DATE: January 21, 1999

CASE NO: 1998-CAA-2

In the Matter of:

   CURTIS N. FANNING,
      Complainant,

    v.

   RAMSEY SCHILLING CONSULTING GROUP,
      Respondent.

   This matter arises under the employee protection provisions of the Clean Air Act (the "Act"), 42 U.S.C. § 7622, and the applicable regulations contained at 29 C.F.R. Part 24. Curtis Fanning, a pro se complainant, appealed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's determination that his allegations were without merit and requested a formal hearing.

   After complainant refused to appear for the second deposition scheduled for January 7, 1999, and a telephone conference to discuss this matter on January 12, 1999, the undersigned issued an Order Granting Continuance and Motion to Compel and Denying Motions to Dismiss and for Sanctions on January 15, 1999.

   Subsequently, on January 20, 1999, the undersigned received motions from both the complainant and respondent in which they accused the undersigned of being biased toward the other party and requesting that I recuse myself from the case.

   Despite my best efforts to be impartial in this case, it is evident that the animosity between the parties is so great that my attempts to be impartial have been misinterpreted by each party as bias toward the other party. Accordingly, I find that the interests of justice would be best served by my recusal pursuant to the provisions of 29 C.F.R. § 18.31(b).

   IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the motions to recuse be granted.

   Entered this 21st day of January 1999, at Long Beach, California.

      DANIEL L. STEWART
      Administrative Law Judge