Office of Administrative Law Judges Seven Parkway Center - Room 290 Pittsburgh, PA 15220
(412) 644-5754 (412) 644-5005 (FAX)
Issue date: 23Aug2001 CASE NO. 2001-ERA-15
In the Matter of
RONALD J. D. ULA,
Complainant
v.
ONYX ENVIRONMENTAL,
Respondent
ORDER GRANTING RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
DECISION IN PART, AND ORDER GRANTING
COMPLAINANT'S MOTION FOR DISMISSAL
The above-styled matter is scheduled for hearing on September 26, 2001, in Akron, Ohio. By facsimile dated August 13, 2001, the Complainant requested a voluntary dismissal of this case. On August 15, 2001, the Respondent filed a Motion for Summary Decision.
The Respondent argued that summary decision should be granted for the claims asserted under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"), the Safe Drinking Water Act ("SDWA"), and the Toxic Substances Control Act ("TSCA"), because the Complainant failed to timely file these claims. The implementing regulation at 29 C.F.R. Part 24.3(b) states:
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(2)of this section, any complaint shall be filed within 30 days after the occurrence of the alleged violation. For the purpose of determining timeliness of filing, a complaint field by mail shall be deemed filed as of the date of mailing.
(2) Under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, any complaint shall be filed within 180 days after the occurrence of the alleged violation.
According to the Regional Supervisory Investigator's findings, the Complainant was discharged on September 5, 2001. The Complainant's complaint letters, however, were postmarked October 28, 2000 and March 5, 2001. The Complainant's CERCLA, SDWA and TSCA claims were filed 53 days after the termination of employment, and thus, outside the 30 days requirement of the regulations. Therefore, theses claims are time barred and the Respondent's motion for summary decision is granted.
[Page 2]
Unlike the Complainant's CERCLA, SDWA and TSCA claims, his ERA claim is not time barred. However, the Complainant has requested that this matter be dismissed. No objection to this request has been received.
WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1) The Respondent's motion for summary decision on the claims filed under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Toxic Substances Control Act is GRANTED.
2) The Complainant's request to voluntarily dismiss the complaint filed under the Energy Reorganization Act is GRANTED and this matter is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
