EEOC Appeal 2020001396

U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
Raleigh T.,1
Complainant,
v.
Kevin K. McAleenan,
Acting Secretary,
Department of Homeland Security
(Immigration and Customs Enforcement),
Agency.
Request No. 2020001396
Appeal No. 0120182312
Hearing No. 480-2016-00064X
Agency No. HSICE256372016
DECISION ON REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Complainant timely requested that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC or
Commission) reconsider its decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120182312 (Oct. 22, 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. 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c).
Complainant worked as Criminal Investigator, GS-13, at the Agency’s Homeland Security
Investigations (HIS) facility in Calexico, California. In the underlying complaint, Complainant
alleged twelve discrimination claims based on sex, disability, and in reprisal for protected EEO
activities. Complainant stated that between 2015 and 2016, the Agency had denied her request for
a reasonable accommodation and did not select her for promotion vacancies and detail
opportunities.
1 In her request for reconsideration, Complainant states she does not desire to have a pseudonym
used when the decision is published to non-parties and placed on EEOC’s website.

2 2020001396
Additionally, Complainant accused Agency management of creating a hostile work environment
of wrongfully removing her from collateral duties and impropriety in requiring her to provide a
doctor's note for her reasonable accommodation request.
After receiving the Agency’s investigative report, Complainant requested a hearing before an
EEOC Administrative Judge (AJ). Later, Complainant withdrew the request for a hearing before
an AJ and instead requested a final decision from the Agency. The Agency rendered a final
decision finding that it had not subjected Complainant to unlawful discrimination. Complainant
appealed. In EEOC Appeal No. 0120182688, this Commission affirmed the Agency’s final
decision. Our prior decision noted that Complaint’s reasonable accommodation request was
eventually granted and that the Agency restored her collateral duties. We also determined that the
Agency’s non-selecting Complainant for details and for promotions were legitimately based on
qualifications and on staffing needs at Complainant’s office.
In requesting reconsideration, Complainant stated that the AJ failed to advise her of the
implications of withdrawing her hearing request. Specifically, by withdrawing, she relinquished
her chance to conduct further discovery and to present witnesses favorable to her case.
Complainant now regrets her withdrawal and believes she could have benefited from a hearing
and having legal representation. However, Complainant failed to evidence that her withdrawal
decision was involuntary or that she was unable to make a sound decision because of physical or
mental incapacitation. A request for reconsideration is not a second appeal. EEO MD-110 at Ch.
9, § VII.A. Complainant could have raised her concerns about the impact of her withdrawal
decision to the AJ assigned to her case. EEO Management Directive for 29 C.F.R. Part 1614 (EEO
MD-110) at Ch. 5 § IV.D (Aug. 5, 2015). Here, Complainant did not persuade us that the prior
appellate decision was clearly erroneous in fact or law, or substantially impacted Agency policies,
practices, or operations.
After reviewing our previous decision and the entire record, we find this request failed to meet the
criteria of 29 C.F.R. § 1614.405(c). Therefore, we deny reconsideration our decision on EEOC
Appeal No. 0120181582 remains in effect. Complainant has no further rights to administratively
appeal before this Commission.
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.

3 2020001396
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
May 7, 2020
Date