---

 10 FLRA No. 27
 
 AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO, LOCAL 3400
 (Union)
 
 and
 
 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
 HEALTH CARE FINANCING ADMINISTRATION,
 CHICAGO REGIONAL OFFICE
 (Activity)
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-668
 
                 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
 
    This case is before the Authority at this time on a motion filed by
 the union on October 25, 1982, seeking reconsideration of the
 Authority's Order of September 24, 1982, dismissing the union's petition
 for review.  /1/ For the reason set forth below, the union's motion must
 be denied.
 
    Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, effective
 September 10, 1981, provides, in pertinent part:
 
          Sec. 2429.17 Reconsideration.
 
          After a final decision or order of the Authority has been
       issued, a party to the proceeding before the Authority who can
       establish in its moving papers extraordinary circumstances for so
       doing, may move for reconsideration of such final decision or
       order.  The motion shall be filed within ten (10) days after
       service of the Authority's decision or order . . . .
 
    As indicated above, the subject Order of the Authority was dated and
 served upon the union by mail on September 24, 1982.  Therefore, under
 section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations, and sections
 2429.21 and 2429.22, which are also applicable to the time limit here
 involved, the union's motion for reconsideration had to be filed, i.e.,
 received in the national office of the Authority, no later than the
 close of business on October 12, 1982, in order to be considered timely.
  However, since the union's motion was not filed until October 25, 1982,
 it is clearly untimely and must be denied on that basis.
 
    Accordingly, the union's motion for reconsideration is hereby denied.
  /2/ For the Authority.  Issued, Washington, D.C., February 10, 1983
                                       James J. Shepard, Executive
                                       Director
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 --------------- FOOTNOTES$ ---------------
 
 
    /1/ The union's petition was dismissed because it appeared clear from
 the submissions of the parties in the record before the Authority that
 the union had sought to negotiate procedures for a specific, planned
 reduction-in-force (RIF), which RIF had been cancelled by the agency;
 and, further, that the parties had not been negotiating procedures that
 were to be applicable to any other RIF situation.  It was therefore
 likewise apparent that the union was in effect seeking an advisory
 opinion from the Authority concerning its proposals for possible use in
 the future.  Since section 2429.10 of the Authority Rules and
 Regulations precludes the issuance of advisory opinions, the union's
 petition was dismissed.
 
 
    /2/ It should be noted that the Authority's September 24, 1982
 dismissal Order was without prejudice to the union seeking to negotiate
 procedures which would be applicable to RIF situations other than the
 one that was cancelled, submitting specific proposals for the purpose of
 such negotiations and duly filing a petition for review of any
 negotiability issues that might arise in connection with such
 negotiations, in accordance with the Federal Service Labor-Management
 Relations Statute and the Authority's Rules and Regulations. 
 
 
 

---