You are here

Whistleblower Cases

RSS
September 19, 2006
TBU-0052 - In the Matter of John Merwin

John Merwin (Merwin or the complainant) appeals the dismissal of his May 1, 2006 complaint of retaliation filed under 10 C.F.R. Part 708, the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. He filed the complaint with the Whistleblower Program Manager (WP Manager) of the DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration Service Center (NNSA/SC), located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. As explained below, the WP Manager’s August 14, 2006 dismissal of the complaint should be upheld, and the appeal denied.

August 21, 2006
TBH-0047 - In the Matter of Dennis Patterson

This Initial Agency Decision involves a whistleblower complaint filed by Mr. Dennis Patterson (“Patterson,” “the complainant,” or “Complainant”) under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Part 708. The complainant was an employee of Batelle Energy Alliance, LLC, (“BEA” or “the contractor”) the management and operating contractor of the DOE Idaho National Laboratory (INL) in Idaho Falls, Idaho, where he was employed as the Employee Concerns Program Manager until June 2007.

August 21, 2006
TBU-0047 - In the Matter of Dennis D. Patterson

Dennis D. Patterson (Patterson or the complainant) appeals the dismissal of his June 1, 2006 complaint of retaliation filed under 10 C.F.R. Part 708, the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. He filed the complaint with the Employee Concerns (EC) Manager of the DOE’s Idaho Operations Office (DOE/ID), located in Idaho Falls, ID. As explained below, the EC Manager’s July 17, 2006 dismissal of the complaint should be reversed, and the appeal granted.

August 3, 2006
TBU-0049 - In the Matter of Gary S. Vander Boegh

Gary S. Vander Boegh (Vander Boegh or the complainant) appeals the dismissal of his February 21, 2006 complaint of retaliation filed under 10 C.F.R. Part 708, the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. He filed the complaint with the 1 Office of Civil Rights and Diversity of the DOE’s Environmental Management Consolidated Business Center (EMCBC) located in Cincinnati, Ohio. As explained below, the EMCBC June 29, 2006 dismissal of the complaint should be sustained, and the appeal denied.

June 26, 2006
TBB-0040 - In the Matter of Caroline Roberts

This letter concerns the complaint of retaliation that you filed with the Department of Energy (DOE} under 10 C.F.R. Part 708. On March 24, 2006, the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA} received your petition for Secretarial review of the February 23 jurisdictional appeal decision issued by the OHA Director. Under the Part 708 regulations, the Secretary will reverse or revise an appeal decision by the Director of OHA only in extraordinary circumstances. 10 C.F.R. § 708.19.

May 30, 2006
TBZ-0034 - In the Matter of Casey Von Bargen

This Decision concerns a Motion To Dismiss that was filed by Sandia National Laboratories (hereinafter referred to as “SNL” or “the Respondent”). In this Motion, SNL seeks the dismissal of a complaint that was filed by Casey Von Bargen (hereinafter referred to as “Mr. Von Bargen” or “the Complainant”) under the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program (or “Whistleblower”) regulations found at 10 C.F.R. Part 708. This complaint is currently under investigation by the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) (Case No. TBI-0034).

February 23, 2006
TBU-0040 - In the Matter of

Caroline C. Roberts (the complainant), appeals the dismissal of her complaint of retaliation filed under 10 C.F.R. Part 708, the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. As explained below, the dismissal of the complaint should be sustained, and the appeal denied.

October 27, 2005
TBH-0027 - In the Matter of Clint Olson

This Initial Agency Decision involves a whistleblower complaint filed by Mr. Clint Olson (also referred to as the complainant or the individual) under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Part 708. The complainant is an employee of BWXT Pantex (BWXT), the Management and Operations Contractor at the DOE’s Pantex Plant in Amarillo, Texas. From July 1999 until November 2004, he was employed as a counter-intelligence officer (CIO) at the plant.

September 19, 2005
TBB-0003 - In the Matter of Gilbert J. Hinojos

This letter pertains to a Petition for Secretarial Review that you filed on August 8, 2005, on behalf of Gilbert Hinojos. In the Petition, you requested that the Secretary of Energy review a July 8, 2005 appeal decision, issued by the Director of the Office of Hearings and Appeals. That appeal decision denied Mr. Hinojos' complaint of retaliation filed pursuant to 10 C.F.R. Part 708.

July 8, 2005
TBA-0003 - In the Matter of Gilbert J. Hinojos

This Decision considers an Appeal of an Initial Agency Decision (IAD) issued on April 27, 2005, involving a Complaint filed by Gilbert J. Hinojos (also referred to as the employee or the complainant) under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Part 708. In his Complaint, Hinojos claims that his former employer, DOE contractor Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & Technologies (Honeywell or the contractor), retaliated against him for engaging in activity that is protected by Part 708.