U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Waneta F.,1 Complainant, v. Alejandro N. Mayorkas, Secretary, Department of Homeland Security (Federal Emergency Management Agency), Agency. Request No. 2021002150 Appeal No. 2019005452 Agency No. HS-FEMA-24679-2015 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Waneta F. v. Dep’t of Homeland Sec., EEOC Appeal No. 2019005452 (Jan. 22, 2021). 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). At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant was the GS-0343-15 Director of Records Management at the Agency’s Office of Chief Administrative Officer in Crystal City, Virginia and then an employee of the U.S. Treasury. Complainant filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to discrimination and a hostile work environment on the bases of race/color (African-American/Black), sex (female), and in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when: 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. 2021002150 2 1. Before her first investigative interview by the Internal Investigative Branch (part of the Office of Chief Security Officer) on February 26, 2014, it refused to inform her in advance of the topic so she could prepare, and at her second interview on June 18, 2014, it denied her permission to use the laptop she brought to answer questions, was hostile, and repeatedly called her a liar; 2. On February 11, 2015, the Director (African American/Black/female) of the Personnel Security Division (part of the Office of the Chief Security Officer) suspended her clearance (with the right to respond) pending the Division making a final determination; 3. After being placed on administrative leave on February 11, 2015, she was issued a notice dated March 6, 2015, of proposed indefinite suspension from duty by her first line supervisor (S1 - male); 4. By notice dated April 29, 2015, she was issued an indefinite suspension without pay effective May 1, 2015, by her second line supervisor (S2 - female) which resulted in her constructive discharge around May 2015; 5. She learned on July 16, 2015, that because her Agency clearance was still in suspension status, her new employer denied her access to classified information; 6. On August 7, 2015, she learned that the Personnel Security Division ceased processing whether to restore her clearance; 7. On August 20, 2015, the above Director of the Personnel Security Division issued a decision revoking her security clearance; and 8. 8. On September 15, 2015, the above Director rescinded this decision and returned her to suspension status. Following an investigation, the Agency issued a final agency decision finding that Complainant was not subjected to discrimination or reprisal. In the appellate decision, the Commission affirmed. In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement with the previous decision and reiterates arguments previously made and considered on appeal. The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), Chap. 9 § VI.A (Aug. 5, 2015); 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. Complainant has not done so here. Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission's 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. The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2019005452 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 2021002150 3 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 29, 2021 Date
