Complainant,v.Megan J. Brennan, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service (Capital Metro Area), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Mar 9, 2015

0520150017 (E.E.O.C. Mar. 9, 2015)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013

,
Complainant,

v.

Megan J. Brennan,
Postmaster General,
United States Postal Service
(Capital Metro Area),
Agency.

Request No. 0520150017

Appeal No. 0120141934

Agency No. 4K280003814

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in EEOC Appeal No.
0120141934 (August 28, 2014). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its
discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision where the
requesting party demonstrates 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. See

29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c).
In our prior decision, we affirmed the Agency’s dismissal of Complainant’s claim that the
Agency retaliated against her when it issued her a Letter of Indebtedness dated July 19, 2013,
in the amount of $28,383.76.

In her request, Complainant argues that our dismissal involves a clearly erroneous
interpretation of material facts and law. We disagree. Commission precedent has long held
that challenges to an agency’s actions under the Debt Collection Act are not within the scope of
the EEO complaint process. Baughman vs. Department of Army, EEOC Appeal No. 01900865
(February 26, 1990); Amato v. Department of the Army, EEOC Request No, 0520070240
(July 18, 2007). The Debt Collection Act, 31 U.S.C. 3711 et seq. mandates that monetary
disputes involving an agency of the United States government and any claimed debtor must be
resolved through the provisions of the Debt Collection Act. The Commission has previously
held that challenges to agency's actions under the Debt Collection Act are not within the scope
of the EEO complaint process and the Commission's jurisdiction. The proper forum for
complainant to challenge the appropriateness of the collection process and validity of his debt
0520150017

2
is through the administrative process of the Debt Collection Act. As complainant is essentially
alleging violations of the Debt Collection Act by challenging the existence of the debt, the
Commission determines that her allegations are not within the scope of its jurisdiction, and, as
such, fail to state a claim. We note that the Agency properly advised Complainant as to how
to challenge the appropriateness of the collection process through the administrative process
under the Debt Collection Act. Finally, we remind Complainant, as we did in our prior
decision, that we will not address claims raised for the first time on appeal.

After reviewing the previous decision and the entire record, the Commission finds that the
request fails to meet the criteria of 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c), and it is the decision of the
Commission to deny the request. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120141934 remains the
Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of
the Commission on this request.

COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION

(P0610)
This decision of the Commission is final, and there is no further right of administrative appeal
from the Commission’s decision. 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. 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.

RIGHT TO REQUEST COUNSEL

(Z0610)
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 from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you
and that the Court also 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
0520150017

3
with the Court 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:

______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

Date
March 9, 2015