ARB CASE NO 99-011 ALJ CASE NO. 97-CAA-12 DATE:September 1, 1999
In the Matter of:
MARK DUNCAN,
COMPLAINANT
v.
SACRAMENTO METROPOLITAN AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT,
RESPONDENT.
BEFORE: THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD
Appearances:
For the Complainant: Mark Duncan, pro se Shingle Springs, California
For the Respondent: Kenneth Swenson, Esq., Duncan, Ball, Evans & Ubaldi Sacramento, California
For the Amicus Curiae, Assistant Secretary, Occupational Safety and Health: Steven J. Mandel, Esq., William J. Stone, Esq., U.S. Department of
Labor Washington, D. C.
ORDER ACCEPTING APPEAL
AND ESTABLISHING BRIEFING SCHEDULE
On December 3, 1998, we issued an Order to Show Cause in this case arising
under the employee protection provision of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7622. In our order,
129 C.F.R. §24.8
provides that a party seeking review of an ALJ's recommended decision and order shall file a petition for
review with the Administrative Review Board. To be effective, the Board must receive the petition within
10 business days of the date of the recommended decision. 29 C.F.R. §24.7(d) provides that the
recommended decision shall become the Secretary's final order unless, pursuant to 29 C.F.R.
§24.8, a party timely files a petition for review with the Board.
2The ALJ's
recommended decision and order is dated October 16, 1998. The Chief Judge of the Office of
Administrative Law Judges received the petition for review on October 30, 1998. The Office of
Administrative Law Judges issued a notice of improper filing, informing Duncan of his error on
November 10, 1998. Duncan filed his petition for review with the Board on November 23, 1998.