Warren Rowan, Petitioner,v.Ann M. Veneman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionDec 29, 2003
03A40025 (E.E.O.C. Dec. 29, 2003)

03A40025

12-29-2003

Warren Rowan, Petitioner, v. Ann M. Veneman, Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Agency.


Warren Rowan v. Department of Agriculture

03A40025

December 29, 2003

.

Warren Rowan,

Petitioner,

v.

Ann M. Veneman,

Secretary,

Department of Agriculture,

Agency.

Petition No. 03A40025

MSPB No. SF-0752-02-0421-I-3

DECISION

On November 6, 2003, petitioner filed a timely petition with the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission asking for review of a Final Order

issued by the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) concerning his claim

of discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the Rehabilitation

Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq.

Petitioner, an Assistant Helicopter Manager, GS-8, at the agency's

Angeles National Forest, Van Nuys, California facility, alleged that

he was discriminated against on the basis of disability (back injury)

when he was removed from employment.<1>

On February 25, 2003, petitioner filed a mixed case appeal with the MSPB.

After a hearing, the Administrative Judge upheld petitioner's removal

finding, inter alia, no disability discrimination. Petitioner did not

petition the full Board for review.

EEOC regulations provide that the Commission has jurisdiction over

mixed case appeals on which the MSPB has issued a decision that makes

determinations on allegations of discrimination. 29 C.F.R. � 1614.303

et seq. The Commission must determine whether the decision of the

MSPB with respect to the allegation of discrimination constitutes a

correct interpretation of any applicable law, rule, regulation or policy

directive, and is supported by the evidence in the record as a whole.

29 C.F.R. � 1614.305(c).

Based upon a thorough review of the record<2>, it is the decision of

the Commission to concur with the final decision of the MSPB finding

no discrimination. The Commission finds that the MSPB's decision

constitutes a correct interpretation of the laws, rules, regulations,

and policies governing this matter and is supported by the evidence in

the record as a whole.

PETITIONER'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (W0900)

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,

based on the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, within

thirty (30) calendar days of 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 (Z1199)

If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot

afford the services of an attorney, you may request that the Court appoint

an attorney to represent you and that the Court permit you to file the

action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.;

the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c).

The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of

the Court. Filing a request for an attorney does not extend your time

in which to file a civil action. Both the request and the civil action

must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above

(�Right to File a Civil Action�).

FOR THE COMMISSION:

______________________________

Carlton M. Hadden, Director

Office of Federal Operations

December 29, 2003

__________________

Date

1Petitioner also initially alleged discrimination based on race, sex,

and reprisal, but subsequently withdrew those bases.

2For purposes of its review, the Commission assumes, without deciding,

that petitioner is an �individual with a disability� within the meaning

of the Rehabilitation Act.