Batch 22 — Referral consequences, contaminated background records, and appeal reconciliation

7 October 2026. Bounded US administrative-record pass. Extends Batch 21; originals remain unchanged. This batch does not complete the international or engineering-role census.

Source standing

DOL EDIG13 and EDIG8 were downloaded in full through ordinary public HTTP access and read at the relevant sections. These are official agency digests, not the underlying decisions. Local HTML snapshots are supplied. Browsing retrieval returned 403 for some pages while ordinary retrieval succeeded for these two digests; no authentication or access control was bypassed. Decision URLs failed with 404, timeout, or 403 as logged below.

1. Patrickson — appeal result confirmed in official register, referral ruling still open

Key: 2003-US-NY-PATRICKSON. DOL's 2002–2003 ERA caselist identifies ALJ 2003-ERA-22; recommended decision 3 March 2005; ARB final decision 31 August 2007; and Second Circuit No. 07-4574, 18 December 2008, petition for review denied. The official indexed register confirms the appeal result independently of the earlier addendum. Full circuit decision bytes were not retrieved in this pass. Status: VERIFIED (official register/indexed record) for procedural result; primary judgment text still outstanding. Do not promote this to primary judgment read.

The DOL adverse-action digest confirms the Board rejected the ALJ's treatment of performance-plan meetings and found no proven pretext. That does not independently resolve the evaluation referral. The earlier general claim that reviewers found no retaliation must not be restated as a specific finding that the psychological referral was justified.

Sources:

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/PUBLIC/WHISTLEBLOWER/REFERENCES/CASELISTS/ERALIST8

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/PUBLIC/ARB/REFERENCES/CASELISTS/08_2007

2. Referral section recovered — two entries, with different consequences

The actual XIII B 11 section contains Mandreger and Smith. It is not a complete census of psychiatric referrals: other pertinent entries appear elsewhere in the digest.

Mandreger v. Detroit Edison, 88-ERA-17, Secretary 30 March 1994: the digest distinguishes an EAP referral from its consequences. A psychologist found a mental disorder; the worker could not return to the plant, exhausted leave, and later received work with reduced overtime and advancement. Those consequences were adverse action. Engineering role and the precise diagnosis remain unverified; adverse action alone does not establish retaliation.

Smith v. Esicorp, 93-ERA-16, Secretary 13 March 1996: a compelled doctor visit was adverse but not necessarily retaliatory. The digest reports substantial support for medical attention and a possible safety risk. The worker alleged suppression of scaffolding concerns but had been assigned responsibility for fixing the scaffolding. This is a medical-referral comparison, not evidence of a psychiatric diagnosis or an engineering role.

Source: EDIG13, XIII B 11.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/PUBLIC/WHISTLEBLOWER/REFERENCES/REFERENCE_WORKS/EDIG13

3. Wells — incorrect background material can infect a later evaluation

Key: 1991-US-KS-WELLS-85ERA22. Official digest SUPPORTS a finding in Wells v. Kansas Gas & Electric, 85-ERA-22, Secretary 21 March 1991. A security-clearance psychologist received inaccurate or unexplained background information already implicated in a successful whistleblower complaint, without context concerning that complaint and reinstatement. The employer used the recommendation to discharge the worker three months after reinstatement. The Secretary found the evaluation invalid in the context of the earlier reinstatement/expungement order and an ERA violation for noncompliance. The digest's editor reports the later appeal was dismissed but explicitly lacks the dismissal order.

This connects the 85-ERA-22 proceeding to 83-ERA-12 in the agency's account, strengthening the litigation-family link. It does not independently confirm the person's full identity or engineering qualifications. Keep it outside the engineer count pending role verification.

Source: EDIG8, VIII B 1 d.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oalj/PUBLIC/WHISTLEBLOWER/REFERENCES/REFERENCE_WORKS/EDIG8

5. Search log and return point

Read: full relevant sections of EDIG13 and EDIG8. Search engines supplied DOL register/caselist records. Tried underlying Patrickson ARB on oalj.dol.gov (404), dol.gov (timeout), circuit PDF (404), and Public Citizen ALJ PDF (403). A reproduced circuit opinion was found on Midpage, but it is not treated as a court-hosted retrieval or used to close the referral question.

Next: underlying Wells and Mandreger decisions; engineering-role confirmation; Patrickson ALJ conclusions and ARB referral treatment; full circuit order; DOE Part 710 and non-US routes from Batch 21. International and local-language coverage remains incomplete.