EEOC Appeal 2020001133

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Neal O.,1
Complainant,
v.
Thomas B. Modly,
Acting Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.
Request No. 2020001133
Appeal No. 2019002229
Agency No. DON186449800787
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 2019002229 (March 27, 2020).
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).
In his underlying complaint, Complainant alleged that the Agency discriminated against him and
subjected him to a hostile work environment in reprisal for prior protected EEO activity when:
1. on November 3, 2017, Complainant’s FMLA request was delayed as a result of his EEO
complaint filed on July 30, 2017; and
2. Complainant alleged he was discriminated against on the basis of reprisal when he had
been bullied, harassed, and subjected to a hostile work environment because he filed an
EEO complaint on July 30, 2017.
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.

2020001133	2
Following an investigation and development of the record, the Agency’s issued a final decision,
finding no discrimination.2 On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final decision.
Specifically, the Commission found that neither during the investigation, nor on appeal, did
Complainant prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proffered reasons for the
disputed actions were a pretext for unlawful discrimination in reprisal for his prior protected
EEO activity. Additionally, the Commission found Complainant provided inadequate evidence to
support his discriminatory harassment claim that his treatment was the result of reprisal for prior
protected EEO activity.
In his request for reconsideration, just as on appeal, Complainant did not submit any additional
statements or briefs. The Commission emphasizes 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), at 9-18 (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. 2019002229 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.
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.
2 The Agency initially dismissed claim 1 on procedural grounds but alternatively discussed this
claim on the merits. Therefore, the Commission analyzed all claims on the merits in EEOC
Appeal No. 2019002229.

2020001133	3
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
May 12, 2020
Date