05A20734
08-02-2002
Tanna N. Herchenhahn, Complainant, v. Thomas E. White, Secretary, Department of the Army, Agency.
Tanna N. Herchenhahn v. Department of the Army
05A20734
August 2, 2002
.
Tanna N. Herchenhahn,
Complainant,
v.
Thomas E. White,
Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.
Request No. 05A20734
Appeal No. 01A14090
Agency Nos. ANBKFO0002A0050; ANBKFO0002A0020; ANBKFO0006A0390
Hearing No. 130-A1-8024X
DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Tanna N. Herchenhahn (complainant) timely initiated a request to the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or Commission) to reconsider
the decision in Tanna N. Herchenhahn v. Department of the Army, EEOC
Appeal No. 01A14090 (March 29, 2002). 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 the underlying complaint, complainant contended that she was
discriminated against on the bases sex (female) and reprisal (prior
EEO activity) in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
(Title VII), as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq., when:
on August 4, 1999, the acting supervisor (AS1) made suggestive comments
during a conversation to the effect that she was promoted by her former
supervisor because she was sleeping with him, listened to her private
conversation behind closed doors, and interfered in the Outrider Project
that she worked on;
her job duties were gradually taken away;
she was counseled for engaging in personal activities that allegedly
took place while she was on temporary duty (TDY); and
on April 21, 2000, she received a low performance rating.
Specifically, complainant contended, inter alia, that her acting
supervisor (AS1) retaliated against her because she had participated
in prior protected activity. An EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ) issued
findings of fact and conclusions of law without a hearing, finding no
discrimination. The findings and conclusions were adopted by the agency
it its final agency decision, which our prior appellate decision affirmed.
In her request for reconsideration, complainant raises no new contentions.
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. In reaching this
conclusion, we note that complainant reiterates arguments that were
made in the appeal below. Accordingly, the decision in EEOC Appeal
No. 01A14090 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
August 2, 2002
__________________
Date