EEOC Appeal 2020001882

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Lawrence L.,1
Complainant,
v.
Ryan D. McCarthy,
Secretary,
Department of the Army,
Agency.
Request No. 2020001882
Appeal No. 2019002577
Hearing No. 420-2015-00141X
Agency No. ARCEHUNTV14JUN02051
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Lawrence L. v. Dep’t of the Army, EEOC Appeal No.
2019002577 (Jan. 15, 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).
Complainant, a GS-2210-13 Information Technology Specialist at the Agency’s U.S. Army
Engineering and Support Center in Huntsville, Alabama, filed the underlying complaint wherein
he claimed that he was discriminated against in reprisal for his prior protected EEO activity when
he was subjected to a hostile work environment from June 2013 until he was terminated on May
2, 2014.
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.

2020001882	2
Following an investigation, Complainant requested a hearing before an EEOC Administrative
Judge (AJ). 	The AJ held a hearing and subsequently issued a decision finding that no reprisal
occurred. Thereafter, the Agency issued a final order wherein it implemented the AJ’s decision.
On appeal, the Commission affirmed the Agency’s final order. 	Therein, we determined that
substantial evidence of record supported the AJ’s finding that Complainant did not establish that
reprisal occurred. Complainant subsequently filed the instant request for reconsideration.
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). 	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. 	Upon review of
Complainant’s request for reconsideration, we find that Complainant has not presented any
argument or evidence to support reconsideration of the Commission’s decision. Complainant has
failed to establish that he subjected to reprisal or a hostile work environment as alleged.
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. 2019002577 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.
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.

2020001882	3
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
September 9, 2020
Date