Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Parker v. Department of Defense

Supreme Court brief2004

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Supreeé- ~ 4 US.

f }

4931103 DEC 4 2003

ems TICE CE THE Cpe

In The

Supreme Court of the United States

GLENDA GAIL CROOK, U.S. citizen

Veteran and Pro se Petitioner

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Respondent

On Petition For Writ Of Certiorari

To The Federal Circuit Court Of Appeals

PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI

GLENDA GAIL CROOK

(aka GLENDA GAIL PARKER)

Petitioner

5902 Mt. Eagle Drive, # 307

Alexandria, VA 22303

(703) 960-5602

Writ of Certiorari

A. QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW:

1. Does the Fifth Amendment guarantee a civil servant U.S.

citizen the right to discovery, when filed and served, in Due

Process of Law in an employment termination action by the

U.S. Department of Defense?

2. Does the Fifth Amendment protect a civil servant U.S.

citizen’s property, goodwill, and liberty of contract interest in

a TS/SCI security clearance held for 16 years?

3. Does Article II require the Executive Branch to comply

with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, The Privacy Rights Act of

1974, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

(HIPAA), with 28 U.S.C. § 3486(e), and the Whistleblower

Protection Act in matters of administrative investigations

involving termination of employment?

4. Does signing ‘“Petitioner’s Fed. Cir. R. 15(c) Statement

Concerning Discrimination” and checking item (4), “The

case involves an application to the Office of Personnel

Management for benefits.” require a petitioner to de facto

give up her Constitutionally protected civil rights in order to

appeal in the Federal Court of Appeais?

5. The Department of Defense did not publish or have a

hearing on a regulation under 28 U.S.C. §§ 3901, 3902, and

3903 to prevent the unauthorized use of health information in

an administrative investigation/hearing or permitting the

publication of medical information to a Merit Systems

Protection Board.

6. May a Government employer release confidential health or

falsified health information to a Merit System Protection

il

Writ of Certiorari

Board or other administrative hearing without the permission

of the person identified in the confidential health information

in violation of Title Il (HIPAA) amending 28 U.S.C. §

3486(e)?

7. Does Article Il of the U.S. Constitution require the

Department of Defense to re-employ the petitioner upon her

return to duty from military service in accordance with 38

U.S.C. Chapter 43?

B. PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS - None

else

OF

S

ill

Writ of Certiorari

TABLE OF CONTENTS

QUESTIONS PRESENTED i

PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS ii

TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES ~ Vv

1. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY Vv

2. STATUTORY AUTHORITY

3. REGULATORY AUTHORITY Vi

CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1

OPINIONS AND ORDERS ENTERED

JURISDICTION

DATE OF ORDER TO BE REVIEWED

RULE 11 STATEMENT |

N/A — NO CROSS-PETITION FILED

STATUTE CONFERING JURISDICTiON

. RULE 29.4 NOTIFICATION

AUTHORITIES INVOLVED IN THIS CASE

1. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

2. STATUTES INVOLVED

3. REGULATIONS INVOLVED

FACTS MATERIAL TO CONSIDERATION

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS

2. JURISDICTION OF FIRST COURT

RULE 10(c) STATEMENT

CONCLUSION

ve WN =

Cee AnaAaAaUN Nhs ph kh BWW W =

VI.

IV

Writ of Certiorari

APPENDIX

OPINIONS, ORDERS, FINDINGS OF FACT,

CONCLUSION OF LAW, AND TRANSCRIPTS

1-24

OTHER RELEVANT OPINIONS

25 —32

ORDER ON REHEARING

- 33

JUDGEMENT TO BE REVIEWED

34 — 37

COPY OF AUTHORITIES

38 — 276

OTHER MATERIAL ESSENTIAL TO

UNDERSTAND THE PETITION

277 - 283

om

Writ of Certiorari

C. TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES

1. CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY

AUTHORITY

RELEVANCE

Fifth Amendment to the

Protects a U.S. Citizen’s

U.S. Constitution (App. | property interests and due

V, pg 41)

process rights

Article II to the U.S.

Constitution

(App. V, pg 38)

Requires the Department of

Defense to abide by laws

Section 8 of the U.S.

Relegates the authority to

Constitution (App. | make and approve arms sales

to the U.S. Congress

V, pgs 39 — 40)

2. STATUTORY AUTHORITY

AUTHORITY

RELEVANCE

28 U.S.C. §§-1253

3904 (App. V, pgs

101 & 111)

Establishes jurisdiction

Fifth Amendment to

the U.S. Constitution

(App. V, pg 41)

Establishes jurisdiction

Title 5, § 7703 (App.

V, pgs 90 — 91)

Establishes jurisdiction

38 U.S.C. § 4324

(App. V, pgs 147 -

149)

Establishes jurisdiction

The Westfall Act

28 U.S.C. §§ 1346(g)

and 2679(d) (App. V,

pgs 104 & 107 — 110)

Permits civil action/Constitutional

torts against government employees

who act outside of their duties.

5 U.S.C. §§ 552(b)

and 552(g)(1)(D)

(App. V, pgs50& ~~

58-59)

Establishes jurisdiction and prohibits

release of plaintiff's grievance record

outside of the grievance channels

without her written permission.

Vi

Writ of Certiorari

AUTHORITY

RELEVANCE

a

The Health Insurance

Portability and

Accountability Act

(HIPAA) SECs

248(e) & 262(a)(6)

(App. V, pgs 209 &

214)

Prohibits the exploitation of an

individual’s medical records by the

DOD in an administrative ;

investigation [to revoke a security

clearance or terminate a civil

servant].

18 U.S.C. §§ 24 and _

1025, as amended by

HIPAA (App. V, pgs

92 — 93)

Prohibits defendant(s) from making

false statements relating to the health

of the plaintiff that could result in

defrauding the government of health

care benefits. .

18 U.S.C. § 3486(e),

as amended by

HIPAA (App. V, pgs

99-100) .

Prevent the.defendant(s) from using

health information in any

administrative investigation directed

against the plaintiff.

38 U.S.C. § 4314,

4322, 4323, 4324,

5425 (App. V, pgs

130 - 132, 142 - 150)

Requires the DOD to reemploy the

petitioner/plaintiff.

VA Code §§ 18.2-499

and 18.2-500

Codifies defendants and plaintiff's

fiduciary duty

3. REGULATORY AUTHORITY

AUTHORITY

RELEVANCE

DODI 1205.12, April 4,

(App. V, pgs 243 -270)

1996 | Regulatory requirement to re-

employ plaintiff upon return

from military service even if

no longer qualified for

vreviously held position.

DODD 5200.2-R, paragraphs | De facto proof that no

clearance was required for

3-102, 1-322, and 3-101

(App. V, pgs 271 — 276)

the plaintiffs position.

~

Vil

Writ of Certiorari

AUTHORITY ~ RELEVANCE

DODD 7050.6, paragraphs DOD Directive protecting

4.1 and 4.4 (by reference) whistleblowers from

termination.

Writ of Certiorari

D. CORPORATE DISCLOSURE STATEMENT:

Not Applicable (N/A)

E. CITATIONS OF OPINIONS AND ORDERS

ENTERED IN THE CASE

1. Per Curiam Decision July 14, 2003, opinion not

citable as precedent (App. I, pgs 1 - 9)

a. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c) (2000), pg 2

b. 5 U.S.C. § 7701(c)(1)(B) (2000), pg 2

c. Hesse v. Dept of State, 217 F.3d, 1377-80

(Fed. Cir. 2000), pg 3 & 4

d. Id at 1381, 1382 (citing Jones v. Dept of the

Navy, 978 F.2d 1223, 1225-26 (Fed. Cir. 1992), pg 3

e. Spears v. Merit Systems Protection Board,

766 F.2d 520, 522 (Fed. Cir. 1985), pg 4

2. MSPB Decision, January 17, 2002 (App. I, pgs

17 - 24)

a. 5 USC. §§ 7511(a)(1)(A), 75120),

7513(d), pg 17

b. 5C.F.R. § 1201.58, pg 17 footnote

c. 5 U.S.C. Chapter 75, pg 21

d. DOD 5200.2-R paragraph C3.1.2, pg 20

e. 5C.F.R. § 1201.112(a)(5), pg 5

f. Germino v. Department of Defense, 61

M.S.P.R. 686-87 (1994), pg 20

g. Hesse v. Department of State, 82 M.S.P.R.

489, 492, 493 (1999), citing Hinton v. Department of the

Navy, 61 M.S.P.R. 692, 697 (1994), pg 21

h. Holley v. Department of the Navy, 62

M.S.P.R. 300, 303-04 (1994), citing Cleveland Board of

Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 546, 105 S. Ct. 1487,

1495, 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985), pg 19

i yt wat tale VY BAe PAS oie a ATL Rae

ROL TE EASE I a ANU OO RE tT ETT Ee

NO

Writ of Certiorari

i. Jones vy. Department of the Navy, 48

M.S.P.R. 680, 689 (1991), aff'd’ 978 F.2d 1223 (Fed. Cir.

1992), pg 18

j. Id at 690 (citing, Department of the Navy v.

Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 527-32, 108 S.Ct. 818, 824-26, 98

L.Ed.2d 918 (1998), pg 19

k. Kriner vy. Department of the Navy, 61

M.S.P.R. 526 (1994), pg 19

I> Matos v. Department of the Navy, 62

M.S.P.R. 117, 119 (1994), pg 19

m. Stephen v. Department of the Air Force,

47 M.S.P.R. 672, 681 (1991), pg 19

n. Vanduzer v. Department of the Navy, 41

M.S.P.R. 357, 361-62 (1989), pg 21

0. West v. Department of the Navy, 63

M.S.P.R. 86, 88-89 (1994), pg 20

ae Motion for Rehearing DENIED September

10, 2003 (App. III, pg 33)

_a. No additional cites provided.

4. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of

Virginia Amended Memorandum Opinion on Civil Action

No. 03-431-A, dated October 27, 2003 (App. II, pgs 25 —

32)

a. Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, pg 25, 29 & 31

b. Federal Circuit Rule 15(c), pg 3, 5,6 & 8

c. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Fed. R.

Civ. P. 58, pg 32

d. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46

(1957), pg 27

=

Writ of Certiorari

e. Crook v. Department of Defense, 71 Fed.

Appx. 54, 2003 WL 21675126, at *1 (Fed. Cir. July 14,

2003), pg 27 footnote

f. Daniels v. United States Postal Service, 726

F.2d 723, 724 (Fed. Cir. 1984), pg 30

g. Davidson v. United States Postal Service,

24 F.3d 223, 223-224 (Fed. Cir. 1994), pg 30

h. Mylan Lab., Inc. v. Matkari, 7F.3d 1130,

1134 (4" Cir. 1993), pg 27

i. Smith v. Horner, 846 F.2d 1521, 1522,

1523, 1524 (D.C. Cir. 1988), pg 30 & 31

5 j. Williams v. Department of the Army, 715

F.2d 1485 (Fed. Cir. 1983), pg 30

F. JURISDICTION — 28 U.S.C. §§ 1253, 1346(g),

2679(d), 3901, 3992, 3903, 3904, 3905, and the Fifth

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protecting property

interests and due process rights.

1. DATE OF ORDER TO BE REVIEWED:

a. Per Curiam Federal Circuit Court’s July 14,

2003 decision, re-hearing motion denied September 10, 2003.

b. United States District Court Amended

Memorandum Opinion dated October 27, 2003, on Civil

Action Case No. 03-431-A*

2. RULE 11 STATEMENT: It is appropriate for the

U.S. Supreme Court to decide this federal-question case

under 28 U.S.C. Section 3904. The nature of this case is of

such public importance that it justifies deviation from normal

appellate practice. Virginia state code codified civil servant’s

fiduciary duty. Opinion entered by the Federal Circuit Court

on July 14, 2003 and by the U.S. District Court on October

? See 28 U.S.C. § 2101(e).

Writ of Certiorari

27, 2003 contradicts numerous rulings on the Fifth

Amendment. U.S. Supreme Court decision in Hesse vs the

Department of State, 1998 prevents the MSPB from making

security clearance determinations as it did in this case.

Allowing the termination of a U.S. citizen’s civil service

employment without cause destroys the merit promotion

system and opens the door to unfettered retribution for

whistleblowing, to discrimination, and to political purging of

the Executive Department and its contractors —all without

judicial review.

3. NOT APPLICABLE — NO CROSS-PETITION

FILED

4. STATUTE CONFERING JURISDICTION:

28 U.S.C. §§ 1253 and 3904; Fifth Amendment to the U.S.

Constitution; 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1); and 28 U.S.C. § 2101 (e).

5. RULE 29.4 NOTIFICATION STATEMENT:

Notification is required to the Solicitor General of the United

States, Room 5614, Department of Justice, 950 Pennsylvania

Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20530-0001. Certificate of

service provided.

G. AUTHORITIES INVOLVED IN THIS CASE:

1. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

INVOLVED:

a. Fifth Amendment, which extends

protection against arbitrary state legislation, affecting

life, liberty and property and due process of law

protection to U.S. citizens.

b. Article II of the Constitution which makes

it incumbent upon the Executive Branch to take care

to faithfully execute the laws.

Writ of Certiorari

2. STATUTES INVOLVED:

a. 3 U.S.C. §§ 401, 402, 451 and 453

b. 5 U.S.C. § 552a (The Privacy Rights Act of

1974)

c. 5 U.S.C. § 1221 (Individual Right of

Action in Certain Reprisal Cases)

d. 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(10) & (11) (Prohibited

Personnel Actions)

e. 5U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)

f 18 U.S.C. §§ 24, 1035, 3231 and 3486(e)

g, 28 U.S.C. § 1253 (Jurisdiction)

h. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(g)

i. 28 U.S.C. § 2101(e)

j. 28 U.S.C. §§ 2674 and 2679

_ k. 28 US.C. §§ 3904 and 3905

|. 38 U.S.C. Chapter 43

m. H.R. 169 Notification & Federal Employee

Antidiscrimination and Retaliation Act of 2002

n. Health Insurance Portability and

Accountability Act of 1996

o. Taft-Hartley Act (Section 305)

p. Title 5 C.F.R., Chapter II, Subchapter A,

Part 1208.16, and 5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.73 & 1207.73(c)

q. The Whistleblower Protection Act, as

amended by the MSPB and OSC FY 2003

Authorizations Act

r. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

3. REGULATIONS INVOLVED:

a. DODI 1205.12, April 16, 1997, “Civilian

Employment and Reemployment Rights of Applicants

for, and Service Members and Former Service

Members of the Uniformed Services.”

Writ of Certiorari

b. DODD 5200.1-R, paragraphs 3-102, 1-322,

and 3-101.

c. DODD 7050.6, paragraphs 4.1 and 4.4

H. FACTS MATERIAL TO CONSIDERATION On

action arising from the United States Court of Appeals for the

Federal Circuit and arising from the United States District

Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, this petitions the

Court for Writ of Certiorari under Rules 11 and 10(c) of the

Rules of the Supreme Court of the United States, adopted

January 27, 2003.

In accordance with William K. Suter’s December 10,

2003 letter, this corrects, amends and re-submits for

docketing in the correct format the petition and appendix

filed December 4, 2003 and received by the Office of the

Clerk of the Supreme Court, U.S., on Dec 5, 2003 and

incorporates amendment filed December 8, 2003 and other

typographical corrections.

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS:

a. On March 28, 2001, with only two days

notice the DOD suspended the plaintiff indefinitely

upon her return from military service alleging failure

to maintain her security clearance.

b. Plaintiff, a civilian and a U.S. citizen

employed with the DOD for 34 years, filed an instant

appeal, alleging retaliation for protected disclosures

and violations of the Uniformed Services

Employment and Reemployment Rights Act

(USERRA).

e DOD advertised two vacancies not

requiring a security clearance and the plaintiff applied

for both positions.

d. On August 2, 2001, the DOD revoked the

plaintiff's security clearance.

Writ of Certiorari

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS Cont'd:

e. On August 28, 2001, the DOD notified

plaintiff that her employment would be terminated

effective September 25, 2001.

f. The plaintiff requested and was granted a

discontinued service retirement effective the date of

her request September 15, 2001.

g. The MSPB concluded that a clearance was

required for the plaintiff's position and on January 17,

2002 affirmed the DOD’s indefinite suspension action

without fully responsive discovery by the DOD.

h. On December 19, 2002, the MSPB denied

the plaintiff materia!ly relevant discovery and issued a

final order affirming DOD’s termination action.

i. The plaintiff complied with all military

service notification requirements of 38 U.S.C.

Chapter 43.

j. Between June 18, 1999 and November 2001

the plaintiff made protected disclosures containing

irrefragable proof and legal cites of statutes violated

by DOD to the following offices: the DOD Inspector

General, the Air Force Office of Special

Investigations, to the Office of Special Counsel, to the

Merit Systems Protection Board, to the Government

Accountability Project, to the U.S. Congress

(November 16, 1999 and subsequent dates), to the

GAO and to the FBI.

k. In pursuing redress through the Federal

Circuit Court, the petitioner did not consent to waive

her Constitutionally guaranteed rights. Written

guidance for pro se claimants provided by the MSPB

was ambiguous. Clarifying pro se guidance received

from the Federal Circuit Court Clerk’s office was that

the Federal Circuit Court could only address the issue

ie nee

Writ of Certiorari

1. STATEMENT OF FACTS Cont'd:

ruled upon by the MSPB and that the plaintiff should

file her discrimination claims with the District Court.

2. JURISDICTION OF COURT OF FIRST

INSTANCE:

a. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)

b. 38 U.S.C. §§ 4324, 4301- 4333

c. Title 5 C.F.R., Chapter II, Subchapter A,

Part 1208.16, and 5 C.F.R. §§ 1201.73 & 1207.73(c)

I. RULE 10(c) STATEMENT: _ It is appropriate for

the U.S. Supreme Court to decide this federal-question case.

The Federal Circuit Appeals Court Opinion dated July 14,

2003 misapplied the Hesse v. Department of State (1998)

decision of this Court in a way that conflicts with the Fifth

Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. This case is of such

public importance in ensuring the execution of civil servant’s

fiduciary duty’ and in preserving the public’s trust in the

government that a deviation from normal appellate practice is

justified.

Expedited review is requested under 28 U.S.C. §

3904. Allowing U.S. citizens’ civil service employment to be

terminated without cause and without limitation destroys the

merit promotion system and opens the door to unfettered

retribution for whistleblowing, to discrimination, to

violations of privacy and to political purging of the Executive

Department and its contractors —all without judicial review.

* Virginia Code §§ 18.2-499 and 18.2-500 makes a breach of fiduciary

duty a litigatible cause of action under Virginia law.

Writ of Certiorari

J. CONCLUSION: WHEREFORE, the petitioner

requests that a writ of certiorari be granted.

Respectfully submitted,

& @ fev fein

Lonsla tot’

GLENDA GAIL PARKER, U.S. Citizen, pro se

5902 Mt. Eagle Dr. # 307

Alexandria, VA 22303

703-960-5602

Of Counsel:

O. William (Bill) Davis, Attorney at Law

2145 Eagle Blvd

Kingston, Oklahoma 73439

580-564-3876/4732

IV.

IV.

VI.

Appendix

APPENDIX

OPINIONS, ORDERS, FINDINGS OF FACT,

CONCLUSION OF LAW, AND TRANSCRIPTS

1-24

OTHER RELEVANT OPINIONS

25-32

ORDER ON REHEARING

33

JUDGEMENT TO BE REVIEWED

34 — 37

COPY OF AUTHORITIES

38 — 276

OTHER MATERIAL ESSENTIAL TO

UNDERSTAND THE PETITION

277 - 283

NRE eres etree rs Wen nore ena aA

il

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

for

Appendix

Location Date Document Description

Appendix | July 14,2003 Fed. Circuit. Court PER

App. 1 -9 CURIAM Decision, 03-

3152

Appendix | Dec 19,2002 Transcript of MSPB Hearing

App. — 10- 11

Appendix I Dec 19,2002 Merit Systems Protection

App.-12 - 16 Board Final Order

DC-0752-02-0053-I-1

Appendix I Jan 17,2002 Merit Systems Protection

App. — 17 - 24 Board Final Order

DC-0752-02-0053-I-1

Appendix II Oct 27,2003 Fed District Court: Opinion,

App. - 25 -32 Civil Action No. 03-431-A

Appendix III Sep 10,2003 Fed Circuit Court Order

App. — 33 DENIED a rehearing.

Appendix IV July 14, 2003 Fed Circuit Court Judgment,

App. — 34 - 35 03-3152

Appendix IV Oct 27,2003 District Court Judgment and

App. — 36 - 37 Amended Judgment

Location

Appendix V

App. — 38

Appendix V

App. — 39 - 40

Appendix V

App. 41

Appendix V

App. -42 - 45

Appendix V

App. — 46 - 76

Appendix V

App. — 77 - 81

Appendix V

App. — 82 - 89

Appendix V

App. — 90 - 91

Appendix V

App.—92 - 100

Appendix V

App.-101

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

Undated

ill

~ Table of Contents

Document Description

Civil Action No. 04-431-A

Article II, U.S. Constitution

Section 8, U.S. Constitution

Bill of Rights, USS.

Constitution

3 U.S.C. §§ 401, 402, 45T,

453

5 U.S.C. § 552a

5 U.S.C. § 1221

5 US.C. § 2303(b)€10),

(11)& (12) & (e)

5 U.S.C. § 7703

18 U.S.C. §§ 24, 1035,

3231, 3486

28 U.S.C. § 1253

ee ...——.6&06O c___ ___m®™

iV

Table of Contents

Location Date Document Description

Appendix V Undated 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a) -(g)

App.-102-104

Appendix V Undated 28 U.S.C. § 2101(e)

App. - 105

Appendix V Undated 28 U.S.C. § 2674

App.-106

Appendix V Undated 28 U.S.C. § 2679

App.-107-110

Appendix V Undated 28 U.S.C. § 3904

App.-111

Appendix V Undated 28 U.S.C. § 3905

App.-112

Appendix V Undated 38 U.S.C. Chapter 43

App.113-153

Appendix V Undated H.R. 169 Notification &

App.154-165 Federal Employee

Antidiscrimination and

Retaliation Act of 2002

Appendix V Undated Health Insurance Portability

App.166-234 and Accountability Act of

1996

Location

Appendix V

App.235-242

Appendix V

App.243-270

Appendix V

App.271-276

Appendix V

App.277

Appendix VI

App.278-279

Appendix VI

App.-280

Undated

Apr 4, 1996,

as changed

Apr 16, 1997

January 1987

Dec 7, 1995

Mar 21, 2003

Apr 20, 2003

Table of Contents

Document Description

Taft-Hartley Act (Section

305)

DODI 1205.12 Civilian

Employment and

Reemployment

Rights of Applicants for,

and Service Members and

Former Service Members of

the Uniformed Services

DODD 5200.2-R, Chapters

1, 3, 7, and 10

Excerpt from Petitioner’s

Position Description

Fed. Cir. 15(c) Statement

Concerning Discrimination

filed with petitioner’s Fed.

Cir. Court Appeal of MSPB

decision.

Petitioner’s

includes

Response -—-

notification to

Federal Circuit that a civil

action lawsuit was filed in

District Court, Number CA-

03-431-A

Location

Appendix VI

App.-281

Appendix VI

App.-282

Appendix VI

App.-283

Date

Nov14, 2003

Jan 6, 2004

Jan 6, 2004

Table of Contents

Document Description

White House Memorandum

supporting USERRA

Employment ad published in

The Washington Post help

wanted ad section.

Employment ad published in

The Washington Post help

wanted ad section.

Apo. I- l

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

NOTE: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this disposition is not

citable as precedent. It is a public record that will appear in

Tables published periodically.

United States Court of Appeals for the

Federal Circuit

03-3152

GLENDA G. CROOK (now known as Glenda Gail Parker),

Petitioner,

(Rec’d by Petitioner July 21, 2003)

v.

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE,

Respondent.

DECIDED: July 14, 2003

Before NEWMAN, MICHEL and RADER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Glenda Gail Parker (formerly Glenda Gail Crook)

petitions for judicial review of the final decision of the Merit

Systems Protection Board (“Board”) dated December 19,

2002, Docket No. DC-0752-02-0053-I-1, declining review of

the initial decision of the administrative judge (“AJ”)

sustaining Parker’s removal for loss of her security clearance.

Because we conclude that substantial evidence supports the

Board’s decision sustaining Parker’s removal and because the

App. I- 2

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

Board properly declined to decide the other issues presented,

we affirm.

BACKGROUND

Ms. Parker was employed as a Security Assistance

Analyst, GM-1101-15, in the Defense Security Cooperation

Agency (“Agency”). The Agency designated this position

“special sensitive” and it therefore required a top secret

security clearance. On October 4, 2000, the Agency informed

Parker that it had made a tentative determination to revoke

her eligibility for access to classified information and/or

occupancy of a sensitive position. On December 20, 2000,

the Agency revoked Parker’s security access and on March

28, 2001 the Agency suspended parker indefinitely. The

Agency denied parker’s appeal of its revocation of her

security clearance on August 2, 2001. On September 5, 2001,

the Agency issued a decision to remove Parker because she

lacked the security clearance necessary for her position.

Parker resigned on September 14, 2001.

DISCUSSION

We will affirm a decision of the Board unless it is

arbitrary and capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise

not in accordance with law; obtained without procedures

required by law, rule, or regulation having been followed; or

unsupported by substantial evidence. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c)

(2000).

I.

Before the Board, agencies must prove charges

supporting a removal by a preponderance of the evidence. 5

U.S.C. § 7701(c)(1)(B) (2000). Parker argues that the Board

failed to do so, because it erred in determining her position

required a security clearance. The record belies her

argument, however, as there was testimony that “within the

App. I- 3

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

agency all positions are required to have a secret clearance or

higher” and documentary evidence in the form of a standard

Agency form identifying her position as “special sensitive.”

This constitutes substantial evidence supporting the Board’s

decision.

Parker also argues that the Board erred by declining to

consider whether her security clearance was_ properly

revoked. The Board was correct, however, in its

determination that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the

propriety of the Agency’s revocation of Parker’s security

clearance. “[{I]t would be improper, without a clear directive

from Congress, to allow a non-expert body, such as the Merit

Syste3ms Protection Board, to review the merits of [security

clearance] determinations.” Hesse v. Dep’t of State, 217 F 3d

1372 (Fed. Cir. 2000).

Parker next apparently argues that the Agency’s

procedures denied her due process. This argument also fails.

First of all, “this court has held, the Due Process Clause of

the Fifth Amendment has no application to a proceeding to

review an employee’s security clearance.” Id. At 1381 (citing

Jones v. Dep’t of the Navy, 978 F.2d 1223, 1225-26 (Fed.

Cir. 1992)). To the extent Parker argues she was given

insufficient notice or explanation of the Agency’s reasons for

revoking her clearance, we note that the Agency provided

Parker with its reasons for revoking her clearance and gave

her an opportunity to respond to that reason. As in Hesse,

“{d]Jue process did not require a fuller explanation.” Id. At

1382.

Il.

Parker also asserts various other defenses to her

removal, including, discrimination under the Civil Rights Act

of 1964, the Whistsleblower Protection Act, the Uniformed

Services Employment and Reemployment Act of 1994, and

violations of various portions of the Constitution. We must

also reject these arguments. First, this court lacks jurisdiction

to reach the merits of a discrimination claim. Spears v. Merit

App. I- 4

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

Systems Protection Board, 766 F.2d 520, 522 (Fed. Cir.

1985). Board decisions reaching the merits of discrimination

claims must be appealed in the district courts, and not to this

court. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1); Spears, 766 F.2d at 522.

Second, no statute (citing by Parker, or otherwise) authorizes

the Board to review security clearance determinations. See

Hesse, 217 F.3d at 1377-80. Third, parker has not identified

any constitutional reason why the Agency should not remove

her from her position given her loss of security clearance.

CONCLUSION

For all the reasons stated above, we affirm the

Board’s determination that the Agency’s removal should be

sustained.

— ir

App.I- 5

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Information Sheet

Filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari

There is no automatic right of appeal to the Supreme Court of

the Unites States from judgments of the Federal Circuit. You

must file a petition for writ of certiorari which the Supreme

Court will grant only when there are compelling reasons.

(See Rule 10 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the United

States, hereinafter called Rules.)

Time. The petition must be filed in the Supreme Court of the

United States within 90 days of the entry of judgment in this

Court or within 90 days of the denial of a timely petition for

rehearing. The judgment is entered on the day the Federal

Circuit issues a final decision in your case. [The time does

not run from the issuance of the mandate, which has no effect

on the right to petition.] (See Rule 13 of the Rules.)

Fees. Either the $300 docketing fee or a motion for leave to

proceed in forma pauperis with an affidavit in support thereof

must accompany the petition. (See Rules 38 and 39)

Authorized Filer. The petition must be filed by a member of

the bar of the Supreme Court of the United States or by the

petitioner representing himself or herself.

Format of a Petition. The Rules are very specific about the

order of the required information and should be consulted

before you start drafting your petition. (See Rule 14.) Rules

33 and 34 should be consulted regarding type size and font,

paper size, paper weight, margins, page limits, cover, etc.

App. I- 6

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

Number of Copies. Forty copies of a petition must be filed

unless the petitioner is proceeding in forma pauperis, in

which case an original and ten copies of the petition for wnit

of certiorari and of the motion for leave to proceed in forma

pauperis. (See Rule 12.)

Where te File. You must file your docunients at the

Supreme Court.

Clerk

Supreme Court of the United States

1 First Street, NE

Washington, DC 20543

(202) 479-3000

No documents are filed at the Federal Circuit and the Federal

Circuit provides no information to the Supreme Court unless

the Supreme Court asks for the information.

Access to the Rules. The current rules can be found in Title

28 of the United States Code Annotated and other legal

publications available in many public libraries.

App. I- 7

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

Questions and Answers

Petitions for Panel Rehearing (Fed. Cir. R. 40)

And

Petitions for Hearing or Rehearing En Banc (Fed. Cir. R

35)

Q. When is a petition for panel hearing appropriate?

A. Petitions for panel rehearing are rarely considered

meritorious. Consequently, it is easiest to first answer when a

petition for panel rehearing is not appropriate. A petition for

panel rehearing should not be used to reargue issues already

briefed and orally argued. If a party failed to persuade the

court on an issue in the first instance, they do not get a second

chance. This is especially so when the court has entered a

judgment of affirmance without opinion under Fed. Cir. R.

36, as a disposition of this nature is used only when the

appellant/petitioner has utterly failed to raise any issues in the

appeal that require an opinion to be written in support of the

court’s judgment of affirmance.

Thus, as a usual prerequisite, the court must have filed an

opinion in support of its judgment for a petition for panel

rehearing to be appropriate. Counsel seeking panel rehearing

must be able to identify in the court’s opinion a material error

of fact or law, the correction of which would require a

different judgment on appeal.

Q. When is a petition for rehearing en banc appropriate?

App. I- 8

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

A. En bance decisions are extraordinary occurrences. To

properly answer the question, one must first understand the

responsibility of a three-judge merits panel of the court. The

panel is charged with deciding individual appeals according

to the law of the circuit as established in the court’s

precedential opinions. While each merits panel is

empowered to enter precedential opinions, the ultimate duty

of the court en banc is to set forth the law of the Federal

Circuit, which merits panels are obliged to follow.

Thus, as a usual prerequisite, a merits panel of the court must

have entered a precedential opinion in support of its judgment

for a petition for rehearing en banc to be appropriate. In

addition, the party seeking rehearing en banc must show that

either the merits panel has failed to follow decisions of the

Supreme Court of the United States or Federal Circuit

precedential opinions, or that the merits panel has followed

circuit precedent, which the party seeks to have overruled by

the count en banc.

Q. How frequently are petitions for panel rehearing granted

by merits panels or petitions for rehearing en banc granted

by the court?

A. The data regarding petitions for panel rehearing since

1982 shows that merits panels granted some relief in only

three percent of the petitions filed. The relief granted usually

involved only minor corrections of factual misstatements,

rarely resulting in a change of outcome in the decision.

En banc petitions have been granted less _ frequently.

Historically, the court has initiated en banc review in a few of

the appeals decided en banc since 1982.

~

bene:

App. I- 9

Fed. Cir. DECISION 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

Q. Is it necessary to have filed either of these petitions before

filing a petition for certiorari in the U.S. Supreme Court?

A. No. All that is needed is a final judgment of the Court of

Appeals.

App. I- 10

Transcript MSPB Hearing, Dec 19, 2002

Excerpt (pages 4 & 5)

Transcript of December 19, 2002 MSPB Hearing”

PROCEEDINGS

JUDGE BOGLE: The Washington Regional Office

of the Merit Systems Protection Board has an appeal filed by

Glenda G. Crook from action taken by the Department of

Defense.

Ms. Crook represents herself and the Agency is

represented by Gilah G. Goldsmith. My name is Elizabeth

Bogle and I am the assigned administrative judge.

We had some discussion this morning about — again,

about the very limited nature of the Board’s jurisdiction in

this case. The Agency has made a settlement offer, but Ms.

Crook has not accepted the offer and after some discussion, I

guess we have determined that we will go ahead with the

hearing.

Ms. Crook did file this morning a Motion to Compel

Discovery.

Ms. Goldsmith, do you have copy?

MS. GOLDSMITH: Yes. Is this different from the

ones that she filed previously?

JUDGE BOGGLE: Not much, but a little bit. She

did file one on December 17", the day that I issued the

prehearing conference summary. The Agency filed a written

objection to that, that none of the information - basically

stating that the information she sought was not reasonably

calculated to lead to discovery of relevant information, and |

agree with that given, as I’ve said repeatedly, the very limited

nature of the Board’s jurisdiction in this proceeding.

So the motion filed on December iv, as well as the

motion filed this morning are denied for that reason that the

' ABLE REPORTING (301) 627-8210

App. I-11

Transcript MSPB Hearing, Dec 19, 2002

Excerpt (pages 4 & 5) Cont’d

Transcript December 19, 2002 MSPB Hearing

PROCEEDINGS

information sought simply isn’t relevant or reasonably

calculated to lead to something that would be relevant.

MS. CROOK: I object, your Honor. This issue 1s

whether or not the position required a clearance and whether

or not it was revoked. The information requested is directly

related to those two issues.

JUDGE BOGLE: And let me just add here that a

moment ago I explained to the parties that notwithstanding

my December 17th conference summary, because I have

explained the limited jurisdiction the Board has, and I do not

understand what Ms. Crook feels is before the Board — within

the Board’s jurisdiction in this case. I want her to testify first.

And I would......

' ABLE REPORTING (301) 627-8210

ee ae

App. |- = 12

MSPB Final ORDER Dec 19, 2002

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

GLENDA G. CROOK, DOCKET NUMBER

Appellant, DC-0752-02-0053-I-1

v. (Rec'd by appellant Dec 21, 2002)

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DATE: Dec 19 2002

Agency.

Glenda G. Crook, Alexandria, Virginia, pro se.

Gilah G. Goldsmith, Esquire, Washington, D.C., for

the agency

BEFORE

Susanne T. Marshall, Chairman

Beth S. Slavet, Member

FINAL ORDER

The appellant has filed a petition for review in this

case asking us to reconsider the initial decision issued by the

administrative judge. We grant petitions such as this one

only when significant new evidence is presented to us that

was not available for consideration earlier or when the

administrative judge made an error interpreting a law or

regulation. The regulation that establishes this standard of

review is found in Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations,

section 1201.115 (5 C.F.R. § 1201.115).

App. I- 13

MSPB Final ORDER Dec 19, 2002

After fully considering the filings in this appeal, we

conclude that there is no new, previously unavailable,

evidence and that the administrative judge made no error in

law or regulation that affects the outcome. 5 C.F.R. §

1201.115(d). Therefore, we DENY the petition for review.

The initial decision of the administrative judge is final. This

‘s ihe Board’s final decision in this matter. 5 C.F.R. §

1201.113.

NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT REGARDING

YOUR FURTHER REVIEW RIGHTS

You have the right to request the United States Court

of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to review this final

decision. You must submit your request to the court at the

following address:

United States Court of Appeals

For the Federal Circuit

717 Madison Place, N.W.

Washington, DC 20439

The court must receive your request for review no later than

60 calendar days after your receipt of this order. If you have

a representative in this case, and your representative receives

this order before you do, then you must fie with the court no

later than 60 calendar days after receipt by your

representative. If you choose to file, be very careful to file on

time. The court has held that normally it does not have the

authority to waive this statutory deadline and that filings that

do not comply with the deadline must be dismissed. See

Pinat v. Office of Personnel Management, 931 F.2d 1544

(Fed. Cir. 1991).

If you need further information about your right to

appeal this decision to court, you should refer to the federal

law that gives you this right. It is found in Title 5 of the

United States Code, section 7703 (5 U.S.C. § 7703). You

may read this law as well as review the Board’s regulations

App. I- 14

MSPB Final ORDER Dec 19, 200.

and other’ related material at our. web © site

http://www.mspb. gov.

FOR THE BOARD: s/Bentley M. Roberts, Jr.

Clerk of the Board

Washington, D.C.

App. I- 15

MSPB Final ORDER Dec 19, 2002

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that this ORDER was sent today:

By certified mail to:

Washington College of Law

Civil Practice Clinic

4801 Massachusetts Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20016

Glenda G. Crook

621 N. Saint Asaph St. # 209

Alexandria, VA 22314

By regular mail to:

Gilah G. Goldsmith

Department of Defense

Washington Headquarters Services OGC

1155 Defense Pentagon, Room 1D197

Washington, DC 20301-1155

Kenneth L. Bates

U.S. Office of Personnel Management

Employee Relations Division

1900 “E” Street, N.W., Room 7412

Washington, DC 20415

Merit Systems Protection Board

Washington Regional Office

1800 Diagonal Road, Suite 205

Alexandria, VA 22314

App. I- 16

MSPB Final ORDER Dec 19, 2002

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Con’td

By hand to:

Office of the Special Counsel

1730 M Street, N.W.

Suite 201

Washington, DC 20036-4505

December 19, 2002 s/Marie A. Warcholak

(Date) Marie A. Warcholak

Legal Assistant

Washington, DC

nobtaniy Seat sks eas eae sia cies Res Soya DE Rata tetany Cl ae dO AN

App. I-17

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17, 2002

UNITED STATE OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

WASHINGTON REGIONAL OFFICE

GLENDA G. CROOK, DOCKET NUMBER

Appellant, DC-0752-02-0053-I-1

V. (Rec’d by Appellant Jan 18, 2002)

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, DATE: Jan 17, 2002

Agency.

American University Clinical Law Program,

Washington College of Law, Washington, D.C.

Gilah G. Goldsmith, Esquire, Washington, D.C., for

the agency.

BEFORE

Elizabeth B. Bogle

Administrative Judge

INITIAL DECISION

On October 29, 2001, the appellant filed an appeal

from an agency decision to remove her from the position of

Security Assistance Analyst, GM-1101-15, in the Defense

Security Cooperation Agency. The Board has jurisdiction

over the appeal. See 5 U.S.C. §§ 7511(a)(1)(A), 75120),

7513(d). For the following reasons, the agency action is

AFFIRMED. !

' The appellant has designated the American University Clinical Law

Program to represent her and moved to reopen the record. The record in

this case closed at the conclusion of the hearing on December 19, 2001. 5

C.F.R. § 1201.58. Once the record closes, no additional evidence or

App. I- 18

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17, 2002

Background

The appellant’s Security Assistance Analyst position

was designated Special Sensitive. Appeal File (AF) tab 4,

subtab 4). By notice dated October 4, 2000, the appellant was

informed that -a tentative determination had been made to

revoke her eligibility for access to classified information

and/or occupancy of a sensitive position. AF tab 4, subtab

4h. A “statement of reasons” was attached to the notice, and

the appellant was afforded an opportunity to reply. On

December 20, 2000, the agency revoked the appellant’s

security access. AF tab 4, subtab 4g. Beginning on March

28, 2001, the appellant was indefinitely suspended. AF tab 4,

subtab 4f. The appellant’s appeal of the revocation action

was denied on August 2, 2001. AF tab 4, subtab 4e.

By notice dated August 28, 2001, Beth M. Baker,

Policy and Plans Division, proposed the appellant’s removal

because her position required a top secret security clearance,

and her security clearance had been revoked. AF tab 4,

subtab 4c. The appellant was afforded an opportunity to

reply, but she did not submit a reply. By memorandum dated

September 5, 2001, Keith Webster Director, Policy, Plans and

Programs Directorate, issued a decision to remove the

appellant. AF tab 4, subtab 4b. The appellant resigned in

lieu of removal on September 14, 2001, and was granted

discontinued service retirement.

Legal standard

In Jones v. Department of the Navy, 48 M.S.P.R. 680,

689 (1991), aff'd, 978 F.2d 1223 (Fed. Cir. 1992), the Board

held that an agency may indefinitely suspend an employee

argument will be accepted unless it was not readily available before the

record closed. /d. Because the appellant’s designation of a representative

is not a basis for reopening the record and because the appellant has not

otherwise established a basis for reopening the record, her motion is

DENIED.

es

A PRES AP ed Ie RE EN OE BRT POS Soh Pe eee ee ea ? Li 4

Bee Sen ES ER RR ORGAO SAA NE a Na MB ae AS ER Rd Se ISIAH SR Ricci

App.I- 19

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17. 2002

based on the suspension of her security access, or pending its

investigation of her security clearance, where the agency

believes that her retention in a duty status would be

detrimental to government interests. The Board further found

that it lacks the authority to review the merits of an agency’s

suspension of an employee’s security access. Id. at 690,

citing, Department of the Navy v Egan, 484 U.S. 518, 527-32,

108 S.Ct. 818, 824-26, 98 L.Ed.2d 918 (1988).

In Kriner v. Department of the Navy, 61 M.S.P.R. 526

(1994), the Board reaffirmed that an agency ay indefinitely

suspend an employee based on its prior action with respect to

her security access and that the Board may not inquire into

the merits of the agency’s reasons for the security access

decision; the Board nonetheless held that it must assure that

minimum due process requirements were accorded in the

indefinite suspension action. Thus, where an indefinite

suspension is based on the relocation of access to security

areas or information, the agency must provide the appellant

with a meaningful opportunity to respond to the reasons for

the indefinite suspension by ensuring that either in the

advance notice of that action, or in the earlier access

determination, she has been notified of the cause that led to

the access determination. Because an employee against

whom an adverse action such as an indefinite suspension is

taken is entitled to notice of the specific reasons for that

action and to an opportunity to address those reasons in her

response to the agency’s proposal, only in this manner does

the agency assure that the appellant is afforded meaningful

due process with respect to her constitutionally protected

property interest in her employment. See, e.g., Holley v.

Department of the Navy, 62 M.S.P.R. 300, 303-04 (1994),

citing, Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 US.

532, 546, 105 S.Ct. 1487, 1495, 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985);

Stephen v. Department of the Air Force, 47 M.S.P.R. 672,

681 (1991). The same analysis applies to a removal appeal.

Mantos v. Department of the Navy. 62 M.S.P.R. 117, 119

App. I- =. 20

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17, 2002

(1994); Germino v. Department of Defense, 61 M.S.P.R. 686-

87 (1994).

The appellant’s position required a security clearance

The Board lacks authority to review the agency’s

reasons for imposing a security clearance requirement as a

condition of employment for a position. See West v.

Department of the Navy, 63 M.S.P.R. 86, 88-89 (1994). In

reviewing an adverse action based on the revocation of a

security clearance, however, the Board may inquire whether

the agency has established that a security clearance was

required for the position in question. /d.

The appellant’s position description provided four

possible levels of sensitivity: _Non-sensitive, Noncritical-

Sensitive, Critical-Sensitive, and Special-Sensitive. The

appellant’s position was designated Special-Sensitive. Mr.

Webster testified that without exception all employees of the

Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) are required

to have a security clearance. Tr. At 16, 28. His testimony

was consistent with that of Arthur R. Kel[t]z, Deputy

Director, and Jacqueline Manuel, Personnel Officer, at the

hearing in the appellant’s indefinite suspension appeals.”

Citing DOD 5200.2-R, paragraph C3.1.2 (criteria for security

designation of positions), the appellant argued that her

position did not require a security clearance. Appellant’s

exhibit A, Tr. At 23. Pursuant to that paragraph, civilian

positions of the Department of Defense are designated Non-

sensitive, Noncritical-Sensitive, or Critical-Sensitive. The

paragraph does not address the designation of Special-

Sensitive. While it is unclear from the record when the

Special-Sensitive designation applies, this does not provide a

basis for concluding that a position designated Special-

Sensitive does not require a security clearance. Because the

> The appellant furnished a copy of the transcript of that hearing as

evidence in this appeal. AF tab 1, exhibit 13.

App. I-21

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17, 2002

appellant’s position was designated sensitive and based on

Mr. Webster’s testimony that all DSCA employees are

required to have a security clearance, | conclude that the

appellant’s position required her to have a security clearance.

The appellant was afforded meaningful due process

The agency afforded the appellant her adverse action

procedural rights under 5 U.S.C. chapter 75 by providing her

prior written notice of the reason for the action, an

opportunity to reply orally and in writing, a written decision,

and notice of appeal rights. The appellant, I conclude, was

afforded meaningful due process in the removal action.

The appellant alleged that the agency could have

reassigned her to a nonsensitive position following the

revocation of her security clearance. To be entitled to a

reassignment, the appellant would be required to show that

the agency had a policy, manifested by regulations, requiring

such reassignment. See Hesse v. Department of State, 82

M.S.P.R. 489, 492 (1999); Vanduzer v. Department of the

Navy, 41 M.S.P.R. 357, 361-62 (1989). None of the agency

regulations cited by the appellant would require her

reassignment in these circumstances.

Finally, the appellant alleged that the agency

committed prohibited personnel _ practices including

discrimination and reprisal. It is well settled that the Board

lacks jurisdiction over these affirmative defenses when raised

in connection with a removal based on the revocation of a

security clearance. See Hesse v. Department of State, 82

M.S.P.R. at 493, citing Hinton v. Department of the Navy, 61

M.S.P.R. 692, 697 (1994).

DECISION

The agency’s action is AFFIRMED.

FOR THE BOARD: s/Elizabeth B. Bogle

Elizabeth B. Bogle

Administrative Judge

App. I- 22

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17. 2002

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES CONCERNING

SETTLEMENT

The date that this initial decision becomes final,

which ts set forth below, is the last day that the administrative

judge may vacate the initial decision in order to accept a

settlement agreement into the record. See 5 C.F.R. §

1201.112(a)(5). ~

NOTICE TO APPELLANT

This initial decision will become ffinal on

, unless a petition for review is filed by that date

or the Board reopens the case on its own motion. This is an

important date because it is usually the last day on which you

can file a petition for review with the Board. However, if this

initial decision is received by you more than 5 days after the

date of issuance, you may file a petition for review within 30

days after the date you actually received the initial decision.

The date on which the initial decision becomes final also

controls when you can file a petition for review with the

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The paragraphs that

follow tell you how and when to file with the board or the

federal court. These instructions are important because if you

wish to file a petition, you must file it within the proper time

period.

BOARD REVIEW

You may request Board review of this initial decision

by filing a petition for review. Your petition, with supporting

evidence and argument, must be filed with:

The Clerk of the Board

Merit Systems Protection Board

1615 M Street, NW.,

Washington, DC 20419

App. I- = 23

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17; 2002

C51 og Na

If you file a petition for review, the Board will obtain the

record in your case from the administrative judge and you

should not submit anything to the Board that is already part of

the record. Your petition must be postmarked, faxed, or

hand-delivered no later than the date this initial decision

becomes final, or if this initial decision is received by you

more than 5 days after the date of issuance, 30 days after the

date you actually receive the initial decision. If you fail to

provide a statement with your petition that you have either

mailed, faxed, or hand-delivered a copy of your petition to

the agency, your petition will be rejected and returned to you.

JUDICIAL REVIEW

If you are dissatisfied with the Board’s final decision

you may file a petition with: |

The United States Court of Appeals

For the Federal Circuit

717 Madison Place, NW.

Washington, DC 20439

You may not file your petition with the court before this

decision becomes final. To be timely, your petition must be

) received by the court no later than 60 calendar days after the

: date this initial decision becomes final.

-_

NOTICE TO AGENCY/INTERVENOR

The agency or intervenor may file a petition for

review of this initial decision in accordance with the Board’s

regulations.

App. I- 24

MSPB Final ORDER, Jan 17, 2002

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that the attached Document(s) was (were)

sent by regular mail this day to each of the following:

Appellant

Glenda G. Crook

621 N. Saint Asaph St. # 209

Alexandria, VA 22314

Appellant’s Representative

American University

Washington College of Law

Civil Practice Clinic

4801 Massachusetts Ave., NW.

Washington, DC 20016

Agency’s Representative

Gilah G. Goldsmith

Department of Defense

Washington Headquarters Services/OGC

1155 Defense Pentagon, Room 1D197

Washington, DC 20301-1155

Other

Kenneth L. Bates

U.S. Office of Personnel Management

Employee Relations Division

1900 E Street, NW, Room 7412

Washington, DC 20415

January 17, 2002 s/Eric W. Hawthorne

(Date) Eric W. Hawthorne

Paralegal Specialist

BS Sa ye A ER CAAT I kT ORE ANE EI EIS TROT Co Mer

App. II- 25

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A. Oct 27, 2003

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

GLENDA GAIL PARKER FILED OCT 27 2003

Plaintiff, Clerk, US District Court

v. Alexandria, Virginia

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defendant. (Rec’d by plaintiff Oct 31, 2003)

AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Defendant’s

Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs Complaint for lack of

jurisdiction pursuant to Rule 12(b) (6) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure. This case concerns Plaintiff's appeal to this

Court for review of unfavorable rulings by the Merit Systems

Protection Board (“MSPB”) and the United States Court of

Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”).' The

issue raised in this Motion to Dismiss is whether this Court

has jurisdiction to consider Plaintiff's appeal when Plaintiff

waived her opportunity to present her discrimination and

nondiscrimination claims before the District Court, and

instead sought review by the Federal Circuit, which docketed

and decided her nondiscrimination claims only.

Upon review of Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss and

Plaintiff's Motions in Opposition to Defendant’s Motion to

Dismiss, the Court grants the motion because Plaintiff waived

her right to pursue her Title VII discrimination claims in this

district court when she signed a waiver of these claims and

submitted her appeal to the Federal Circuit.

! Defendant revoked Plaintiff's security clearance, and her employment

was later terminated — described in detail infra.

App. Il- 26

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

BACKGROUND

Glenda Gail Parker (“Parker”), Plaintiff, worked as a

security assistance analyst for Defendant’ from December

1995 until she was indefinitely suspended from pay and duty

on March 23, 2001. As a security assistance analyst, Parker

required a top secret security clearance. Because of instances

of irrational behavior and as a result of concerns about

Parker’s performance and conduct, the DSCA was reluctant

to entrust sensitive duties to her. Therefore, on April 10,

1998, she was administratively reassigned to other duties.

While administratively reassigned, Parker continued to

exhibit irrational behavior.

On March 23, 2001, following a psychiatric evaluation

and administrative process, Keltz imposed a suspension from

pay and duty pursuant to a decision that no meaningful work

could be assigned to Parker because of the revoked security

clearance. On April 25, 2001, Parker appealed her indefinite

suspension to the Merit Systems Protection Board (“MSPB”).

In Parker’s appeal, she alleged that she was suspended in

reprisal for whistleblowing and for her seeking military

service. On August 23, 2001, the MSPB sustained Parker’s

indefinite suspension. Parker appealed the MSPB

determination. On August 2, 2001, in a separate review and

determination, the Clearance Review Board)”CAB”) decided

not to reinstate Parker’s security clearance pending the

outcome of the MSPB appeal.

On October 29, 2001, Parker simultaneously filed a

petition for Review of the MSPB’s sustainment of her

security clearance revocation and a new MSPB appeal of her

removal from employment. On appeal, an MSPB

Administrative Law Judge (“A.L.J.”) sustained Parker’s

removal on January 17, 2002 and noted that the A.L.J. lacked

*Parker was a GS-15 Security Assistance Analyst with the Defense

Security Cooperation Agency (“DSCA”), an agency of Defendant the

Department of Defense (:DOD”’).

App. l- 27

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

jurisdiction to further review Parker’s appeal. On February

16, 2002, Parker petitioned the MSPB to review the A.L.J.’s

decision, but the petition was denied. On February 19, 2003,

Parker filed a pro se petition with the Federal Circuit for

review of the final decision made by the MSPB on the

revocation of her security clearance and removal from

employment.

In accordance with an appeal to the Federal Circuit,

Parker filed a Federal Circuit Rule 15(c) waiver ‘of

discrimination claims (“Rule 15(c)”) with the clerk of the

Federal Circuit on April 1, 2003. By order dated May 23,

2003, the Federal Circuit informed the parties that the appeal

will be submitted to a three judge panel on July 11, 2003. In

the Government’s Second Report to the Court Regarding the

Federal Circuit’s Decision in this Case, filed on July 24,

2003, the Government avers that Parker’s appeal was heard

by the Federal Circuit, and that the court affirmed the

MSPB’s decision.* (Def.’s 2d Report at 1.)

a. ANALYSIS

A. Standard of Review

In considering a motion to dismiss under Rule

12(b)(6), the Court should accept as true all well-plead

allegations of the complaint and view the complaint in the

light most favorable to the plaintiff. Mylan Lab., Inc. v.

Matkari, 7 F.3d 1130, 1134 (4" Cir. 1993); Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(b)(6). The Court should grant a motion to dismiss for

failure to state a claim only if it appears to a certainty that the

plaintiff cannot prove any set of facts in support of its claim

that would entitle the plaintiff to relief. Conley v. Gibson,

355 U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957).

The Court’s analysis will determine if this Court has

jurisdiction to decide Parker’s appeal. To that end, the Court

3 Crook v. Dep’t of Defense, 71 Fed. Appx. 54, 2003 WL 21675126, at *1

(Fed. Cir. July 14, 2003) (Crook now known as Glenda Gail Parker) (not

cited for authority).

App. II- 28

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

must first decide if it has jurisdiction over a claim after it has

already been docketed and decided by the Federal Circuit.

Second, if the Court does have jurisdiction to hear the appeal,

the Court will decide if it has jurisdiction to hear appeals of

government employees who were terminated following

revocation of their security clearance.

B. Analysis

The Court holds that Plaintiff fails to state a claim

upon which relief may be granted because she fails to

demonstrate that this Court has jurisdiction to hear her

appeal. This ruling is founded on settled principles that a

litigant may not have “two bites of the apple.” Plaintiff

waived her opportunity to remove her appeal to the district

court, where both her discrimination and non-discrimination

claims could be heard, when she appealed to the Federal

Circuit. In addition, the Federal Circuit has already ruled on

the merits of the nondiscrimination claims raised in that

forum. Therefore, because Parker waived her discrimination

claims and the nondiscrimination claims have been decided

by the Federal Circuit, this Court has no jurisdiction.

Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted.

1. Parker Waived her discrimination claims to

gain forum in the Federal Circuit

Plaintiff waived her opportunity to appeal to

the district court for review of her discrimination and

nondiscrimination claims. The Guide for Pro Se

Petitioners and Appellants (“Guide”) issued by the

Federal Circuit provides that:

This court does not have jurisdiction to

review cases involving bona _ fide

claims of discrimination...that were

raised before the Merit Systems

Protection Board. If your case

involves such claims and you are

unwilling to abandon the forever, you

App. Il- 29

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

Re tn. A

must proceed in a district court.... You

may waive your discrimination claims

on the Federal Circuit Rule 15(c) form

sent to you by the court...A

discrimination issue raised for the first

time in this court does not affect the

jurisdiction of the court to decide the

issues raised before the Board, and

such a discrimination claim will be

disregarded.

Fed. Cir. R. apps. At 133 (Guide for Pro Se Petitioners and

Appellants) (emphasis added). Rule 15(c) provides in

“ pertinent part that:

Within 14 days after a petition for review of a

decision of the Merit Systems Protection

Board ... is docketed, the petitioner must

serve on the respondent and file with the clerk:

(A) one of the following statements:

(i) no claim of discrimination by reason of

race, sex, age, national origin, or

handicapped condition has been or will be

made in the case;

(ii) any claim of discrimination ... raised

before the Board has been abandoned and

will not be raised or continued in this or

any other court:

(iii) the petition seeks review only of the ~

Board’s dismissal of the case for lack of

jurisdiction or for untimeliness; ...

(B) a statement whether petitioner has

filed a discrimination case;

(i) in a United States district court; or :

PUMA seer eRate ene ESS ashley ati B RRA eis

App. IIl- 30

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

(11) in the Equal Employment Opportunity

Commission.

Thus, an appellant must either file a written waiver of her

discrimination claims or she must remove her case to the

appropriate district court for review. Davidson v. United

States Postal Service, 24 F.3d 223, 223-224 (Fed. Cir. 1994)

(ordering that petitioner must file “either (1) a request for the

[Federal Circuit] to proceed which must be accompanied by

the appropriate waiver, or (2) a request for transfer to a

particular United States district court.”); Williams v. Dep’t of

the Army, 715 F.2d 1485 (Fed. Cir. 1983) (holding that the

Federal Circuit has no jurisdiction over the merits of a mixed

case 1.e., one involving an adverse action and a claim of

discrimination); Daniels v. United States Postal Service, 726

F.2d 723, 724 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (ruling that a waiver of a

claim of discrimination must be by an express written

statement).

Furthermore, an appellant is precluded from

relitigating discrimination claims before the district court

when he splits his discrimination and nondiscrimination

claims between the Federal Circuit and the district court.

Smith v. Horner, 846 F.2d 1521, 1524 (D.C. Cir. 1988) (The

appellant “could also be held precluded from litigating his

Title VII claim because he “split” his two claims. [The

appellant] chose to litigate his disability claim in a court (the

Federal Circuit) that could hear less than his entire claim

instead of going to the district court ....”’).

In Smith, the appellant chose to dispose of his

nondiscrimination claims before the Federal Circuit. Id. at

1523. The Clerk advised the appellant that the Federal

Circuit will not hear discrimination claims, but rather, he may

remove his claim to the district court, which can hear both his

discrimination and nondiscrimination claims. Id. at 1522-23.

The Court of Appeals ruled that the appellant waived her

Title VII claim by signing the written waiver of her

discrimination claims she filed in the Federal Circuit.

ee Oe ee ee, eS wat PR ay eae er eee, ee eee ee eee Pa

Sp Se ms

App. Il- 31

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

Furthermore, to permit an appellant to pursue [her]

discrimination claim in the District Court notwithstanding

[her] waiver in the Federal Circuit would undermine that

court’s “efforts to prevent sequential forum shopping.” Id. at

1524.

In the instant case, Defendant avers, and Parker does

not refute, that she submitted a Rule 15(c) waiver of her

discrimination claims to the Federal Circuit on April 1, 2003

(Def.’s Mot. Dismiss at 9), and Parker filed the instant appeal

with this Court on April 4, 2003. (PI.’s Notice Appeal at 1).

Parker’s appeal was set for review by a three judge panel on

July 11, 2003, and the Federal Circuit affirmed the MSPB’s

determination on July 14, 2003. Hence, because Parker

waived her Title VII claims and submitted her appeal to the

Federal Circuit, which cannot hear discrimination claims, she

effectively waived her discrimination claims forever.

Therefore, she fails to state a claim upon which relief may be

granted.

2. Parker’s_nondiscrimination claims were

docketed and decided by the Federal Circuit

Parker also fails to state a claim for which relief may

be granted because her appeal was docketed and decided by

the Federal Circuit. The Guide alerts the pro se petitioner

that the Federal Circuit will not hear discrimination claims,

but rather, such claims must either be abandoned forever or

removed to district court. Fed. Cir. R. apps. At 132 (Guide

for Pro Se Petitioners and Appellants). Parker had the

opportunity to litigate both claims before a court of

competent jurisdiction, but instead chose to split them. The

Federal Circuit docketed Parker’s appeal on May 23, 2003 for

hearing on July 11, 2003, affirming the determination of the

MSPB.* Thus Parker may not waive her discrimination

claims to secure a forum in the Federal Circuit, quickly assert

her discrimination claims in this Court, and then hope to gain

ss Supra note 3.

App. Il- 32

District Court OPINION CA-03-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

a second review by reasserting her discrimination claims.

Litigants are precluded from “two bites at the apple.”

Therefore, Parker fails to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted because she waived her opportunity to appeal to

this forum and her appeal was decided by the Federal Circuit.

Accordingly, Plaintiffs claim is dismissed for lack of

jurisdiction, and Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted.

Il. CONCLUSION

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss is granted because

Plaintiff waived her opportunity to have both her

discrimination and nondiscrimination claims decided by this

Court when she submitted her case to the Federal Circuit. By

agreeing to waive her discrimination claims, she abandoned

her discrimination claims forever. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that Defendant the Department of Defense’s

motion to Dismiss is GRANTED.

The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of the

Department of Defense and against Glenda Gail Parker

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58. Fed. R. Civ.

P. 58.

The Clerk is directed to forward 2 copy of this Order to

counsel of record.

ENTERED this 27" day of OCTOBER, 2003.°

s/Gerald Bruce Lee

Gerald Bruce Lee

United States District Judge

Alexandria, Virginia

10/27/2003

> Smith, 846 F.2d at 1524.

°Appealed to the Fourth Circuit Nov 25, 2093, Docket No. 03-2483,

decision pending.

eo

App. Ill- 33

Fed. Cir. Rehearing ORDER 03-3152, Sep 10, 2003

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

ORDER'

Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge, MICHEL, Circuit Judge,

and RADER, Circuit Judge.

A petition for rehearing having been filed by the

PETITIONER,

UPON CONSIDERATION THEREOF, it is

ORDERED that the petition for rehearing be, and the

same hereby is, DENIED.

The mandate of the court will issue on September 17, 2003.

FOR THE COURT,

s/Jan Horbaly

Clerk

Dated: September 10, 2003

Cc: | Glenda Gail Parker

Kyle Chadwick

FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

SEP 10 2003

JAN HORBALY

CLERK

CROOK V DEFENSE, 033152

(MSPB — DC0752020053-I-1)

' Note: Pursuant to Fed. Cir. R. 47.6, this order is not citable as

precedent. It is a public record.

App. IV- 34

Fed. Cir. Judgment 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

UNITED ST ATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FEDERAL CIRCUIT

NOTICE OF ENTRY OF

JUDGMENT ACCOMPANIED BY OPINION

OPINION FILED AND JUGEMENT ENTERED:

07/14/03

The attached opinion announcing the judgment of the

court in your case was filed and judgment was entered on the

date indicated above. The mandate will be issued in due

course.

Information is also provided about petitions for

rehearing and petitions for rehearing en banc. The questions

and answers are those frequently asked and answered by the

Clerk’s Office.

Costs are taxed against the Petitioner(s) under Rule

39. The party entitled to costs is provided a bill of costs form

and an instruction sheet with this notice.

The parties are encouraged to stipulate to the costs. A

bill of costs will be presumed correct in the absence of a

timely filed objection.

Costs are payable to the party awarded costs. If costs

are awarded to the government, they should be paid to the

Treasurer of the United States. Where costs are awarded

against the government, payment should e made to the

person(s) designated under the governing statutes, the court’s

orders, and the parties’ written settlement agreements. In

cases between private parties, payment should be made to

counsel for the party awarded costs or, if the party is not

represented by counsel, to the party pro se. Payment of costs

should not be sent to the court. Costs should be paid

promptly.

App. IV- 35

j Fed. Cir. Judgment 03-3152, Jul 14, 2003

If the court also imposed monetary sanctions, they are -

payable to the opposing party unless the court’s opinion

provides otherwise. Sanctions should be paid in the same

way as costs.

Regarding exhibits and visual aids: Your attention is

directed to FRAP 34(g) which states that the clerk may

destroy or dispose of the exhibits if counsel does not reclaim

them within a reasonable time after the clerk gives notice to

remove them. (The clerk deems a reasonable time to be 15

days from the date the final mandate is issued.)

s/JAN HORBALY

Clerk

Ce: GLENDA GAIL PARKER

KYLE CHADWICK

4 CROOK V DEFENSE, 03-3152

4 MSPB-DC0752020053-I-1

4

(a

|

*

a

%

App. IV- 36

District Court Judgment CA 04-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Alexandria Division

FILED

OCT 27 2003

Clerk, U.S. District Court

Alexandria, Virginia

Glenda Gail Parker

v. (Rec’d Oct 31, 2003)

Civil Action 03-0431-A

Department of Defense |

JUDGMENT

Pursuant to the order of this Court entered on October

27, 2003 and in accordance with Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure 58, JUDGMENT is hereby entered in favor of the

Defendant, Department of Defense, against the Plaintiff,

Glenda Gail Parker.

ELIZABETH H. PARET, CLERK

s/By: Jenny Cupp

Deputy Clerk

Alexandria, Virginia

October 27, 2003

App. IV- 37

District Court Judgment CA 04-431-A, Oct 27, 2003

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

_ THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

ALEXANDRIA DIVISION

FILED

OCT 27 2003

Clerk, U.S. District Court

Alexandria, Virginia

GLENDA GAIL PARKER

Plaintiff,

V. Civil Action No. 03-431-A

(Rec’d by plaintiff Oct 31, 2003)

DEPARATMENT OF DEFENSE,

Defendant.

AMENDED JUDGMENT

Pursuant to the Court’s Opinion of October 27, 2003,

wherein the Court granted the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss

pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), the

Court hereby

ORDERS the Clerk to enter JUDGMENT in favor of

the Defendant, Department of Defense, and against the

Plaintiff, Glenda Gail Parker, pursuant to Rule 58 of the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the case is hereby

DISMISSED.

The Clerk is directed to forward a copy of the Order

to counsel.

Entered this 27" day of October, 2003.

sGerald Bruce Lee

Gerald Bruce Lee

United States District Judge

Alexandria, Virginia

10/27/03

App. V- 38

U.S. Constitution, Article II

U.S. Constitution

é

Article II

Section 1...

...Before he enter on the execution of his office, he shall take

the following oath or affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or

affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of

the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve,

protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Section 2. The President shall be commander in chief of the

Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the

several states, when called into the actual service of the

United States; he may require the opinion, in writing, of the

principal officer in each of the executive departments, upon

any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices,

and he shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for

offenses against the United States, except in cases of

impeachment.

He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of

the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the

Senators present concur;...

Section 3. He shall from time to time give to the Congress

information of the state of the union, and recommend to their

consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and

expedient; he may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both

Houses, or either of them, and in case of disagreement

between them, with respect to the time of adjournment, he

may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper; he

shall receive ambassadors and other public ministers; he

shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed, and

shall commission all the officers of the United States.

Pe a ee eS I II ST we

SR

PS TA RE PAA FREAD MSH

App. V- 39

U.S. Constitution, Section 8

U.S. Constitution

Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect

taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and

provide for the common defense and general welfare of

the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be

uniform throughout the United States;

To borrow money on the credit of the United States;

To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the

several states, and with the Indian tribes;

To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform

laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United

States;

To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign

coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;

To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities

and current coin of the United States;

To establish post offices and post roads;

To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by

securing for limited times to authors and inventors the

exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;

To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;

To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the

high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;

To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and

make rules concerning captures on land and water;

To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money

to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;

To provide and maintain a navy;

To make rules for the government and regulation of the

land and naval forces;

To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws

of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

App. V- 40

U.S. Constitution, Section 8

To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the

militia, and for governing such part of them as may be

employed in the service of the United States, reserving to

the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and

the authority of training the militia according to the discipline

prescribed by Congress;

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over

such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by

cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress,

become the seat of the government of the United States, and

to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the

consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shail

be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards,

and other needful buildings;--And

To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for

carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all

other powers vested by this Constitution in the

government of the United States, or in any department or

officer thereof.

BE ENTE IAG Nl EE RTE IAI EE ORE CUFT I

App. V- 41

U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights

U.S. Constitution

Bill of Rights

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of

religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging

the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the

people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the

government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons,

houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches

and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall

issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or

affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be

searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise

infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a

grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces,

or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or

public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same

offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall

be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against

himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property,

without due process of law; nor shall private property be

taken for public use, without just compensation.

App. V- 42

3 U.S.C. § 401

TITLE 3 CHAPTER5 SUBCHAPTER I Sec. 401.

Sec. 401. - Definitions

(a) In General. - Except as otherwise specifically provided in

this chapter, as used in this chapter:

(1) Board. - The term "Board" means the Merit Systems

Protection Board under chapter 12 of title 5.

(2) Covered employee. - The term "covered employee"

means any employee of an employing office.

(3) Employee. - The term "employee" includes an

applicant for employment and a former employee.

(4) Employing office. - The term "employing office"

means -

(A) each office, agency, or other component of

the Executive Office of the President;

(B) the Executive Residence at the White

House; and

(C) the official residence (temporary or

otherwise) of the Vice President.

(b) Definitions Relating to Certain Matters. - For purposes of

applying this chapter with respect to any practice or other

matter -

(1) to which section 411 relates, the terms "employing

office" and "covered employee" shall each be

considered to have the meaning given to the term by

such section;

(2) to which section 412 relates, the term "covered

employee" means a covered employee described in

section 412(a)(2)(B);

(3) to which section 413 relates, the term "covered

employee” excludes interns and _ volunteers, as

described in section 413(a)(2); and

(4) to which section 416 relates, the term "covered

employee" means a covered employee described in

section 416(a)(2)

App. V- 43

3 U.S.C. §. 402

TITLE 3 CHAPTER 5 SUBCHAPTER I Sec. 402.

Sec. 402. - Application of laws

The following laws shall apply, as prescribed by

this chapter, to all employing offices (including

employing offices within the meaning of section 411,

to the extent prescribed therein):

(1) The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

(2) Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

(3) The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.

(4) The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of

1967.

(5) The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993.

(6) The Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.

(7) Chapter 71 (relating to Federal service labor-

management relations) of title 5.

(8) The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988.

(9) Fhe Worker Adjustment and Retraining

Notification Act.

(10) The Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

(11) Chapter 43 (relating to veterans’ employment

and reemployment) of title 38

+e ie aaa

App. V- 44

3 U.S.C. § 451

TITLE 3 CHAPTER 5 SUBCHAPTER III Sec. 451.

Sec. 451. - Procedure for consideration of alleged

violations

The procedure for consideration of alleged

violations of part A of subchapter II consists of -

(1) counseling and mediation as provided in section

452; and

(2) election, as provided in section 453, of either -

(A) an administrative proceeding as provided in

section 453(1) and judicial review as provided

in section 1296 of title 28; or

(B) acivil action in a district court of the United

States as provided in section 1346(g) of title 28

App. V- 45

3 U.S.C. § 453

TITLE 3 CHAPTER 5 SUBCHAPTER III Sec. 453.

Sec. 453. - Election of proceeding

Not later than 90 days after a covered employee receives

notice of the end of the period of mediation, but no sooner

than 30 days after receipt of such notification, such covered

employee may either -

(1) file a complaint with the appropriate agency, as

determined under section 454; or

(2) file a civil action under section 1346(g) of title 28

App. V- 46

5 U.S.C. § 552a

TITLE 5 PARTI CHAPT 5 SUBCHAPT II Sec. 552a.

Sec. 552a. - Records maintained on individuals

(a) Definitions. - For purposes of this section -

(1) the term "agency" means agency as defined in

section 552(e) LU of this title:

(2) the term "individual'' means a citizen of the

United States or an alien lawfully admitted for

permanent residence;

(3) the term "maintain" includes maintain, collect,

use, or disseminate;

(4) the term "'record'' means any item, collection,

or grouping of information about an individual that

is_ maintained by an_agency, including, but not

limited to, his education, financial transactions,

medical history, and criminal or employment

history and that contains his name, _ or_the

identifying number, symbol, or other identifying

particular assigned to the individual, such as a

finger or voice print or a photograph;

(5) the term "system of records" means a group of any

records under the control of any agency from which

information is retrieved by the name of the individual

or by some identifying number, symbol, or other

identifying particular assigned to the individual;

(6) the term "statistical record" means a record in a

system of records maintained for statistical research or

reporting purposes only and not used in whole or in

part _in making any _ determination about an

identifiable individual, except as provided by section

8 of title 13;

(7) the term "routine use" means, with respect to the

disclosure of a record, the use of such record for a

purpose which is compatible with the purpose for

which it was collected;

(8) the term "matching program" -

: App. V- 47

‘ 5 U.S.C. § 552a

(A) means any computerized comparison of -

(i) two or more automated systems of

records or a system of records with non-

Federal records for the purpose of -

(I) establishing or verifying the

eligibility of, or continuing

compliance with statutory and

regulatory requirements by,

applicants for, recipients or

beneficiaries of, participants in, or

providers of services with respect

to, cash or in-kind assistance or

payments under Federal benefit

programs, or

(iD) recouping payments or

delinquent debts under such Federal

benefit programs, or

(ii) two or more automated Federal

personnel or payroll systems of records or

a system of Federal personnel or payroll

records with non-Fedceral records,

(B) but does not include -

(i) matches performed to produce

aggregate statistical data without any

: personal identifiers;

(ii) matches performed to support any

research or statistical project, the specific

data of which may not be used to make

decisions concerning the rights, benefits,

or privileges of specific individuals;

(iii) matches performed, by an agency (or

component thereof) which performs as its

principal function any activity pertaining

to the enforcement of criminal laws,

subsequent to the initiation of a specific

App. V- 48

5 U.S.C. § 552a

criminal or civil law enforcement

investigation of a named person or persons

for the purpose of gathering evidence

against such person or persons;

(iv) matches of tax information

(I) pursuant to section 6103(d) of

the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,

(II) fer purposes of tax

administration as defined in section

6103(b)(4) of such Code,

(III) for the purpose of intercepting

a tax refund due an individual under

authority granted by section 404(e),

464, or 1137 of the Social Security

Act; or

(IV) for the purpose of intercepting

a tax refund due an individual under

any other tax refund intercept

program authorized by _ statute

which has been determined by the

Director of the Office of

Management and Budget to contain

verification, notice, and hearing

requirements that are substantially

similar to the procedures in section

1137 of the Social Security Act;

(v) matches -

(I) using records predominantly

relating to Federal personnel, that

are performed ffor routine

administrative purposes (subject to

guidance provided by the Director

of the Office of Management and

Budget pursuant to subsection (v));

or

App. V- 49

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(II) conducted by an agency using

only records from systems of

records maintained by that agency;

if the purpose of the match is not to

take any adverse financial,

personnel, disciplinary, or other

adverse action against Federal

personnel;

(vi) matches performed for foreign

counterintelligence purposes or to produce

background checks for security clearances

of Federal personnel or Federal contractor

personnel;

(vii) matches performed incident to a levy

described in section 6103(k)(8) of the

Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or

(viii) matches performed pursuant to

section 202(x)(3) or 1611(e)(1) of the

Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 402(x)(3),

1382(e)(1));

(9) the term "recipient agency" meats any agency, or

contractor thereof, receiving records contained in a

system of records from a source agency for use in a

matching program;

(10) the term "non-Federal agency" means any State or

local government, or agency thereof, which receives

records contained in a system of records from a source

agency for use in a matching program;

(11) the term "source agency" means any agency which

discloses records contained in a system of records to be

used in a matching program, or any State or local

government, or agency thereof, which discloses records

to be used in a matching program;

(12) the term "Federal benefit program" means any

program administered or funded by the Federal

App. V- 50

5 U.S.C. § 552a

Government, or by any agent or State on behalf of the

Federal Government, providing cash or in-kind

assistance in the form of payments, grants, loans, or

loan guarantees to individuals; and

(13) the term "Federal personnel" means officers and

employees of the Government of the United States,

members of the uniformed services (including

members of the Reserve Components), individuals

entitled to receive immediate or deferred retirement

benefits under any retirement program of the

Government of the United States (including survivor

benefits).

(b) Conditions of Disclosure. -

No agency shall disclose any record which is

contained in a system of records by any means of

communication to any person, or to another agency,

except pursuant to a written request by, or with the

prior written consent of, the individual to whom the

record pertains, unless disclosure of the record

would be -

(1) to those officers and employees of the agency

which maintains the record who have a need for the

record in the performance of their duties;

(2) required under section 552 of this title;

(3) for a routine use as defined in subsection (a)(7) of

this section and described under subsection (e)(4)(D)

of this section;

(4) to the Bureau of the Census for purposes of

planning or carrying out a census or survey or related

activity pursuant to the provisions of title 13;

(5) to a recipient who has provided the agency with

advance adequate written assurance that the record will

be used solely as a statistical research or reporting

record, and the record is to be transferred in a form that

is not individually identifiable;

App. V- 51

5 U.S.C. § 552a

ODL DTA.

; (6) to the National Archives and Records

Administration as a record which has sufficient

historical or other value to warrant its continued

preservation by the United States Government, or for

evaluation by the Archivist of the United States or the

designee of the Archivist to determine whether the

record has such value;

(7) to another agency or to an instrumentality of any

| governmental jurisdiction within or under the control

: of the United States for a civil or criminal law

F enforcement activity if the activity is authorized by

law, and if the head of the agency or instrumentality

: has made a written request to the agency which

: maintains the record specifying the particular portion

: desired and the law enforcement activity for which the

record is sought;

(8) to a person pursuant to a showing of compelling

circumstances affecting the health or safety of an

individual if upon such disclosure notification is

transmitted to the last known address of such

; individual;

(9) to either House of Congress, or, to the extent of

matter within its jurisdiction, any committee or

subcommittee thereof, any joint committee of Congress

4 or subcommittee of any such joint committee;

: (10) to the Comptroller General, or any of his

authorized representatives, in the course of the

performance of the duties of the General Accounting

Office;

(11) pursuant to the order of a court of competent

jurisdiction; or

(12) to a consumer reporting agency in accordance

with section 371 1(e) of title 31.

(c) Accounting of Certain Disclosures. -

te tate PAU pel ea

App. V- 52

5 U.S.C. § 552a

Each agency, with respect to each system of

records under its control, shall -

(1) except for disclosures made under subsections

(b)(1) or (b)(2) of this section, keep an accurate

accounting of -

(A) the date, nature, and purpose of each

disclosure of a record to any person or to another

agency made under subsection (b) of this

section; and

(B) the name and address of the person or

agency to whom the disclosure is made;

(2) retain the accounting made under paragraph (1) of

this subsection for at least five years or the life of the

record, whichever is longer, after the disclosure for

which the accounting is made;

(3) except for disclosures made under subsection

(b)(7) of this section, make the accounting made under

paragraph (1) of this subsection available to the

individual named in the record at his request; and

(4) inform any person or other agency about any

correction or notation of dispute made by the agency in

accordance with subsection (d) of this section of any

record that has been disclosed to the person or agency

if an accounting of the disclosure was made.

(d) Access to Records. -

Each agency that maintains a system of records

shall -

(1) upon request by any individual to gain access to his

record or to any information pertaining to him which is

contained in the system, permit him and upon his

request, a person of his own choosing to accompany

him, to review the record and have a copy made of all

or any portion thereof in a form comprehensible to

him, except that the agency may require the individual

to furnish a written statement authorizing discussion of

Se ee ae eee

App. V- 53

5 U.S.C. § 552a

that individual's record in the accompanying person's

presence;

(2) permit the individual to request amendment of a

record pertaining to him and -

(A) not later than 10 days (excluding Saturdays,

Sundays, and legal public holidays) after the date

of receipt of such request, acknowledge in

writing such receipt; and

(B) promptly, either -

(i) make any correction of any portion

thereof which the individual believes is

not accurate, relevant, timely, or complete;

or

(ii) inform the individual of its refusal to

amend the record in accordance with his

request, the reason for the refusal, the

procedures established by the agency for

the individual to request a review of that

refusal by the head of the agency or an

officer designated by the head of the

agency, and the name and _ business

address of that official;

(3) permit the individual who disagrees with the

refusal of the agency to amend his record to request

a review of such refusal, and not later than 30 days

(excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and legal public

holidays) from the date on which the individual

requests such review, complete such review and

make a final determination unless, for good cause

shown, the head of the agency extends such 30-day

period; and if, after his review, the reviewing

official also refuses to amend the record in

accordance with the request, permit the individual

to file with the agency a concise statement setting

forth the reasons for his disagreement with the

App. V- 54

5 U.S.C. § 552a

refusal of the agency, and notify the individual of

the provisions for judicial review of the reviewing

official's determination under subsection (g)(1)(A)

of this section;

‘ ps Oh ee

<org ERG fe ee Oe as

BW ipa ER Rags, ete f

(4) in any disclosure, containing information about

which the individual has filed a _ statement of

disagreement, occurring after the filing of the statement

under paragraph (3) of this subsection, clearly note any

portion of the record which is disputed and provide

copies of the statement and, if the agency deems it

appropriate, copies of a concise statement of the

reasons of the agency for not making the amendments

requested, to persons or other agencies to whom the

disputed record has been disclosed; and

Si iad BARES DRT Lane NS SREP BIG hil Caen ts dhe

Picola #3

(5) nothing in this section shall allow an individual

access to any information compiled in reasonable

anticipation of a civil action or proceeding.

ESE She tN RPA

(e) Agency Requirements. -

Each agency that maintains a system of records

shall -

(1) maintain in its records only such information

about an individual as is relevant and necessary to

accomplish a purpose of the agency required to be

accomplished by statute or by executive order of the

President;

(2) collect _information to the greatest extent

practicable directly from the subject individual

when the information may _ result in adverse

determinations about an_ individual's _ rights,

benefits, and privileges under Federal programs;

(3) inform each individual whom it asks to supply

information, on the form which it uses to collect the

information or on a separate form that can be retained

by the individual -

App. V- 55

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(A) the authority (whether granted by statute, or

by executive order of the President) which

authorizes the solicitation of the information and

whether disclosure of such information is

mandatory or voluntary;

(B) the principal purpose _or_ purposes for

which the information is intended to be used;

(C) the routine uses which may be made of

the information, as published pursuant to

paragraph (4)(D) of this subsection; and

(D) the effects on him, if any, of not providing

all or any part of the requested information;

(4) subject to the provisions of paragraph (11) of this

subsection, publish _in_ the Federal Register_upon

establishment or revision a notice of the existence

and character of the system of records, which notice

shall include -

(A) the name and location of the system;

(B) the categories of individuals on whom

records are maintained in the system;

(C) the categories of records maintained in the

system;

(D) each routine use of the records contained

in the system, including the categories of users

and the purpose of such use;

(E) the policies and practices of the agency

regarding _ storage, _retrievability, access

controls, retention, and disposal of the

records;

(F) the title and business address of the agency

official who is responsible for the system of

records;

(G) the agency procedures whereby an

individual can be notified at his request if the

App. V- 56

5 U.S.C. § 552a

system of records contains a record pertaining to

him;

(H) the agency procedures whereby an

individual can be notified at his request how he

can gain access to any record pertaining to him

contained in the system of records, and how he

can contest its content; and

(1) the categories of sources of records in the

system;

(5) maintain all records which are used by the

agency in making any determination about any

individual with such accuracy, _ relevance,

timeliness, and completeness as is reasonably

necessary to assure fairness to the individual in the

determination;

(6) prior to disseminating any record about an

individual to any person other than an_ agency,

unless _ the dissemination is made _ pursuant to

subsection (b)(2) of this section, make reasonable

efforts to assure that such records are accurate,

complete, timely, and relevant for agency purposes;

(7) maintain _no_ record describing how any

individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First

Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute

or by the individual about whom the record is

maintained or unless pertinent to and within the

scope of an authorized law enforcement activity;

(8) make reasonable efforts to serve notice on an

individual when any record on such individual is made

available to any person under compulsory legal process

when such process becomes a matter of public record;

(9) establish rules of conduct for persons involved

inthe design, development, operation, _ or

maintenance of any system of records, or in

maintaining any record, and instruct each such

App. V- 57

5 U.S.C. § 552a

person with respect to such rules and_ the

requirements of this section, including any other

rules and procedures adopted pursuant to_ this

section and the penalties for noncompliance;

(10) establish appropriate _ administrative,

technical, and physical safeguards to insure the

security and confidentiality of records and_ to

protect against any anticipated threats or hazards

to their security or integrity which could result in

substantial harm, embarrassment, inconvenience,

or unfairness to any_ individual on whom

information is maintained;

(11) at least 30 days prior to publication of

information under paragraph (4)(D) of this subsection,

publish in the Federal Register notice of any new

use or intended use of the information in_the

system, and provide an opportunity for interested

persons to submit written data, views, or arguments

to the agency; and

(12) if such agency is a recipient agency or a source

agency in a matching program with a non-Federal

agency, with respect to any establishment or revision of

a matching program, at least 30 days prior to

conducting such program, publish in the Federal

Register notice of such establishment or revision.

(f) Agency Rules. -

In order to carry out the provisions of this section,

each agency that maintains a system of records shall

promulgate rules, in accordance with the requirements

(including general notice) of section 553 of this title,

which shall -

(1) establish procedures whereby an individual can be

notified in response to his request if any system of

records named by the individual contains a record

pertaining to him;

(g)

App. V- 58

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(2) define reasonable times, places, and requirements

for identifying an individual who requests his record or

information pertaining to him before the agency shall

make the record or information available to the

individual:

(3) establish procedures for the disclosure to an

individual upon his request of his record or information

pertaining to him, including special procedure, if

deemed necessary, for the disclosure to an individual of

medical records, including psychological records,

pertaining to him;

(4) establish procedures for reviewing a request from

an individual concerning the amendment of any record

or information pertaining to the individual, for making

a determination on the request, for an appeal within the

agency of an initial adverse agency determination, and

for whatever additional means may be necessary for

each individual to be able to exercise fully his rights

under this section; and

(5) establish fees to be charged, if any, to any

individual for making copies of his record, excluding

the cost of any search for and review of the record.

The Office of the Federal Register shall biennially

compile and publish the rules promulgated under this

subsection and agency notices published under

subsection (e)(4) of this section in a form available to

the public at low cost.

(1) Civil Remedies. -

Whenever any agency

(A) makes a determination under subsection

(d)(3) of this section not to amend an

individual's record in accordance with his

request, or fails to make such review in

conformity with that subsection;

App. V- 59

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(B) refuses to comply with an_individual

request under subsection (d)(1) of this

section;

(C) fails to maintain any record concerning

any individual with such accuracy, relevance,

timeliness, and completeness as is necessary to

assure fairness in any determination relating

to the qualifications, character, rights, or

opportunities of, or benefits to the individual

that may be made on the basis of such record,

and consequently a determination is made

which is adverse to the individual; or

(D) fails to comply with any other provision

of this section, or any rule promulgated

thereunder, in such _a way as to have an

adverse effect on an individual,

the individual may bring a civil action against

the agency, and the district courts of the United

States shall have jurisdiction in the matters under

the provisions of this subsection.

(2)

(3)

(A) In any suit brought under the provisions of

subsection (g)(1)(A) of this section, the court

may order the agency to amend _ the

individual's record in accordance with his

request or in such other way as the court may

direct. In such a case the court shall determine

the matter de novo. .

(B) The court may assess against the United

States reasonable attorney fees and other

litigation costs reasonably incurred in any

case under this paragraph in which the

complainant has substantially prevailed.

App. V- 60

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(A) In any suit brought under the provisions of

subsection (g)(1)(B) of this section, the court

may enjoin the agency from withholding the

records and order the production to the

complainant of any agency records improperly

withheld from him. In such a case the court shall

determine the matter de novo, and may examine

the contents of any agency records in camera to

determine whether the records or any portion

thereof may be withheld under any of the

exemptions set forth in subsection (k) of this

section, and the burden is on the agency to

sustain its action.

(B) The court may assess against the United

States reasonable attorney fees and_ other

litigation costs reasonably incurred in any case

under this paragraph in which the complainant

has substantially prevailed.

(4) In any suit brought under the provisions of

subsection (g)(1)(C) or (D) of this section in which the

court determines that the agency acted in a manner

which was intentional or willful, the United States

shall be liable to the individual in an amount equal

to the sum of -

(A) actual damages _ sustained by _ the

individual as a result of the refusal or failure,

but in no case shall a person entitled to recovery

receive less than the sum of $1,000; and_

(B) the costs of the action together with

reasonable attorney fees as determined by the

court.

(5) An action to enforce any liability created under

this section may be brought in the district court of

the United States in the district in which the

complainant resides, or has his principal place of

business, or in which the agency records are situated,

App. V- 61

5 U.S.C. § 552a

or in the District of Columbia, without regard to the

amount in controversy, within two years from the date

on which the cause of action arises, except that where

an__agency ___has___ materially _and__ willfully

misrepresented any information required under

this section to be disclosed to an individual and the

information so misrepresented is material to

establishment of the liability of the agency to the

individual under this section, the action may _ be

brought at any time within two _years_ after

discovery by the individual of __the

misrepresentation. Nothing in this section shall be

construed to authorize any civil action by reason of any

injury sustained as the result of a disclosure of a record

prior to September 27, 1975.

(h) Rights of Legal Guardians. -

For the purposes of this section, the parent of any

minor, or the legal guardian of any individual who has

been declared to be incompetent due to physical or

_mental incapacity or age by a court of competent

jurisdiction, may act on behalf of the individual.

(i) Criminal Penalties

(1) Any officer or employee of an agency, who by

virtue of his employment or official position, has

possession of, or access to, agency records which

contain individually identifiable information the

disclosure of which is prohibited by_this section or

by rules or regulations established thereunder, and

who knowing that disclosure of the specific material

is so prohibited, willfully discloses the material in

any manner to any person or agency not entitled to

i receive it, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined

not more than $5,000.

(2) Any officer or employee of any agency who

willfully maintains a system of records without

App. V- 62

5 U.S.C. § 552a

meeting the notice requirements of subsection (e)(4) of

this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined

not more than $5,000.

(3) Any person who knowingly anc_ willfully

requests or obtains any record concerning an

individual from _an_ agency under false pretenses

shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and fined not more

than $5,000.

(j) General Exemptions. -

The head of any agency may promulgate rules, in

accordance with the requirements (including general

notice) of sections 553(b)(1), (2), and (3), (c), and (e)

of this title, to exempt any system of records within the

agency from any part of this section except subsections

(b), (c)(1) and (2), (e)(4)(A) through (F), (€)(6), (7),

(9), (10), and (11), and (1) if the system of records is -

(1) maintained by the Central Intelligence Agency; or

(2) maintained by an agency or component thereof

which performs as its principal function any activity

pertaining to the enforcement of criminal laws,

including police efforts to prevent, control, or reduce

crime or to apprehend criminals, and the activities of

prosecutors, courts, correctional, probation, pardon, or

parole authorities, and which consists of

(A) information compiled for the purpose of

identifying individual criminal offenders and

alleged offenders and consisting only of

identifying data and notations of arrests, the

nature and disposition of criminal charges,

sentencing, confinement, release, and parole and

probation status;

(B) information compiled for the purpose of a

criminal investigation, including reports of

informants and investigators, and associated

with an identifiable individual; or

App. V- 63

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(C) reports identifiable to an _ individual

compiled at any stage of the process of

enforcement of the criminal laws from arrest or

indictment through release from supervision.

At the time rules are adopted under this

subsection, the agency shall include in the statement

required under section 553(c) of this title, the reasons

why the system of records is to be exempted from a

provision of this section.

(k) Specific Exemptions. -

The head of any agency may promulgate rules,

in accordance with the requirements (including

general notice) of sections 553(b)(1), (2), and (3), (c),

and (e) of this title, to exempt any system of records

within the agency from subsections (c)(3), (d), (e)(1).

(e)(4)(G), (H), and (1) and (f) of this section if the

system of records is -

(1) subject to the provisions of section 552(b)(1) of

this title;

(2) investigatory material compiled for law

enforcement purposes, other than material within the

scope of subsection (j)(2) of this section: Provided,

however, That if any individual is denied any night,

privilege, or benefit that he would otherwise be entitled

by Federal law, or for which he would otherwise be

eligible, as a result of the maintenance of such

material, such material shall be provided to such

individual, except to the extent that the disclosure of

such material would reveal the identity of a source who

furnished information to the Government under an

express promise that the identity of the source would

be held in confidence, or, prior to the effective date of

this section, under an implied promise that the identity

of the source would be held in confidence;

App. V- 64

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(3) maintained in connection with providing protective

services to the President of the United States or other

individuals pursuant to section 3056 of title 18;

(4) required by statute to be maintained and used

solely as statistical records;

(5) investigatory material compiled solely for the

purpose of determining suitability, eligibility, or

qualifications for Federal civilian employment,

military service, Federal contracts, or access to

classified information, but only to the extent that

the disclosure of such material would reveal the

identity of a source who furnished information to

the Government under an express promise that the

identity of the source would be held in confidence,

or, prior to the effective date of this section, under

an implied promise that the identity of the source

would be held in confidence;

(6) testing or examination material used solely to

determine individual qualifications for appointment or

promotion in the Federal service the disclosure of

which would compromise the objectivity or fairness of

the testing or examination process; or

(7) evaluation material used to determine potential for

promotion in the armed-services, but only to the extent

that the disclosure of such material would reveal the

identity of a source who furnished information to the

Government under an express promise that the identity

of the source would be held in confidence, or, prior to

the effective date of this section, under an implied

promise that the identity of the source would be held in

confidence.

At the time rules are adopted under this

subsection, the agency shall include in the statement

required under section 553(c) of this title, the reasons

why the system of records is to be exempted from a

provision of this section.

App. V- 65

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(1) Archival Records.

(1) Each agency record which is accepted by the

Archivist of the United States for storage, processing,

and servicing in accordance with section 3103 of title

44 shall, for the purposes of this section, be considered

to be maintained by the agency which deposited the

record and shall be subject to the provisions of this

section. The Archivist of the United States shall not

disclose the record except to the agency which

maintains the record, or under rules established by that

agency which are not inconsistent with the provisions

of this section.

(2) Each agency record pertaining to an identifiable

individual which was transferred to the National

Archives of the United States as a record which has

sufficient historical or other value to warrant its

continued preservation by the United States

Government, prior to the effective date of this section,

shall, for the purposes of this section, be considered to

be maintained by the National Archives and shall not

be subject to the provisioys of this section, except that

a statement generally describing such records (modeled

after the requirements relating to records subject to

subsections (e)(4)(A) through (G) of this section) shall

be published in the Federal Register.

(3) Each agency record pertaining to an identifiable

individual which is transferred to the National

Archives of the United States as a record which has

sufficient historical or- other value to warrant its

continued preservation by the United States

Government, on or after the effective date of this

section, shall, for the purposes of this section, be

considered to be maintained by the National Archives

and shall be exempt from the requirements of this

section except subsections (e)(4)(A) through (G) and

(e)(9) of this section.

App. V- 66

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(m)

(1) Government Contractors. -

When an agency provides by a contract for

the operation by or on behalf of the agency of a

system of records to accomplish an agency

function, the agency shall, consistent with its

authority, cause the requirements of this section

to be applied to such system. For purposes of

subsection (i) of this section any such contractor

and any employee of such contractor, if such

contract is agreed to on or after the effective date

of this section, shall be considered to be an

employee of an agency.

(2) A consumer reporting agency to which a record is

disclosed under section 3711(e) of title 31 shall not be

considered a contractor for the purposes of this section.

(n) Mailing Lists. -

An individual's name and address may not be sold

or rented by an agency unless such action is

specifically authorized by law. This provision shall not

be construed to require the withholding of names and

addresses otherwise permitted to be made public.

(o) Matching Agreements. -

(1) No record which is contained in a system of

records may be disclosed to a recipient agency or non-

Federal agency for use in a computer matching

program except pursuant to a written agreement

between the source agency and the recipient agency or

non-Federal agency specifying -

(A) the purpose and legal authority for

conducting the program;

(B) the justification for the program and the

anticipated results, including a specific estimate

of any savings;

App. V- 67

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(C) a description of the records that will be

matched, including each data element that will

be used, the approximate number of records that

will be matched, and the projected starting and

completion dates of the matching program;

(D) procedures for providing individualized

notice at the time of application, and notice

periodically thereafter as directed by the Data

Integrity Board of such agency (subject to

guidance provided by the Director of the Office

of Management and Budget pursuant to

subsection (v)), to -

(i) applicants for and recipients of

financial assistance or payments under

Federal benefit programs, and

(ii) applicants for and holders of

positions as Federal personnel,

that any information provided by such

applicants, recipients, holders, and individuals

may be subject to verification through matching

programs;

(E) procedures for verifying information

produced in such matching program as required

by subsection (p);

(F) procedures for the retention and_timely

destruction of identifiable records created by

a recipient agency or non-Federal agency in such

matching program; _

(G) procedures for ensuring the administrative,

technical, and physical security of the records

matched and the results of such programs;

(H) prohibitions on duplication and

redisclosure_of records provided by _the

source agency within or outside the recipient

agency or the non-Federal agency, except where

(2)

App. V- 68

5 U.S.C. § 552a

required by law or essential to the conduct of the

matching program;

(I) procedures governing the use by a recipient

agency or non-Federal agency of records

provided in a matching program by a source

agency, including procedures governing return of

the records to the source agency or destruction of

records used in such program;

(J) information on_ assessments that have

been made on the accuracy of the records that

will be used in such matching program; and

(K) that the Comptroller General may have

access to all records of a recipient agency or a

non-Federal agency that the Comptroller General

deems necessary in order to monitor or verify

compliance-with the agreement.

(A) A _ copy of each agreement entered into

' pursuant to paragraph (1) shall -

(i) be transmitted to the Committee on

Governmental Affairs of the Senate and

the Committee on Government Operations

of the House of Representatives; and

(ii) be available upon request to the

public.

(B) No such agreement shall be effective until

30 days after the date on which such a copy is

transmitted pursuant to subparagraph (A)(1).

(C) Such an agreement shall remain in effect

only for such period, not to exceed 18 months, as

the Data Integrity Board of the agency

determines is appropriate in light of the

purposes, and length of time necessary for the

conduct, of the matching program.

App. V- 69

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(D) Within 3 months prior to the expiration of

such an agreement pursuant to subparagraph (C),

the Data Integrity Board of the agency may,

without additional review, renew the matching

agreement for a current, ongoing matching

program for not more than one additional year if

(i) such program will be conducted

without any change; and

(ii) each party to the agreement certifies

to the Board in writing that the program

has been conducted in compliance with

the agreement.

(p) Verification and Opportunity to Contest Findings. -

(1) In order to protect any individual whose records

are used in a matching program, no recipient agency,

non-Federal agency, or source agency may suspend,

terminate, reduce, or make a final denial of any

financial assistance or payment under a Federal benefit

program to such individual, or take other adverse

action against such individual, as a result of

information produced by such matching program, until

(A)

(i) the agency has independently verified

the information; or

(ii) the Data Integrity Board of the

agency, or in the case of a non-Federal

agency the Data Integrity Board of the

source agency, determines in accordance

with guidance issued by the Director of

the Office of Management and Budget that

(1) the information is limited to

identification and amount. of

App. V- 70

5 U.S.C. § 552a

benefits paid by the source agency

under a Federal benefit program;

and

(II) there is a high degree of

confidence that the information

provided to the recipient agency

is accurate;

(B) the individual receives a notice from the

agency containing a statement of its findings and

informing the individual of the opportunity to

contest such findings; and

(C)

(i) the expiration of any time period

established for the program by statute or

regulation for the individual to respond to

that notice; or

(ii) in the case of a program for which no

such period is established, the end of the

30-day period beginning on the date on

which notice under subparagraph (B) is

mailed or otherwise provided to the

individual.

(2) Independent verification referred to in paragraph

(1) requires investigation and confirmation of

specific information relating to an individua! that is

used _as a basis for an adverse action against the

individual, including where applicable investigation

and confirmation of -

(A) the amount of any asset or income involved;

(B) whether such individual actually has or had

access to such asset or income for such

individual's own use; and

(C) the period or periods when the individual

actually had such asset or income.

App. V- 71

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(3) Notwithstanding ‘paragraph (1), an agency may

take any appropriate action otherwise prohibited by

such paragraph if the agency determines that the public

health or public safety may be adversely affected or

significantly threatened during any notice period

required by such paragraph.

(q) Sanctions. -

(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no

source agency may disclose any record which _ is

contained in a system of records to a recipient agency

or non-Federal agency for a matching program if such

source agency has reascn to believe that the

requirements of subsection (p), or any matching

agreement entered into pursuant to subsection (0), or

both, are not being met by such recipient agency.

(2) No source agency may renew a matching

agreement unless -

(A) the recipient agency or non-Federal agency

has certified that it has complied with the

provisions of that agreement; and

(B) the source agency has no reason to believe

that the certification is inaccurate.

(r) Report on New Systems and Matching Programs. -

Each agency that proposes to establish or make a

significant change in a system of records or a matching

program shall provide adequate advance notice of any

such proposal (in duplicate) to the Committee on

Government Operations of the House of

Representatives, the Committee on Governmental

Affairs of the Senate, and the Office of Management

and Budget in order to permit an evaluation of the

probable or potential effect of such proposal on the

privacy or other rights of individuals.

(s) Biennial Report. -

(t)

App. V- 72

5 U.S.C. § 552a

The President shall biennially submit to the

Speaker of the House of Representatives and the

President pro tempore of the Senate a report -

(1) describing the actions of the Director of the Office

of Management and Budget pursuant to section 6 of the

Privacy Act of 1974 during the preceding 2 years;

(2) describing the exercise of individual nights of

access and amendment under this section during such

years;

(3) identifying changes in or additions to systems of

records;

(4) containing such other information concerning

administration of this section as may be necessary or

useful to the Congress in reviewing the effectiveness of

this section in carrying out the purposes of the Privacy

Act of 1974.

(1) Effect of Other Laws. -

No agency shall rely on any exemption

contained in section 552 of this title to withhold

from an individual any record which is otherwise

accessible to such individual under the

provisions of this section.

(2) No agency shall rely on any exemption in this

section to withhold from an individual any record

which is otherwise accessible to such individual under

the provisions of section 552 of this title.

(u) Data Integrity Boards. -

(1) Every agency conducting or participating in a

matching program shall establish a Data Integrity

Board to oversee and coordinate among the various

components of such agency’ the agency's

implementation of this section.

(2) Each Data Integrity Board shall consist of senior

officials designated by the head of the agency, and

App. V- 73

5 U.S.C. § 552a

shall include any senior official designated by the head

of the agency as responsible for implementation of this

section, and the inspector general of the agency, if any.

The inspector general shall not serve as chairman of

the Data Integrity Board.

(3) Each Data Integrity Board -

(A) shall review, approve, and maintain all

written agreements for receipt or disclosure of —

agency records for matching programs to ensure

compliance with subsection (0), and all relevant

statutes, regulations, and guidelines;

(B) shall review all matching programs in which

the agency has participated during the year,

either as a source agency or recipient agency,

determine compliance with applicable laws,

regulations, guidelines, and agency agreements,

and assess the costs and benefits of such

programs;

(C) shall review all recurring matching

programs in which the agency has participated

during the year, either as a source agency or

recipient agency, for continued justification for

such disclosures;

(D) shall compile an annual report, which shall

be submitted to the head of the agency and the

Office of Management and Budget and made

available to the public on request, describing the

matching activities of the agency, including -

(i) matching programs in which the

agency has participated as a source agency

or recipient agency;

(ii) matching agreements proposed under

subsection (0) that were disapproved by

the Board;

(4)

App. V- 74

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(iii) © any changes in membership or

structure of the Board in the preceding

year;

(iv) the reasons for any waiver of the

requirement in paragraph (4) of this

section for completion and submission of

a cost-benefit analysis prior to the

approval of a matching program;

(v) any violations of matching agreements

that have been alleged or identified and

any corrective action taken; and

(vi) any other information required by the

Director of the Office of Management and

Budget to be included in such report;

(E) shall serve as a clearinghouse for receiving

and providing information on the accuracy,

completeness, and reliability of records used in

matching programs;

(F) shall provide interpretation and guidance to

agency components and personnel on_ the

requirements of this section for matching

programs;

(G) shall review agency recordkeeping and

disposal policies and ‘practices for matching

programs to assure compliance with this section;

and

(H) may review and report on any agency

matching activities that are not matching

programs.

(A) Except as provided in subparagraphs (B)

and (C), a Data Integrity Board shall not approve

any written agreement for a matching program

unless the agency has completed and submitted

to such Board a cost-benefit analysis of the

(5)

App. V- 75

5 U.S.C. § 552a

proposed program and_ such §$ analysis

demonstrates that the program is likely to be cost

effective. @! "cost-effective."

(B) The Board may waive the requirements of

subparagraph (A) of this paragraph if it

determines in writing, in accordance with

guidelines prescribed by the Director of the

Office of Management and Budget, that a cost-

benefit analysis is not required.

(C) A cost-benefit analysis shall not be required

under subparagraph (A) prior to the initial

approval of a written agreement for a matching

program that is specifically required by statute.

Any subsequent written agreement for such a

program shall not be approved by the Data

Integrity Board unless the agency has- submitted

a cost-benefit analysis of the program as

conducted under the preceding approval of such

agreement.

(A) If a matching agreement is disapproved by a

Data Integrity Board, any party to such

agreement may appeal the disapproval to the

Director of the Office of Management and

Budget. Timely notice of the filing of such an

appeal shall be provided by the Director of the

Office of Management and Budget to the

Committee on Governmental Affairs of the

Senate and the Committee on Government

Operations of the House of Representatives.

(B) The Director of the Office of Management

and Budget may approve a matching agreement

notwithstanding the disapproval of a Data

Integrity Board if the Director determines that -

App. V- 76

5 U.S.C. § 552a

(i) the matching program will be

consistent with all applicable legal,

regulatory, and policy requirements;

(ii) there is adequate evidence that the

matching agreement will be cost-effective;

and

(iii) the matching program is in the

public interest.

(C) The decision of the Director to approve a

matching agreement shall not take effect until 30

days after it is reported to committees described

in subparagraph (A).

(D) If the Data Integrity Board and the Director

of the Office of Management and Budget

disapprove a matching program proposed by the

inspector general of an agency, the inspector

general may report the disapproval to the head of

the agency and to the Congress.

(6) In the reports required by paragraph (3)(D), agency

matching activities that are not matching programs may

be reported on an aggregate basis, if and to the extent

necessary to protect ongoing law enforcement or

counterintelligence investigations.

(v) Office of Management and Budget Responsibilities. -

The Director of the Office of Management and

Budget shall -

(1) develop and, after notice and opportunity for.

public comment, prescribe guidelines and regulations

for the use of agencies in implementing the provisions

of this section; and

(2) provide continuing assistance to and oversight of

the implementation of this section by agencies

[1] See References in Text note below.

>

App. V- 77

[2] So in original. Probably should be

App. V- 78

5 U.S.C. § 1221

TITLE 5 PART Il CHAPTER 12 SUBCHAPTER Ill

Sec. 1221.

Sec. 1221. - Individual right of action in certain reprisal

cases

(a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (b) of this section

and subsection 1214(a)(3), an employee, former employee, or

applicant for employment may, with respect to any personnel

action taken, or proposed to be taken, against such employee,

former employee, or applicant for employment, as a result of

a prohibited personnel practice described in_ section

2302(b)(8), seek corrective action from the Merit Systems

Protection Board.

(b) This section may not be construed to prohibit any

employee, former employee, or applicant for employment

from seeking corrective action from the Merit Systems

Protection Board before seeking corrective action from the

Special Counsel, if such employee, former employee, or

applicant for employment has the right to appeal directly to

the Board under any law, rule, or regulation.

(c)

(1) Any employee, former employee, or applicant for

employment seeking corrective action under subsection

(a) may request that the Board order a stay of the

personnel action involved.

(2) Any stay requested under paragraph (1) shall be

granted within 10 calendar days (excluding Saturdays,

Sundays, and legal holidays) after the date the request

is made, if the Board determines that such a stay would

be appropriate.

(3)

(A) The Board shali allow any agency which

would be subject to a stay under this subsection

to comment to the Board on such stay request.

(B) Except as provided in subparagraph (C), a

stay granted under this subsection shall remain

(d)

(e)

S$ U.S.C. § 1221

in effect for such period as the Board determines

to be appropriate.

(C) The Board may modify or dissolve a stay

under this subsection at any time, if the Board

determines that such a _ modification or

dissolution is appropriate.

(1) At _the request _of an employee, former

employee, or applicant for employment seeking

corrective action under subsection (a), the Board

shall_issue_a subpoena for the attendance and

testimony of any person or the production of.

documentary or other evidence from any person if

the Board finds that the testimony or production

requested is not unduly burdensome and appears

reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of

admissible evidence.

(2) A subpoena under this subsection may be issued,

and shall be enforced, in the same manner as applies in

the case of subpoenas under section 1204.

(1) Subject to the provisions of paragraph (2), in any

case involving an alleged prohibited personnel practice

as described under section 2302(b)(8), the Board shall

order such corrective action as the Board considers

appropriate if the employee, former employee, or

applicant for employment has demonstrated that a

disclosure described under section 2302(b)(8) was a

contributing factor in the personnel action which was

taken or is to be taken against such employee, former

employee, or applicant. The employee may

demonstrate that the disclosure was a contributing

factor in the personnel action through circumstantial

evidence, such as evidence that -

(f)

(g)

App. V- 80

5 U.S.C. § 1221

(A) the official taking the personnel action

knew of the disclosure; and

(B) the personnel action occurred within a

period of time such that a reasonable person

could conclude that the disclosure was a

contributing factor in the personnel action.

(2) Corrective action under paragraph (1) may not be

ordered if the agency demonstrates by clear and

convincing evidence that it would have taken the same

personnel action in the absence of such disclosure.

(1) A final order or decision shall be rendered by the

Board as soon as practicable after the commencement

of any proceeding under this section.

(2) A decision to terminate an investigation under

subchapter II may not be considered in any action or

other proceeding under this section.

(3) If, based on evidence presented to it under this

section, the Merit Systems Protection Board

determines that there is reason to believe that a current

employee may have committed a prohibited personnel

practice, the Board shall refer the matter to the Special

Counsel to investigate and take appropriate action

under section 1215.

(1)

(A) If the Board orders corrective action under

this section, such corrective action may

include -

(i) that the individual be placed, as

nearly as possible, in the position the

individual would have been in had the

prohibited personnel practice not

occurred; and

App. V- 81

$ U.S.C. § 1221

(ii) back pay and related benefits,

medical costs incurred, travel expenses,

and _any other reasonable __ and

foreseeable consequential changes.

(B) Corrective action shall include attorney's

fees _and_ costs _as_ provided for under

paragraphs (2) and (3).

(2) If an employee, former employee, or applicant for

employment is the prevailing party before the Merit

Systems Protection Board, and the decision is based on

a finding of a prohibited personnel practice, the agency

involved. shall be liable to the employee, former

employee, or applicant for reasonable attorney's fees

and any other reasonable costs incurred.

(3) If an employee, former employee, (or applicant

for employment is the prevailing party in an appeal

from the Merit Systems Protection Board, the agency

involved shall be liable to the employee, former

employee, or applicant for reasonable attorney's fees

and any other reasonable costs incurred, regardless of

the basis of the decision.

(h)

(1) An employee, former employee, or applicant for

employment adversely affected or aggrieved by a

final order or decision of the Board under this

section may obtain judicial review of the order or

decision.

(2) A petition for review under this subsection shall

be filed with such court, and within such time, as

provided for under section 7703(b).

(i) Subsections (a) through (h) shall apply in any

proceeding brought under section 7513(d) if, or to the

extent that, a prohibited personnel practice as defined in

section 2302(b)(8) is alleged.

App. V- 82

5 U.S.C. § 1221

(j) In determining the appealability of any case involving

an allegation made by an individual under the provisions

of this chapter, neither the status of an individual under

any retirement system established under a Federal statute

nor any election made by such individual under any such

system may be taken into account

[1] So in original. Probably should be "employee,"

App. V- 83

5 U.S.C. § 2302

TITLE 5 PART III Subpart A CHAPTER 23 Sec. 2302.

Sec. 2302. - Prohibited personnel practices

(a)

(1) For the purpose of this title, "prohibited

personnel practice'' means any action described in

subsection (b).

(2) For the purpose of this section -

(A) "personnel action" means -

(i) an appointment;

(ii) a promotion;

(iii) an_action under chapter 75 of this

title or other disciplinary or corrective

action;

(iv) a detail, transfer, or reassignment;

(v) a reinstatement;

(vi) a restoration;

(vii) a reemployment;

(viii) a performance evaluation under

chapter 43 of this title;

(ix) a decision concerning pay, benefits,

or awards, concerning -education or

training if the education or training may

reasonably be expected to lead to an

appointment, promotion, ~ performance

evaluation, or other action described in

this subparagraph;

(x) a decision to order_psychiatric

testing or examination; and

(xi) any other significant change in

duties, responsibilities, or working

conditions;

with respect to an employee in, or applicant

for, a covered position in an agency, and in the

case of an alleged prohibited personnel practice

App. V- 84

5 U.S.C. § 2302

described in subsection (b)(8), an employee or

applicant for employment in a Government

corporation as defined in section 9101 of title

31;

(B) "covered position" means, with respect to

any personnel action, any position in the

competitive service, a career appointee position

in the Senior Executive Service, or a position in

the excepted service, but does not include any

position which is, prior to the personnel action -

(i) excepted from the competitive service

because of its confidential, policy-

determining, policy-making, or policy-

advocating character; or

(ii) excluded from the coverage of this

section by the President based on a

determination by the President that it is

necessary and warranted by conditions of

good administration; and

(C) "agency" means an Executive agency and

the Government Printing Office, but does not

include -

(i) a Government corporation, except in

the case of an alleged prohibited personnel

practice described under subsection (b)(8);

(ii) the Federal Bureau of Investigation,

the Central Intelligence Agency, the

Defense Intelligence Agency, the National

Imagery and Mapping Agency, the

National Security Agency, and, as

determined by the President, any

Executive agency or unit thereof the

principal function of which is the conduct

of foreign intelligence or

counterintelligence activities; or

App. V- 85

5 U.S.C. § 2302

(iii) the General Accounting Office.

(b) Any employee who has authority to take, direct others

to take, recommend, or approve any personnel action,

shall not, with respect to such authority -

(1) discriminate for or against any employee or

applicant for employment -

(A) on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or

national origin, as prohibited under section 717

of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C.

2000e-16);

(B) on the basis of age, as prohibited under

sections 12 and 15 of the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. 631, 633a);

(C) on the basis of sex, as prohibited under

section 6(d) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of

1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(d));

(D) on the basis of handicapping condition, as

prohibited uncer section 501 of _ the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 791); or

(E) on the basis of marital status or political

affiliation, as prohibited under any law, rule, or

regulation;

(2) solicit or consider any recommendation or

statement, oral or written, with respect to ariy

individual who requests or is under consideration for

any personnel action unless such recommendation or

statement is based on the personal knowledge or

records of the person furriishing it and consists of -

(A) an evaluation of the work performance,

ability, aptitude, or general qualifications of such

individual; or

(B) an evaluation of the character, loyalty, or

suitability of such individual;

(3) coerce the political activity of any person

(including the providing of any political contribution or

App. V- 86

5 U.S.C. § 2302

service), or take any action against any employee or

applicant for employment as a reprisal for the refusal of

any person to engage in such political activity;

(4) deceive or willfully obstruct any person with

respect _to such person's right to compete _for

employment:

(5) influence any person to withdraw from competition

for any position for the purpose of improving or

injuring the prospects of any other person for

employment;

(6) grant any preference or advantage not authorized

by law, rule, or regulation to any employee or applicant

for employment (including defining the scope or

manner of competition or the requirements for any-

position) for the purpose of improving or injuring the

prospects of any particular person for employment;

(7) appoint, employ, promote, advance, or advocate

for appointment, employment, promotion, or

advancement, in or to a civilian position any individual

who is a relative (as defined in section 3110(a)(3) of

this title) of such employee if such position is in the

agency in which such employee is serving as a public

official (as defined in section 3110(a)(2) of this title) or

over which such employee exercises jurisdiction or

control as such an official;

(8) take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to

take, a personnel action with respect to any

employee or applicant for employment because of -

(A) any disclosure of information by an

employee or applicant which the employee or

applicant reasonably believes evidences -

(i) a violation of any law. rule, or

regulation, or

(ii) gross mismanagement, a_ gross

waste of funds, an abuse of authority,

App. V- 87

5 U.S.C. § 2302

or _a substantial and specific danger to

public health or safety,

if such disclosure is not specifically

prohibited by law and if such information

is not specifically required by Executive

order to be kept secret in the interest of

national defense or the conduct of foreign

affairs; or

(B) any disclosure to the Special Counsel, or

to the Inspector General of an agency or

another employee designated by the head of

the agency to receive such disclosures, of

information which the employee or applicant

reasonably believes evidences -

(i) a violation of any law, rule, or

regulation, or

(ii) gross mismanagement, a_ gross

waste of funds, an abuse of authority,

or _a substantial and specific danger to

public health or safety;

(9) take or fail to take, or threaten to take or fail to

take, any personnel action against any employee or

applicant for employment because of -

(A) the exercise of any appeal, complaint, or

grievance right granted by any law, rule, or

regulation;

(B) testifying for or otherwise lawfully assisting

any individual in the exercise of any right

referred to in subparagraph (A);

(C) cooperating with or disclosing

information to the Inspector General of an

agency, or the Special Counsel, in accordance

with applicable provisions of law; or

(D) for refusing to obey an order that would

require the individual to violate a law;

App. V- 88

5 U.S.C. § 2302

(10) discriminate for or against any employee or

applicant for employment on the basis of conduct

which does not adversely affect the performance of

the employee or applicant or the performance of

others; except that nothing in this paragraph shall

prohibit an agency from taking into account in

determining suitability or fitness any conviction of the

employee or applicant for any crime under the laws of

any State, of the District of Columbia, or of the United

States;

(11)

(A) knowingly take, recommend, or approve

any personnel action if the taking of such

action would violate _a veterans' preference

requirement; or

(B) knowingly fail to take, recommend, or

approve any personnel action if the failure to

take such action would violate a veterans’

preference requirement; or

(12) take or fail to take any other personnel action

if the taking of or failure to take such action

violates any law, rule, or regulation implementing,

or directly concerning, the merit system principles

contained in section 2301 of this title.

This subsection shall not be construed _to

authorize the withholding of information from the

Congress or the taking of any personnel action

against an_ employee who discloses information to

the Congress.

(c) The head of each agency shall be responsible for the

prevention of prohibited personnel practices, for the

compliance with and enforcement of applicable civil service

laws, rules, and regulations, and other aspects of personnel

management, and for ensuring (in consultation with the

Office of Special Counsel) that agency employees are

App. V- 89

5 U.S.C. § 2302

informed of the rights and remedies available to them under

this chapter and chapter 12 of this title. Any individual to

whom the head of an agency delegates authority for personnel

management, or for any aspect thereof, shall be similarly

responsible within the limits of the delegation.

(d) This section shall not be construed to extinguish or

lessen any effort to achieve equal employment opportunity

through affirmative action or any right or remedy available to

any employee or applicant for employment in the civil service

under -

(e)

(1) section 717 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42

U.S.C. 2000e-16), prohibiting discrimination on the

basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;

(2) sections 12 and 15 of the Age Discrimination in

Employment Act of 1967 (29 U.S.C. 631, 633a),

prohibiting discrimination on the basis of age;

(3) under section 6(d) of the Fair Labor Standards Act

of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 206(d)), prohibiting discrimination

on the basis of sex;

(4) section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29

U.S.C. 791), prohibiting discrimination on the basis of

handicapping condition; or

(5) the provisions of any law, rule, or regulation

prohibiting discrimination on the basis of marital status

or political affiliation.

(1) For the purpose of this section, the term

"veterans' preference requirement"' means any of

the following provisions of law:

(A) Sections 2108, 3305(b), 3309, 3310, 3311,

3312, 3313, 3314, 3315, 3316, 3317(b), 3318,

3320, 3351, 3352, 3363, 3501, 3502(b), 3504,

and 4303(e) and (with respect to a preference

eligible referred to in section 7511(a)(1)(B))

subchapter II of chapter 75 and section 7701.

App. V- 90

5 U.S.C. § 2302

(B) Sections 943(c)(2) and 1784(c) of title 10.

(C) Section 1308(b) of the Alaska National

Interest Lands Conservation Act.

(D) Section 301(c) of the Foreign Service Act of

1980.

(E) Sections 106(f), 7281(e), and 7802(5) of

title 38.

(F) Section 1005(a) of title 39.

(G) Any other provision of law that the Director

of the Office of Personnel Management

designates in regulations as being a veterans'

preference requirement for the purposes of this

subsection.

(H) Any regulation prescribed under subsection

(b) or (c) of section 1302 and any _other

regulation that implements a provision of law

referred to in any of the preceding

subparagraphs.

(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title,

no authority to order corrective action shall be

available in connection with a prohibited personnel

practice described in subsection (b)(11). Nothing in

this paragraph shall be considered to affect any

authority under section 1215 (relating to disciplinary

action)

App. V- 91

5 U.S.C. § 7703

TITLE 5 PART Il Subpart F CHAPTER 77 Sec.:7703.

Sec. 7703. - Judicial review of decisions of the Merit

Systems Protection Board

(a)

(1) Any employee or applicant for employment

adversely affected or aggrieved by a final order or

decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board may

obtain judicial review of the order or decision.

(2) The Board shall be named respondent in any

proceeding brought pursuant to this subsection, unless

the employee or applicant for employment seeks

review of a final order or decision on the merits on the

underlying personnel action or on _a_request for

attorney fees, in which case the agency responsible

for taking the personnel action shall be the

respondent.

(b)

(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2) of this

subsection, a petition to review a final order or final

decision of the Board shall be filed in the United

States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Notwithstanding any other provision of law, any

petition for review must be filed within 60 days after

the date the petitioner received notice of the final order

or decision of the Board. %

(2) Cases of discrimination subject to the

provisions of section 7702 of this title shall be filed

under section 717(c) of the Civil Rights Act of 1964

(42 U.S.C. 2000e-16(c)), section 15(c) of the Age

Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (29

U.S.C. 633a(c)), and section 16(b) of the Fair Labor

Standards Act of 1938, as amended (29 U.S.C.

216(b)), as applicable. Notwithstanding any other

provision of law, any such case filed under any such

section must be filed within 30 days after the date

App. V- 92

5 U.S.C. § 7703

the individual filing the case received notice of the

judicially reviewable action under _such_ section

7702.

(c) In any case filed in the United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit, the court shall review the record

and hold unlawful and set aside any agency action,

findings, or conclusions found to be -

(1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or

otherwise not in accordance with law:

(2) obtained without procedures required by law,

rule, or regulation having been followed; or

(3) unsupported by substantial evidence; except

that in the case of discrimination brought under

any section referred to in subsection (b)(2) of this

section, the employee or applicant shall have the

right to have the facts subject to trial de novo by the

reviewing court.

(d) The Director of the Office of Personnel Management

may obtain review of any final order or decision of the Board

by filing, within 60 days after the date the Director received

notice of the final order or decision of the Board, a petition

for judicial review in the United States Court of Appeals for

the Federal Circuit if the Director determines, in his

discretion, that the Board erred in interpreting a civil service

law, rule, or regulation affecting personnel management and

that the Board's decision will have a substantial impact on a

civil service law, rule, regulation, or policy directive. If the

Director did not intervene in a matter before the Board, the

Director may not petition for review of a Board decision

under this section unless the Director first petitions the Board

for a reconsideration of its decision, and such petition is

denied. In addition to the named respondent, the Board and

all other parties to the proceedings before the Board shall

have the right to appear in the proceeding before the Court of

Appeals. The granting of the petition for judicial review shall

be at the discretion of the Court of Appeals

App. V- 93

18 U.S.C. § 24

TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 1 Sec. 24.

Sec. 24. - Definitions relating to Federal health care

offense

(a) As used in this title, the term "Federal health care

offense" means a violation of, or a criminal conspiracy to

violate -

(1) section 669, 1035, 1347, or 1518 of this title;

(2) section 287, 371, 664, 666, 1001, 1027, 1341,

1343, or 1954 of this title, if the violation or conspiracy

relates to a health care benefit program.

(b) As used in this title, the term "health care benefit

program" means any public or private plan or contract,

affecting commerce, under which any medical benefit,

item, or service is provided to any individual, and

includes any individual or entity who is providing a

medical benefit, item, or service for which payment may

be made under the plan or contract

—

App. V- 94

18 U.S.C. § 1035

TITLE 18 PART I CHAPTER 47 Sec. 1035.

Sec. 1035. - False statements relating to health care

matters

(a) Whoever, in any matter involving a health care benefit

program, knowingly and willfully -_

(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick,

scheme, or device a material fact; or

(2) makes any _ materially false, fictitious, or

fraudulent statements or representations, or makes

or_uses any materially false writing or document

knowing the same to contain any materially false,

fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry,

in connection with the delivery of or payment

for health care benefits, items, or services, shall be

fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 5

years, or both.

(b) As used in this section, the term "health care benefit

program" has the meaning given such term in section 24(b) of

this title

App. V- 95

18 U.S.C. § 3231

TITLE 18 PART Il CHAPTER 211 Sec. 3231.

Sec. 3231. - District courts

The district courts of the United States shall have

original jurisdiction, exclusive of the courts of the States, of

all offenses against the laws of the United States.

Nothing in this title shall be held to take away or impair the

jurisdiction of the courts of the several States under the laws

thereof

App. V- 96

18 U.S.C. § 3486

TITLE 18 PART Il CHAPTER 223 Sec. 3486.

Sec. 3486. - Administrative subpoenas

(a) Authorization. -

(1)

(A) In any investigation of -

(i)

(1) a Federal health care offense; or

(II) a Federal offense involving the

sexual exploitation or abuse of

children, the Attorney General; or

(ii) an offense under section 871 or 879,

or a threat against a person protected by

the United States Secret Service under

paragraph (5) or (6) of section 3056, Ul if

the Director of the Secret Service

determines that the threat constituting the

offense or the threat against the person

protected is imminent, the Secretary of the

Treasury, "3056(a),". may issue in writing

and cause to be served a_ subpoena

requiring the production and testimony

described in subparagraph (B).

(B) Except as provided in subparagraph (C), a

subpoena issued under subparagraph (A) may

require -

(i) the production of any records or other

things relevant to the investigation; and

(ii) testimony by the custodian of the

things required to be produced concerning

the production and authenticity of those

things.

(C) A subpoena issued under subparagraph (A)

with respect to a provider of electronic

communication service or remote computing

App. V- 97

18 U.S.C. § 3486

service, in an investigation of a Federal offense

involving the sexual exploitation or abuse of

children shall not extend beyond -

(i) requiring that provider to disclose the

name, address, local and long distance

telephone toll billing records, telephone

number or other subscriber number or

identity, and length of service of a

subscriber to or customer of such service

and the types of services the subscriber or

customer utilized, which may be relevant

to an authorized law enforcement inquiry;

or

(ii) requiring a custodian of the records of

that provider to give testimony concerning

the production and authentication of such

records or information.

(D) As used in this paragraph, the term "Federal

offense involving the sexual exploitation or

abuse of children" means an offense under

section 1201, 2241(c), 2242, 2243, 2251, 2251A,

2252, 2252A, 2260, 2421, 2422, or 2423, in

which the victim is an individual who has not

attained the age of 18 years.

(2) A subpoena under this subsection shall describe

the objects required to be produced and prescribe a

return date within a reasonable period of time within

which the objects can be assembled and made

available.

(3) The production of records relating to a Federal

health care offense shall not be required under this

section at any place more than 500 miles distant from

the place where the subpoena for the production of

such records is served. The production of things in any

other case may be required from any place within the

App. V- 98

18 U.S.C. § 3486

United States or subject to the laws or jurisdiction of

the United States.

(4) Witnesses subpoenaed under this section shall be

paid the same fees and mileage that are paid witnesses

in the courts of the United States.

(5) At any time before the return date specified in the

summons, the person or entity summoned may, in the

United States district court for the district in which that

person or entity does business or resides, petition for an

order modifying or setting aside the summons, or a

prohibition of disclosure ordered by a court under

paragraph (6).

(6)

(A) A United State @ district court for the

district in which the summons is or will be

served, upon application of the United States,

may issue an ex parte order that no person or

entity disclose to any other person or entity

(other than to an attorney in order to obtain legal

advice) the existence of such summons for a

period of up to 90 days.

(B) Such order may be issued on a showing that

the things being sought may be relevant to the

investigation and there is reason to believe that

such disclosure may result in -

(i) endangerment to the life or physical

safety of any person;

(ii) flight to avoid prosecution;

(iii) destruction of or tampering with

evidence; or

(iv) intimidation of potential witnesses.

(C) An order under this paragraph may be

renewed for additional periods of up to 90 days

upon a showing that the circumstances described

in subparagraph (B) continue to exist.

App. V- 99

18 U.S.C. § 3486

(7) A summons issued under this section shall not

require the production of anything that would be

protected from production under the standards

applicable to a subpoena duces tecum issued by a court

of the United States.

(8) If no case or proceeding arises from the production

of records or other things pursuant to this section

within a reasonable time after those records or things

are produced, the agency to which those records or

things were delivered shall, upon written demand made

by the person producing those records or things, return

them to that person, except where the production

required was only of copies rather than originals.

(9) A subpoena issued under paragraph (1)(A)(i)(II) or

(1)(A)(ii) may require production as soon as possible,

but in no event less than 24 hours after service of the

subpoena.

(10) As soon as practicable following the issuance of a

subpoena under paragraph (1)(A)(ii), the Secretary of

the Treasury shall notify the Attorney General of its

issuance.

(b) Service. - A subpoena issued under this section may be

served by any person who is at least 18 years of age and is

designated in the subpoena to serve it. Service upon a natural

person may be made by personal delivery of the subpoena to

him. Service may be made upon a domestic or foreign

corporation or upon a partnership or other unincorporated

association which is subject to suit under a common name, by

delivering the subpoena to an officer, to a managing or

general agent, or to any other agent authorized by

appointment or by law to receive service of process. The

affidavit of the person serving the subpoena entered on a true

copy thereof by the person serving it shall be proof of service.

(c) Enforcement. - In the case of contumacy by or refusal to

obey a subpoena issued to any person, the Attorney General

may invoke the aid of any court of the United States within

App. V- 100

18 U.S.C. § 3486

the jurisdiction of which the investigation is carried on or of

which the subpoenaed person is an inhabitant, or in which he

carries on business or may be found, to compel compliance

with the subpoena. The court may issue an order requiring the

subpoenaed person to appear before the Attorney General to

produce records, if so ordered, or to give testimony

concerning the production and authentication of such records.

Any failure to obey the order of the court may be punished by

the court as a contempt thereof. All process in any such case

may be served in any judicial district in which such person

may be found.

(d) Immunity From Civil Liability. - Notwithstanding any

Federal, State, or local law, any person, including officers,

agents, and employees, receiving a subpoena under this

section, who complies in good faith with the subpoena and

thus produces the materials sought, shall not be liable in any

court of any State or the United States to any customer or

other person for such production or for nondisclosure of that

production to the customer.

(e) Limitation on Use. -

(1) Health information about an individual that is

disclosed under this section may not be

This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari — Parker v. Department of Defense · 541 U.S. 904 | Frix