EEOC Appeal 2020001473

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Ellan K., 1
Complainant,
v.
William P. Barr,
Attorney General,
Department of Justice
(Federal Bureau of Investigation),
Agency.
Request No. 2020001473
Appeal No. 0120182555
Hearing No. 570-2016-00144X
Agency No. FBI-2015-00028
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Ellan K. v. Dep’t of Justice, EEOC Appeal No.
0120182555 (Nov. 5, 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 Scholastic Honors Intern within the Laboratory Division (LD) of the Agency's
Washington, D.C. Field Office (WFO) in Quantico, Virginia, filed an EEO complaint in which she
alleged that the Agency discriminated against her on the basis of race/national origin (Hispanic,
Puerto Rican) when: (1) in June 2014, the Trace Evidence Unit (TEU), Laboratory Division (LD)
in Quantico, Virginia informed Complainant that it was unable to reinstate her in her former
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.

2020001473	2
position as Physical Scientist, GS-12, in Quantico, and HR offered her a downgraded position as
an Evidence Technician, GS-8; (2) TEU LD advised Complainant of her nonselection as Physical
Scientist, GS-11/12, under Vacancy Announcement Number 07-2014-0077; and (3) in or around
June 2014, the Albuquerque Division dismissed Complainant from the Basic Surveillance Course
(BSC) training.
Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ) for a hearing. Complainant subsequently withdrew her hearing request, and the Agency
issued a final decision in which it found no discrimination. In our appellate decision, we found
that the Agency had articulated legitimate and nondiscriminatory reasons for the personnel actions
in question and that Complainant failed to show that any of those reasons were pretexts for
discrimination.
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. She
has not presented any argument or evidence tending to establish the existence of either
reconsideration criterion. 	She merely attempts to relitigate the merits of her appeal, raising
contentions similar to those we considered and rejected in our previous decision.
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. 0120182555 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.

2020001473	3
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 27, 2020
Date