EEOC Appeal 2026002722

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Sector
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Donella D.,1
Complainant,
v.
Douglas A. Collins,
Secretary,
Department of Veterans Affairs,
Agency.
Appeal No. 2026002722
Hearing No. 520-2025-00095X
Agency No. 200H-523-2024-155568
DECISION
Complainant filed an appeal with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC or Commission), pursuant to 29 C.F.R. §1614.403(a), concerning her equal
employment 	opportunity 	(EEO) 	complaint 	of 	employment 	discrimination 	in
violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), as amended, 42
U.S.C. § 2000e et seq. For the following reasons, the Commission AFFIRMS the
Agency’s decision finding no discrimination.
At the time of events giving rise to this complaint, Complainant worked as a Program
Analyst/Scientific Project Manager, at the Agency’s Jamaica Plain VA Medical
Center facility in Boston, Massachusetts. On February 24, 2024, Complainant filed
a complaint alleging that the Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race
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.

2026002722	2
(African-American), national origin (African), sex (female), and in reprisal for prior
protected EEO activity when:
1. Since August 2023, the Health Science Specialist (HSS) has failed to take
action regarding Complainant’s reports of aggressive emails and vocal
outbursts by a coworker, a Computer Specialist, who refuses to follow
orders or complete work assignments.
2. Since approximately June or July 2023, management readily responds to
concerns raised by others against Complainant.
3. Since approximately June or July 2023, coworkers shout and speak rudely
toward Complainant.
4. Since June or July 2023, Complainant has been left out of scientific
conference announcements.
5. Since June or July 2023, Complainant has been isolated and neglected
regarding 	her 	need 	for 	supervisory 	input 	and 	attending 	workplace
activities, and management has failed to answer emails and cancelled
meetings.
6. On November 15, 2023, HSS and the Director of Data & Computer
Science (Director) removed Complainant from the duties of COVID-19
Project Manager.2
At the conclusion of the investigation, the Agency provided Complainant with a
copy of the report of investigation and notice of her right to request a hearing before
an AJ. Complainant requested a hearing before an AJ. The Agency submitted a
motion for a decision without a hearing, which Complainant opposed. The AJ
granted the Agency’s motion and issued a decision by summary judgment in favor
of the Agency, finding no discrimination. When the Agency failed to issue a final
order within 40 days of receipt of the AJ’s decision, the AJ’s decision finding that
Complainant failed to prove that the Agency subjected her to discrimination as
alleged became the Agency’s final action pursuant to 29 C.F.R. § 1614.109(i). The
instant appeal followed.
2 We note that Complainant withdrew another claim (claim (d)) during a conference
with an EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). See Order Following Telephonic Pre-
Conference Hearing dated September 10, 2024. We have renumbered the claims at
issue for the sake of clarity.

2026002722	3
The AJ found that the Agency articulated legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for
its actions. Regarding claim 1, HSS stated that she was told about Complainant’s
concerns and she escalated the matter to her supervisor, Director. Director said that
he and HSS took multiple actions, including moving the Computer Specialist to
other projects to avoid direct conflict between him and Complainant. Director
mentioned that he spoke to both Complainant and the Computer Specialist separately
and asked them both to act professionally and de-escalate by discussing the issues
collegially if possible.
As to claim 2, Director stated that he was not sure what Complainant was referring
to regarding this issue. Director said that, to his knowledge, no actions have been
taken against Complainant by him based on any complaints from any other members
of the Center for Data & Computational Science (C-DACS).
With respect to claim 3, Director stated that he requested that the Human Resources
Representative for C-DACS provide EEO complaint information to Complainant.
Director mentioned that he requested to meet with Complainant specifically to
address these issues, met with the other individuals responsible for the allegations,
and ultimately asked the Computer Specialist to cease all form of communication
with Complainant until further notice.
Concerning claim 4, Director stated that he gets requests from individual team
members to attend conferences that they are interested in, and he has not rejected
any requests.
Regarding claim 5, Director stated that he has not isolated or neglected Complainant
regarding her need for supervisory input and attending workplace activities. He said
that he responds to all emails that require his input and that he was unaware of any
specific incident where he did not respond to Complainant, nor had he cancelled any
meeting with Complainant unless there was a conflict.
Regarding claim 6, Director stated that Complainant complained about three people
on the project and requested personnel changes. The Director said Project Managers
are often moved around to different projects in order to balance workloads.
Furthermore, Complainant was offered the opportunity to return to being Project
Manager for the project at issue, but Complainant declined the offer.

2026002722	4
As to the claim of harassment, the AJ found that Complainant had not shown that
the incidents she complained of in her complaint were sufficiently severe or
pervasive to alter the conditions of her employment. Furthermore, the AJ found that
Complainant failed to show that any of the allegedly harassing incidents were
motivated by her protected bases.
Accordingly, we AFFIRM the AJ’s decision finding no discrimination which
became the Agency’s final decision.
STATEMENT OF RIGHTS - ON APPEAL
RECONSIDERATION (M1125)
The Commission may, in its discretion, reconsider this appellate decision if
Complainant or the Agency submits a written request that contains arguments or
evidence that 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 for reconsideration must be filed with EEOC’s Office of Federal Sector
(OFS) within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of this decision. 	If the party
requesting reconsideration elects to file a statement or brief in support of the request,
that 	statement 	or 	brief 	must 	be 	filed 	together 	with 	the 	request 	for
reconsideration. 	A party shall have twenty (20) calendar days from receipt of
another party’s request for reconsideration within which to submit a brief or
statement in opposition. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405; Equal Employment Opportunity
Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO MD-110), at Chap. 9 § VII.B
(Aug. 5, 2015).
Complainant should submit their request for reconsideration, and any statement or
brief in support of their request, via the EEOC Public Portal, which can be found at
https://publicportal.eeoc.gov/Portal/Login.aspx. 	Alternatively, Complainant can
submit their request and arguments to the Director, Office of Federal Sector, Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, via regular mail addressed to P.O. Box
77960, Washington, DC 20013, or by certified mail addressed to 131 M Street, NE,
Washington, DC 20507.

2026002722	5
In the absence of a legible postmark, a complainant’s request to reconsider shall be
deemed timely filed if OFS receives it by mail within five days of the expiration of
the applicable filing period. See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.604.
An agency’s request for reconsideration must be submitted in digital format via the
EEOC’s Federal Sector EEO Portal (FedSEP). See 29 C.F.R. § 1614.403(g). Either
party’s request and/or statement or brief in opposition must also include proof of
service on the other party, unless Complainant files their request via the EEOC
Public Portal, in which case no proof of service is required.
Failure to file within the 30-day time period will result in dismissal of the party’s
request for reconsideration as untimely, unless extenuating circumstances prevented
the timely filing of the request. 	Any supporting documentation must be
submitted together with the 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(f).
COMPLAINANT’S RIGHT TO FILE A CIVIL ACTION (S0124)
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 their
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 (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.

2026002722	6
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:
T. Gimbrere 	_________ 	Gul Chaudhry’s signature
T. Gimbrere, Acting Director
Office of Federal Sector
September 22, 2026
Date