Andrezj J. Rafalski, Complainant,v.John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Capital-Metro Area), Request Nos. 05A20282; 05A20283 Appeal Nos. 01A00985; 01A10115 Agency Nos. 1K-221-0102-97; 1K-221-0121-97; 1K-221-0181-97; 1K-221-0042-98; 1K-221-0062-98; 1K-221-0074-98;1K-221-0100-98; 1K-221-0001-99; 1K-221-0031-99 Hearing Nos. 100-98-7749X; 100-98-7750X; 100-98-7759X; 100-99-7311X

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionApr 5, 2002
05A20282_05A20283 (E.E.O.C. Apr. 5, 2002)

05A20282_05A20283

04-05-2002

Andrezj J. Rafalski, Complainant, v. John E. Potter, Postmaster General, United States Postal Service, (Capital-Metro Area), Request Nos. 05A20282; 05A20283 Appeal Nos. 01A00985; 01A10115 Agency Nos. 1K-221-0102-97; 1K-221-0121-97; 1K-221-0181-97; 1K-221-0042-98; 1K-221-0062-98; 1K-221-0074-98;1K-221-0100-98; 1K-221-0001-99; 1K-221-0031-99 Hearing Nos. 100-98-7749X; 100-98-7750X; 100-98-7759X; 100-99-7311X


Andrezj J. Rafalski v. United States Postal Service

05A20282; 05A20283

April 5, 2002

.

Andrezj J. Rafalski,

Complainant,

v.

John E. Potter,

Postmaster General,

United States Postal Service,

(Capital-Metro Area),

Request Nos. 05A20282; 05A20283

Appeal Nos. 01A00985; 01A10115

Agency Nos. 1K-221-0102-97; 1K-221-0121-97; 1K-221-0181-97;

1K-221-0042-98;

1K-221-0062-98; 1K-221-0074-98;1K-221-0100-98; 1K-221-0001-99;

1K-221-0031-99

Hearing Nos. 100-98-7749X; 100-98-7750X; 100-98-7759X; 100-99-7311X

DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely initiated a request to the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission to reconsider the decision in Andrezj J. Rafalski v. United

States Postal Service, EEOC Appeal Nos. 01A00985; 01A10115 (November

27, 2001). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in

its discretion, reconsider any previous Commission decision 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(b).

In his formal complaint, complainant alleged that the agency violated

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended,

42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq., and Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act

of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. � 791 et seq.<1>

The specifics of complainant's claims are set forth in detail in the

appellate decision. The appellate decision affirmed an Administrative

Judge's finding of no discrimination. In his request for reconsideration,

complainant has not presented any evidence or argument that was not

previously considered by the Commission when we affirmed the agency's

final decision.

After a review of complainant's request for reconsideration, 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(b), and it is the

decision of the Commission to deny the request. The decision in EEOC

Appeal Nos. 01A00985; 01A10115 remains the Commission's final decision.

There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of

the Commission on this request for reconsideration.

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (P0900)

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 (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

April 5, 2002

__________________

Date

1 The Rehabilitation Act was amended in 1992 to apply the standards in

the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to complaints of discrimination

by federal employees or applicants for employment.