may seek judicial review by filing a petition in an appropriate United States court of appeals within 60 days after issuance under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(a). Filing a petition does not stay the Authority's order unless the court orders a stay under 5 U.S.C. § 7123(c).

Plain-English summary

IAM Lodge 67 sought review of the Navy's allegation that a proposal was nonnegotiable. The filing deadline was October 22, 1990. The union sent its petition to an FLRA regional office, which forwarded it to the Authority's Docket Room, where it arrived October 23. The Authority held that filing occurred upon receipt in the Docket Room and that the deadline could not be extended or waived. It dismissed the petition without reaching the proposal's negotiability.

Decision snapshot

• Authority: Negotiability petition filing rules, including 5 C.F.R. §§ 2424.3 and 2429.24(a).
• Outcome: Petition dismissed as untimely.
• Key point: Sending a petition to an FLRA regional office did not count as filing it in the Authority's Docket Room.

Full text (FLRA public release)

[ v38 p1180 ]
38:1180(93)NG

The decision of the Authority follows:

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION

OF MACHINISTS
AND AEROSPACE WORKERS

LODGE 67

(Union)

and

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVAL ORDNANCE STATION

INDIAN HEAD, MARYLAND

(Agency)

0-NG-1887

December 21, 1990

ORDER TO DISMISS

The Union has filed a petition for review of negotiability issues in the above-captioned case. On November 16, 1990, the Authority issued an Order directing the Agency 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 petition for review is untimely and must be dismissed.

A petition for review of negotiability issues must be filed with the Authority within 15 days after service on the Union of the Agency's allegation of nonnegotiability. 5 C.F.R. 2424.3. The date of service is the date the allegation is deposited in the U.S. mail or is delivered in person. 5 C.F.R. 2429.27(d). If the allegation is served by mail, 5 days are added to the 15-day period for filing the petition for review. 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). Any document filed with the Authority must be filed in the Authority's Docket Room in Washington, D.C. 5 C.F.R. 2429.24(a). See also The Association of Civilian Technicians and the Division of Military and Naval Affairs, the State of New York, 32 FLRA 96 (1988).

The Agency's written allegation of nonnegotiability was dated October 1, 1990. 1 Presuming that the allegation was deposited in the U.S. mail on that date, a petition for review of negotiability issues had to be either postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service or received in person at the Authority's Docket Room no later than October 22, 1990, in order to be considered timely. 5 C.F.R. 2424.3, 2429.21(b) and 2429.22.

The Union mailed its petition for review to the Authority's Washington, D.C. Regional Office. The Regional Office forwarded the Union's petition to the Authority's Docket Room on October 23, 1990. The Union's petition was received in the Authority's Docket Room on October 23, 1990. Accordingly, the Union's petition for review was considered filed on the date it was received in the Authority's Docket Room.

In its response to the Order to Show Cause the Union states that before filing its petition for review, it spoke to an Authority agent in the Washington, D.C. Regional Office. The Union argues that the Authority agent did not indicate that the Union was required to send the petition for review to the Authority's Docket Room at 500 C Street, SW., Washington, D.C. We note however, that the Union does not assert that it requested information from the agent as to where to file the petition or that the agent gave erroneous advice.

Parties filing actions with the Authority are responsible for being knowledgeable of the statutory and regulatory filing requirements. See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Washington, D.C. and American Federation of Government Employees, Local 476, 34 FLRA 309. Moreover, the time limit for filing a petition for review of an agency allegation of nonnegotiability may not be extended or waived by the Authority. 5 C.F.R. 2429.23(d). See U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and American Federation of Government Employees, AFL

• CIO. Local 476, 27 FLRA 852, 854 (1987).

Accordingly, as the Union's petition for review was not timely filed, it is dismissed.

For the Authority.

Alicia N. Columna
Director,

Case Control Office

__________

FOOTNOTES

Footnote 1 The Union argues that the Agency's October 1, 1990 allegation of nonnegotiability was effectively rescinded when the Agency agreed to meet and negotiate with the Union on October 22, 1990. The Union has not established that the Agency withdrew its October 1, 1990 allegation of nonnegotiability.