[Redacted], Dominica V., 1 Complainant,v.Lloyd Austin III, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Intelligence Agency), Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Aug 8, 2022

Appeal No. 2020004559 (E.E.O.C. Aug. 8, 2022)

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION Office of Federal Operations P.O. Box 77960 Washington, DC 20013 Dominica V.,1 Complainant, v. Lloyd Austin III, Secretary, Department of Defense, (Defense Intelligence Agency), Agency. Request No. 2022002665 Appeal No. 2020004559 Hearing No. 570-2017-00701X Agency No. DIA-2012-00049 DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) reconsider its decision in Dominica V. v. Department of Defense, EEOC Appeal No. 2020004559 (March 15, 2022). 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). 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. 3 2022002665 During the relevant time, Complainant worked as an Intelligence Officer for the Agency in Washington, DC. Complainant filed a formal complaint claiming discrimination based on race, national origin, and in reprisal for prior protected activity when: on January 30, 2013, she was placed on administrative leave; on September 11, 2014, she received a Notice of Proposed Suspension; on March 10, 2014, she received a Notice of Proposed Removal; and on October 15, 2014, she was removed from her position. Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative Judge, but subsequently withdrew the request. The Agency issued a final decision, finding no discrimination. In EEOC Appeal No. 2020004559, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision finding no discrimination. In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant, through counsel, argues that the prior decision improperly failed to consider her appeal brief, finding that it was not timely filed. Complainant argues that she had requested and received an extension to file a brief, and that it was timely filed within the extension period. Our current record support Complainant’s assertion and it appears our prior decision inadvertently missed the extension granted. However, we have now carefully examined that brief, and conclude that even if Complainant’s brief had been reviewed in the prior decision, the arguments raised therein would not have affected our ultimate decision that the Agency properly found no discrimination was established in its final decision. Moreover, regarding the substance of the subject claims, we find no persuasive arguments indicating that the prior decision affirming the Agency final action was improper. We emphasize 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. 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. 2020004559 remains the Commission's decision. There is no further right of administrative appeal on the decision of the Commission on this request. 4 2022002665 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 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 August 08, 2022 Date