EEOC Appeal 2020001798

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Jutta A.,1
Complainant,
v.
Matthew P. Donovan,
Acting Secretary,
Department of the Air Force,
Agency.
Request No. 2020001798
Appeal No. 2019002314
Agency No. 8L1M15034
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in Jutta A. v. Dep’t of the Air Force, EEOC Appeal No.
2019002314 (Dec. 4, 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).
In the underlying complaint, Complainant, a Budget Analyst, GS-0560-11, at the Agency's 75th
Civil Engineering Group, Air Base Wing facility at Hill Air Force Base, Utah, alleged that the
Agency discriminated against her on the bases of race (African-American), age (60), and reprisal
(prior protected EEO activity) when: (1) on or about July 21, 2015, Complainant’s first-level
supervisor (S1: Caucasian, born in 1982) denied Complainant's leave request for July 24, and July
30, 2015; (2) on or about October 5, 2015, S1 and Complainant’s second-level supervisor (S2:
Caucasian, born in 1966) removed Complainant’s major graded duties and reassigned the duties
to a GS-7, while assigning Complainant menial duties and responsibilities with no major graded
duties; (3) on January 5, 2016, S1 issued Complainant a Decision to Reprimand for “Conduct
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.

2020001798	2
Unbecoming of a Federal Employee;” and (4) from April 15, 2015 to January 5, 2016, Complainant
was subjected to harassment.
Following an investigation, the Agency issued a final agency decision (FAD) finding no
discrimination or reprisal. 	Our appellate decision affirmed the FAD finding that Complainant
failed to establish that the articulated, legitimate explanation for the employment actions were a
pretext or otherwise motivated by discriminatory or retaliatory animus. In addition, we affirmed
the Agency’s conclusion that Complainant failed to establish that the alleged employment actions
were sufficiently severe and/or pervasive to alter the conditions of Complainant’s employment and
create a hostile work environment.
In her request for reconsideration, Complainant expresses her disagreement and argues that her
due process rights were denied. 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.
Complainant has not done so here. 	Complainant has not presented any persuasive evidence to
support reconsideration of the Commission’s 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. 2019002314 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.

2020001798	3
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
September 9, 2020
Date