U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Ervin P.,1
Complainant,
v.
Robert M. Lightfoot, Jr.,
Acting Administrator,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(Goddard Space Flight Center),
Agency.
Request No. 2019000189
Appeal No. 0120171597
Agency No. NCN16GSFC00012
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Ervin P. v. Nat’l Aeronautics & Space Admin., EEOC
Appeal No. 0120171597 (July 31, 2017). 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).
In his underlying complaint, Complainant alleged that the Agency subjected him to unlawful
discrimination on the bases of his race (African-American), age (over 40), and in reprisal for prior
protected EEO activity when, on November 20, 2015, the appraisal narrative of his mid-year
Standard Performance and Communications Environment (SPACE) performance plan did not
properly reflect his performance which he considered to be unfair and inaccurate; and he was
threatened with being placed on a Performance Improvement Plan.
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.
2019000189
2
Following an investigation, Complainant requested a final agency decision. In its final decision,
the Agency found that Complainant had failed to prove he had been subjected to discrimination.
On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision, finding that Complainant failed
to show that the Agency’s reasons for its actions was a pretext designed to conceal discrimination.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant asserts that his performance was “extraordinary,”
but does not directly refute the particularized criticisms of the quality of his work, e.g., that his
“written work contained numerous errors.” 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), 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. We find that Complainant’s arguments do not
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.
Accordingly, we find that Complainant has failed to demonstrate that the Commission should
reconsider its appellate 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. 0120171597 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
2019000189
3
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
February 15, 2019
Date
