Decisions and Orders | Office of Administrative Law Judges| US EPA

 
	
		
	
	
	

  







UNITED STATES 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY



BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATOR










IN THE MATTER OF

	WELTY MOBILE SERVICE        [UST]RCRA-(9006)-VIII-95-07

	Respondent		  








	ORDER ON POSSIBLE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION


		On November 4, 1996, the Presiding Judge received a letter from the Respondent in which the
Respondent made three requests, one relating to the location of the hearing, the second concerning the
EPA Rules of Practice and the third about the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. §§3501 et seq. 
There is no indication in the letter that a copy thereof was served on the Complainant's counsel and, as a
result, the letter may constitute an ex parte communication prohibited by Section 22.08 of the EPA Rule
of Practice (Rules), 40 C.F.R. §22.08. Therefore, in accordance with Section 22.08 of the Rules, a copy
of this letter is being attached to this order and will be served on the Complainant's counsel. 
Complainant's counsel can make, on or before December 2, 1996, such reply to the Respondent's letter as
is deemed necessary.


		Since the Respondent is handling this proceeding pro se, it is noted that an ex parte
communication means any communication with the Presiding Judge on the merits of the case that has not
also been furnished to the other party, the Complainant.


		Moreover, with regard to the Respondent's request that he be furnished a copy of the EPA Rules
of Practice, it is further noted that a copy of those Rules was attached as an exhibit to the copy of the
Complaint received by the Presiding Judge.  If a copy of the Rules was inadvertently not attached to the
Complaint served upon the Respondent, the Complainant is directed to send a copy of the Rules to the
Respondent by the date set out above for replying to the letter, December 2, 1996.


	 Further, with regard to the Paperwork Reduction Act request, it would not be appropriate by the
Presiding Judge to supply the information requested since this would constitute giving legal advice to a
party.  The Respondent will have to conduct his own independent research on this matter if the
Respondent intends to take any position on the applicability on the Paperwork Reduction Act.


	SO ORDERED.

Daniel M. Head

Administrative Law Judge
Dated: November 14, 1996

Washington, DC



IN THE MATTER OF WELTY'S MOBIL SERVICE Respondent

Docket No. RCRA-(9006)-VIII-95-07




CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE


	I certify that the foregoing Order on Possible Ex Parte Communication, dated ______________, 
 was sent in the following manner to the addressees listed below:



Original by Pouch Mail to:
	Tina Artemis

						Regional Hearing Clerk

						U.S. EPA, Reg. 8

					999 18th Street

						Denver, CO 80202-2466


Copy by Certified Mail-Return
	Receipt Requested to:

Counsel for Complainant:
Dana J. Stotsky, Esquire

					Senior Enforcement Attorney

					Enforcement Division

						U.S. EPA, Reg. 8

						999 18th Street

						Denver, CO 80202-2466


Representative for Respondent:
	Welty Mobile Service

					Frank and Alta Welty

						P.O. Box 277

					DuBois, Wyoming 82513



Aurora M. Jennings

Legal Assistant

Office of Administrative Law

	Judges

Environmental Protection Agency

Washington, DC 20460


Dated:

Washington, DC
Local Navigation
