U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Celine D.,1
Complainant,
v.
Ryan D. McCarthy,
Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.
Request No. 2020000493
Appeal No. 2019004456
Agency No. ARLEAD19FEB00645
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Celine D. v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Appeal No.
2019004456 (Sept. 19, 2019). 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).
Complainant, a former employee at the Agency's Letterkenny Army Depot facility in
Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, filed a formal complaint alleging that the Agency subjected her to
discrimination on the basis of sex (female) when she was subjected to ongoing harassment starting
in October 2017, that led to her November 10, 2018 resignation from her position as an Electronics
Worker, WG-2604-08. Complainant's harassment claim centered primarily on a series of
interactions with several identified male coworkers
The Agency dismissed the complaint for failure to timely contact an EEO counselor. The record
disclosed that the last alleged discriminatory event (constructive discharge) occurred on November
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.
20200004932
10, 2018, but Complainant did not initiate contact with an EEO counselor until February 8, 2019,
which was beyond the 45-day limitation period.
In the appellate decision, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s dismissal decision finding that
Complainant failed to provide persuasive arguments or evidence warranting an extension of the
45-day contact period prescribed by 29 C.F.R. § 1614.105(a)(1). In doing so, the Commission
rejected Complainant’s argument that she relied upon erroneous advice that she could not seek
recourse through the EEO process against one of her alleged harassers because he was a
government contractor. The Commission noted that Complainant failed to seek recourse regarding
other identified alleged harassers and did not timely seek counseling regarding her constructive
discharge claim.
In the instant request for reconsideration, Complainant reiterates the arguments she set forth in her
appeal. The Commission emphasizes that a request for reconsideration is not a second appeal.
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). A request for reconsideration is not the time for Complainant to raise new
evidence or new arguments or to reiterate prior arguments. 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. 2019004456 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.
20200004933
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 24, 2020
Date
