David Bernstein, Complainant,v.Carol M. Browner, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionAug 22, 2000
01a02884 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 22, 2000)

01a02884

08-22-2000

David Bernstein, Complainant, v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, Environmental Protection Agency, Agency.


David Bernstein v. Environmental Protection Agency

01A02884

August 22, 2000

.

David Bernstein,

Complainant,

v.

Carol M. Browner,

Administrator,

Environmental Protection Agency,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01A02884

Agency No. 99-0073-R2

DECISION

Upon review, the Commission finds that complainant's complaint was

properly dismissed pursuant to 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,656 (1999)(to be

codified and hereinafter referred to as EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(2)), for untimely EEO contact.<1> In his complaint,

complainant alleged that he was subjected to discrimination on the

basis of religion (Hebrew) when his supervisor: delayed his promotion

to GS-11 in1993; delayed his promotion to GS-12 and denied him a bronze

medal for his participation �in the Kodak enforcement case� in 1994;

and, in 1996, denied him a bronze medal for his participation with the

�Onondaga Workgroup.�<2>

The record discloses that the alleged discriminatory events occurred

from 1993 through 1996, but complainant did not initiate contact with an

EEO Counselor until February 4, 1999, which is beyond the forty-five day

limitation period. On appeal, no persuasive arguments or evidence have

been presented to warrant an extension of the time limit for initiating

EEO contact. Accordingly, the agency's final decision dismissing

complainant's complaint is AFFIRMED.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0300)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. The appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation

of material fact or law; or

2. The appellate decision will have a substantial impact on the policies,

practices, or operations of the agency.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, MUST BE FILED

WITH THE OFFICE OF FEDERAL OPERATIONS (OFO) WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR

DAYS of receipt of this decision or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS OF

RECEIPT OF ANOTHER PARTY'S TIMELY REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION. See 64

Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred

to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405); Equal Employment Opportunity Management

Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999).

All requests and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of

Federal Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box

19848, Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the

request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by

mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.

See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,661 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter

referred to as 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604). The request or opposition must

also include proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANTS' RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0400)

You have the right to file a civil action in an appropriate United States

District Court WITHIN NINETY (90) CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you

receive this decision. If you file a civil action, YOU MUST NAME AS

THE DEFENDANT IN THE COMPLAINT THE PERSON WHO IS THE OFFICIAL AGENCY HEAD

OR DEPARTMENT HEAD, IDENTIFYING THAT PERSON BY HIS OR HER FULL NAME AND

OFFICIAL TITLE. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of your

case in court. "Agency" or "department" means the national organization,

and not the local office, facility or department in which you work. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL (Z1199)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action

must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above

("Right to File A Civil Action").

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

August 22, 2000

__________________

Date

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days after it was mailed. I certify

that this decision was mailed to complainant, complainant's representative

(if applicable), and the agency on:

__________________

Date

______________________________

1On November 9, 1999, revised regulations governing the EEOC's federal

sector complaint process went into effect. These regulations apply to all

federal sector EEO complaints pending at any stage in the administrative

process. Consequently, the Commission will apply the revised regulations

found at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644 (1999), where applicable, in deciding the

present appeal. The regulations, as amended, may also be found at the

Commission's website at www.eeoc.gov.

2In its original decision issued on January 4, 2000, the agency framed

complainant's complaint to include an additional claim of non-promotion

to GS-13, a claim it accepted for investigation. After complainant

disputed the inclusion of the accepted claim in his complaint, the

agency redefined the complaint and issued the above appealed decision,

which rescinded the prior decision and dismissed the remaining claims in

their entirety. We note that, on appeal, complainant does not challenge

the present characterization of his complaint.