You are here

Whistleblower Cases

RSS
December 18, 2007
TBA-0069 - In the Matter of Gary S. Vander Boegh

This Decision considers three Appeals of an Initial Agency Decision (IAD) issued on July 11, 2003, involving a complaint filed by Gary S. Vander Boegh under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Part 708.

November 21, 2007
TBZ-0047 - In the Matter of Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC

This decision concerns a Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC (“BEA,” “the contractor,” or “Respondent”) on September 6, 2007. The motion relates to five pending complaints filed by one of its employees, Dennis Patterson (“Mr. Patterson” or “the complainant”), under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Regulations codified at 10 CFR Part 708. In the motion under consideration, BEA requests that I dismiss two of the five Part 708 complaints.

November 19, 2007
TBH-0039 - In the Matter of Joshua Lucero

This Initial Agency Decision concerns a whistleblower complaint filed by Joshua Lucero (Lucero) against his former employer, Wackenhut Services, Inc. (WSI), under the Department of Energy=s (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program, which is codified at 10 C.F.R. Part 708. WSI is a contractor that provides services to the DOE=s Office of Secure Transportation (OST). Lucero alleges that he engaged in activity protected by Part 708 and, as a result, was retaliated against by WSI.

November 8, 2007
TBH-0057 - In the Matter of Frederick L. Higgs

This Decision concerns a whistleblower complaint that Frederick L. Higgs (the complainant) filed under the Department of Energy’s Contractor Employee Protection Program, 10 C.F.R. Part 708, against his former employer, Texas Environmental Plastics, Ltd. (TEP), a DOE subcontractor at the DOE’s Savannah River Site in Aiken, South Carolina.1 The complainant contends that he made a number of disclosures that are protected under Part 708, and that TEP retaliated against him for making those disclosures by terminating his employment.

November 5, 2007
TBH-0046 - In the Matter of David K. Isham

David Isham filed a retaliation complaint (the Part 708 Complaint or the Complaint) under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. 10 C.F.R. Part 708 (2007). As explained below, I have determined that the Complaint should be dismissed.

November 2, 2007
TBH-0034 - In the Matter of Casey von Bargen

This Initial Agency Decision involves a whistleblower complaint filed by Mr. Casey von Bargen (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 was an employee of COMPA Industries, Inc. (COMPA), a subcontractor of Sandia Corporation (Sandia) which manages the Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in Albuquerque, New Mexico for the DOE. On June 2, 2003, he began employment at the SNL facility as a safety engineer.

August 30, 2007
TBU-0071 - In the Matter of Jeffrey R. Burnette

Jeffrey R. Burnette (Burnette or the complainant), appeals the dismissal of his complaint of retaliation filed under 10 C.F.R. Part 708, the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. The complaint was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction under Section 708.17. As explained below, the dismissal of the complaint should be sustained, and the appeal denied.

August 29, 2007
TBA-0030 - In the Matter of Curtis Broaddus

Curtis Broaddus filed a complaint of retaliation under the Department of Energy (DOE) Contractor Employee Protection Program. See 10 C.F.R. Part 708. Mr. Broaddus alleged that he engaged in protected activity and that his employer, BWXT Pantex (BWXT), retaliated by not giving his working group a proposed salary increase. An Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) Hearing Officer denied relief, and Mr. Broaddus filed the instant appeal. In a companion case involving Mr. Broaddus’ subordinate, Clint Olson, I held that BWXT’s failure to grant the proposed salary increase was not retaliatory.

July 16, 2007
TBU-0070 - In the Matter of Sharon M. Fiorillo

Sharon M. Fiorillo (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. The complaint was filed on May 4, 2007. As explained below, the dismissal of the complaint should be sustained, and the appeal denied.

July 9, 2007
TBA-0023 - In the Matter of Franklin C. Tucker

This Decision considers an Appeal of an Initial Agency Decision (IAD) issued on April 9, 2007, involving a Complaint of Retaliation filed by Franklin C. Tucker (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, Tucker claims that his former employer, DOE contractor BWXT Y-12, L.L.C. (BWXT or the contractor), retaliated against him for engaging in activity that is protected by Part 708.