THE DEVADOSS LAW FIRM, P.L.L.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
www.fedemploymentlaw.com

REPRESENTING FEDERAL EMPLOYEES NATIONWIDE
OUR LEGAL TEAM

"Serving those who serve in government"
November 20, 2018
To:

Ms. Shaunette Crawford
Deciding Official
Executive Officer
Center for Disease Control and Prevention
Clifton Road, Building 21
Room 11031, Mailstop D25
Atlanta, GA 30329
E-Mail: sxc3@cdc.gov

From:

Mr. George Luber, through his attorneys, The Devadoss Law Firm PLLC

Re:

Response to Proposed Removal Letter

As you are aware, I was issued a proposed removal letter on or about October 22, 2018 and
in accordance with the instructions mentioned in the said proposal letter, I am submitting this
response for your consideration. Please consider this letter as my official response to the proposed
personnel action.
I would like to first thank you for giving me the opportunity to present my response to the
above mentioned proposed action. After carefully reading the proposal letter, it appears that I am
being accused of the following charges: Falsification of Time/Attendance Records; Failure to
Obtain Prior Approval to Engage in Outside Activities; Misuse of Position and Conduct
PRINCIPAL OFFICE:

SATELLITE OFFICES:

14651 Dallas Parkway, Suite 144

Washington D.C &

Dallas, Texas 75254

Atlanta, GA

 Unbecoming to a Federal Employee. Both for clarification purposes, as well as in an effort to better
state my case, I have chosen the following format for my response.
Charge 1:

Falsification of Time/Attendance Records

Based on the above referenced proposal letter, it appears that this charge was initiated based
on my alleged falsification of time/attendance records on the cited dates – from October 2014 –
March 2018. I want to start out by providing some relevant background information. I had been
teaching this course (HLTH 350-R) since 2012 and I had always been incredibly diligent in the
past about keeping my time. I was meticulous about it. As such, I believe there was something else
going on behind the scenes.
I want to describe how the system works – generally – then I will turn to what I think was
going on. Finally, I will address some of the specifications individually. Our electronic
timekeeping system is called TAS. Each week, we – as employees – would simply enter the time
that we were out. Specifically, I would record the hours when I would not be at work. These hours
related to the time I was teaching my course at Emory. The next step in the process is to submit
the sheet to the time clerk, who was able to modify our timesheets as needed. Around October
2016, my Agency starts listing a lot of errors. This was the same time my timekeeper, Florence
Deneise Turner (“Deneise”), was having difficulties with both her conduct and her performance at
work. My Branch Deputy, Kenneth Archer and I were actually engaged in disciplinary action
against Denise at this time, this is well documented. Denise was very disgruntled and angry with
the actions taken against her. Based on the fact that we had begun to initiate significant disciplinary
action against her, I believe it is possible that Denise may have gone in and eliminated my
exceptions. In fact, it was Kenneth Archer who initially made this suggestion – i.e. that Denise
could have gone in and “edited” my timesheets. As noted above, our timekeepers (or time clerks)

2

 were able to modify our timesheets. Denise could have gone back and deleted her actions and there
would be no record of what she did. Denise still works at the Agency and, interestingly, the Agency
failed to provide a statement from her affirming that she did not alter anything. I have included a
statement from Ken Archer (Appendix A) attesting to this belief and to statements that Denise has
made in the past threatening to take such action.
I now want to turn to some of the individual specifications noted in this proposal letter:
Specification 1 – Specification 1 alleges on October 18, 2014, I certified my time and attendance
record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I performed
8 hours of duty on October 9, 2014. The Agency alleges my certification was false in that I only
performed duty for 5.5 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was knowingly false
and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. On October 9, 2014, I was on travel status in
Washington, DC and had canceled class. I have proof of my travel, which is attached (Appendix
B) I flew to Washington, DC on October 8 and returned to Atlanta on October 10; therefore, I
canceled my class on October 9. I am not guilty of this specification.
Specification 2 – Specification 2 alleges on September 19, 2015, I certified my time and
attendance record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I
performed 8 hours of duty on September 10, 2015. The Agency alleges my certification was false
in that I only performed duty for 5.5 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was
knowingly false and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. During this time period, I was
on travel status in Montreal. I returned the evening of September 9, when my timesheet would
have already been submitted. Our time was automatically entered and I should have gone in and
edited the sheet to correctly enter the time. Early the next week – when I should have gone in to
edit the timesheet – I simply forgot. This was a simple mistake on my part and I had no intention
3

 of misleading the Agency whatsoever. My failure to retroactively correct my timesheet was not
done to knowingly make a false assertion. I am not guilty of this specification.
Specification 3 – Specification 3 alleges on September 17, 2016, I certified my time and
attendance record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I
performed 8 hours of duty on September 15, 2016. The Agency alleges my certification was false
in that I only performed duty for 5.5 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was
knowingly false and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. I was in Colorado for the entire
week – i.e. September 11 – September 17 – and thus canceled my class. As I was on travel status,
I would not have entered my time. I have attached my rental car receipt from Colorado as proof
(Appendix C). I am not guilty of this specification.
Specification 5 – Specification 5 alleges on October 15, 2016, I certified my time and attendance
record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I performed
8 hours of duty on October 13, 2016. The Agency alleges my certification was false in that I only
performed duty for 6.5 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was knowingly false
and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. I have attached a screenshot of our class
management software (Blackboard) with a list of announcements that I posted to students,
including class cancelations (Appendix D). I am not guilty of this specification.
Specification 7 – Specification 7 alleges on September 2, 2017, I certified my time and attendance
record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I performed
8 hours of duty on August 31, 2017. The Agency alleges my certification was false in that I only
performed duty for 6.5 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was knowingly false
and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. On this date, I was on travel to Alaska for a site
visit. I have attached my itinerary (Appendix E). I am not guilty of this specification.
4

 Specification 9 – Specification 9 alleges on October 14, 2017, I certified my time and attendance
record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I performed
8 hours of duty on October 5, 2017. The Agency alleges my certification was false in that I only
performed duty for 6.5 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was knowingly false
and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. I have attached a screenshot of our class
management software (Blackboard) with a list of announcements that I posted to students,
including class cancelations, (Appendix F). I want to mention here that on September 9, 2017, I
suffered a heart attack.1 Proof of this is provided in Appendix G. On this date – i.e. October 5,
2017 – my heartrate monitor detected an irregularity. As such, I canceled class and, as I was on
medical telework leave, I spent the day teleworking. I am not guilty of this specification.
Specification 19 – Specification 19 alleges on February 17, 2018, I certified my time and
attendance record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I
performed 8 hours of duty on February 6, 2018. The Agency alleges my certification was false in
that I only performed duty for 6 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was knowingly
false and made with the intent to mislead the Agency. On this date, the only thing I am guilty of is
telling a white lie. I did cancel class this day (see Appendix H) and, as such, I am not guilty of the
specification as set forth in the proposal letter. I did lie about the reason I canceled class. I told my
students that I was heading to the ER. In fact, I did not go to the ER. I was wearing a defibrillator
vest and it went crazy! However, instead of going to the ER, I simply rested at home and completed
a work deadline. As I did cancel class that day, I am not guilty of this specification.

1

After my heart attack on September 9, 2017, I was on a temporary medical telework plan. I was at home full time,
but working. I was – however – disabled from Specification 9 onwards.

5

 Specification 23 – Specification 23 alleges on March 31, 2018, I certified my time and attendance
record in TASNet, the CDC’s electronic time and attendance system, indicating that I performed
8 hours of duty on March 20, 2018. The Agency alleges my certification was false in that I only
performed duty for 6 hours on that date and – as such – my certification was knowingly false and
made with the intent to mislead the Agency. On March 19, 2018, I was placed on administrative
leave. I was told to go home, not touch work, and not log into the system. My badge was taken
from me and – in addition to the fact the I could not access the system – I was also not permitted
to step foot on campus. I was told – verbally – that my administrative leave would start on March
20. Later, I was told conflicting information; specifically, that my administrative leave would
actually start on March 21, 2 days after I was told to hand in my badge and not access any CDC
systems. As noted above, I did not have access to the system to even enter my time. The Agency
put administrative leave on my timesheet starting March 21. I am not guilty of this specification
as I was told the administrative leave would start Tuesday, March 20 and at this time, I did not
even have access to the system to implement my time.
I hope you will take my detailed response to the charge and specifications – both the
background information as well as the rebuttal evidence I provided for individual specifications into account before you issue your decision. For the reasons articulated above, I do not believe this
behavior warrants a removal.
Charge 2:

Failure to Obtain Prior Approval to Engage in Outside Activities

Based on the proposal letter, it appears this charge pertains to the allegation that I failed
to obtain the requisite approval to engage in outside activities that related to my official duties on
3 separate occasions. I will address each specification in turn.

6

 Specification 1: Let me start out by saying I did get approval in 2012. In 2012, I submitted
ethics approval for outside activity and was approved, which is included as part of the Agency’s
evidence file. Specifically, the evidence indicates the approval was valid until June 5, 2013. I
admit that as I read the information now, the form does state that the approval was for 1 year and
that I had to renew the approval form every year. At the time, I did not know or realize this. No
one from the Agency ever reached out to me and told me that I had to renew the form. Judith
Qualters was aware the book was ongoing and I even gave her a copy of the book when it was
completed. Judith never mentioned the renewal form or process. I will admit that I made a
mistake and I acknowledge that this initial form was only for 1 year, but I do want it on the
record that I – in no way – intended to deceive the Agency
Specification 2: Specification 2 alleges I failed to obtain approval prior to my work as a co-author
of a chapter in the book entitled Foundations of Global Health between July 22, 2016, and its
publication date on March 2, 2018. I simply did not know – and was not told – I needed outside
approval because I was actually representing the CDC in the book chapter. I did discuss this matter
with my supervisor at the time, Paul Garbe. Specifically, I told him I had been approved by these
authors and that I wanted to write a chapter. He told me to “go ahead” and gave me verbal approval
during a 1 on 1 meeting. I was never told to get approval. I even used my official title, which I
could not have done if I was not in my official capacity
I want to add that Stasia Widerynski was a young scientist who needed a publication and
did not have one at this time. I invited her to work with me on the chapter for the book. I honestly
thought I was doing her a favor.
I do not believe I am guilty of this specification. I was under the impression I was
representing the CDC in the book chapter, my immediate supervisor gave me verbal approval, and
7

 my supervisor never once mentioned I needed outside approval. I even used my official title. I
truly do not understand how I can be guilty of failure to obtain prior approval to engage in outside
activities as the charge relates to this specification.
Specification 3: I teach this class – i.e. Emory University’s “Advanced Seminar in Climate Change
and Health: Research and Policy” – every year, usually during the Fall semester. This specification
refers to the Spring course for 2018. I did submit an approval request to teach (see Appendix I) for
the Fall ’17 and Spring of 2018. On the EPATS 520 form, I listed the dates as 8/1/2017 through
7/31/2018, to cover both the fall and spring semesters.
For recurring activities, such as courses I teach each year, I can use a previous year’s 520 form
and auto-populate the information, as I have done for many years. When I repopulated the form
in July of 2017 I modified the information to include both the fall and spring semesters, as this had
changed from previous years. All the information on the form was the same except for a text box,
which contained a short narrative description that was auto-populated from the previous year’s
form, “Teaching a class at Emory Fall 2016.” I had gone in and updated the text to, “Fall 2017 and
Spring 2018,” however, I believe I hit “submit” before I hit “save.” It seems the text box never
properly updated. As such, the text box included the incorrect dates – stating that I would be
teaching a class in 2016, when in fact we were already in July of 2017. I did alter the dates in the
date box to include the proper dates. I understand this is a very long-winded and complex
explanation, but I do want you to understand what happened in this case. The final step was that
the ethics official approved my submission with a rubber stamp. The official should have come
back to me and pointed out that my dates described in the text box for “II Outside Activity
Information, 1. Nature of Outside Activity” did not match. They failed to do so and as such, the
form was submitted with incorrect text description that did not properly match up. Again, this was

8

 simply a minor administrative error. There was no intent to deceive the Agency whatsoever. I did
include the correct dates in the required field.
Again, please take my detailed response to the charge and specifications into account
before you issue your decision on this charge. For the reasons articulated above, I do not believe
this behavior warrants a removal.

Charge 3:

Misuse of Position

Based on the proposal letter, it appears the Agency is alleging I acted improperly on the
following dates: September 26, 2016; September 27, 2017; July 2017; and October 30, 2017. I
will address each specification in turn.
Specification 1: On or about September 26, 2016, I was not teaching the Rollins School of Public
Health, class EH-582, “Global Climate Change: Health Impacts and Response” – the course cited
in specification 1 under charge 3. As such, I absolutely cannot be guilty of this specification.
Specification 2: This specification refers to the same incident alleged in specification 2 under
charge 2 – addressed above. As I explained above, I honestly thought I was doing Stasia a favor.
Again, she was a young employee without a publication – and in need of a publication. I was
approved by my supervisor and in my official capacity to author this chapter. I even used my
official title, which I could not have done if I was not in my official capacity. Everything was
approved by my supervisor Paul Garbe. As I see it, I had the opportunity to give a young scientist
her first publication and I felt I was doing her a favor.
Specification 3: Specification 3 refers to a course – Climate Adaptation – which was to be
developed in concert with Yale University. I want to start out by providing some relevant

9

 background information about this course. GAO conducted a survey/audit in 2014-15. The purpose
of the exercise was to find out what was going on regarding climate and health and what the
Agency could do better. Basically, the study aimed to find out what we were “missing” and what
we could improve on. We received a recommendation indicating we could improve our
communication activities regarding climate and health. Based on this recommendation, we
developed a strategic plan regarding communication pertaining to climate change. Specifically,
we were working with Yale University to provide subject matter experts in development of
instructional course materials. I discussed everything with my supervisor Paul Garbe and was
approved to conduct this work, which was part of my official duties. I am simply not guilty of this
specification as my supervisor approved this work as part of my official duties.
Specification 4: On or about October 30, 2017, I was not teaching the Rollins School of Public
Health, class EH-582, “Global Climate Change: Health Impacts and Response” – the course cited
in specification 4 under charge 3. As such, I am not guilty of this specification.
I am requesting you – as the deciding official - take my detailed response to the charge and
specifications into account before you issue your decision on this charge. For the reasons
articulated above, I am not guilty of this charge.
Charge 4:

Conduct Unbecoming to a Federal Employee

Based on the proposal letter, it appears the Agency is alleging I acted improperly on the
following dates: June 19-23, 2016 and October 30 – November 2, 2016. I will address each
specification in turn.
Specification 1: Specifications 1 and 2 both pertain to a June 2016 trip to Alaska. I will start by
providing some relevant background information about the trip. June 19-23, I was on travel in
Alaska. I attended the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists (CSTE). I attended the
10

 CSTE conference for the full duration, from June 19-21, 2016. I did not leave the conference to
sightsee. Once the CSTE meeting concluded on June 21, I left Anchorage on the evening of 6/21
with a funded collaborator to conduct a site visit to Barrow, AK. I flew back to Anchorage on June
22. The next available flight to Atlanta did not leave until June 23rd. The morning of June 23d,
out local collaborator Dr David Driscoll from the University of Alaska, Anchorage suggested that,
since our flight did not leave for Atlanta until 7pm, that we spend the day discussing next steps in
the project and also that we visit a potential new site of the town of Whittier. So, David invited
me, Katie Conlon, and Ari Managan to accompany him. During this day-long visit, we discussed
collaboration, work activities, and did some sightseeing along the way. Katie did not attend this
trip because she had a migraine. We returned to Anchorage the evening of June 23rd to catch our
flight home to Atlanta. Please let me make it clear that the conference was over at this point and
that we spent the day conducting official business with a local collaborator. Please see Appendix
J
Specification 2: The facts surrounding this specification are identical to those above. However,
the Agency alleges I “revealed” to another “colleague” that I had been “high” during the visit to
Whittier with our local collaborator (referenced above). This is absolutely false. First, I want to
point out this colleague is not identified. The Agency has failed to identify a single person who
has made this false allegation against me. Second, in the materials relied upon, there is simply a
typed Word document that is largely redacted with some unsubstantiated allegations listed. It is
unclear who authored this document or what weight it carries. It is my understanding that in a
proper and unbiased investigation, witnesses should give signed statements with a penalty of
perjury. This was clearly not done in this case. David, who was on the trip with me, never witnessed
me “high’ and has stated so. Please see Appendix J. Finally, if the Agency was suspicious that I

11

 had used drugs, they could have drug tested me. They failed to do so. For the reasons articulated
above, I am absolutely not guilty of this specification.
Specification 3: The final specification in this letter refers to a meeting for the American Public
Health Association in Denver, Colorado. Prior to arriving at the meeting, we were e-mailed a table
of all presentations related to climate change (please see Appendix K). The table noted that my
presentation was scheduled for Tuesday at 10:30am, this was an error on APHA’s part. In truth,
my presentation was actually scheduled for Monday at 10:30am (please see Appendix L). On
Monday morning, at about 10am, I was in my hotel room working on my presentation when I got
a text from my colleague Paul Schramm asking where I was and warning me that my session was
about to begin. He told me the table that was e-mailed was wrong and that the official program for
the event had my presentation listed on Monday. I immediately got dressed and hustled over. I
made it to the conference room at approximately 10:45am and made my presentation in full. When
I entered the conference room, I sat next to a colleague and explained why I was 15 minutes late.
I was neither hungover nor still drunk. My colleague has provided a letter attesting to this fact (see
Appendix M). Rather, I was merely late because the e-mail with the table of presentations was
incorrect. Other than this inaccurate allegation, the Agency has presented no evidence of the
“facts” set forth in their specification. I am clearly not guilty of this specification.
Please take my response to the charge and specifications into account before you issue your
decision on this charge. For the reasons articulated above, I do not believe I am guilty of this
charge.
One of the things that should be considered in an action as serious as this is whether it
would promote the efficiency of the federal service. That is, the proposed penalty must be

12

 reasonable and it should take into account several factors. For clarification purposes, I have
addressed these individually below.
The nature and seriousness of the offense, and its relation to the employee’s duties, position, and
responsibilities, including whether the offense was intentional or technical or inadvertent, or was
committed maliciously or for gain, or was frequently repeated;
Response: As indicated earlier, I do not believe I should be terminated based on the allegations set
forth in the proposal letter. None of the actions that I have admitted to, to include my errors in
timekeeping and updating my outside activity requests were committed intentionally, or in any
way to deceive. These were inadvertent errors that I regret. I have been forthcoming with my
supervisors on all of my outside activities and received, and intended to receive, permission on
each occasion. The allegations surrounding my abuse of position and conduct unbecoming to a
federal employee have been addressed in my statement and are in no way accurate or true.

The employee’s job level and type of employment, including supervisory or fiduciary role, contacts
with the public, and prominence of the position;
Response: I am the Chief of the Climate and Health Program, National Center for Environmental
Health (NCEH), and a Title 5, GS-15 employee. I am the lead subject matter expert for CDC on
climate change and health. I have been employed at CDC for 16 ½ years serving in numerous
scientific roles. I have a wide presence in the scientific community on issues surrounding
climate change and health and have authored numerous federal reports on the subject. I currently
serve as supervisor for the Climate and Health Program and have done so since 2009.

The employee’s past disciplinary record;
Response: I have never been issued a formal or informal disciplinary action in all my years of
dedicated service. Not once. My record is spotless.

13

 The employee’s past work record, including length of service, performance on the job, ability to
get along with fellow workers, and dependability;
Response: I have been at the CDC since July 1, 2012 – 16 years, 5 months. I did serve in the
military as a Uniformed Officer, O-4, in the US Public Health Service, beginning on July 1, 2002.
I was medically separated on July 1, 2004 for rheumatoid arthritis. I stated in civil service as a GS12, was promoted to a GS-13 in 2005, promoted to a GS-14 in 2015, and promoted to a GS-15 in
February 2017. My performance has never been below a 4.2 on a 5-point scale and has ranged
from fully successful to exceptional. I have never been reprimanded for conduct including my
ability to work with others. All of my performance evaluation have indicated strength in leadership
abilities, proper conduct, and attention to administrative responsibilities, as reflected in my
performance rating as well as my promotions.

The effect of the offense upon the employee’s ability to perform at a satisfactory level and its effect
upon supervisors’ confidence in the employee’s work ability to perform assigned duties;
Response: As indicated earlier, I am not guilty of these charges and these mere speculations should
not define my ability to do my job successfully. As noted above, my performance has never been
below a 4.2 on a 5-point scale and has ranged from fully successful to exceptional.

Consistency of the penalty with those imposed upon other employees for the same or similar
offenses;
Response: I believe there may be other agency employees who have been charged with similar
charges and not removed. I do not believe that a few errors in timekeeping, nor failing to update
an Outside Activity Request, after one was submitted and approved, warrant removal from my
position. I have served faithfully and honorably in my position at CDC for over 16 years, never
having been reprimanded or disciplined, and would hope that my many years of good service
would be taken into consideration in the application of any penalty.

Consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties;

14

 Response: The applicable table of penalties does not require a removal in this case. Being the first
time that I have been accused of any wrongdoing, with no history of disciplinary actions, I would
beg for leniency and a penalty other than removal.

The notoriety of the offense or its impact upon the reputation of the agency;
Response: I did not, nor ever would, intentionally act in a manner that harms the reputation of our
agency. I have great pride in the work of this Agency and have always strived to represent it in the
most honorable way.

The clarity with which the employee was on notice of any rules that were violated in committing
the offense, or had been warned about the conduct in question;
Response: I have never encountered a situation such as this one. I have never been warned of
inconsistencies in my timekeeping prior to this notice, and have never been warned about my
conduct or performance of my duties prior to this action to remove.

The potential for the employee’s rehabilitation;
Response: As I indicated earlier, I did not engage in this alleged misconduct as stated and given
the fact that in all of my years of dedicated service I have not had any discipline, the chances of
“rehabilitation” are extremely high. I admit potential sloppiness in my time-keeping and updating
of Ethics Approval requests, and commit to making sure these don’t occur again in the future.

Mitigating circumstances surrounding the offense such as unusual job tensions, personality
problems, mental impairment, harassment, or bad faith, malice or provocation on the part of
others involved in the matter; and
Response: At the time these allegations and accusations came to light, there were two ongoing
incidents that should be considered:

15

 The first incident surrounds a disagreement between myself and one of my junior scientists, Dr.
Kathryn Conlon. In the early spring of 2018, Dr Conlon was expressing frustration at her pay
grade as she had come on board as a GS-11 health scientist, Title 42. While she was producing
high quality work, that of a higher grade, she had lamented that her pay grade did not reflect that.
I informed her that she was graded by a Title 42 peer review board and there was nothing I could
do to elevate her grade, she would have to wait a year before being re-graded, something she was
upset at and stated numerous times in conversation. Also, in January of 2018, she received a
“Exceeds expectations” rating for her 2017 performance review, one that I thought she deserved.
She complained to me and my Deputy, Kenneth Archer, numerous times that she felt that she
deserved an “Outstanding” evaluation based upon the fact that she was a GS-11 performing the
duties of a higher grade.

I responded that her self-evaluation, and my evaluation did not

substantiate a higher rating and that it would not be accepted by the reviewing official. I offered
her the chance to re-write her evaluation and submit evidence of her higher rating, but she refused
to do so. I believe that many of the allegations set forth, especially concerning the Misuse of
Position and Conduct Unbecoming with her and were motivated by an act of revenge. Dr Conlon
has since left the Agency.
The second concerns Deneise Florence Turner. Ms Turner has been an underperforming employee
with numerous issues involving her conduct and performance. As stated earlier, and in a letter
submitted by my Deputy, Kenneth Archer, Ms Turner was in the process of receiving significant
disciplinary action at the time of these allegations. This is well documented and known to
management and Human Resources. Ms Turner has stated verbally that she has the capacity and
motivation to retaliate if actions were taken against her and I believe that she has done so in this
case.

The adequacy and effectiveness of alternative sanctions to deter such conduct in the future by the
employee or others.
Response:
Many of the incidents referenced in the proposal letter are not accurate or true and a removal is
too severe of a penalty in this case. That is, management can effectively accomplish future

16

 compliance with regards to this particular conduct issue with a penalty that is a lot less severe than
a removal. Alternative discipline other than removal would yield the same outcome for the agency.

I believe the deciding management official has significant discretion with regards to the range of
penalties in this matter. My alleged behavior is not of the kind that is not correctable and I sincerely
hope that you will give due consideration to all the mitigating factors that I have mentioned in my
response and render a decision that is consistent with our established table of penalties.
I am an honest individual who has had an excellent work record. I have over 16 years of
federal service and I have never had a bad performance rating. Nor have I had any formal discipline
of any sort. After repeatedly reviewing this case in detail, I simply could not believe how the
proposing official could reach this conclusion based on the evidence that was presented. This
reasonably leads me to believe that this is being motivated by more than just the facts that were
presented to me in this case. I want to point out 2 specific factors that I think played a role in this
proposal letter.
First, in the Summer of 2016, we planned a large meeting at the CDC – a Climate and
Health Summit – for February 2017. We had the meeting planned and the keynote speaker was Al
Gore. We were told we needed to cancel meeting in November 2016 – after the election – as the
incoming administration was hostile toward climate change. The Agency wanted me to send out a
letter canceling the meeting and I said no. I strongly believed – and believe today – the decision to
cancel the meeting undermined scientific credibility. A decision that I stand by today. The Agency
sent out an announcement without my name on it, which garnered national press. During meetings
with U.S. Senators, I was ordered to not say “climate change” and to use other language. My access
to the media was stopped. I was no longer allowed to respond to media requests and I was not
17

 permitted to participate in speaking engagements. This all started in February/March 2017.
Essentially, the order was to “shut up” about climate change. I feel this order undermines science
and my job as a scientist.
I want to bring up another “factor” that I believe contributed to this proposal letter.
During a meeting in February 2018 with Lori Johnson (the deputy division director), Pat Brycee
made the following comment to me: “Considering your heart attack, can you do that job?” The
comment was made in the following context: the Agency was offering me a “promotion” (i.e. a
new set of duties). John Decker attended the meeting as well and was a witness to this comment.
I am hopeful that you will give due consideration to my rather detailed response above
and conclude that this proposed action is not warranted. I have provided a lot of documentation
in support of my position – I am respectfully requesting that you review the attached
documentation thoroughly. If you need additional information or clarification concerning any
of the matters referenced above, please inform my attorney and we will be happy to provide
the same. Thank you.

Sincerely,

George Luber, PhD

18

 November 15, 2018

To: George Luber
From: Kenneth Archer
HE: Timesheets
George,

In reference to vour time sheets being altered by someone else, it is possible that the time clerk has the
ability to do so. F. Denise Turner is the assigned time clerk for the Climate and Health program at CDC.

Ms. Turner has the responsibilitv to review all staff timesheets for accuracv. Ms. Turner has the
authority to make changes to timesheets and had made changes on occasion when instructed by you or
mvself. There have been several occasions when Ms. Turner has not followed instructions to either add
leave to timesheets or contact individuals to update their timesheets and submit. On several occasions, I
have instructed Ms. Turner to add leave to staff member?s timesheet who notified me of their absence,
onlv to discover during my review, that she did not enter the leave. I would then have to enter the leave
myself in order to submit the leave bv the deadline.

For the past two vears, we have had performance and conduct issues with Ms. Turner and we were
counseling her on both. Ms. Turner?s poor performance was documented in her previous official
evaluations. 0n manv of these, she received low ratings in the element related to timekeeping.

Before she was assigned to The Climate and Health program, Ms. Turner was the Administrative
Assistant for the Division Director and Deputv Director, Ms. Turner had access to their credit ca rd
information and other personal data. It was reported to me that she had made statements to other
administrative staff that she could "mess up" someone's credit if she wanted to, due to her access to
personal and private information.

It is therefore my opinion that she very well could have removed leave deliberately or not recorded
leave on vour timesheets after being instructed to do so, due to poor work performance.

     

Kenneth Archer, De tv Director

Appendix A, Pg. 1

Carlson 
Wagonlit I bimTlIM?l.



 
 
   
 

Your Itinerary

 

Trip on Oct 08, 2014 Locator: CDANRK Date: Sep 18, 2014
Traveler GEORGE EDWARD LUBER - 0U9FUA
NGMS GOV
SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
AUTOMATION

Customer Number 
Agent GT

 

48 HOUR AUTO CANCELLATION - DUE TO RECENT CHANGES
IN THE FY13 GOVERNMENT CITY PAIR PROGRAM CPP YOUR
AIR RESERVATION IS SUBJECT TO CANCELLATION BY THE
AIRLINES IF NOT TICKETED AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR

TO SCHEDULED DEPARTURE.

DID YOU KNOW WE CAN ALSO BOOK YOUR HOTELS 
AND RENTAL CARS 

DOMESTIC 28.50USD 31.49 EFF 11/12/13
INTERNATIONAL 37.75 38.60 EFF 11/12/13

ONLY 17.75USD 16.72 EFF 11/12/13

 

 

Wednesday, October 08, 2014 Con?rmation HQUNFG
.l Flight DELTA AIR LINES INC 2238
DEPARTURE ARRIVAL
ATLANTA, GA 
1:20 PM, Oct 08, 2014 3:03 PM, Oct 08, 2014
Status Con?rmed
Class Coach Class - 
Duration 01:43 (Non-stop)
Equipment Airbus Industrie 320
Meal Service None
Reserved Seats 9C
Notes DEP-SOUTH TERMINAL

ARR-TERMINAL 

 

Friday, October 10, 2014 Con?rmation HQUNF6
.l Flight DELTA AIR LINES INC 1639
DEPARTURE ARRIVAL
ATLANTA, GA
1:00 PM, Oct 10, 2014 2:57 PM, Oct 10, 2014
Status Con?rmed
Class Coach Class - 
Duration 01:57 (Non?stop)
Equipment McDonnell Douglas Jet
Meal Service None
Reserved Seats 31C
Notes DEP-TERMINAL 

ARR-SOUTH TERMINAL

 

 

 

Name Invoice Ticket 1 Date Base Tax 1 Tax 2 Tax 3 Total
USD 282.80 21.20US 8.002P 20.20XT 332.20
Total Amount 332.20

Form of Payment: 
Appendix B, Pg. 1

GENERAL INFORMATION
EACH TRAVELER LISTED IN THIS ITINERARY AGREES TO
THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS WHICH ARE PART OF THIS
TRANSACTION AS SET FORTH IN THE AGENTS WEBSITE AT
...... WWW.SATOTRAVEL.COM/CONTENT/TERMSITIN.HTM .....
....................................................
FOR INFORMATION ON THE TSA SECURE FLIGHT PROGRAM ***
GO TO WWW.TSA.GOV ***
YOUR LOCAL OFFICE IS ****** M4NC *******
FOR NON EMERGENCY TRAVEL RESERVATIONS PLEASE CALL
THE LOCAL OFFICE DURING NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS
TOLL FREE NUMBER 866-848-3831 MON-FRI 8AM-8PM EST
FOR AFTER HOURS EMERGENCY SERVICE CALL THE ABOVE
NUMBER AND FOLLOW THE PROMPTS
INTERNATIONAL COLLECT NUMBER IS 210-877-3255
**************************************************
CONTRACT CARRIER CITY PAIR FARES DO NOT REQUIRE
ADVANCE PURCHASE
ALL OTHER FARES MAY REQUIRE ADVANCE PURCHASE
AND ARE NOT GUARANTEED UNTIL TICKETED.
PLEASE BE PREPARED TO SHOW A GOVERNMENT ISSUED PICTURE
ID IN ORDER TO CHECK IN AND BOARD YOUR FLIGHT.
IN SOME INSTANCES WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO OBTAIN
PRE RESERVED SEAT ASSIGNMENTS. IF THIS IS THE CASE
PLEASE RECEIVE SEAT ASSIGNMENT AT GATE CHECK IN.
--------------------------------------------PLEASE VISIT WWW.CARLSONWAGONLIT.COM/AIRLINEBAGGAGEFEES
FOR BAGGAGE FEE INFORMATION. CHECK OPERATING CARRIER
FOR ALLOWANCE IF TRAVELING ON CODE SHARE FLIGHT.
--------------------------------------------.
CWTSATOTRAVEL CAN BOOK YOUR HOTEL ACCOMODATIONS. WE CAN ASSIST IN KEEPING COSTS
WITHIN PER DIEM AT A FEMA APPROVED PROPERTY, GUARANTEE YOUR RESERVATION FOR
LATE ARRIVAL, AND EVEN CHECK FOR A ROOM AT YOUR FAVORITE HOTEL AT LOW FEDROOM
OR CWTSATOTRAVEL GOVERNMENT RATES. ALL YOUR RESERVATIONS INCLUDED ON ONE
ITINERARY--AIR, CAR, AND HOTEL.
.
THANKS FROM YOUR CWTSATOTRAVEL TEAM!!!

Appendix B, Pg. 2

 ADVANTAGE - DEN
DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
23790 E. 78TH AVE

DENVER, CD 80249

PH: (800) 777-5500

LUBER, GEORGE
188 IW GLEN CIR
AVONDALE ESTATES, GA 30002-1752



Date: 09/17/201 6
Invoice Date: 09/17/2016

LUBER, GEORGE
188 IW GLEN CIR
AVONDALE ESTATES, GA 30002-1752
359-0200

License Information:

PO Number:

Agreement Number: 

 

Vehicle Number Vehicle Tvpe
PVF8678180 2015 TOYOTA SIENNA 8

Vehicle Plate

Date Rented Date Returned
09/11/2016 03:28 PM 09/17/2016 09:51 AM

 

1 Week(s) @30000

Charged 6 Day(s)

 

 

Description Amount
RATE CHARGE INCLUDED
ENERGY SURCHARGE 1.03
GOVERNMENT FEE 30.00
LDW GOVERNMENT BENEFIT 0.00
ONEWAY DROP CHARGE 0.00
CONCESSION FEE 36.78
STATE TAX 42.83
COUNTY RENTAL TAX 7.61
CFC 12.90
COLORADO ROAD FEE 12.00
Total Charges 443.15

Driver Total: 443.15

Driver Payments: 443.15

Tax ID: Net Due From Driver: 0.00

Please Make Check Payable To and Remit To:

ADVANTAGE RENT A CAR

DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
23790 E. 78TH AVE

DENVER, CO 80249

DUE UPON RECEIPT
Agreement Number: DEN-360239
LUBER. GEORGE

Please Pay This Amount: 0.00

Appendix C, Pg. 1

. .- . -- 

Inv- a I'l 



1' - -. Err-



 

II: 


vlnu 
C?r
--
.

 

Appendix D, Pg. 1

OmegaTravel.com

Federal Services
Hotel/Car/Air/Rail
855.326.5411 7A-10P EST
855326541 1 Emergency
A-2E6H-CDC

Monday, 14AUG 2017 12:30 PM EDT
Passengers: GEORGE EDWARD LUBER (TANUMOC26L)
Agency Record Locator: NSVT5P

>>ViewTrip
PreCheck

Airport Info
>>Federa  Travel Online

 

Please do not reply to this email. This is an unattended email box
Omega World Travel must be noti?ed within 24 hours regarding corrections. Thank you.

AIR Tuesday, 29AUG 2017

United Airlines

Operated By: REPUBLIC AIRLINES DBA UNITED Flight Number: 3523 Class: S-Coach/Economy
EXPRE

From: (ATL) Atlanta GA, USA Depart: 11:10 AM

To: (ORD) Chicago O'Hare IL, USA Arrive: 12:22 PM

Stops: Nonstop Duration: 2 hour(s) 12 minute(s)

Seats: 12C Status: CONFIRMED Miles: 600/ 960 KM
Equipment: EMBRAER EMB 170 MEAL: MEAL AT COST

DEPARTS ATL TERMINAL - ARRIVES ORD TERMINAL 2

Frequent Flyer Number:?

United Airlines Con?rmation number is ISEHQM
Check in on-Iine to obtain boarding pass: United
Click here for Baggage policies and fees: United

AIR Tuesday, 29AUG 2017

United Airlines Flight Number: 1280 Class: S-Coach/Economy
From: (ORD) Chicago O'Hare IL, USA Depart: 03:50 PM

To: (ANC) Anchorage AK, USA Arrive: 07:37 PM

Stops: Nonstop Duration: 6 hour(s) 47 minute(s)

Seats: 29C Status: CONFIRMED Miles: 2847 /4555 KM
Equipment: Boeing 737-800 Jet MEAL: FOOD TO PURCHASE

DEPARTS ORD TERMINAL 1 - ARRIVES ANC TERMINAL 

Frequent Flyer Number:?

NO HOTEL BOOKED FOR ANCHORAGE AK
United Airlines Con?rmation number is I5EHQM
Check in on-line to obtain boarding pass: United

Appendix E, Pg. 1
Page 1 of 4

 

 

Appendix E, Pg. 2
Page 2 0:4

 

 

Appendix E, Pg. 3
Page 3 of4

Appendix E, Pg. 4
Page 4 of 4

 

     

   

 

       

            

. .
In: El - 
my.

Cl. . aha-?Class lodzv. JouleAppendix F, Pg. 1

 

.


Mr. George Edwaxd Luber was treated for a myocardial infarction (heart attack) on
09/09/2017. He has been under the care of Dr. Laurence Sperling, Emory Cardiology,

.fu'nce 10/24/2017.


hum-cc Sperling, M.D., FACC, FACP, FAHA, FASPC
Km meeasor in Preventive Cardiology
Directotofthc Emory HeartDisease PreventionCenter

7 

 

(404) 778-2746 of?ce
(404) 778-2895 fax

Appendix G, Pg. 1


 

   

 

 

. .-- . . 12? IA
3 
IW - 
I. -"Inr- mun-.1; -n :1r- FIE
lu'. -

rm'u'r r  rm 1.1r I'm-1 I). my." 'wnrlirAppendix H, Pg. 1

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF OUTSIDE ACTIVITY
Standards of Ethical Conduct Regulation
HHS Supplemental Ethics Regulation
(5 CFR 2635.803, 5 CFR 5501.106(d))
DATE FILED

Initial Request

Revised Request

√

Renewal

06/01/2017

EMPLOYEE INFORMATION

I.
1. EMPLOYEE'S NAME (Last, First, MI)

George E. Luber
2. AGENCY (Operating/Staff Division)

(Subcomponent)

CDC/ATSDR

ONDIEH\NCEH\DEHHE\OD\CCP

3. TITLE OF POSITION

SUPV HEALTH SCIENTIST

4. GRADE/STEP

5. FEDERAL SALARY

15/04

$137,646.00

6. APPOINTMENT TYPE

√

7. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE FILING STATUS

PAS/PA

Non-Career SES

Career SES

GS

Title 42

Other

Schedule C

Commissioned

Public (SF 278)
Confidential (OGE 450)

√

None

8. OFFICE ADDRESS
STREET

4770 Buford Hwy
CITY

STATE

ZIP

Atlanta

GA

30341

9. OFFICE CONTACT INFORMATION
TELEPHONE

FAX

CELL

EMAIL

10. NAME OF IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR

Paul L. Garbe

11. TITLE OF SUPERVISOR

SUPERVISORY HEALTH SCIENTIS

12. SUPERVISOR CONTACT INFORMATION
TELEPHONE

FAX

CELL

EMAIL

PLG2@cdc.gov
AGENCY USE ONLY

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 1 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 1

 OUTSIDE ACTIVITY INFORMATION

II.

1. Nature of Outside Activity
Indicate the type of activity for which you request prior approval, and descr be fully the specific duties or services to be performed.
Professional or Consultative Activities
Other
Descr be:

√

Teaching, Speaking, Writing or Editing

Board Service

Expert Witness

Teaching course at Emory

I am requesting approval to teach an undergraduate course at Emory University on Global Environmental Change, Culture and
Health. The course will be offered in the Fall Semester 2016

If you will provide personal services or products directly to multiple clients, patients, customers, or others, as a self-employed individual or as an
independent contractor, alone or jointly with others, check the box below and specify the type of activity or business in which you propose to be
engaged, such as legal, medical, accounting, or sales (specify industry or economic sector) and identify any partners or others with whom you provide
services or products jointly. Estimate the total number of clients, patients, customers, or persons to whom you would provide services or products
during the activity period, rather than listing them in Part II, Item 2.
Self-Employed Activity

0 Clients/Customers

For activities involving teaching, speaking, or writing, provide a syllabus, outline, summary, synopsis, draft, or similar description of the content and
subject matter involved in the course, speech, or written product (including, if available, a copy of the text of any speech) and the proposed text of any
disclaimer that indicates that the views expressed do not necessarily represent the views of the agency or the United States. Check the applicable
boxes indicating that these materials are attached. If you are unable to provide this information, or will be delayed in submitting the attachments,
please explain below.

√

Subject Matter of Activity

Text of Disclaimer

Explain:

please see attachment (disclaimer to accompany course material; syllabus

2. Outside Employer or Other Entity
Identify the outside employer or other person for whom or organization for which the proposed activity will be performed or conducted. Give the name
and title of a contact person. In Items 3 and 4, provide address and contact information for the outside entity.
OUTSIDE ENTITY NAME

Emory University, Department of Anthropology
CONTACT PERSON

TITLE

Peter Brown

Professor

3. Outside Entity Address
STREET

207 Anthropology Bldg, 1557 Dickey Dr
CITY

STATE

ZIP

Atlanta

GA

30322

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 2 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 2

 OUTSIDE ACTIVITY INFORMATION (continued)

II.
4. Contact Information
TELEPHONE

FAX

(
CELL

EMAIL

antpjb@emory.edu
5. Location
Indicate the location where the activity or services will be performed.

Emory Univeristy, Anthropology Building, , Atlanta, GA, UNITED STATES

6. Travel
Indicate whether travel is involved, and if so, whether the transportation, lodging, meals, or per diem will be at your own expense or provided by the
outside entity in kind or through reimbursement. Describe arrangements and provide estimated costs of items to be furnished or reimbursed by the
outside entity.
Yes
At own Expense

√

In-Kind or Reimbursed

Estimated Amount

$

No

Describe:

Transportation:
Lodging:
Meals:
Per Diem:

7. Time
Provide details with respect to the duration, frequency, and timing of the activity. If your request for prior approval is granted, the approval is effective for
a period not to exceed one year from the date of approval. If you wish to continue an activity beyond the one year approval period, you must renew your
request no later than thirty days prior to the expiration of the period authorized.
a. Period Covered
From (mm/dd/yy):

b. Estimated Total Time Devoted to the Proposed Activity
Hours per Day
Days per Week
Weeks per Year

To (mm/dd/yy):

08/01/2017

07/31/2018

3

1

16

c. Will work be performed entirely outside of usual working hours?

√

Yes

No

(If "no," estimate the number of hours or days that you will be absent from work and indicate the type of leave to be
requested.)

8. Compensation
Indicate whether the activity is compensated, and if so, answer the questions below.

√

Yes

No

a. Method or Basis of Compensation (Check all boxes that apply)
Fee

Honorarium

Retainer

Non-Travel Related Expenses (describe)

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

√

Salary

Advance

Royalty

Stock

Stock Options

Other (specify)

PAGE 3 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 3

 OUTSIDE ACTIVITY INFORMATION (continued)

II.

b. Compensation Amount
Indicate the total amount of compensation to be received for the proposed activity for the period covered by this request. Do not include the amount
of any travel expenses to be provided by the outside entity that were reported in Part II, Item 6.

$5,000.00

c. Payor
If any compensation will be received from a payor other than the entity to which personal services will be provided, identify the payor and explain.

d. Funding Source
Indicate whether any compensation is derived from an HHS grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or other source of HHS funding or if the services
to be performed are related to an activity funded by HHS, regardless of the specific source of the compensation.
Yes (If "yes," describe)

√

No

e. Grantee, Contractor, or Other Status
For activities involving the provision of consultative or professional services, indicate whether the client, employer, or other person on whose behalf
the services are performed is receiving, or intends to seek, an HHS grant, contract, cooperative agreement, or other funding relationship.
Yes (If "yes," describe)

√

No

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 4 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 4

 OUTSIDE ACTIVITY INFORMATION (continued)

II.

f. Record of Prior Compensation from Same Source
Identify the source, activity, amount and date of any compensation received, or due for services performed, within the last six calendar years and the
current year through the date this request is submitted, from the person for whom or the organization with which the current work or activity will be
done (including any amount received or due from an agent, affiliate, parent, subsidiary, or predecessor of the proposed payor). This information must
be provided as to any outside activity performed for the person or organization that is the subject of this request for approval. Include any prior
activity that is the same or similar to the present request, as well as any unrelated activity involving the same source.

YEAR

SOURCE

ACTIVITY

AMOUNT $

DATE

Current

1

2

3

4

5

Emory Univ

Course Taught (Fall 2016)

5000.00 08/01/2016

Emory Univ

Course Taught (fall semester 2015)

5000.00 08/01/2015

Emory Univ

Course Taught (fall semester 2014)

5000.00 08/01/2014

Emory Univ

Course taught (spring semester 2013)

5000.00 05/01/2013

Emory Univ

Course Taught (fall semester 2012)

5000.00 12/01/2012

6

ADDITIONAL SPACE

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 5 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 5

 III.

OFFICIAL DUTY INFORMATION

1. Nature of Official Duties
Descr be the principal duties and responsibilities of your current position. You may attach a copy of your position description in lieu of providing the
description unless you currently have significant duties or assignments that are not reflected in that document.
Position Description Attached

My current position is as the Chief of the Climate and Health program at CDC. I manage a suite of research and non-research
copperative agreements dedicated to buildign capacity at state and local health departments to identify and adapt to the health
consequenses of climate change. I serve as the Agency's subject matter expert on this issue and provide consultation to other CDC
programs on this topic. My official duties also require supervision of a staff of 11 scientists and program managers.

2. Relationship of Official Duties to Outside Activity
Descr be any official duties that relate in any way to the proposed activity. If none, explain why.

My official duties require significant subject matter expertise on the relation between global environmental change and health; the topic
of this course. The experience and knowledge I have developed as a result of my official duties puts me in a position of enough
command of the literature to be able to teach on the subject. Aside from the subject matter of the course, my official duties do not
directly relate to the teaching of this course.

3. Effect of Official Duties on Outside Employer
In performing your official duties, explain how your actions or the matters upon which you may be called upon to work could affect the interests of the
person for whom or the organization for which the proposed activity will be performed. If the exercise of your official duties would not have such an
effect, explain why.

While the performance of my official duties provides me with some of the knowledge required to teach this course, the performance of
my official duties will not have any direct impact on the interest of the Emory University Department of Anthropology, for whom I will be
teaching this course. However, as this course will serve as simply a review of major issues on global environmental change, it will in
no way relate to or influence the performance of my official duties.

4. Assignments Involving Outside Employer
Descr be any official duty assignments or other interactions you have had that involve the person for whom or the organization for which the proposed
activity will be performed and indicate when such assignments or interactions occurred. If none, explain.

I have had no official interaction with the Department of Anthroplogy, or Dr Peter Brown, the director of the program for whom I'll be
teaching.

5.

CERTIFICATION

The undersigned employee certifies that the notices in Part VIII have been read and understood and that the statements made and information provided on
this form are true, complete, and correct to the best of the individual’s knowledge.
DATE

EMPLOYEE SIGNATURE (eSigned in EPATS)

George E. Luber
HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

06/01/2017
PAGE 6 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 6

 SUPERVISOR REVIEW

IV.

1. Summary of Applicable Law
An employee cannot undertake an outside activity that conflicts with the employee’s official duties. An activity conflicts with official duties: (a) if it is
prohibited by statute or regulation; or (b) if, under the standards in 5 CFR 2635.402 and 2635.502, it would require the employee’s recusal from matters
so central or critical to the performance of his or her official duties that the employee’s ability to perform the duties of his or her position would be
materially impaired. Such a recusal would l kely arise where the outside activity involves a person or entity that is regulated by, does business with,
receives grants or other benefits from, or is otherwise substantially impacted by the programs, policies, and operations of the employee’s agency, and
the employee normally would be involved personally and substantially in such matters on a frequent basis or as a principal duty. In addition, an activity
may be improper if the circumstances suggest that the employee received an outside business opportunity based on his or her official position or would
create the appearance of using public office for the private gain of an outside entity. An employee also must endeavor to avoid any actions that create
the appearance of a violation of law or the ethical standards. Special rules apply to activities involving fundraising, expert witness testimony, teaching,
speaking, writing, or editing, and activities with foreign entities. Certain categories of employees, such as those in FDA, NIH, and OGC, are subject to
component specific rules on outside activities. Refer to the Standards of Ethical Conduct, 5 CFR part 2635, subpart H, and the HHS Supplemental
Ethics Regulation, 5 CFR part 5501.

2. Supervisor’s Statement
Describe the extent to which the employee’s official duties are related to the proposed outside activity.

outside activity complements official duties

3. Recommendation
The undersigned supervisor, identified in Part I, Item 10, has reviewed the employee’s responses, obtained additional information where appropriate,
and recommends the following action:

√

Recommend Approval
If this box is checked, the supervisor understands that if the outside activity is approved, the employee may be disqualified from performing official
duties that involve or affect any outside entity with which the employee has an outside employment, consulting, or similar relationship. If the activity
constitutes employment or service as an officer, director, or trustee, or in another fiduciary role, the recusal obligation may extend not only to
government matters that specifically involve or affect the outside entity, but to those matters that affect generally the industry or economic sector in
which the outside entity operates. The supervisor concludes that any work assignments involving specific or general matters from which the
employee will be recused can be reassigned to another individual and are not so central or critical to the performance of the employee’s official
duties that the employee’s ability to perform the duties of his or her position would be materially impaired.
Recommend Disapproval
If this box is checked, explain the reason(s) in the additional space provided on the last page of this form.

SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE (eSigned in EPATS)

DATE

Paul L. Garbe

06/01/2017

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 7 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 7

 MANAGEMENT / COMMITTEE / OTHER INTERMEDIATE REVIEW

V.
1. Name of Reviewer

2. Title of Reviewer

3. Reviewer Contact Information
TELEPHONE

FAX

CELL

EMAIL

4. Organization

5. Committee
If the reviewer acts on behalf of a committee, identify the body and record any dissenting views in the "Comments" below.

6. Review
Review the employee’s answers and indicate whether you concur in the supervisor’s recommendation. Explain your reason(s) in the space below. Sign
and date the form in the space provided.
Concur
Nonconcur
REVIEWER SIGNATURE (eSigned in EPATS)

DATE

7. Comments

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 8 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 8

 AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL REVIEW

VI.
1. Name of Agency Ethics Official

Allerick O. Knight

2. Title of Agency Ethics Official

Ethics Program Manager

3. Agency Ethics Official Contact Information
TELEPHONE

FAX

(770) 488-8971

(770) 488-8990

CELL

EMAIL

YVG1@cdc.gov
4. Organization

CDC\OD\OCOO\HRO\OD\ECA
5. Ethics Review
Review the employee’s answers and the supervisor’s recommendation. Consider the assessment of any management official, committee, or other
intermediate reviewer. Based on the information provided and applying the standard for approval prescribed in 5 CFR 5501.106(d)(5), indicate whether
the activity can be approved or permission must be denied. Explain your reason(s) in the space below and descr be any actions deemed necessary to
ensure compliance with applicable ethics laws. Sign and date the form in the space provided.
Request as described may be approved

√

Request may be approved subject to conditions noted in Comments Section
Request as described must be denied
Other disposition noted in Comments Section

AGENCY ETHICS OFFICIAL SIGNATURE (eSigned in EPATS)

DATE

Allerick O. Knight

06/14/2017

6. Comments

wrote:
The employee has been advised of the following CONDITIONS: (1) When participating in teaching, speaking, or writing an
employee may include or permit the inclusion of his/her title or position as one of the several biographical details when
such information is given to identify him/her in connection with the teaching, speaking, or writing activity, provided that
his/her title is given no more prominence than other significant biographical details. Example: Dr. Karen Johnson is
teaching a research course at a local university, and is introduced as follows: Dr. Karen Johnson graduated cum laude from
the University of Maryland with a degree in biochemistry, and completed Medical School at Johns Hopkins University in
Baltimore. Following three years in the military, he began his career as an epidemiologist at the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, currently working in the Center of Global Health. She has taught several courses in basic research
methods, chemistry, and biochemistry. (2) An employee may use, or permit the use of, his/her title in connection with an
article published in a scientific or professional journal, provided that the title or position is accompanied by a reasonably
prominent disclaimer stating that the views expressed in the article are the employee's and do not represent the
Government. Example of Disclaimer: Dr. Karen Johnson works with another faculty member as part of his teaching at the
local university (see above example). She and the other faculty member jointly prepare an article for publication in a
scientific journal. She may use his official Government title as in the example for an Official Duty Activity but it must be
accompanied by the following disclaimer, prominently placed so readers see it: Dr. Johnson contributed to this article in his
personal capacity. The views expressed are his own and do not necessarily represent the views of the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention or the United States Government. (3) An employee who is ordinarily addressed using a general
term of address, such as "The Honorable," or a rank, such as "Admiral" may use or permit the use of that term of address
or rank in connection with the outside teaching, speaking, or writing. Example: Dr. Karen Johnson is a US Public Health
Service Commissioned Officer, at the rank of Rear Admiral. Colleagues normally address her as "Admiral Johnson." When
Dr. Johnson is engaged in an outside activity, individuals interacting with her as part of that outside activity may also call
her Admiral. (4)There can be no use of government time, non-public information, property, email, phone number or address
(Note: all correspondence/contact with outside organization should be through home address/telephone); or other
government resources. Employee must inform the outside entity of applicable conditions. PLEASE NOTE: Approval of this
outside activity does not release you from a continuing legal obligation to disqualify yourself from official assignments
affecting your outside employer or the entity to which you are providing personal services. While performing this approved
outside activity, any actions taken in conflict with applicable ethics laws may subject you to criminal prosecution or
disciplinary proceedings. Please submit renewal for outside activity 45 days before expiration date.

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 9 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 9

 VII, AGENCY DESIGNEE (APPROVING OFFICIAL) DETERMINATION

1. Name of Agency Designee

2. Title of Agency Designee

 

 

 

John C. Tibbs MANAGEMENT OFFICER
3. Agency Designee Contact Information
TELEPHONE FAX
(770) 488-3148
CELL EMAIL
JGT2@cdc.gov

 

 

4. Organization



 

5. Decision

Based on the foregoing statements and any supporting documentation, the recommendations of the supervisor and, if applicable, any management
of?cial, committee, or other intermediate reviewer, and the review by the agency ethics of?cial, the disposition indicated below constitutes my written
determination, pursuant to 5 CFR 2635.803 and 5 CFR 5501 .106(d), that the request to engage in the identi?ed outside activity is:

 

EH Approved
[3 Approved subject to conditions
Denied
AGENCY DESIGNEE (APPROVING OFFICIAL) SIGNATURE (eSigned in EPA TS) DATE
John C. Tibbs 06/15/2017

 

 

6. Specified Conditions (If any)

 

7. Comments

 

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 10 OF 16 Appendix I, Pg. 10

 NOTICES

APPROVAL OF AN OUTSIDE ACTIVITY DOES NOT RELEASE YOU FROM A CONTINUING LEGAL OBLIGATION TO DISQUALIFY
YOURSELF FROM OFFICIAL ASSIGNMENTS AFFECTING YOUR OUTSIDE EMPLOYER OR THE ENTITY TO WHICH YOU ARE
PROVIDING PERSONAL SERVICES. WHILE PERFORMING AN APPROVED OUTSIDE ACTIVITY. ANY ACTIONS TAKEN IN
CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE ETHICS LAWS MAY SUBJECT YOU TO CRIMINAL PROSECUTION OR DISCIPLINARY

PROCEEDINGS.

Caution. When you consult, teach, speak, write, serve on a board,
or work for a company, organization, or other entity outside your
government job, your relationship with that outside entity has
certain legal and ethical consequences. The approval of an outside
activity does not mean that you are free of con?icts of interest. You
must still follow all substantive ethics requirements after approval is
granted. Consult the ethics regulations at 5 CFR 2635.802 and
5501 .106(d)(5) which are reprinted below.

Conflicts Resolution. An approved HHS Form 520 does not signify
that you need not be concerned about con?icts of interest. Under
the law, con?icts of interest arising out of outside employment or
service in a ?duciary position can be resolved in advance in only
three ways: (1) you can inform your supervisor and disqualify
yourself from participating in a con?icting government matter (often
called a recusal); (2) you can seek, if certain legal requirements
are satis?ed, a separate legal document from your appointing
of?cial or designee that speci?cally permits you to work on the
government matter (known as a waiver), or (3) you can resign from
either your government or outside job. Outside relationships that
fall short of actual employment or a ?duciary role pose similar
appearance concerns that must be addressed under procedures in
5 CFR 2635.502.

Effect of Prior Approval. The outside activities prior approval
process has very limited purposes. When a reviewer approves an
HHS Form 520 for your outside activity, two fundamental
assessments are being made, which are discussed below. You
reasonably may rely on these speci?c determinations only if you
provided all relevant information on the form and the
circumstances under review do not thereafter change. You remain
responsible for the legal and ethical consequences of any change
in personal or business affairs or a change in your government
duties.

First, based on the information which you provide, the reviewer
determines whether your proposed activity is plainly prohibited by
applicable statutes or regulations, including the provisions of the
ethical standards governing appearances of impropriety. For
example, if you want to lobby Federal agencies on behalf of a non-
pro?t organization that employs you, prior approval will be denied
because a criminal statute prohibits such representational
activities.

Second, assuming your proposed activity is not speci?cally
prohibited, the reviewer determines whether, under the
circumstances, approval should be denied for other reasons
speci?ed under the law. For example, the reviewer may deny
approval if the facts show that you used your government position
to obtain an outside compensated business opportunity or if the
activity would create the appearance that you are violating the law
or the ethical standards. Another common reason for denying
approval is that the outside activity may prevent you from handling
work that is expected of you. Because the outside activity may
cause you to have to disqualify yourself from a broad range of job
assignments, or even a few crucial projects, that will affect your
outside employer or the entity to which you provide personal
services, it may be impossible for you to discharge fully your
government duties.

 

 

If, however, your outside activity is approved, the reviewer has
determined that the matters in which you will not be allowed to
participate are not ?so central or critical to the performance of [your]
of?cial duties? that your ability to perform the duties of your position
would be materially impaired. In other words, you cannot work on a
government matter affecting your outside employer, but the reviewer
expects that you will be able to stay away from these assignments
and still do your job.

Recusal Obligations. When performing your Federal duties, you
must not participate in any government matter that will affect your
own self-interest in continuing your outside job or activity. For
example, you would have to disqualify yourself from participating in
any of?cial matter that might put your outside employer out of
business or seriously affect its ?nances, either positively or
negatively, so that the odds of your remaining employed are also
affected. In addition, when you work for an outside employer or
serve in a ?duciary role with an organization, the ?nancial interests
of that company or organization are considered to be your own. As a
result, if the company or organization has a ?nancial interest in how
a government matter will be resolved, you cannot work on that
matter. This means that you cannot work on a government matter
that involves or affects your outside employer as a speci?c party,
such as a contract, grant, audit, investigation, or litigation. The law
also requires you to stay away from government matters that are
larger in scope, such as deliberations and decisions on developing,
implementing, or enforcing statutes, regulations, policies, studies, or
proposals, that will have an effect on a large class of employers like
the one for which you work on the outside. For example, if you were
permitted to have an outside position as an employee of a hospital,
a drug company, or a nonpro?t organization, you could not
participate personally in any signi?cant way in a policy decision that
affects the ?nancial interests of the industry or organizational sector
in which these employers operate. Under certain limited
circumstances, a waiver for such ?particular matters of general
applicability? can be considered, if you notify your appointing of?cial
in advance and receive a written determination. Outside
relationships that fall short of actual employment or a ?duciary role
pose similar appearance concerns, but the recusal obligation is
limited to speci?c party matters.

Scope of Recusal. Although many employees understand the need
to disqualify themselves from participating in an of?cial matter that
affects their outside employer, they often believe erroneously that
they can pick and choose among the various aspects of a particular
matter and stay away only from the important decisions. Such
incomplete recusals will not protect you from a criminal con?ict of
interest violation. Unless a waiver, approved in advance, identi?es
speci?c permitted activities, you must refrain entirely and absolutely
from participating personally and substantially in a government
matter that affects your own ?nancial interest or that of an outside
employer. When you are involved signi?cantly in proposing,
planning, advising, deciding, or implementing some of?cial action,
and you do so individually or by actively directing subordinates, your
participation is personal and substantial.

 

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 11 OF 16

Appendix 1, Pg. 11

 NOTICES (continued)

EXCERPTS FROM THE STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH ANDTHE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES SUPPLEMENTAL AGENCY ETHICS REGULATIONS:

TITLE 5 CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

2635.802 Conflicting outside employment and activities.

An employee shall not engage in outside employment or any other
outside activity that con?icts with his of?cial duties. An activity
con?icts with an employee?s of?cial duties:

If it is prohibited by statute or by an agency supplemental
regulation; or

If, under the standards set forth in 2635.402 and 2635.502,
it would require the employee?s disquali?cation from matters so
central or critical to the performance of his of?cial duties that the
employee?s ability to perform the duties of his position would be
materially impaired.

Employees are cautioned that even though an outside activity may
not be prohibited under this section, it may violate other principles
or standards set forth in this part or require the employee to
disqualify himself from participation in certain particular matters
under either subpart or subpart of this part.

Example 1: An employee of the Environmental Protection Agency
has just been promoted. His principal duty in his new position is to
write regulations relating to the disposal of hazardous waste. The
employee may not continue to serve as president of a nonpro?t
environmental organization that routinely submits comments on
such regulations. His service as an of?cer would require his
disquali?cation from duties critical to the performance of his of?cial
duties on a basis so frequent as to materially impair his ability to
perform the duties of his position.

Example 2: An employee of the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration who was and is expected again to be instrumental
in formulating new OSHA safety standards applicable to
manufacturers that use chemical solvents has been offered a
consulting contract to provide advice to an affected company in
restructuring its manufacturing operations to comply with the OSHA
standards. The employee should not enter into the consulting
arrangement even though he is not currently working on OSHA
standards affecting this industry and his consulting contract can be
expected to be completed before he again works on such
standards. Even though the consulting arrangement would not be
a con?icting activity within the meaning of 2635.802, it would
create an appearance that the employee had used his of?cial
position to obtain the compensated outside business opportunity
and it would create the further appearance of using his public of?ce
for the private gain of the manufacturer.

 

 

Standard for approval.

Approval shall be granted only upon a determination that the outside
employment or other outside activity is not expected to involve
conduct prohibited by statute or Federal regulation, including 5 CFR
part 2635 and this part.

Note: The granting of approval for an outside activity does not
relieve the employee of the obligation to abide by all applicable
laws governing employee conduct nor does approval constitute
a sanction of any violation. Approval involves an assessment
that the general activity as described on the submission does
not appear likely to violate any criminal statutes or other ethics
rules. Employees are reminded that during the course of an
otherwise approvable activity, situations may arise, or actions
may be contemplated, that, nevertheless, pose ethical
concerns.

Example 1: A clerical employee with a degree in library science
volunteers to work on the acquisitions committee at a local public
library. Serving on a panel that renders advice to a non-Federal
entity is subject to prior approval. Because recommending books for
the library collection normally would not pose a con?ict with the
typing duties assigned the employee, the request would be
approved.

Example 2: While serving on the library acquisitions committee, the
clerical employee in the preceding example is asked to help the
library business of?ce locate a missing book order. Shipment of the
order is delayed because the publisher has declared bankruptcy and
its assets, including inventory in the warehouse, have been frozen to
satisfy the claims of the Internal Revenue Service and other
creditors. The employee may not contact the Federal bankruptcy
trustee to seek, on behalf of the public library, the release of the
books. Even though the employee?s service on the acquisitions
committee had been approved, a criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. 205,
would preclude any representation by a Federal employee of an
outside entity before a Federal court or agency with respect to a
matter in which the United States is a party or has a direct and
substantial interest.

 

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 12 OF 16

Appendix 1, Pg. 12

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT

The Ethics in Government Act, 5 U.S.C. App. § 101, et seq., Executive Order 12674, as amended by Executive Order 12731,
Sections 301 and 7301 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code, and Sections 2635.803 and 5501.106(d) of Title 5 of the Code of Federal
Regulations authorize the collection of this information. Disclosure of this information is mandatory for employees seeking prior
authorization from an agency designee to pursue outside employment or activities pursuant to Sections 2635.803 and 5501.106
(d) of Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations. Failure to provide all or part of the requested information may result in denial of
the request for approval of the outside employment or activity. Falsification of information or failure to file or report information
required to be reported may subject the employee to disciplinary action. Knowing and willful falsification of information required to
be reported may subject the employee to criminal prosecution. The primary use of this information is to allow HHS supervisors,
management officials, and agency ethics officials to make necessary determinations concerning employee requests for prior
approval of outside employment or activities in order to prevent a conflict of interest or other violations of the statutes, regulations,
and executive orders governing employee conduct. The information is also requested, pursuant to 5 C.F.R. §§ 2638.203(b)(9),
(10), and (11), for the purpose of evaluating ethics program administration, as well as the Department’s supplemental ethics
regulations, to determine their continued adequacy and effectiveness in relation to current agency responsibilities and to ensure
that prompt and effective action is taken to remedy violations or potential violations, or appearances thereof, of conflict of interest
and related ethics provisions. Additionally, this information may be disclosed to: (1) the Office of Personnel Management, Office of
Government Ethics, Merit Systems Protection Board, Office of the Special Counsel, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission,
Federal Labor Relations Authority, Federal Service Impasses Panel, Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, and an
arbitrator, in carrying out their functions; (2) a Federal, State, or local agency charged with investigating or prosecuting violations
of, or implementing, the law, in the event there is an indication of a violation or potential violation of civil, criminal or regulatory law;
(3) a Federal, State, or local agency maintaining enforcement records or other pertinent records, such as current licenses, if
necessary to obtain a record relevant to an agency decision concerning the hiring or retention of an employee, the issuance of a
security clearance, the letting of a contract, or the issuance of a license, grant or other benefit; (4) the National Archives and
Records Administration or the General Services Administration in records management inspections; (5) the Office of Management
and Budget during legislative coordination on privacy relief legislation; (6) Federal agencies with power to subpoena other Federal
agencies’ records; (7) a court or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the Government is a party or in order to
comply with a judge-issued subpoena; (8) private firms with which the Department may contract for the purpose of collating,
analyzing, aggregating or otherwise refining records; (9) a Member of Congress or a Congressional office, pursuant to an inquiry
made at the request of the individual who is a subject of the record; (10) the Department of Justice in defense of litigation; and
(11) contractors and other non-Government employees working for the Federal Government to accomplish a function related to an
Office of Government Ethics Government-wide system of records. This confidential report will not be disclosed to any requesting
person unless authorized by law. See the OGE/GOVT-2 Government-wide executive branch system of records.

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 13 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 13

 STAPLE ATTACHMENTS TO THIS PAGE
List each attachment in the space provided and append copies

1.

Syllabus.docx

2.

PMAS_HHS704B.pdf

3.

George Luber 2016 PMAS.pdf

4.

Luber, George invite letter.pdf

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 14 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 14

 ADDITIONAL SPACE
Identify the part and item number to which the additional information refers.

This is a system generated email. Please do not respond.
<?xml:namespace prefix = o />
This is an official notification that your HHS 520: Request for Approval of Outside Activity for your work with Teaching
course at Emory from 8/1/2017 to 7/31/2018 has been reviewed by the CDC Ethics & Compliance Activity, and approved
by the CDC Deputy Ethics Counselor.

You may perform this activity under the following conditions:

1.
2.

3.
4.

5.
6.

This outside teaching activity must not conflict with your official duties.
You may not work on any particular matter, as a CDC employee, that will have a direct or predictable effect on the
financial interests of Teaching course at Emory, or participate in a particular matter involving specific parties if one
of the parties in that matter is Teaching course at Emory, if such participation would cause a reasonable person to
question your impartiality.
Government-financed time, supplies, facilities, or equipment assigned or loaned to you for completion of your
official duties may be used for this outside activity only as permitted by the Information Resources Management
Manual Guide, CDC-8, June 99, updated September 08, “Use of CDC Information Technology Resources.”
You shall not use or permit the use of your official title or position to identify you in connection with your outside
teaching activity, except when it is included as one of several biographical details and such information is given to
identify you in connection with your presentations, provided that your title or position is given no more prominence
than other significant biographical details.
You may not include non-public information in your teaching materials or in presentations, and you may not make
statements that could be construed as making a commitment on behalf of CDC, or statements that could be
perceived as if you were speaking on behalf of CDC.
You may not represent Teaching course at Emory before any Federal agency, or Federal court, with the intent to influence
Government action, or where the Federal Government has a substantial interest.

7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.

You may not engage in compensated work on an HHS-funded grant, contract, cooperative agreement, cooperative
research and development agreement, or other similar project or arrangement authorized by statute.
You may not provide, for compensation, services on behalf of an organization to prepare, or assist in the
preparation of any grant applications, contract proposals, program reports, or other documents intended for
submission to HHS.
You may receive compensation for this outside teaching activity, so long as you are teaching a course that is part of
the regular curriculum of an accredited educational institution.
You must disqualify yourself from all official actions involving this outside entity, as well as all matters that would
affect the outside entity’s class of similarly-situated organizations generally.
For more specific information concerning this outside activity, refer to Subpart H -- Outside Activities, of the
Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch, and Section 5501.106 of the HHS
Supplemental Standards of Ethical Conduct.
Please note that if this activity is performed during normal working hours, you must be on approved leave.

Thanks,

Ethics & Compliance Activity

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 15 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 15

 ADDITIONAL SPACE (continued)
Identify the part and item number to which the additional information refers.

Department of Health and Human Services
Office of the Secretary
Office of the General Counsel
Ethics Division
Washington, DC 20201
(202) 690-7258

HHS-520 (1/06) (Previous Editions Obsolete)

PAGE 16 OF 16

Appendix I, Pg. 16

 14 November, 2018

To whom it may concern,
I had the pleasure of serving as Principal Investigator of a series of CDC-sponsored projects assessing
and mitigating the health effects of climate change in Alaska. The work has been well received
professionally, and has been published frequently, most recently in Climatic Change 137(3). Dr. Luber
was an important part of this work, both as a sponsor and then as a representative of the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention in our meetings with local and tribal leadership.
Following the 2016 CSTE meetings taking place in Anchorage, from June 19-21, I accompanied Dr. Luber
and his colleagues on a site visit to Barrow, AK, departing on the evening of the 21st. Following our
return from Barrow on June 22nd, and because Dr Luber’s flight wasn't until the evening of the following
day, I suggested that we visit another potential study site in Whittier on Friday the 23rd.
I was with him throughout the entire visit to Whittier, during which we discussed the current projects
and next steps moving forward as well as did some sight-seeing. We viewed the receding Portage
Glacier, spoke with local fishermen, and visited a salmon-spawning ground with reducing water flow
associated with reduced snowpack. I never observed Dr. Luber to reveal any impairment, either in action
or speech, that might be associated with substance use, nor did I hear him refer to experiencing such an
impairment.
I have always been impressed with Dr. Luber’s expertise and professionalism during his site visits, and
felt that his actions reflected well on the CDC.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions.

Respectfully,

David L. Driscoll, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Driscoll907@gmail.com

Appendix J, Pg. 1

 Climate Change Sessions at APHA Annual Meeting 2016
Saturday

9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.

Sunday

Day Time

2:30 p.m. - 3:30 p.m.
2:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
6:00 p.m. - 8:00 p.m.
8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.
8:50 a.m. - 9:10 a.m.
9:09 a.m. - 9:22 a.m.
10:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.

Monday

10:30 a.m. - 11:30 a.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
10:56 a.m. - 11:09 a.m.
12:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
2:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
3:30 a.m. - 3:50 p.m.
6:30 a.m. - 8:00 a.m.
8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.
8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.

Tuesday

9:30 a.m. - 9:50 a.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
12:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
12:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
12:30 p.m. - 2:00 p.m.
2:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m.
2:30 p.m. - 2:50 p.m.

Wednesday

4:30 p.m. - 6:00 p.m.
8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.
10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m.

Title

Session

Type

Program

Climate Change and Health: Building Your Expertise and Leadership for a 21st-Century Climate for Health (Kim Knowlton, Patrick L.
Kinney, Charles B. Beard, John M. Balbus, Meighen Speiser)

1005.0

Course

n/a

2052.0
n/a
288.1
304.0

Poster
Social
Round-table
Social

Public Health Nursing
Environment
Center for Public Health Policy
Environment

3053.0

Round-table

Occupational Health and Safety

3097.0
3040.0

Oral
Oral

Veterinary Public Health
International Health

3079.0

Poster

Environment

3078.0

Poster

Environment

3164.0

Oral

Occupational Health and Safety

3137.0

Oral

Environment

3152.0
3272.0

Oral
Oral

International Health
Veterinary Public Health

3320.0

Oral

Center for Public Health Policy

3377.0

Oral

Veterinary Public Health

401.0
4026.0

Oral
Oral

Environment
Epidemiology

4023.0

Oral

Environment

4017.1

Oral

Community Health Planning and
Policy Development

3139.0

Oral

Epidemiology

4115.0
4206.2
4233.0
4199.0

Oral
Oral
Oral
Oral

Environment
Center for Public Health Policy
International Health
Aging & Public Health

4282.0

Oral

Center for Public Health Policy

4285.0

Oral

Center for Public Health Policy

4272.0

Oral

Environment

Creating a Global Environmental Health Certificate for Nurses (Erin Flynn, Barbara Sattler, Kelley Booth, Catharine McKeever)
Building Healthy Communities Topic Committee Tour
Climate Changes Health: Addressing the Most Pressing Public Health Issue of Our Time (Metropolitan Group)
U.S. Climate Health Alliance & APHA Climate Change and Health Topic Committee Social Hour, with support from ecoAmerica
Worker health, climate change and policy: An example from Costa Rica (Jennifer Crowe, Maria Nilsson, Catharina Wesseling, Tord
Kjellstrom)
Zoonosis: A Global Threat to Humans (Stephanie Baiyasi)
Public Health Co-Benefits of Climate Change Mitigation in the Philippines' Wastewater Sector (Anna Belova, David Mills)
Climate Change and Health (Jennifer Kreslake, Patricia Koman, Samar Khoury, Kathy Dervin, David Driscoll, June Flora, Kelly Squires,
Brooke Sommerfeldt, Charles Lee)
President's Task Force on Environmental Health Risks and Safety Risks to Children: Federal Collaborative Efforts to Improve Children's
Health (Ruth Etzel, Sandra Howard)
Climate Change: The Hot Get Hotter and The Dry Get Drier (Elizabeth Carlton, Lee S. Newman, Balaji Rajagopalan, Richard Johnson,
Jason Glaser, Liliana Tenney, David Wegman)
Climate change and human health: Findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Scientific Assessment (John Balbus, Marcus
Sarofim, Neal Fann, Charles B. Beard, Juli Trtanj, Allison Crimmins)
Triple Bottom Line: Making the Business Case for Health, Human Rights and Environmental Protection (Sarah Kalloch)
Human-Animal Journeys: Disease and Climate Change (Dennis Lawler, Laura Kahn)
Planting Healthier Air: An assessment of the potential for trees to reduce air pollution and cool cities to enhance human health
(Robert McDonald, Timm Kroeger, Aruni Bhatnagar, Carol Mee)
Indigenous One Health in the Arctic, A Systematic Literature Review of Circumpolar Zoonoses (Christopher Nelson, Sandra Romain,
Meghan Davis)
Cross-component climate change and health meeting
Special Session - Nutrition and Climate Change - Lessons in Public Health Epidemiology (Samuel Soret, Nico Rizzo)
Understanding disparity in health impacts of climate change and extreme events in the U.S (Janet Gamble, Daniel Dodgen, Joanna
Watson, Martha Berger, Stephanie Herring, Lesley Jantarasami)
Centralizing Frontline Community Leadership in the Movement Towards Environmental/Social Justice and Health Equity (Jacqueline
Patterson, Pamela Pugh, Frances Gilcreast)
Special Session - Public Health Perspectives on Fuel Combustion, Climate Change and Health (M. Harvey Brenner, Michael Brauer,
George Luber)
Just transition: Health equity in a carbon-free future (James Larson, Charlotte Brody, Jacqueline Patterson, Kyla Retzer)
Making the Connection: Climate Changes Health (Mona Sarfaty, Nse Obot Witherspoon, Richard Jackson, Susan Clayton)
Climate change -The Science, Effects on Health, and Opportunities For Public Health Professionals (Rose Schneider)
Healthy Food Policies for Healthy Communities of All Ages (Kathy Sykes, Robert Lawrence, Ann Cooper, Wenonah Hauter)
Building Resilience Against Climate Effects - How Health Departments are Preparing for Climate Change (Micah Hahn, Paul Schramm,
Matt Cahillane, Kathleen Bush)
California's Health in All Policies Task Force: Advancing health, equity, and environmental sustainability (Julia Caplan)
Health equity and climate change: A collaborative session with APHA Caucuses of under-served communities (Michael Schmeltz,
Lawrence Palinkas, Cheryl Levine, Fernando Pineda-Reyes, June Spector, Charles Lee)
Informing climate change adaptation strategies through community-engaged research on personal heat exposure (Julia Gohlke, David
Hondula, Christopher Uejio, Evan Kuras, Sheila Tyson, Kristie Ebi)
Climate change, cities, and health (Maggie Grabow, Jennifer Miller, Jason Vargo, Jonathan Patz, Howard Frumkin)
Invited Session on Climate Change (in collaboration with Environment section)
Perceived health harms from climate change among vulnerable populations in the United States (Jennifer Kreslake, Mona Sarfaty,
Connie Roser-Renouf, Anthony Leiserowitz, Edward Maibach)

5037.0

Oral

Environment

5091.0
5107.0

Oral
Oral

Environment
Law

5086.0

Round-table

Black Caucus of Health Workers

APHA Staff Sponsored

Appendix K, Pg.1

   

Manage H-?cur ?eccunt :cr ?r?ea. f. how - Setup - Gecrgia F'a- 



555 ?5-135 The l?Jet'r'r'CI'ltT'rce

 
  



Sign In Careers .3 ?eccur:
Features ecsrtetite far Regrets rec' it-feefrng Attendees:
Ereate ycur schedule
i. Fatrcrite Items

in Access ycur schedule any device

frict'wc'uars netregraterea ferthe greens are
wei'ccme fa crease the but wt ce ups-eta te
create schec?ates er wew sessien 

NDTE: The share features will With the
APHJJI 2' star?Fem Arr-"ice: Meeting Maurie App


?retrse c; Day
Sicwse t; Fl 
Jester Essa-24's

.1 Incaest Incas

Flethurchase ?eeting Recordings - 

l- 
I. El

?3 3i are

't?t'ashingta" Pest IE Elaine-ah 

[Ell - I: Annua: Meeting E's. is?. 

i El '3 at 

Nettlis - watch T's" 

ll Tce l-urf'sgtc-r- Fest 5? Canvas ij'El Mail - Luaer. Eea'c- 

C1

 
 
  

APHA 2015

Annual Expre-

DENVER

seesaw dear. 

   
    
  

c: Pit-1t

Hill-II..- Hu??n?l


til-t:

 

3139: Special Sessien - Peptic Health Perspectives en Fue: Cembustier?i. Climate Change and Heath: Establistied Facts and Hex-s
Disccseries

Mendey?. Dumber 31. 2316 AM - 1233"] PM



The purpcse cfthis sessien is tc initiate a discussicn and awareness amcng researchers. pclicy' matters educatcrs. and public health practiticners c? the cf [3:32 and 
IiIJ-ecl carbcn pcllutants cn climate change and thus an immediate and Icng-term and cuerall glcbal public health. Current research and new.I dieccueries are indicating
that climate change have ehcrt- and Icng-term effects cn public health and glcbal mcrtalitgt This sessicn will ere-title an c'Jenriew cf current research in the ?elds 
enuircnmental health and health tc ascertain the impact at ISIS-2. carbcn pcllutants and cuerall greenhcuse gases en glcbal and US public health ?his presides the
at current and future pclicg etEcrts tc recluce the harmful effects cf climate change en the public'e health. Present strategies to mitigate the effects at climate
change ccntinue tc ancl challenges Epidemiclcgists have rmpc-rtant tc matte. including surveillance and research cn climate change and glcbal
health. and educaticn cfthe public health ccmmunity.

Learning Objectives:

tclentifgt the current and Icng-ten'r- impact cfctimate change an glcbal public health and mcrtality by the majcr pcllulants which tc climate change. Describe the impact cf climate
change en the varicus eliagncses cfillness and mcrtality' as well as pclitical and mental health effects Evaluate current apprcaches tc climate and health rist: management
Analyze the impact cf climate change an public health taking patterns at fc-ssil fuel ccnsumpticn and the pc-Iitical ccntest

Drganizers
72?. Her-:e-J Brenner Fh Ei.

Texas Hearth Science Genre-f Department ef?ehawcra! ena' GcU'nmunef Health ti Saba-sic? nubile Heelrt'.? .Ichne Hus-pulses 

".ica Flrazc. F'er Br Se.
Linda Leavers-ff

 

12cc PM
El

:r 
'l El-

 

Appendix L, Pg. 1

November 10, 2018
To whom this may concern:
I attended the American Public Health Association Annual Meeting from October 30 to
November 2, 2016. On the morning of October 31, I was attending a session on Climate Change
and Health where Dr. George Luber was presenting. Shortly after the session began, while I was
sitting in the rear of the room, Dr. Luber entered the room, breathing heavily, and sat next to me,
as we are colleagues and know each other. He then began to tell me that he was late (by about 15
minutes) because of an error on a schedule that had been distributed by the APHA. I told him
that I noticed the error as well and was wondering why the session was poorly attended. Aside
from looking like he had just run a mile in his suit, Dr. Luber appeared normal. He did not
appear haggard, or hung-over, nor did he smell of alcohol. He told me that he was in his hotel
room, doing some work, when a colleague informed him that the session he was to speak at was
in fact on Monday, not on Tuesday as the schedule incorrectly noted, and that he had rushed to
make it to the session. When his turn to speak came, Dr. Luber presented his material quite
lucidly and professionally. I did not observe any impairment in his presentation.
Thank you for your attention.
Sincerely,

Chris Rea, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Associate Program Officer
crea@nas.edu

500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001
Phone 202.334.1973 E-mail gulfprogram@nas.edu www.nas.edu/gulf

Appendix M, Pg. 1