0520120208
10-05-2012
Bart D. Kimber, Complainant, v. Ray Mabus, Secretary, Department of the Navy, Agency.
Bart D. Kimber,
Complainant,
v.
Ray Mabus,
Secretary,
Department of the Navy,
Agency.
Request No. 0520120208
Appeal No. 0120113390
Agency No. DON (MC) 11-00681-02140
DENIAL
Complainant timely requested reconsideration of the decision in Bart D. Kimber v. Department of the Navy, EEOC Appeal No. 0120113390 (December 6, 2011). EEOC Regulations provide that the Commission may, in its discretion, grant a request to reconsider any previous Commission decision 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(b).
In our previous decision we affirmed the Agency's dismissal of Complainant's complaint for failure to state a claim, and for stating the same matter that had been raised in a prior complaint. In particular, we found that claim 1 was raised in a prior EEO complaint and adjudicated by the Commission. We also found that claim 2 amounted to an impermissible collateral attack on the Office of Worker's Compensation Program (OWCP) process. We noted that Complainant made repeated references to the improper processing of CA-2 forms by Agency officials. As such, we found that the Agency properly dismissed Complainant's complaint.
In his request for reconsideration, Complainant, in pertinent part, contends that the Agency falsely indicated that claim 1 was adjudicated in a prior complaint. Complainant further contends that the Agency purposefully destroyed documentation, and that the Agency's actions against him altered his conditions of employment. Complainant also contends that our previous decision improperly found that claim 2 was a collateral attack on the OWCP process.
We remind Complainant 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) (rev. Nov. 9, 1999), at 9-17; see, e.g., Lopez v. Dep't of Agriculture, EEOC Request No. 0520070736 (Aug. 20, 2007). We note, with regard to claim 1, that Complainant is alleging dissatisfaction with events that occurred in the processing of a previously filed complaint. See 29 C.F.R. � 1614.107(a)(8). Regarding claim 2, there is no dispute that Complainant's allegations concern the processing of his OWCP claims. We note that the proper forum for Complainant to have his issues raised concerning the processing of his OWCP claims is the Department of Labor, which administers OWCP laws and procedures.
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(b), and it is the decision of the Commission to DENY the request.The decision in EEOC Appeal No. 0120113390 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 (Z0610)
If you decide to file a civil action, and if you do not have or cannot afford the services of an attorney, you may request from the Court that the Court appoint an attorney to represent you and that the Court also permit you to file the action without payment of fees, costs, or other security. See Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. � 2000e et seq.; the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, 29 U.S.C. �� 791, 794(c). The grant or denial of the request is within the sole discretion of the Court. Filing a request for an attorney with the Court does not extend your time in which to file a civil action. Both the request and
the civil action must be filed within the time limits as stated in the paragraph above ("Right to File a Civil Action").
FOR THE COMMISSION:
______________________________
Carlton M. Hadden, Director
Office of Federal Operations
October 5, 2012
Date
2
0520120208
U.S. EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION
Office of Federal Operations
P.O. Box 77960
Washington, DC 20013
2
0520120208