destruction of medical evidence
Prior to the hearing on complainant’s formal complaint, the parties, with
the assistance of the Administrative Judge, entered into a settlement
agreement (SA), memorialized in a document signed and dated October 19,
2004.<2> On (a) November 11, (b) December 11, and (c) December 20, 2005,
complainant notified the agency that it had breached the SA; the agency
responded on November 8, December 15, and December 22, 2005. In addition,
during the pendency of this appeal, complainant alleged another breach
of the SA on (d) May 29, 2006, in a pleading filed with the Commission;
the agency filed a response on June 28, 2006. Although complainant’s
allegation of breach in (d) did not comply with our regulation found
at 29 C.F.R. § 1614.504, because we are considering other allegations
of breach, in the interests of judicial economy, we will address this
claim as well, to the extent that it alleges a breach of the SA.
At the time of the events herein, complainant worked for the agency’s
investigation service as an Investigator, located in Yokosuka, Japan.
The terms of the SA provided, inter alia, that in exchange for withdrawal
of his complaints, including all supplements and amendments, that
complainant be promoted to GS-12/7, that he receive an amount of money,
that he attend one training course, for the destruction of certain medical
documents in the possession of the agency, that the agency not retaliate
and not reclassify his position, and that the agency remove comments in
his performance appraisal (PARS) for the period ending May 31, 2003.<3>
We will address complainant’s allegations of breach seriatim.<4>
