On July 21, 2015, an OHA Administrative Judge granted in part and denied in part a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by UChicago Argonne LLC (Argonne). In its Motion, Argonne sought dismissal of a Part 708 complaint filed by Jonathan McKay against the contractor on several grounds. After considering the parties’ full briefing of this matter, the Administrative Judge determined that: (1) Argonne’s alleged retaliatory acts that occurred more than 90 days before Mr.
On July 7, 2015, the OHA issued a decision granting in part a jurisdictional appeal filed by Ms. Stacey Kittner, a former senior member of the technical staff of Sandia National Laboratory (Sandia). Ms. Kittner appealed the National Nuclear Security Administration’s (NNSA) June 4, 2015, dismissal of a whistleblower complaint that she filed under 10 CFR Part 708, the DOE Contractor Employee Protection Program. OHA denied those portions of the appeal that were based upon Ms.
On May 29, 2015, OHA granted an Appeal involving a complaint filed by Robert J. Schumacher (Schumacher) against Bechtel National, Inc. (Bechtel), a DOE prime contractor that coordinates the construction of DOE’s Hanford Site’s Waste Treatment Plant, under the DOE’s Contractor Employee Protection Program and its governing regulations set forth at 10 CFR Part 708. Schumacher’s complaint was dismissed by an OHA investigator because he did not file his complaint within the 90-day regulatory deadline which elapsed on July 13, 2014.
On April 2, 2015, the OHA issued a decision denying, due to lack of jurisdiction, an Appeal filed by Mr. Charles W. Trask III of the dismissal of his whistleblower complaint by the Whistleblower Program Manager for the Employee Concerns Program of the National Nuclear Security Administration. Mr. Trask filed the Complaint against his former employer, Los Alamos National Security, LLC (LANS), under the DOE’s Contractor Employee Protection Program (10 CFR Part 708). In the Complaint, Mr.
On March 9, 2015, OHA denied an Appeal of the dismissal of a complaint filed by Anthony T. Rivera (Rivera) against Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS), management and operating contractor for DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, under the DOE’s Contractor Employee Protection Program (10 CFR Part 708). In his complaint, Rivera alleges that he was terminated from his position with LLNS because he had made a series of disclosures concerning alleged fraud, abuse of authority, gross waste of funds, health and safety, and gross mismanagement.
The DOE’s Contractor Employee Protection Program was established to safeguard public and employee health and safety, ensure compliance with applicable laws, rules, and regulations, and prevent fraud, mismanagement, waste and abuse at DOE’s government-owned, contractor-operated facilities. 57 Fed. Reg. 7533 (March 3, 1992). Its primary purposes are to encourage contractor employees to disclose information which they believe exhibits unsafe, illegal, fraudulent, or wasteful practices, and to protect those “whistleblowers” from consequential reprisals by their employers.
On November 3, 2014, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) issued a decision denying a jurisdictional appeal filed by Dr. Paul M. Cole, Ph.D (Dr. Cole), a former Oak Ridge Institute for Science Education (ORISE) fellow at the Department of Defense’s (DOD) Joint POW/MIA Accounting Command (JPAC) at Hickam Air Force Base, Hawaii. Dr. Cole appealed the Oak Ridge Office’s (ORO) Diversity Programs and Employee Concerns Managers September 30, 2014, dismissal of a whistleblower complaint that he filed under 10 C.F.R.
On September 11, 2014, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) issued a decision denying Mr. Tony Quillen’s Appeal of the Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office’s (PPPO) dismissal of his whistleblower complaint for lack of jurisdiction or other good cause. The OHA found that PPPO had correctly and reasonably determined that a settlement agreement between a union and his employer had provided Mr. Quillen with a remedy that it considered to be equivalent to what he could receive under Part 708. We therefore upheld the dismissal.
On August 20, 2014, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) denied an appeal of an Initial Agency Decision (IAD) that OHA issued on April 10, 2014, regarding a complaint of retaliation that Edward G. Gallrein, III (Gallrein or the Complainant) filed under the DOE’s Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R.
On August 6, 2014, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) issued a decision granting Mr. Earl Ballard’s Appeal of the Portsmouth/Paducah Project Office’s (PPPO) dismissal of his whistleblower complaint for lack of jurisdiction or other good cause. The OHA found that the reasons provided by PPPO for the dismissal, i.e., that Mr. Ballard had not proven that his alleged disclosure was a contributing factor to his dismissal, and that the Part 708 regulations were not applicable to an alleged protected disclosure made within the context of an investigation into Mr.