To Whom It May Concern,

I, Thasha A. Boyd, have ongoing appeals filed with the Merit Systems Protection 

Board (“MSPB”), and I believe that as a result of the nature of my allegations, 

the MSPB has resorted to seeking a revision of the regulations that govern their 

authority.

Specifically, on November 8, 2013, the MSPB issued a Federal Register Notice 

(Vol. 78, No. 217) upon which it is proposing changes regulations related to the 

MSPB’s jurisdiction and the burdens of proof required from appellants and 

agencies. 

I reviewed the proposed changes and it appears that the MSPB is elevating the 

burden of proving jurisdiction for appellants with Individual Right of Action 

(“IRA”/whistleblower), Veterans Employment Opportunities Act (“VEOA”), and 

Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (“USERRA”) 

appeals. 

This burden of proof is being shifted from “preponderance of the evidence” to 

“proof on the merits” and presents a problem to appellants who already have to 

deal with the agencies holding all the cards when it comes to obtaining evidence 

to present to the MSPB; and, allows the MSPB to dismiss appeals before the 

opportunity to seek evidence through discovery is allowed. Additionally, it 

allows the agency dispute jurisdiction by fabricating evidence presented as 

“facts” in the record. 

Why do I believe this proposed change to regulations relates to my pending 

appeals? I am a federal whistleblower and applied for employment (over six 

applications over the timeframe of over a year) with the Department of 

Homeland Security (“DHS”), United States Citizenship and Immigration 

Services (“USCIS”). 

I met the requirements to be selected (I was a former DHS/USCIS employee and 

am applying for the same position(s) I held with them); however, upon 

conclusion of my background investigation (despite the fact that I left 

DHS/USCIS with a secret clearance), DHS/USCIS alleged that it did not know 

how long it would take to finish my background investigation because of the 

“issue” of the 10-day suspension issued against me by the United States 

Department of Labor (“USDOL”). 

However, both DHS/USCIS and the Office of Personnel Management (“OPM”) 

would not interview anyone from USDOL regarding my tenure as an employee 

there - much less the 10-day suspension. Please note that I contend that the 10-

day suspension (which is a subject of my other appeals with the MSPB) was 

issued against me by USDOL because I made disclosures of fraud, waste, and 

abuse during my tenure at USDOL.
Therefore, I filed my appeals with the MSPB and was issued an “Order to Show 

Cause” - upon which I raised the issues of jurisdiction and burdens of proof. To 

the date of this document, I have not received a determination from the MSPB, 

however, on November 14, 2013, via an article from FedSmith.com I found out 

this week that the MSPB is proposing these changes to its regulations.

If the MSPB is allowed to pass these change in regulations, whistleblowers and 

veterans will suffer. Every appellant and/or his/her representative knows the 

burden of proving their cases in front of the MSPB, and these proposed 

regulations will only make it more difficult. Especially when proving a case 

involving whistleblowers and veterans is often based on circumstantial evidence 

(i.e. preponderance of evidence standard). 

Additionally, agencies will be allowed to continue to retaliate against federal 

whistleblowers through denial of employment and fallacious background 

investigations; and, the collusion of agencies to carry out this retaliation will 

only increase. 

Therefore, I do not agree with the proposed changes to the MSPB’s regulations 

and am appalled that the MSPB has resorted to “changing the rules of the game” 

- which appears to be based on arguments I raised in my ongoing appeals - to 

protect the agencies against appellants who already have a higher burden. 

Sincerely,

Thasha A. Boyd