Eduardo C. Nocon, Appellant,v.Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionJan 19, 1999
01975050 (E.E.O.C. Jan. 19, 1999)

01975050

01-19-1999

Eduardo C. Nocon, Appellant, v. Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Eduardo C. Nocon v. Department of the Navy

01975050

January 19, 1999

Eduardo C. Nocon, )

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01975050

) Agency No. 97-68322-005

Richard J. Danzig, )

Secretary, )

Department of the Navy, )

Agency. )

______________________________)

DECISION

The Commission finds the agency committed no reversible legal error in its

May 14, 1997 final decision (FAD), which dismissed appellant's February 3,

1997 formal EEO complaint for untimely EEO Counselor contact, pursuant

to 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(b), in pertinent part. We are not persuaded by

appellant's arguments in his June 12, 1997 appeal, through his attorney,

to reach a contrary conclusion.

We find, by appellant's own statements in the record, that he reasonably

suspected he had been discriminated against, on the bases of race

(Asian/Pacific Islander) and color (brown) as early as June 1992,

regarding an alleged "pay disparity" between himself and a White

co-worker, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,

as amended, 42 U.S.C. �2000e et seq. Cochran v. U.S. Postal Service,

EEOC Request No. 05920399 (June 18, 1992); Perez v. Department of Health

and Human Services, EEOC Appeal No. 01950452 (May 24, 1995), request to

reconsider denied, Perez v. Department of Health and Human Services,

EEOC Request No. 05950697 (March 1, 1996). Appellant's contention in

the present case that he learned, on November 13, 1996, that a female

coworker, hired after he had been hired, had her pay adjusted, apparently

in connection with her own EEOC case, does not justify an extension of

the applicable time limitations.

We are also not persuaded by appellant's argument that he was not

aware of the applicable time limitations of 45 days as set forth at 29

C.F.R. �1614.105(a)(1).<1> We find that, at least as early as October 22,

1993, appellant expressed an awareness of the need to raise issues of

discrimination with an EEO Counselor. We further find that appellant

failed to act with due diligence or prudent regard for his rights,

waiting some four years before he finally initiated EEO counseling on

November 18, 1996. O'Dell v. Department of Health and Human Services,

EEOC Request No. 05901130 (December 27, 1990); Baldwin County Welcome

Center v. Brown, 466 U.S. 147, 151 (1984) (per curiam).

Having reviewed the entire record, the arguments on appeal, including

those not expressly addressed herein, and for the foregoing reasons, the

Commission hereby AFFIRMS the FAD's dismissal of appellant's complaint

in the present case.

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0795)

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

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

arguments or evidence which tend to establish that:

1. New and material evidence is available that was not readily available

when the previous decision was issued; or

2. The previous decision involved an erroneous interpretation of law,

regulation or material fact, or misapplication of established policy; or

3. The decision is of such exceptional nature as to have substantial

precedential implications.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting arguments or evidence, MUST

BE FILED WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive this

decision, or WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive

a timely request to reconsider filed by another party. Any argument in

opposition to the request to reconsider or cross request to reconsider

MUST be submitted to the Commission and to the requesting party

WITHIN TWENTY (20) CALENDAR DAYS of the date you receive the request

to reconsider. See 29 C.F.R. �1614.407. All requests and arguments

must bear proof of postmark and 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 filed on the date it is received

by the Commission.

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

request for reconsideration as untimely. If extenuating circumstances

have prevented the timely filing of a request for reconsideration,

a written statement setting forth the circumstances which caused the

delay and 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. �l6l4.604(c).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0993)

It is the position of the Commission that 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.

You should be aware, however, that courts in some jurisdictions have

interpreted the Civil Rights Act of 1991 in a manner suggesting that

a civil action must be filed WITHIN THIRTY (30) CALENDAR DAYS from the

date that you receive this decision. To ensure that your civil action

is considered timely, you are advised to file it WITHIN THIRTY (30)

CALENDAR DAYS from the date that you receive this decision or to consult

an attorney concerning the applicable time period in the jurisdiction

in which your action would be filed. 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 (Z1092)

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:

January 19, 1999

DATE Ronnie Blumenthal, Director

Office of Federal Operations

1Prior to October 1, 1992, the effective date of 29 C.F.R. Part 1614,

the applicable time limitation was 30 days.