Odis S.,1 Complainant,v.Gina C. Haspel, Director, Central Intelligence Agency, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

May 9, 2019

2019001995 (E.E.O.C. May. 9, 2019)

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

Odis S.,1
Complainant,

v.

Gina C. Haspel,
Director,
Central Intelligence Agency,
Agency.

Request No. 2019001995

Appeal No. 0120182112

Agency No. 14-08

DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION

Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120182112 (October 23, 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).

During the relevant period, Complainant was employed as an Information Review & Release
Manager, GS-14, at an Agency office located in Washington, D.C. On May 24, 2018,
Complainant filed an EEO complaint, as amended, alleging that the Agency discriminated
against him and subjected him to hostile work environment harassment on the bases of race
(African-American), sex (male), age (63), and reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when:

1. on July 11, 2013, his upper level supervisor and security management referred
him to a Personal Evaluation Board;

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.
2019001995

2
2. in September 2013, management issued him a negative and inaccurate
performance appraisal for the period of November 2, 2012 through August 3,
2013;
3. in September 2013, management failed to recommend him for promotion; and
4. on September 30, 2013, security escorted Complainant out of the building,
took his badge, denied him access to Agency buildings, and denied him
participation in his performance appraisal process.

Following an EEO investigation, the Agency informed Complainant of the right to request a
hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) or an immediate final agency decision.
Complainant requested the former. Without a hearing, the assigned AJ issued a decision finding
no discrimination. An appeal from Complainant followed, which the Commission docketed as
EEOC Appeal No. 0120182112. Subsequently, on June 4, 2018, the Agency issued a final
decision fully implementing the AJ’s finding of no discrimination. On October 23, 2018, in
Appeal No. 0120182112, EEOC affirmed the Agency’s findings of no discrimination or reprisal.
It found that Complainant failed to show that the Agency’s reasons for its actions were a pretext
for discrimination. The instant request for reconsideration from Complainant followed. In his
request for reconsideration, Complainant stated that the appellate decision failed to consider and
address all documented evidence of record.

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) (as revised Aug. 5, 2015), at 9-18; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture,
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. 0120182112 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.
2019001995

3
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 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

May 9, 2019
Date