Scott Winters, Complainant,v.Dr. Donald C. Winter, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.

Equal Employment Opportunity CommissionOct 16, 2007
0120064776 (E.E.O.C. Oct. 16, 2007)

0120064776

10-16-2007

Scott Winters, Complainant, v. Dr. Donald C. Winter, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.


Scott Winters,

Complainant,

v.

Dr. Donald C. Winter,

Secretary,

Department of the Navy,

Agency.

Appeal No. 01200647761

Agency No. 060016401227

DECISION

Complainant filed a timely appeal with this Commission from the

agency's decision dated July 31, 2006, dismissing his complaint of

unlawful employment discrimination in violation of Section 501 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Rehabilitation Act), as amended, 29 U.S.C. �

791 et seq. In his complaint, complainant alleged that he was subjected

to discrimination on the basis of disability (Anxiety attacks, Depression)

when:

1. Complainant was removed from his position with the agency, effective

January 17, 20062.

The agency dismissed the claim on the grounds that complainant had

raised the same matter before the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).

In addition, the agency found that complainant failed to timely contact

an EEO Counselor. Complainant on appeal essentially reiterates the

arguments he made before the agency. He maintains that the reason he did

not contact an EEO Counselor until April 20, 2006, was because he did

not learn of the agency's alleged discrimination until March 6, 2006,

when, during an MSPB pre-hearing conference concerning his removal, an

agency official (RMO) made statements that led complainant to believe

he was removed because of his disability.

The Commission finds that the complaint was properly dismissed pursuant

to 29 C.F.R. � 1614. 107(a)(4). We note that an aggrieved person may

initially file a mixed case complaint with an agency or may file a mixed

case appeal directly with the MSPB, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. � 1201.151,

but not both. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.302(b). EEOC Regulation 29 C.F.R. �

1614.107(a)(4) provides that an agency shall dismiss a complaint where

the complainant has raised the matter in an appeal to the MSPB and 29

C.F.R. � 1614.302 indicates that the complainant has elected to pursue

the non-EEO process. The record reveals that complainant filed an appeal

with the MSPB on January 19, 2006, concerning his removal and on April

28, 2006, an MSPB Administrative Judge (AJ) issued an Initial Decision

on the issue.

The record further reveals that complainant did not raise disability

discrimination as an affirmative defense before the MSPB. Assuming

arguendo that the reason complainant did not raise disability

discrimination when he initially filed his MSPB appeal was because he

only became aware of the discrimination when RMO made an incriminating

statement at the MSPB pre-hearingconference, the record contains

no evidence that complainant subsequently sought to amend his MSPB

complaint to include disability discrimination. In any event,

whether discrimination was raised before the MSPB or not, pursuant

to � 1614.107(a)(4), an agency shall dismiss a complaint where the

complainant has raised the matter in an appeal to the MSPB and � 1614.302

indicates that the complainant has elected to pursue the non-EEO process.

Because complainant raised the issue of his removal before the MSPB,

we AFFIRM the FAD's dismissal of his complaint.

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 tend 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

October 16, 2007

__________________

Date

1 Due to a new Commission data system, this case has been redesignated

with the above-referenced appeal number.

2 We agree with the agency's Appeal Brief in which the agency argues that

a second issue, characterized in the FAD as "the agency representative

. . . stated that you would not be able to regain your security clearance

because of your mental disabilities" is more appropriately viewed as

constituting evidence to support complainant's removal claim and is not

a separate and distinct claim.

??

??

??

??

2

0120064776

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION

Office of Federal Operations

P. O. Box 19848

Washington, D.C. 20036

4

0120064776