Larry L. Larson, Complainant,v.Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 7, 1999
01986788 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 7, 1999)

01986788

12-07-1999

Larry L. Larson, Complainant, v. Richard J. Danzig, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Larry L. Larson, )

Complainant, )

)

v. ) Appeal No. 01986788

) Agency No. 96-00251-074

Richard J. Danzig, )

Secretary, )

Department of the Navy, )

Agency. )

_______________________________ )

DECISION

Complainant filed the instant appeal with this Commission from an agency

decision dated August 6, 1998 dismissing his complaint on the grounds

that the complaint was moot.<1>

The instant complaint was the subject of a prior Commission decision

in Larson v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 01966677

(Apr. 20, 1998). In EEOC Appeal No. 01966677, the Commission found

that complainant had claimed that he was discriminated against on the

bases of disability, sex, and retaliation, when on June 18, 1996, he

was notified that the position of Welder, offered due to a reduction

in force, had been withdrawn. Larson, EEOC Appeal No. 01966677.

The agency found in a decision dated August 23, 1996 that the complaint

was moot because on July 30, 1996 complainant was notified that the offer

due to the reduction in force remained the same as that of the May 1,

1996 offer. Id. Complainant admitted that "the agency has restored my

previous offer . . ." Id.

The Commission previously found:

To determine whether the issues raised in [complainant's] complaint remain

in dispute, it must be ascertained (1) if it can be said with assurance

that there is no reasonable expectation that the alleged violation

will recur, and (2) if the interim relief or events have completely and

irrevocably eradicated the effects of the alleged violation. County of

Los Angeles v. Davis, 440 U.S. 625 (1979). When such circumstances

exist, no relief is available and no need for a determination of the

rights of the parties is presented. [The regulation set forth at 64

Fed. Reg 37,644, 37,656 (1999) (to be codified as and hereinafter cited

as 29 C.F.R. �1614.107(a)(5))] requires an agency to dismiss a complaint

that is moot.

In his complaint and on appeal [complainant] requests compensatory

damages. The agency has not addressed this request. The Commission

has held that compensatory damages are available to federal sector

complainants under the Civil Rights Act of 1991, Pub. L. No. 102-166,

105 Stat. 1071. Jackson v. United States Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal

No. 01923399 (Nov. 12, 1992), aff'd, Jackson v. United States Postal

Serv., EEOC Request No. 05930306 (Feb. 1, 1993). Should [complainant]

prevail on this complaint, the possibility of an award of compensatory

damages exists. See Glover v. United States Postal Serv., EEOC Appeal

No. 01930696 (Dec. 9, 1993). Therefore, we find that the complaint is

not moot because [complainant] requested compensatory damages and the

agency has not addressed that request.

Larson, EEOC Appeal No. 01966677.

Subsequent to our prior decision in EEOC Appeal No. 01966677, the agency

requested that complainant provide objective evidence of compensatory

damages. The agency found that the evidence submitted by complainant was

insufficient to show that complainant would be entitled to compensatory

damages. The agency found that complainant's examination on July 17,

1996, by his personal physician referred to that examination as a

"follow-up" yet complainant did not provide any documentation of prior

or subsequent examinations. The agency found that "[t]he connection

between any stress from [complainant's] job, the alleged discrimination,

and any pre-existing medical conditions is unclear." The agency further

found that "the connection between [complainant's] medication and the

alleged discrimination is not established." The agency stated that

it had provided complainant with an opportunity to clarify "these

contradictions," but complainant provided no further documentation.

By memorandum dated July 26, 1996 complainant asserted that he "suffered

weeks of unnecessary stress that resulted from management's careless

handling of my situation." By a note dated June 11, 1998 complainant

stated:

I am requesting compensatory damages in the amount of $150,000 for

stress placed on me . . . When I experienced the physical symptoms my

Dr. sent me to a cardiologist for testing as stated in enclosed notes

the job stress was blamed for my symptoms.

In notes from Medical Doctor A dated July 17, 1996 regarding complainant,

Medical Doctor A stated:

[Complainant] [h]as been tired, but attributes much of this to increasing

uncertainties at work and some question about whether he will continue

to be employed after September . . . He is having nausea, especially

in the early mornings and stomach upset reminiscent of previous gastritis.

. . . .

[H]e seems to be under a fair amount of stress and anxiety and may

actually have some early symptoms of situational depression related to

the uncertainty about his work.

By letter dated June 9, 1998 complainant's representative stated:

Additionally, I was also a close confidant and friend of [complainant]

throughout this time period. We worked together . . . I have first

hand knowledge of his situation.

. . . .

[Complainant] was not eating, sleeping, or functioning in a healthful

manner. The anxiety and fear had impacted his major life functions to

the point of his near physical exhaustion. His relationship with his

spouse and family had suffered greatly. I recall on numerous occasions

he confided to me that it was extremely difficult for him to continue

coming to work.

The Commission has previously addressed what types of evidence

constitutes objective evidence showing that an complainant suffered

compensatory damages. LaRochelle v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal

No. 01942119 (Apr. 13, 1995); Taylor v. Department of the Navy, EEOC

Appeal No. 01940376 (July 22, 1994); Carle v. Department of the Navy,

EEOC Appeal No. 01922369 (Jan. 5, 1993). In Carle the Commission stated:

Other evidence [of compensatory damages] could have taken the form of

a statement by complainant describing her emotional distress . . .

To properly explain the emotional distress, such statements should

include detailed information on physical or behavioral manifestations of

the distress, if any, and any other information on the intensity of the

distress, information on the duration of the distress, and examples of

how the distress affected complainant day to day, both on and off the job.

Carle, EEOC Appeal No. 01922369.

The Commission finds that the statements provided by complainant, the

June 9, 1998 statement from complainant's representative regarding his

personal observations of complainant, and the observations of Medical

Doctor A, are sufficient to constitute the objective evidence necessary

to show that complainant may be entitled to compensatory damages were

he to prevail on his complaint. Therefore, we can not find that the

effects of the alleged discrimination have been completely eradicated.

The complaint is not moot. The Commission makes no determination in

this decision as to whether complainant would actually be entitled to

compensatory damages were he to prevail on the merits of his complaint.

The agency's decision dismissing the complaint is REVERSED and we REMAND

the complaint to the agency for further processing in accordance with

this decision and applicable regulations.

ORDER (E1092)

The agency is ORDERED to process the remanded claims in accordance with 29

C.F.R. �1614.108. The agency shall acknowledge to the appellant that it

has received the remanded claims within thirty (30) calendar days of the

date this decision becomes final. The agency shall issue to appellant

a copy of the investigative file and also shall notify appellant of the

appropriate rights within one hundred fifty (150) calendar days of the

date this decision becomes final, unless the matter is otherwise resolved

prior to that time. If the appellant requests a final decision without

a hearing, the agency shall issue a final decision within sixty (60)

days of receipt of appellant's request.

A copy of the agency's letter of acknowledgement to appellant and a copy

of the notice that transmits the investigative file and notice of rights

must be sent to the Compliance Officer as referenced below.

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMISSION'S DECISION (K1199)

Compliance with the Commission's corrective action is mandatory.

The agency shall submit its compliance report within thirty (30)

calendar days of the completion of all ordered corrective action. The

report shall be submitted to the Compliance Officer, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. The agency's report must contain supporting

documentation, and the agency must send a copy of all submissions to

the complainant. If the agency does not comply with the Commission's

order, the complainant may petition the Commission for enforcement

of the order. 29 C.F.R. �1614.503(a). The complainant also has

the right to file a civil action to enforce compliance with the

Commission's order prior to or following an administrative petition

for enforcement. See 64 Fed. Reg. 37,644, 37,659-60 (1999) (to be

codified and hereinafter referred to as 29 C.F.R. ��1614.407, 1614.408),

and 29 C.F.R. �1614.503(g). Alternatively, the complainant has the

right to file a civil action on the underlying complaint in accordance

with the paragraph below entitled "Right to File A Civil Action."

29 C.F.R. ��1614.407 and 1614.408. A civil action for enforcement or

a civil action on the underlying complaint is subject to the deadline

stated in 42 U.S.C. � 2000e-16(c)(Supp. V 1993). If the complainant

files a civil action, the administrative processing of the complaint,

including any petition for enforcement, will be terminated. See 64

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

to as 29 C.F.R. �1614.409).

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M1199)

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). 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).

RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (R0993)

This is a decision requiring the agency to continue its administrative

processing of your complaint. However, if you wish to file a civil

action, you have the right to file such action in an appropriate United

States District Court. 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. In the alternative,

you may file a civil action AFTER ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY (180) CALENDAR

DAYS of the date you filed your complaint with the agency, or filed your

appeal with the Commission. 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.

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:

Dec. 7, 1999

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

Equal Employment Assistant1On 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.