Dwight A. Simonton, Complainant,v.William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionMay 3, 2000
01995205 (E.E.O.C. May. 3, 2000)

01995205

05-03-2000

Dwight A. Simonton, Complainant, v. William J. Henderson, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, Agency.


Dwight A. Simonton, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01995205

) Agency No. 4-I-530-0082-99

William J. Henderson, )

Postmaster General, )

United States Postal Service, )

Agency. )

______________________________)

DECISION

The Commission finds that the agency's decision dated May 7, 1999,

dismissing complainant's complaint due to untimely EEO contact is

proper pursuant to the regulation set forth at 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644,

37,656 (1999) (to be codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(2)).<1> In his complaint, complainant alleged that he was

not provided with reasonable accommodation, and the agency falsified

his retirement application which deprived him of health insurance upon

retirement. The agency stated in its decision that the alleged incidents

occurred on September 17, 1997 and October 29, 1998, when complainant

was denied reasonable accommodation and when he was notified that his

health benefit was terminated, respectively. Complainant contacted an

EEO Counselor with regard to the matters on February 17, 1999, which was

beyond the 45-day time limit. Complainant contends that in February

1999, he learned that a female rural carrier was granted reasonable

accommodation, and he learned from the Office of Personnel Management

about the alleged falsification of his retirement papers.

The Commission has adopted a �reasonable suspicion� standard (as opposed

to a �supportive facts� standard) to determine when the limitation period

is triggered under the EEOC Regulations. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.105(a)(2);

Ball v. United States Postal Service, EEOC Request No. 05880247 (July 6,

1988). Thus, the limitations period is not triggered until a complainant

should reasonably suspect discrimination, but before all the facts

that would support a charge of discrimination have become apparent.

After a review of the record, we find that complainant had or should

have had a reasonable suspicion of discrimination concerning the alleged

matters at the time when the alleged discriminatory incidents occurred or

during the relevant time period. The record indicates that complainant

previously sought EEO counseling regarding the denial of reasonable

accommodation in June 1998, however, he did not file a formal complaint

at that time. In addition, complainant filed an appeal to the Merit

Systems Protection Board in July 1998, alleging that he was subjected to

discrimination when he was improperly denied accommodation. Further, the

record contains a letter dated October 29, 1998, from complainant to an

Accounting Service Center employee noting that his health benefits were

terminated, indicating that this termination was purportedly erroneous,

and asking for assistance in correcting the alleged error. Clearly,

complainant should have suspected the alleged discrimination more than

45 days prior to his February 1999 EEO contact.

Accordingly, the agency's decision 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:

May 3, 2000

DATE Carlton M. Hadden, Acting Director

Office of Federal Operations

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

For timeliness purposes, the Commission will presume that this decision

was received within five (5) calendar days of mailing. I certify that

the 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.