[Redacted], Meghann M., 1 Complainant,v.Debra A. Haaland, Secretary, Department of the Interior (Bureau of Reclamation), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Apr 26, 2021

Appeal No. 2020004991 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 26, 2021)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Meghann M.,1 Complainant, v. Debra A. Haaland, Secretary, Department of the Interior (Bureau of Reclamation), Agency. Request No. 2021001694 Appeal No. 2020004991 Agency No. DOI-BOR-19-0444 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020004991 (December 17, 2020). 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 May 16, 2019, Complainant filed a formal EEO complaint claiming the Agency subjected her to unlawful retaliation for engaging in protected EEO activity (prior 2017 formal complaint) when she was not selected for one of the two vacancies advertised by Announcement Number BR-MP-2018-261 in October 2018 for the position of Grants Management Specialist, GS-1109- 11, After an investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before an Equal Employment 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. 2021001694 2 Opportunity Commission Administrative Judge (AJ). In accordance with Complainant’s request, the Agency issued a final decision pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.110(b), finding no discrimination. In EEOC Appeal No. 2019004029, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision determining the evidence of record did not establish that discrimination had occurred. In Complainant’s original appeal from the Agency’s final decision, Complainant argued that the selecting officials’ articulated rationale for not selecting her was pretext masking retaliatory animus because her prior EEO activity was ongoing at the time. Complainant challenged the Agency’s selecting officials’ rationales for the selections by comparing the language in the announcement to their testimony. Additionally, Complainant attempted to refute the consensus of the selecting officials that the specific experience presented by the selectees was more important in filling the positions than Complainant’s years of experience. Finally, Complainant averred that the records from the interviews she received, after a Freedom of Information Act request, were redacted and altered. In the instant request to reconsider, Complainant discusses the allegations from her prior 2017 EEO complaint, along with providing a detailed timeline of accommodation requests, and documents related to the prior EEO action. In sum, Complainant attempts to relitigate the underlying matter and largely mirrored the appeal of the Agency’s final decision. 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. 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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2020004991remains 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. 2021001694 3 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 April 26, 2021 Date