---

 15 FLRA No. 46
 
 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,
 NEWARK DISTRICT OFFICE
 Activity
 
 and
 
 NATIONAL TREASURY EMPLOYEES
 UNION, CHAPTER 60
 Union
 
                                            Case No. O-AR-766
 
                        ORDER DISMISSING EXCEPTIONS
 
    This matter is before the Authority on exceptions to the award of
 Arbitrator William J. Fallon filed by the Activity under section 7122(a)
 of the Federal Service Labor-Management Relations Statute and section
 2425.1 of the Authority's Rules and Regulations.  For the reasons set
 forth below, the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the
 Activity's exceptions and they must be dismissed on that basis.
 
    In this case, the Arbitrator found that the Activity's removal of the
 grievant was not for such cause as would promote the efficiency of the
 service and reduced the penalty to a 30-day suspension.  The Arbitrator
 subsequently granted the Union's application for attorney fees.  The
 Activity then filed the instant exceptions to the award of attorney's
 fees.
 
    Section 7122(a) of the Statute provides in pertinent part:
 
          Either party to arbitration under this chapter may file with
       the Authority an exception to any arbitrator's award pursuant to
       the arbitration (other than an award relating to a matter
       described in section 7121(f) of this title).
 
    The matters described in section 7121(f) of the Statute include those
 covered under 5 U.S.C. 7512 which applies to specified adverse actions,
 including removals and suspensions for more than 14 days.  Pursuant to
 section 7121(f), review of an arbitration award relating to such matters
 must be obtained in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 7703, i.e., in the same
 manner and under the same conditions as judicial review of a final
 decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board.
 
    Since the Arbitrator's award relates to a matter covered by 5 U.S.C.
 7512, the removal of the grievant, under section 7122(a) of the Statute
 the Authority is without jurisdiction to review the Activity's
 exceptions.  Rather, judicial review of the Arbitrator's award may be
 sought pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 7703.
 
    Accordingly, and apart from other considerations, the Activity's
 exceptions are hereby dismissed.
 
    For the Authority.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., July 5, 1984
                                       Harold D. Kessler, Director, Case
                                       Management
                                       (ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR
                                       RECONSIDERATION OF CASE
                                       No. O-AR-548)
 
    AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT
 
    EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 3234
 
                                   Union
 
    and
 
    SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION,
 
    SIOUX CITY, IOWA
 
                                 Activity
                                       Case No. O-AR-548
 
                 ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
 
    This case is before the Authority on a motion for reconsideration
 filed by the Union on February 27, 1984, seeking reconsideration of the
 Authority's Decision and Order of February 7, 1984.  For the reason set
 forth below, the motion must be denied.
 
    Section 2429.17 of the Authority's Rules and Regulatio4s, effective
 September 10, 1981, provides in pertinent part:
 
          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 10 days after service of
       the Authority's decision or order . . . .
 
    The Authority's Decision and Order was dated and served on the union
 by mail on February 7, 1984.  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 computation of the time limit here
 involved, the Union's motion for reconsideration was due in the national
 office of the Authority before the close of business on February 22,
 1984.  Since, as indicated above, the Union's motion was not filed until
 February 27, 1984, it is clearly untimely and must be denied.
 
    Accordingly, for the reason set forth above,
 
    IT IS ORDERED that the Union's motion for reconsideration in this
 case be, and it hereby is, denied.
 
    For the Authority.
 
    Issued, Washington, D.C., June 29, 1984
                                       Harold D. Kessler, Director, Case
                                       Management 
 
 
 

---