Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/329901426/Flra-Decision-July-2014-v67-126-Corrected
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 00:30:49+00:00

Document:
satisfying its bargaining obligations to the Union.
direction to bargain over such matters is contrary to law.
Br. to Arbitrator (Post-Hrg Br.) at 62 (quoting 44 U.S.C.
the change in webmail access.
the Union filed an opposition to the Agencys exception.
some of the Agencys arguments.
raised in the Agencys exception 44 U.S.C.
Award at 28 (quoting Post-Hrg Br. at 62).
FISMA grants the Agency sole and exclusive discretion.
discretion to determine the appropriate fees)).
1408, 1412 (1998)) (internal quotation marks omitted).
(analyzing claim of sole and exclusive discretion).
claim of sole and exclusive discretion).
Star Chapter 100, 55 FLRA 1226, 1229 n.7 (2000)).
VAMC, 44 FLRA at 165.
Exception at 5 n.2 (quoting 44 U.S.C. 3534).
Id. at 5 n.2 (quoting 44 U.S.C. 3534).
See 44 U.S.C. 3549 (While this subchapter [44 U.S.C.
3541-49] is in effect, subchapter II of this chapter [44 U.S.C.
12 U.S.C. 481) (emphasis omitted)).
at 55 (2002)) (internal quotation mark omitted).
394 F. Supp. 2d 164, 173 (D.D.C. 2005), vacated, Cobell v.
Kempthorne, 455 F.3d at 314.
E.g., id. at 9 nn.2 & 4; id. at 10 n.15; id. at 12 n.36; id.
at 13 nn.44 & 46.
IRS v. Worldcom, Inc., 723 F.3d 346, 364 (2d Cir. 2013).
124 Cong. Rec. 29,199 (1978) (statement of Rep. William D.
subject (emphasis added) (internal quotation marks omitted)).
See 124 Cong. Rec. 29,188 (1978) (statement of Rep.
and union rights is in the public interest.).
Award at 38 (quoting CBA, Art. 9(F)).
change would have impeded any such attempts.
provided a basis for finding the award contrary to law.
We deny the Agencys exception.
unless they first bargain with the Union.
April 16, 2014) (NIST FISMA FAQs).
1161 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (citing Trusted Integration v.
(April 21, 2010) (OMB M-10-15); OMB M-03-19.
Trusted Integration v. United States, 659 F. 3d at 1159.
Cobell v. Norton, 394 F. Supp. 2d at 173.
Kundra Testimony (May 19, 2009).
matter which is central to the issue before us in this case.
requirements)) (quoting 40 U.S.C. 11331(a)(1))); id.
determine its internal security practices under 5 U.S.C.
limit)40 to these unique circumstances.
Id. at 314 (emphases added).
Id. at 2; see also Cobell v. Hempthorne, 455 F.3d at 313.
Agencys Closing Brief at 1-88.
Exceptions, Attach. 2 (Hrg Tr).
Exceptions, Attach. 3 (Agencys Closing Brief).
Award at 28 (internal citations omitted).
Majority at 4-5 (emphases added).
1978 IBM desktop PC to a 2012 Apple MacBook Pro.
specific actions when faced with security threats.
U.S. DHS, U.S. CBP v. FLRA, No. 12-1457, 2014 U.S. App.
Lexis 10231 (D.C. Cir. June 3, 2014).
U.S. Dept of the Navy v. FLRA, 665 F.3d 1339 (D.C. Cir.
NLRB v. FLRA, 613 F.3d 275 (D.C. Cir. 2010).
improvements. OMB M-10-15 at 2.
U.S. Dept of Treasury, 43 F.3d at 689-90.
394 F. Supp. 2d at 170-78.
58 FLRA 246, 248 (2002)).
See supra notes 2-6, 13, 16.

References: v.

 v. 
 Art. 9
 v.

 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.