This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains regulatory documents having general

applicability and legal effect, most of which

are keyed to and codified in the Code of

Federal Regulations, which is published under

50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.

The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by

the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of

new books are listed in the first FEDERAL

REGISTER issue of each week.

Rules and Regulations Federal Register

9189 

Vol. 80, No. 34 

Friday, February 20, 2015 

FEDERAL LABOR RELATIONS 

AUTHORITY 

5 CFR Part 2429 

Unfair Labor Practice Proceedings and 

Miscellaneous and General 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Federal Labor Relations 

Authority. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Labor Relations 

Authority (FLRA) is engaged in an 

initiative to make electronic filing or 

‘‘eFiling’’ available to parties in all cases 

before the FLRA. Making eFiling 

available is another way in which the 

FLRA is using technology to improve 

the customer-service experience. These 

eFiling enhancements are expected to 

increase efficiency by reducing 

procedural filing errors and processing 

delays. 

DATES: Effective March 23, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: Written comments about 

this final rule can be emailed to 

engagetheFLRA@flra.gov or sent to the 

Case Intake and Publication Office, 

Federal Labor Relations Authority, 1400 

K Street NW., Washington, DC 20424. 

All written comments will be available 

for public inspection during normal 

business hours at the Case Intake and 

Publication Office. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gina 

Grippando, Counsel for Regulatory and 

Public Affairs, Federal Labor Relations 

Authority, Washington, DC 20424, (202) 

218–7776. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the first 

stage of its eFiling initiative, the FLRA 

enabled parties to use eFiling to file 

requests for Federal Service Impasses 

Panel assistance in the resolution of 

negotiation impasses. See 77 FR 5987 

(Feb. 7, 2012). The second stage of the 

FLRA’s eFiling initiative provided 

parties with an option to use eFiling to 

electronically file 11 types of documents 

in cases filed with the FLRA’s threemember adjudicatory body, the 

Authority. Parties may now file such 

documents. See 77 FR 26430 (May 4, 

2012). The third stage of the FLRA’s 

eFiling initiative provided parties with 

the option to use eFiling to 

electronically file certain documents 

involved in representation and unfair 

labor practice proceedings. See 77 FR 

37751 (June 25, 2012). 

The fourth stage of the FLRA’s eFiling 

initiative is the subject of this Final 

Rule. In this stage, parties will be able 

to use the FLRA’s eFiling system to file 

certain documents involved in unfair 

labor practice proceedings before the 

FLRA’s Office of Administrative Law 

Judges. This rule modifies the FLRA’s 

existing regulations to allow eFiling of 

those documents. As the FLRA’s eFiling 

procedures develop, the revisions set 

forth in this action may be evaluated 

and revised further. 

Sectional Analysis 

Sectional analysis of the amendments 

and revisions to part 2429, 

Miscellaneous and General 

Requirements, are as follows: 

Part 2429—Miscellaneous and General 

Requirements 

Section 2429.24(d) 

This section is amended to reflect the 

addition of eFiling as an authorized 

means of filing documents with the 

Office of Administrative Law Judges 

pursuant to paragraph (f)(15) of this 

section and corrects the person with 

whom such documents must be filed by 

replacing appropriate administrative 

law judge with Chief Administrative 

Law Judge. 

Section 2429.24(f)(15) 

This section is added to reflect that 

documents filed with the Office of 

Administrative Law Judges are now 

documents that can be filed using 

eFiling as an alternative to the filing 

methods discussed in paragraph (e) of 

this section. 

As described above, this amendment 

updates the regulations to merely 

expand the Federal Labor Relations 

Authority’s current electronic filing 

system. This rule pertains to agency 

organization, procedure, or practice, and 

it is exempt from prior notice and 

public comment pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

553(b)(A). 

Executive Order 12866 

The FLRA is an independent 

regulatory agency, and as such, is not 

subject to the requirements of E.O. 

12866. 

Executive Order 13132 

The FLRA is an independent 

regulatory agency, and as such, is not 

subject to the requirements of E.O. 

13132. 

Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification 

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 

605(b), the Chairman of the FLRA has 

determined that this rule, as amended, 

will not have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small entities, 

because this rule applies only to federal 

agencies, federal employees, and labor 

organizations representing those 

employees. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 

1995 

This rule change will not result in the 

expenditure by state, local, and tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100,000,000 or more 

in any one year, and it will not 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. Therefore, no actions were 

deemed necessary under the provisions 

of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996 

This action is not a major rule as 

defined by section 804 of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996. This rule will not 

result in an annual effect on the 

economy of $100,000,000 or more; a 

major increase in costs or prices; or 

significant adverse effects on 

competition, employment, investment, 

productivity, innovation, or on the 

ability of United States-based 

companies to compete with foreignbased companies in domestic and 

export markets. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 

The amended regulations contain no 

additional information collection or 

record-keeping requirements under the 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 

U.S.C. 3501, et seq. 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES
9190 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 34 / Friday, February 20, 2015 / Rules and Regulations 

List of Subjects in 5 CFR Part 2429 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Government employees, 

Labor management relations. 

For the reasons stated in the 

preamble, the FLRA amends 5 CFR part 

2429, as follows: 

PART 2429—[AMENDED] 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 2429 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 5 U.S.C. 7134; § 2429.18 also 

issued under 28 U.S.C. 2112(a). 

■ 2. Section 2429.24 is amended by 

revising paragraph (d) and adding 

paragraph (f)(15) to read as follows: 

§ 2429.24 Place and method of filing; 

acknowledgement. 

* * * * * 

(d) Unless electronically filed 

pursuant to paragraph (f)(15) of this 

section, a document filed with the 

Office of Administrative Law Judges 

pursuant to this subchapter shall be 

submitted to the address for the Chief 

Administrative Law Judge, as set forth 

in the appendix. 

(f) * * * 

(15) Documents submitted to the 

Office of Administrative Law Judges 

under 5 CFR part 2423, including 

answers to complaints, motions, briefs, 

pre-hearing disclosures, stipulations, 

and any other documents as permitted 

by the eFiling system for the Office of 

Administrative Law Judges. 

* * * * * 

Dated: February 12, 2015. 

Carol Waller Pope, 

Chairman. 

[FR Doc. 2015–03315 Filed 2–19–15; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6727–01–P 

POSTAL SERVICE 

39 CFR Part 241 

Relocating Retail Services; Adding 

New Retail Service Facilities 

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: This final rule revises the 

Postal Service’s current procedures 

concerning the expansion, relocation, 

and construction of Post OfficesTM to 

clarify these procedures, and to require 

the Postal Service to provide more 

information to communities and elected 

officials about certain types of projects 

earlier in the planning phase. Under the 

final rule, the Postal Service will notify 

communities and officials, and solicit 

and consider their input, regarding 

proposals to relocate retail services or 

add a new retail service facility. The 

final rule also will require the Postal 

Service to provide information about the 

anticipated new location for relocated 

services or for a new retail service 

facility when the Postal Service first 

gives notice of the proposal. 

DATES: Effective date: March 23, 2015. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Richard Hancock, Real Estate Specialist, 

U.S. Postal Service®, at 

Richard.A.Hancock2@usps.gov or 919– 

420–5284. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

October 27, 2014, the Postal Service 

published a proposed rule (79 FR 

63880) to revise the Postal Service’s 

procedures concerning the expansion, 

relocation, and construction of Post 

Offices to clarify those procedures, and 

to require the Postal Service to provide 

more information to communities and 

elected officials about certain types of 

projects earlier in the planning phase. 

The proposed rule would require the 

Postal Service to notify communities 

and officials, and solicit and consider 

their input, regarding proposals to 

relocate retail services or add a new 

retail service facility. As a significant 

change from the current rule, the 

proposed rule would require the Postal 

Service to provide information about the 

anticipated new location for relocated 

services or for a new retail service 

facility when the Postal Service first 

gives notice of the proposal. The Postal 

Service established a 30-day comment 

period and invited comments on the 

proposed rule. The Postal Service 

received five responses. 

Comments and Response 

Below is a summary of the comments, 

in order of the specific sections of the 

proposed rule to which they relate. 

General Comments; 241.4(a) 

One respondent asserted that there is 

no substantive reason for changing the 

current rule and that the Postal Service 

should retain the current rule. The 

respondent suggested that defining 

‘‘customer service facility’’ is 

unnecessary. 

We disagree with the comment. The 

Postal Service Office of Inspector 

General (OIG) specifically 

recommended that the Postal Service 

revise its regulations to enhance 

transparency and public input. Based on 

past experience, we agreed with the 

OIG’s recommendation. The current rule 

does not define ‘‘customer service 

facility’’ and as the Postal Service 

evolves to adapt to a fast changing 

marketplace, providing definitions in 

the new rule will clarify when the new 

rule applies. 

Another respondent commented that 

the new rule should define ‘‘relocation’’ 

and the definition should state a 

maximum permitted distance for 

relocating retail services. 

We expect readers of the new rule 

will understand ‘‘relocation’’ to have its 

ordinary dictionary meaning. We also 

disagree that the new rule should 

include an arbitrary distance limitation 

because such a limitation could prevent 

appropriately accounting for important 

factors, such as the setting (urban, 

suburban, or rural), site conditions 

(public transit availability, location on a 

one-way street, etc.) and the proximity 

of other Postal Service retail locations. 

Temporary, Emergency, and Provisional 

Relocations; 241.4(a)(2) 

One respondent suggested that some 

causes of relocation added to the 

‘‘emergency’’ category in the proposed 

rule are inconsistent with a definition of 

‘‘emergency’’ as a sudden event 

requiring immediate action. The 

respondent also expressed concern that 

expanding the ‘‘emergency’’ category 

increases the universe of relocations 

that can occur without community 

input because the new rule, as 

proposed, provided for the Postal 

Service to determine when it is prudent 

to obtain community input on the longterm location after an emergency 

relocation. The respondent questioned 

adding examples of relocations arising 

from safety concerns without limiting 

those concerns to some specified level 

of seriousness, and the respondent 

urged retaining a 180-day limit for both 

temporary and emergency relocations. 

We appreciate the concerns raised in 

these comments. The current rule lists 

‘‘lease termination’’ as an example of an 

event that may require an emergency 

relocation, but the current rule is silent 

on lease expirations. Nor does the 

current rule recognize that some lessors 

reserve a right during the lease term to 

require the Postal Service to move to a 

different location, e.g., a substitute 

space in the lessor’s project. However, 

the Postal Service believes it is prudent 

to provide in the final rule for soliciting 

and considering community input 

regarding relocations arising from such 

events. While these events may not be 

completely unexpected like other events 

listed as ‘‘emergencies’’, their timing is 

not always predictable. The Postal 

Service may not know when a lessor 

will exercise its right to terminate a 

lease or its right to require the Postal 

Service to move to different premises. 

Similarly, a lease may expire 

unexpectedly when the Postal Service 


Rmajette on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with RULES