DECISION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
This appeal is before the Board of Directors (“Board”) pursuant to the appellant Gerald Evans’s petition for review (“PFR”) of the Hearing Officer’s August 10, 2017 Decision and Order, which found unproven Evans’s claims that the Office of the Architect of the Capitol (“AOC”) issued him a memorandum of counseling in reprisal for filing his complaint in Evans v. Office of the Architect of the Capitol, No. 13-AC-56 (CV, AG, RP), 2017 WL 1057256 (Mar.13, 2017) (“Evans I”), which alleged discrimination based on race, age and reprisal.
Upon due consideration of the Hearing Officer’s Order and Decision, the parties’ briefs and filings, and the record in these proceedings, the Board affirms the Hearing Officer’s decision on all claims.
I. Background
Evans was an employee in the AOC’s Capitol Power Plant (“CPP”), Utility Distribution System (“UDS”). On October 26, 2016, following counseling and mediation, Evans filed a Complaint with the Office of Compliance (“OOC”) alleging discrimination based on race under section 201(a)(1) of the Congressional Accountability Act (“CAA”) and reprisal under section 207(a).1 Evans alleged that the AOC’s issuance of a memorandum of counseling was both an act of discrimination and an act of reprisal taken for his previous complaint in Evans I.
In a prehearing ruling on January 17, 2017, the Hearing Officer granted the AOC’s motion to dismiss Evans’s claim of racial discrimination, and denied the AOC’s motion to dismiss his reprisal claim.2 See Decision & Order on Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Jan. 17, 2017). With respect to Evans’s discrimination claim, the Hearing Officer determined that he had failed to allege that the memorandum of counseling constituted an employment action accompanied by an objectively tangible consequence, such as a decrease in pay or benefits, and therefore failed to state a claim under Title VII. Evans does not contest the Hearing Officer’s determination in this regard.
