|
----- Original Message -----
From: Philip
Pulver
To: Andrewt@dnfsb.gov
Cc: Rick Schapira
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2011 3:37
PM
Subject: Public Comments
to DNFSB
CCOL Inc. [ccol-inc.com]
2415 South Garfield
St.
Kennewick, WA 99337
NationalLabSafetyRisk.com
August 18, 2011
Defense Nuclear Facilities
Safety Board [DNFSB]
625 Indiana Ave NW Suite 700
Washington, DC
20004
Dear Andrew
L. Thibadeau,
Subject: DOE Response [to DNFSB
Recommendation 2011-1] Disingenuous Due to its Ongoing 8-Year Cover-up of
PNNL
Contractor
Battelle Misconduct via Retaliation & Witness Tampering [Perjury to Suppress Technical Info. (Evidence)]
by Office of
Science, Office of General Counsel, Site Offices [Pacific Northwest & Oak Ridge] and Inspector
General.
The Energy Dept.’s 7/19/11
response to DNFSB Recommendation 2011-1 regarding
WTP safety, security, witness tampering, suppressing technical information,
retaliation,
confidentiality and other matters in the Tamosaitis-v-Bechtel
case is tainted
and insincere due to DOE’s
continued churning of taxpayers to specifically fund retaliation, witness
tampering, and other violations in its 8-year cover up
of Battelle misconduct [False Statements
(18 USC
§1001), Perjury (18 USC
§1621), Suborning Perjury
(18 USC
§1622),
False Declarations
(18 USC
§1623),
False Claims (31 USC
§3729) &
Security Breach (10 CFR
§710 - Accessing
Classified Mat.)].
For the benefit of taxpayers, Congress,
and those working at DOE sites, this ongoing situation necessitates a
factual public comment consisting of sections outlined here and presented
below with attachment
and embedded
Web links
to evidence:
|
1. With its 8-year cover up of
contractor misconduct, DOE is willfully funding personal-injury defense
lawyer
abusive tactics [condemned by
courts] and suborning perjury [falsifying research & ventures] to
suppress/hide
technical
information from federal courts, i.e., evidence implicating Battelle that
operates six DOE sites.
2. DOE’s statement that HSS [Health Safety & Security] will “independently review the safety culture
across the entire
complex” [¶16] is suspect, i.e., undermined by HSS [Podonsky et al.]
ignoring ongoing & prior contractor violations.
3. Comments on Other Parts of DOE’s Response Contradicted by its
Ongoing Suppression of Contractor Misconduct.
4. 8/18/11:
DOE Inspector General Friedman Dismisses/Ignores
Pulver’s Evidence-Based Allegations Sent to DNFSB
5. Closing Summary
Points of Concern Regarding DOE Response to 2011-1 or any DNFSB Recommendation
|
1. With its 8-year cover up of contractor
misconduct, DOE is willfully funding personal-injury defense lawyer abusive
tactics [condemned by
courts] and suborning
perjury [e.g., falsifying
research & ventures] to
suppress/hide technical information from federal courts,
i.e., evidence implicating Battelle that operates six DOE national labs.
1a. Prior
Misconduct to Conceal – Then, DOE-funded counsel Miller’s firm was
fined/sanctioned [record $325K]
by WA Supreme Court for
discovery abuse, i.e., concealing smoking-gun evidence of dangerous toxicity of a drug that
permanently brain damaged
a 3-year old girl.
His firm was similarly fined by a federal
judge for suppressing NHTSA rear-impact driver
injury crash test data.
Now, Battelle’s very own evidence
shows that DOE is funding (i) This
attorney to repeat such abuses and (ii)
Battelle to suborn perjury [falsify
research & hide ventures] to
suppress evidence [technical information]
implicating Battelle in again
violating the
False Claims Act [defrauding/skimming
small business assistance research] and falsifying
inventions to patent office. [Attachment
1 has details with press articles.]
1b. DOE 8-Year
Suppression – By authorizing such
abusive concealment tactics condemned by courts, DOE
has confirmed its practice of misappropriating taxpayers
by funding litigation fraud/perjury against individuals or small businesses
[entrepreneurs] suing
contractors due to fraud, negligence, or other misconduct. GAO reports
[GAO-04-148R]
most lawsuits against DOE contractors pertain to “radiation and/or toxic exposure,
personal injury and
wrongful discharge.” Thus,
DOE's 8-year cover-up
[~$1M
cost] of Battelle misconduct
[Authorized by Chu,
Poneman & Koonin]
has dangerous implications for those suing for injury, HAZMAT/radiation
exposure, wrongful death, fraud
or other tortuous/negligent contractor misconduct at any site in DOE
complex. [See evidence
site for details.]
1c. 2010 Email re:
Witness Tampering – DOE
[Chu, Poneman, Podonsky
& Friedman] was
sent a detailed 4/28/10
email stating that its establishing precedent
for such taxpayer-funded practices has adverse health/safety ramifications. A key excerpt is as
follows:
“Doesn’t
Friedman realize he’s jeopardizing health/safety at DOE labs by waiving oversight of litigation fraud
and allowing Science to retain personal-injury defense lawyers with records of concealing
evidence [e.g., radiation dosage, HAZMAT, equipment maintenance/safety records, surveillance logs] or witness tampering if Battelle
is sued for exposure, injury or wrongful death due to negligent or other
misconduct? Now
knowing that Science suborns such attorney misconduct to conceal, Battelle
may relax health/safety procedures to increase lab profits.”
2. DOE’s statement that HSS [Health
Safety
& Security] will “independently review the safety culture
across the entire complex”
[¶16] is suspect, i.e.,
undermined by HSS [Podonsky
et al.] ignoring
ongoing and prior contractor violations.
2a. 2010 Security
Violations [Classified Mat.] – Chu and Podonsky ignored Pulver’s
1/13/10
email regarding the 2009 Christmas Day bombing
and national security breach by Battelle/DOE. It pertained to granting access to air
cargo explosives detection and other classified
research by Battelle-PNNL scientist implicated in criminal
violations, e.g., perjury, violating False Claims Act [withholding
DOE- funded technical assistance research/software from small business] and
falsifying inventions to the patent office. The email stated in part:
“Many
compelling reasons necessitate that DOE address the issues detailed in
emails below and hold Battelle accountable for criminal misconduct [False Claims (31 USC
§3729), False Statements...Perjury (18 USC
§1621) & violating 10 CFR
§710
(Accessing Classified Mat.)].”
“The 12/25/09 terrorist
attack underscores that Science is putting national security at risk by
covering up Battelle misconduct by funding and suborning perjury of
top-secret Q-clearance holder Kevin Dorow who’s involved with DHS air
cargo explosives [detection] and
other classified work…Science has
long been aware of his access to that material; in an 8/27/08 email [below],
Science refused to take any action on this security
breach, thus violating 10 CFR§710
[Classified Access]. Its complicity to ‘protect’
its largest contractor is far worse
than the systemic
failure to “connect the dots” situations of DHS
[Detroit (12/25/09)]
and SEC
[Madoff]”.
“DOE’s refusal to revoke/suspend Dorow’s clearance
emboldens Battelle nationally to suborn perjury
[or possibly
espionage]
by
top-secret clearance holders when
‘needed’ to protect/promote its corporate interests (domestic/foreign).”
2b. 2009
Safety/Security Concerns to HSS – Excerpts of
Pulver’s 11/23/09
email, ignored by Podonsky et al., are as follows:
“Congress has been concerned/outraged that DOE reimburses litigation
costs for wrongdoing contractors. [GAO Report
d04148r] In this case, DOE Office of Science [PNSO & ORO] has gone a giant step further by funding
Battelle and attorney Miller to willfully misrepresent research [RPMP], hide commercial investments and thus invoke litigation
fraud/perjury to conceal smoking-gun evidence. [See Doc. #5 citing
Miller’s prior firm sanctioned for…withholding toxicity data on a drug causing brain damage to a
3-year old.] With this ongoing cover-up, DOE has set a precedent that jeopardizes others who
may later file lawsuits for injury, illness,
cancer, toxic or radiation exposure,
hostile work environment, wrongful termination
[whistleblower] or other causes of
action due to Battelle’s negligent or tortuous conduct at PNNL,
ORNL and other Office of Science labs.”
“Sources show distinct parallels between DOE/Battelle and SEC/Madoff. However,
DOE conduct is more egregious
because it is…
directing
Battelle’s litigation fraud to obstruct justice [conceal
evidence]…churning taxpayers to cover
up…Battelle’s violations threaten national
security [classified access (safeguards)],
research &
patenting integrity, economic development,
entrepreneurs, whistleblowers, and other issues
relevant to safely running a national lab.” [See
details
which include concerns of Congress.]
2c. 2008 Health/Safety
Warnings to HSS
– HSS [Podonsky et al.] ignored this 9/29/08
email which stated in relevant part:
“Staff health/safety/security at Office of
Science labs is at greater risk going forward.
DOE’s authorizing
Battelle to violate 48 CFR
970.5228-1 [Litigation in
“good faith”] via
“personal-injury defense” tactics to withhold smoking-gun
evidence is relevant to staff at DOE labs which entail
HAZMAT, radiation, machinery, high-temperature apparatus and other work hazards. These
abusive/fraudulent litigation tactics put at risk staff that may later file
lawsuits for wrongful injury, illness, cancer, death,
termination or other causes of action due to Battelle’s negligent or
tortuous conduct… Your decision eliminates
or mitigates Battelle’s legal & financial
risk of violating staff health/safety/security procedures,
ignoring DEAR and thwarting
whistleblower protections. It will likely incent them to relax such
procedures to increase profit [See Westbrook ORNL
case in 8/24/08
email (radiation dose alarm levels)];
thousands of employees at the five national labs run
by Battelle could be adversely effected.”
As shown by Battelle’s continued
perjury since, DOE disregarded these and all
evidence-based emails. By repeatedly
ignoring such substantiated concerns,
DOE lacks
credibility to assert that HSS
will now conduct an independent safety review across the
complex.
3. Comments on Other Parts of DOE’s
Response Contradicted by its Ongoing Suppression of Contractor Misconduct.
3a. DOE Response ¶4: “Over the past year, the Department has
undertaken a broad range of steps to assure a strong and questioning safety
culture at WTP and sites across the DOE complex. We will only be successful
if we remain committed to continuous improvement and teamwork. DOE takes
all safety concerns--whether from our employees, our contractors, the
Board, or third-parties--very seriously.”
Comment: Such assertions are contradicted
by ongoing conduct cited above, e.g., funding condemned
personal-injury defense lawyer tactics
to falsify technical information and suppress evidence of misconduct by
contractor Battelle. See details
in Attachment
1 re: DOE Now Repeating
Court-Condemned Concealment Tactics Used to Suppress Technical
Safety-Related Documents].
3b. DOE Response ¶26: “Based on an investigation by the DOE Office of the
General Counsel…found no evidence that
DOE or its contractors were aware of and sought to suppress a
technical report.”
Comment: This statement lacks
credibility given General Counsel’s complicity in the multi-year
perjury by PNNL scientist to suppress technical matter [software] from the court, i.e., concealing evidence that
implicates Battelle in (i) Misusing the Technical Assistance Program [withholding DOE-funded software
developed for small business & violating
False Claims Act]
and (ii) Falsifying inventions to patent office. FOIA documents confirm DOE Oak
Ridge legal staff condones this litigation fraud [cited in §1 above] that’s already cost taxpayers ~$1M. And,
Office of Science confirmed
in Sept. 2010 that General Counsel [GC] has “authorized this litigation
fraud/perjury”. Given DOE’s
ongoing cover-up [via contractor perjury] in the
Pulver/Battelle case, GC’s denial of any suppression in Tamosaitis/Bechtel is
to be expected, but obviously lacks credibility, sincerity and
plausibility. Contrary to Poneman’s
claim, GC [e.g., field offices (Chief Counsel)] is not independent from but is
quite complicit with DOE contractors.
3c. DOE Response ¶25: “HSS review found…most WTP personnel
did not express fear of retaliation.”
Comment: While tacitly admitting
that some personnel feared
retaliation, DOE
glosses over the issue and thus fails to rebut the Board’s concerns re: WTP/Bechtel. Such a flippant response
isn’t surprising given DOE’s 8-year continued retaliation
against my small business for reporting fraud, other
criminal misconduct, and national security breaches by contractor Battelle. In addition to funding Battelle
and counsel to suborn perjury, conceal evidence, and drive up litigation
costs, DOE further retaliated by leaking confidential
case material that Pulver sent to a US Attorney regarding legal
strategy/analysis/evidence. FOIA-obtained
documents from Oak Ridge confirm that an IG Office of Investigations field agent not only
divulged this material to Battelle's legal advisors but
also provided legal advice (work product)
to them. Such complicity shows
that the DOE-IG retaliates against complainants and protects contactors at expense of taxpayers, oversight, research
& patent integrity, health/security/safety and confidentiality. [See details.] And, in May 2009, the site office [PNSO] manager, who issued
orders to report fraud, flatly told Pulver that DOE
will continue funding the litigation despite
evidence of perjury
to
suppress evidence implicating Battelle; a complaint
was
then filed but ignored by the IG.
4. 8/18/11: DOE Inspector General Friedman Dismisses/Ignores
Pulver’s Evidence-Based Allegations Sent to DNFSB
▪ DOE Inspector General, in response to Pulver’s 8/7/11
email [re: public comments to DNSBB], refused to even investigate any
of his evidence-backed allegations which include: suppressing technical information [Evidence], witness
tampering (perjury), taxpayers forced to fund personal-injury defense
lawyer abuses, ignoring national security threats by contractors, as well
as breach of confidentially and other retaliation by DOE [Science, site
offices (ORO, PNSO…), General Counsel , IG Office of Investigations
et al.]. See 8-year chronology of
Friedman authorizing perjury, retaliation, security
breach and cover up [~$1M] of
contractor Battelle misconduct.
▪ Friedman’s
refusal today further validates the concerns cited
above. Moreover, it confirms
that (i) DOE [Chu,
Poneman, Koonin, General Counsel et al.] is authorized to continue
funding & suborning the abusive
practices that have been exposed by Tamosaitis, Pulver, Laul,
Westbrook.
and others over the years, and (ii)
Further embolden contractor misconduct at the
expense of oversight, fraud prevention, health/safety/security, research
integrity, workers’ communicating with managers, and strong safety
culture.
▪ Friedman clearly
implicates himself [revealing his complicity]
by his abject refusal to investigate substantiated allegations of staff colluding
with accused contractors and General Counsel against those reporting fraud
per DOE Order
221.1. [An appropriately
acting IG would diligently pursue
& address/rectify such concerns to preserve public
trust in his office by whistleblowers, Congress, President et al.]
His conduct casts more doubts on the
sincerity of DOE responses to DNFSB [re:
retaliation, suppression,
independent safety
review…].
▪ Because the IG authorizes DOE and its
contractors, at taxpayer expense, to actually suppress information, conceal
evidence, perjure and thus provide false
statements to federal or state courts and/or officials, it obviously
follows that DOE would/will lie to or suppress information from the DNFSB
or Congress to protect its contractors by concealing safety-related or
other misconduct. At
the very least,
so long as Friedman remains Inspector
General, DOE statements to DNFSB or others regarding contractor-related
matters
[e.g., retaliation-free safety culture]
are clearly suspect and should be independently verified by outside third
parties.
5. Closing Summary Points of Concern
Regarding DOE Response to 2011-1 or any DNFSB Recommendation
▪ DOE asserting it has strong safety
culture and condemns retaliation is soundly discredited
by Chu, Poneman and Koonin continuing to be accessories to Battelle’s
taxpayer-funded perjury, material suppressions, national security breach,
research misconduct and false claims, all
done to conceal contractor fraud against a small business entrepreneur and
the patent office.
▪ DOE’s suborning
perjury
to protect Battelle’s commercial interests
demonstrates it will similarly suppress technical safety information and
engage in witness tampering to protect Bechtel’s interests, e.g., not losing a
WTP performance bonus. Moreover, DOE's covering
up misconduct of contractor Battelle [running 6
national labs] will embolden Bechtel [with
General Counsel consent] to repeat such abusive litigation
fraud tactics against Tamosaitis to similarly protect its corporate
interests.
▪ Instead of holding billion-dollar tax-exempt contractor
Battelle accountable for misconduct proven by Battelle & DOE evidence,
Secretary Chu and his senior staff [Poneman, Koonin…], with consent of
current IG Friedman, are relentlessly churning taxpayers [~$1M] in protracted litigation [perjury-to-conceal
by Q-clearance holder accessing classified research] to attempt to financially bury and retaliate against
small business entrepreneur Pulver who dutifully reported fraud to the IG
per Order
221.1 in 2003.
▪ Independent oversight in the $30B DOE
is effectively non-existent especially in contractor cases involving high
financial stakes.
Mr. Thibadeau, if you or other members of
the DNFSB have questions or need more information, please
contact me. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Philip
C. Pulver
Owner/Entrepreneur,
CCOL Inc.
www.NationalLabSafetyRisk.com www.OfficeOfScienceFraud.com
www.PNNLfraud.com www.NationalLabSecurityThreat.com
Attachment
|