Posted on Tue, Feb. 14, 2006
Depot worker under scrutiny
BLEW WHISTLE; NOW COULD LOSE HIS JOB
By Steve Lannen
CENTRAL KENTUCKY BUREAU
A whistle blower's job at the Blue Grass Army Depot could be in jeopardy.
Donald Van Winkle, who earlier questioned if air monitoring equipment at the chemical weapons storage site was being used properly, faces removal from the Blue Grass Chemical Activity's Personnel Reliability Program.
If Van Winkle loses his clearance, he will likely lose his job as an air systems monitor at the Madison County facility, said officials with Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, a Washington, D.C., based group that is representing Van Winkle.
The group posted documents on its Web site, www.peer.org, regarding Van Winkle's case.
In a Jan. 30 letter, chemical operations director Thomas Bilyeu informs Van Winkle that there is a lack of trust between the two of them and that Van Winkle "shows signs of behavior of a disgruntled employee" and "lack of a positive attitude," which are considered security concerns, he writes.
Van Winkle strongly disagrees with Bilyeu's assessment in a separate document and writes that he has not received any sort of written documentation detailing his behavior. He concludes by asserting that he is being retaliated against for bringing safety concerns at the depot to light.
The news that Van Winkle could lose his job comes while several investigations surrounding his complaints continue. Along with a depot internal investigation, the Department of Defense's Inspector General and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration also are looking into the matter.
Depot spokesman Dick Sloan said he cannot comment until the investigations are complete. He could not say if it was standard procedure to initiate action against an employee before investigations had reached their conclusion.
A decision is expected on Van Winkle's status at the end of the month, said Richard Condit, PEER's general counsel.
"They like when people are cowed. They like when people go along to get along," Condit said of the depot. "Thankfully, that's not Don Van Winkle."
In early 2005, Van Winkle says he observed that the depot was not properly using a monitoring device for the chemical weapon VX. The problem involved a piece of equipment called a conversion pad, which makes it easier for VX to travel through a sampling tube.
Depot officials had moved the conversion pad to a different part of the monitor, which meant workers no longer needed to enter storage buildings to monitor VX. But Van Winkle said it "severely compromised" the ability to detect the deadly chemical agent and made his concerns known.