0520160191
06-02-2016
Mack B.,1 Complainant, v. John O. Brennan, Director, Central Intelligence Agency, Agency.
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Mack B.,1
Complainant,
v.
John O. Brennan,
Director,
Central Intelligence Agency,
Agency.
Request No. 0520160191
Appeal No. 0120150080
Agency No. 14-25
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
On January 29, 2016, Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) - EEOC Appeal No. 0120150080 (December 29, 2015). 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).
Complainant is a former employee of the Agency. In 2009, he received an Agency claim of debt for $16,522.03. Therein, the Agency wrote that the debt was based on an investigation by the Office of Inspector General (IG) which determined there were inaccuracies in Complainant's time and attendance submissions.
In May 2010, Complainant filed an equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging that he was discriminated against based on his race (African-American) and reprisal for prior EEO activity under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq. when the Agency in March 2010, denied his appeal of the indebtedness finding and determined his appeal was untimely.
Following an investigation and Complainant's withdrawal of a request for a hearing before an Equal Employment Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge, the Agency in March 2012, found no discrimination and noted that Complainant's complaint was a collateral attack on the IG investigation and findings.
In EEOC Appeal No. 0120122219 (Oct. 18, 2012), the EEOC affirmed. We reasoned that in essence, Complainant was challenging the IG's investigation into his time and attendance submissions from 2004 and 2005, and this failed to state a claim because it was a collateral attack on the IG proceeding. Complainant did not file a request for reconsideration.
Thereafter, in May 2014, Complainant received from the Agency a second claim of debt - a renewal of the initial debt claim. Complainant filed a second EEO complaint alleging discrimination based on race and reprisal for prior EEO activity under Title VII when he received this debt claim. The Agency dismissed the complaint on procedural grounds.
In our previous decision, we affirmed the Agency's dismissal. We found that the complaint failed to state a claim because Complainant was challenging the IG investigation, and that Complainant raised the same claim that had already been decided by the Agency or Commission - the renewed debt collection letter was merely a reissuance of the debt collection which was the subject of his prior EEO complaint.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant contends that the IG investigation was affected by the Agency's racial bias. We emphasize that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the Commission. See EEO MD-110, Ch. 9, � VII.A. 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. Complainant has not done so here.
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. 0120150080 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 (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
June 2, 2016
__________________
Date
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.
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
---------------
------------------------------------------------------------
2
0520160191
3
0520160191