Jeremy C.,1 Complainant,v.Dr. Mark T. Esper, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Aug 24, 2018

0520180450 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 24, 2018)

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

Jeremy C.,1
Complainant,

v.

Dr. Mark T. Esper,
Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.

Request No. 0520180450

Appeal No. 0120181468

Hearing No. 430-2016-00287X

Agency No. ARUSAR15AUG02999

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Jeremy C. v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Appeal No.
0120181468 (May 31, 2018). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its
discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision issued pursuant to 29
C.F.R. § 1614.405(a), 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).

On October 10, 2015, Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency
discriminated against him on the basis of race (Caucasian) when, on July 17 and September 4,
2015, the Traffic Management Specialist only offered Complainant a General Service
Administration (GSA) vehicle with mechanical difficulties.

1 This case has been randomly assigned a pseudonym which will replace Complainant’s name
when the decision is published to non-parties and the Commission’s website.
0520180450

2
Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing. The EEOC Administrative Judge
(AJ) assigned to the matter granted the Agency’s motion for summary judgment and issued a
decision incorporating the Agency’s statement of undisputed material facts. The AJ found that
Complainant had not been subjected to discrimination as alleged. The Agency subsequently
issued a final order fully implementing the AJ’s decision. Complainant appealed and, in Jeremy
C. v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Appeal No. 0120181468 (May 31, 2018), the Commission
affirmed the Agency’s final order.

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses his disagreement with the appellate
decision and reiterates many arguments previously made on appeal. Additionally, Complainant
submits new evidence that he contends supports his claim. The Commission notes that new
evidence generally will not be accepted in a request for reconsideration. See Houser v. Dep't of
Homeland Sec., EEOC Request No. 0520110548 (Oct. 7, 2011) (citing Equal Employment
Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110) (Aug. 5, 2015)).
Further, the Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to
the Commission. EEO MD-110, at 9-18; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agric., EEOC Request No.
0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). Rather, a reconsideration request is an opportunity to demonstrate
that the appellate decision involved a clearly erroneous interpretation of material fact or law, or
will have a substantial impact on the policies, practices, or operations of the Agency.

The Commission finds that the arguments raised by Complainant in the instant request were
largely raised in his previous appeal, fully considered, and rejected. Complainant has not
presented any persuasive arguments demonstrating that the AJ erred in finding that Complainant
failed to set forth sufficient facts showing that there was a genuine issue still in dispute. Further,
the Commission finds that the AJ’s decision appropriately indicated that the record was fully
developed, that he considered all of the record evidence in the light most favorable to
Complainant, and that the evidence established that Complainant failed to show that he was
subjected to discrimination as alleged. Complainant has not presented any evidence
demonstrating that the Commission erred in finding that the AJ properly granted summary
judgment in this matter. Moreover, the Commission finds that Complainant has not presented
any evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission’s finding that he failed to show that
he was subjected to discrimination.

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. 0120181468 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.
0520180450

3
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 (Z0815)

If you want to file a civil action but cannot pay the fees, costs, or security to do so, you may
request permission from the court to proceed with the civil action without paying these fees or
costs. Similarly, if you cannot afford an attorney to represent you in the civil action, you may
request the court to appoint an attorney for you. You must submit the requests for waiver of
court costs or appointment of an attorney directly to the court, not the Commission. The
court has the sole discretion to grant or deny these types of requests. Such requests do not alter
the time limits for filing a civil action (please read the paragraph titled Complainant’s Right to
File a Civil Action for the specific time limits).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________ Carlton M. Hadden’s signature
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations

August 24, 2018
Date