6, and Art. 6, expressly require that all changes of operation, without exception and without regard to the issues raised, be submitted to the COC for approval. The Local seizes upon language enumerating specific issues for the COC's review, and urges this as support for its argument that the COC only has authority over those specifically designated areas. However, the broad requirement that the COC review all changes of operations without regard to the presence of those designated issues which the Local points up, dictates a different conclusion. Also, the decisions brought to the attention of the court indicate that the COC has routinely exercised broad jurisdiction over proposed changes of operations.
Previous practice is a valid consideration in determining jurisdiction.
There being no material issues of fact in dispute, and for the reasons stated above, summary judgment in favor of the Defendant will be granted. Because of our decision on this issue we do not address Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to join necessary parties. Finally, we do not find Plaintiff's action to have been in bad faith and Defendant's request for attorney's fees and costs will be denied.