---

 7 FLRA No. 27
 
 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF
 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES,
 LOCAL 29
 (Union)
 
 and
 
 KANSAS CITY DISTRICT CORPS
 OF ENGINEERS, KANSAS CITY,
 MISSOURI
 (Activity)
 
                                            Case No. O-NG-555
 
                   ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR REVIEW
 
    THIS CASE IS BEFORE THE AUTHORITY PURSUANT TO SECTION 7105(A)(2)(E)
 OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS STATUTE (5 U.S.C. 7101
 ET SEQ.) ON A PETITION FOR REVIEW FILED BY THE UNION.  FOR THE REASONS
 INDICATED BELOW, THE UNION'S APPEAL MUST BE DISMISSED.
 
    THE RECORD IN THIS CASE INDICATES THAT ON JULY 1, 1981, THE PARTIES
 SUBMITTED A LOCALLY EXECUTED COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT TO THE
 AGENCY FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL PURSUANT TO SECTION 7114(C) OF THE
 STATUTE.  BY LETTER SERVED ON THE UNION ON AUGUST 31, 1981, THE AGENCY
 NOTIFIED THE UNION THAT ALTHOUGH IT HAD NOT COMPLETED ITS SECTION
 7114(C) REVIEW WITHIN THE STATUTORY 30-DAY TIME LIMIT, WHICH THEREBY
 RENDERED THE CONTRACT EFFECTIVE ON THE 31ST DAY AFTER EXECUTION, IT WAS
 DECLARING UNENFORCEABLE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT AS THEY WERE
 CONTRARY TO LAW AND APPROPRIATE REGULATION.  THE UNION FILED THE INSTANT
 PETITION ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1981, REQUESTING A REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS
 DECLARED UNENFORCEABLE.
 
    THE PARTIES AGREE THAT AS THE AGREEMENT WAS NOT APPROVED OR
 DISAPPROVED WITHIN 30 DAYS AFTER ITS EXECUTION, IT BECAME EFFECTIVE AND
 BINDING ON THE PARTIES ON THE 31ST DAY, WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE
 AGENCY, SUBJECT ONLY TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE STATUTE AND ANY OTHER
 APPLICABLE LAW, RULE OR REGULATION.
 
    CONSEQUENTLY, SINCE THE ENTIRE AGREEMENT AS NEGOTIATED AND EXECUTED
 BY THE PARTIES BECAME EFFECTIVE AND BINDING ON JULY 31, 1981, THE
 PETITION FOR REVIEW RAISES NO DISPUTE CONCERNING THE TERMS OF SUCH
 AGREEMENT WHICH IS COGNIZABLE UNDER SECTION 7117 OF THE STATUTE.
 
    HOWEVER, OUR CONCLUSION THAT THE INSTANT PETITION IS NOT COGNIZABLE
 IN THE PRESENT PROCEEDING DOES NOT, OF COURSE, MEAN THAT ANY PROVISIONS
 IN THE AGREEMENT WHICH ARE CONTRARY TO THE STATUTE OR ANY OTHER
 APPLICABLE LAW, RULE OR REGULATION, ARE THEREBY ENFORCEABLE.  RATHER, A
 QUESTION AS TO THE VALIDITY OF SUCH PROVISIONS MAY BE RAISED IN OTHER
 APPROPRIATE PROCEEDINGS (SUCH AS GRIEVANCE ARBITRATION AND UNFAIR LABOR
 PRACTICE PROCEEDINGS) AND, IF THE AGREEMENT PROVISIONS ARE THERE FOUND
 TO BE VIOLATIVE OF THE STATUTE OR ANY OTHER APPLICABLE LAW, RULE OR
 REGULATION, THEY WOULD NOT BE ENFORCEABLE BUT WOULD BE DEEMED VOID AND
 UNENFORCEABLE.  AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, AFL-CIO,
 LOCAL 1858 AND U.S. ARMY MISSILE COMMAND, REDSTONE ARSENAL, ALABAMA, 4
 FLRA NO. 47(1980).
 
    ACCORDINGLY, SINCE THE UNION'S APPEAL DOES NOT MEET THE CONDITIONS
 FOR REVIEW UNDER SECTION 7117 OF THE STATUTE AND SECTION 2424.1 OF THE
 AUTHORITY'S RULES AND REGULATIONS, AND APART FROM OTHER CONSIDERATIONS,
 
    IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE UNION'S APPEAL BE, AND IT HEREBY IS,
 DISMISSED.
 
    FOR THE AUTHORITY.
 
    ISSUED, WASHINGTON, D.C., NOVEMBER 12, 1981.
 
                   JAMES J. SHEPARD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 
 
 
 

---