Antonio J. Provencio, Complainant,v.Dr. Donald C. Winter, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionNov 11, 2007
01-2006-3464_Provencio (E.E.O.C. Nov. 11, 2007)

01-2006-3464_Provencio

11-11-2007

Antonio J. Provencio, Complainant, v. Dr. Donald C. Winter, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Antonio J. Provencio,

Complainant,

v.

Dr. Donald C. Winter,

Secretary,

Department of the Navy,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01200634641

Agency No. 056600100852

DECISION

Pursuant to 29 C.F.R. � 1614.405, the Commission accepts complainant's

appeal from the agency's April 12, 2006 final decision concerning

his equal employment opportunity (EEO) complaint alleging employment

discrimination in violation of 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. Complainant alleged that the agency discriminated against him

on the bases of national origin (Hispanic) and disability (shoulder/back

injury)2 when: (1) on March 3, 2005, he submitted a timely request to

be considered for selection for a six-month detail to the Expeditionary

Warfare C41SR Science and Technology Office in Washington, DC, but was

not selected; and (2) on March 23, 2005, while he was still within the

probationary period of his excepted service appointment with the agency,

he was terminated from Federal employment for failure to adhere to the

agency's procedures for requesting and scheduling leave.

Issue 1

Complainant's third level supervisor (S3) explained that the Expeditionary

Warfare C41SR Science and Technology Officer, ONR, asked him to recommend

an employee for the detail to that office. Complainant's second-line

supervisor (S2) received the applications and forwarded them to S3 for

evaluation. S3 evaluated the applicants' background and experience

against four criteria: (a) educational background; (b) experience,

skills and knowledge of program planning; (c) experience, skills and

knowledge of technology and performer selection; and (d) experience in

program execution oversight, guidance, and reporting. S3 recommended the

selectee (SE) because he possessed a PhD in Electrical Engineering and

Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, which

fit with the research and development work done by ONR; he had worked at

the Activity on an internally funded project doing independent research as

the principal investigator; and, he had experience in technical writing,

presentation, management, and reporting of the research. S3 did not

recommend complainant because complainant's background and experience

was not as good as SE's.

Issue 2

Complainant's first-line supervisor (S1) maintained that he terminated

complainant during his probationary period because complainant failed to

follow proper procedures for requesting leave and for working at home.

S1 had counseled complainant verbally and via e-mail regarding the

requirements to request leave through supervision, and that working at

home had to be approved in advance and proper paperwork completed.

S1 stated that complainant demonstrated an unacceptable pattern

of behavior for an intern in the NCIP. S2 and S3 corroborated S1's

statements and concurred with S1's recommendation to terminate complainant

during his probationary period.

After a review of the record in its entirety, including consideration

of all statements submitted on appeal, it is the decision of the Equal

Employment Opportunity Commission to affirm the agency's final decision

because the preponderance of the evidence of record does not establish

that discrimination occurred.3

STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL

RECONSIDERATION (M0701)

The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider the decision in this

case if the complainant or the agency submits a written request containing

arguments or evidence which tends to establish 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.

Requests to reconsider, with supporting statement or brief, must be filed

with the Office of Federal Operations (OFO) within thirty (30) calendar

days of receipt of this decision or within twenty (20) calendar days of

receipt of another party's timely request for reconsideration. See 29

C.F.R. � 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive for

29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), 9-18 (November 9, 1999). All requests

and arguments must be submitted to the Director, Office of Federal

Operations, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, P.O. Box 19848,

Washington, D.C. 20036. In the absence of a legible postmark, the

request to reconsider shall be deemed timely filed if it is received by

mail within five days of the expiration of the applicable filing period.

See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604. The request or opposition must also include

proof of service on the other party.

Failure to file within the time period will result in dismissal of your

request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances

prevented the timely filing of the request. Any supporting documentation

must be submitted with your request for reconsideration. The Commission

will consider requests for reconsideration filed after the deadline only

in very limited circumstances. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.604(c).

COMPLAINANT'S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0900)

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. If you

file a request to reconsider and also file a civil action, filing a civil

action will terminate the administrative processing of your complaint.

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

November 11, 2007

__________________

Date

1 Due to a new data system, complainant's case has been re-designated

with the above-referenced appeal number.

2 We assume for the purposes of this decision that complainant is an

individual with a disability within the meaning of the Rehabilitation

Act.

3 We find that complainant failed to present sufficient evidence of

pretext or discriminatory animus.

??

??

??

??

4

0120063464

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036