Titus M.,1 Complainant,v.Rick Perry, Secretary, Department of Energy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Apr 4, 2019

2019001132 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 4, 2019)

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

Titus M.,1
Complainant,

v.

Rick Perry,
Secretary,
Department of Energy,
Agency.

Request No. 2019001132

Appeal No. 0120172542

Agency No. 160081WAPA

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Titus M. v. Dep’t of Energy, EEOC Appeal No.
0120172542 (Oct. 5, 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).

Complainant, a Vice President for Procurement at the Agency’s Western Area Power
Administration in Lakewood, Colorado, filed an EEO complaint alleging that the Agency
discriminated against him based on sex (male), color (white), and in reprisal for prior protected
EEO activity when on: (1) on March 6, 2016, he was placed on administrative leave and access to
his records was restricted; and (2) on April 4, 2016, he received a Notice of Proposed Removal.

Following an investigation, Complainant requested a final agency decision. In accordance with
Complainant’s request, the Agency issued a final decision finding no discrimination.

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.
2019001132

2
In our appellate decision, we affirmed the final decision finding that Complainant had not rebutted
as pretext the Agency’s proffered legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for its actions; i.e.
Complainant was placed on administrative leave pending investigation of his conduct due to an
assault accusation and Complainant received a subsequent Notice of Proposed Removal because
the assault incident continued and escalated a “pattern of reported bullying behaviors.”

In his request for reconsideration, Complainant largely reiterates the same contentions that were
made and fully considered on appeal. Further, Complainant claims that he was denied due process
and that the Commission, along with the Agency, failed to follow its own rules, procedures, and
protocol.

The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal to the
Commission. Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614
(EEO MD-110), at 9-18 (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.

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. 0120172542 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.
2019001132

3
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 4, 2019
Date