A Department of Energy scientist told Congress she believes she was fired for enthusiastically answering questions about a program she ran for years that department managers wanted to kill, with both Democrats and Republicans agreeing that the agency had overstepped in firing her.
Noelle Metting, a radiation biologist and former head of the department’s Low Dose Radiation Research Program, testified she was fired for enthusiastically answering questions about the program, which was seen as lobbying by her supervisors.
The program researches how low doses of radiation affect workers in the nuclear industry and how citizens could be affected by a “dirty bomb,” an explosive with radioactive material.
Metting, the leader of the program from 2007-14, ran afoul of her supervisors following an October 2014 briefing on the program to House Science, Space and Technology Committee staffers.
She attended the hearing to answer scientific questions from staffers. Two supervisors attended the hearing to provide the department’s strategic goals for the program.
Metting, who said she had never had a disciplinary issue before her dismissal, told the committee she answered questions from staff members, who were engaged and knew the program well. After the briefing was over, her two supervisors accused her of lobbying on behalf of the program, which the department wanted to kill to direct more resources to studying climate change.
She said she was fired days later for being “too enthusiastic and lobbying for the program.”
“They were very upset with me talking about the science in the briefing itself, which was a good opportunity to talk about the program,” Metting said. “That’s why I was just very surprised when they were upset about that. We were not lobbying, we were talking.
“The intimidation and retaliation in this case is somewhat self-evident.”
Republicans and Democrats alike criticized the department for how it treated Metting, who was out of work for months before being rehired in a lesser role.
Rep. Barry Loudermilk, R-Ga., said the committee wanted to reauthorize the Low Dose Radiation Research Program because it’s important to health and national security. But it wasn’t a part of the Obama administration’s climate change goals so it had to go, he said.
In questioning Sharlene Weatherwax, associate director of Biological & Environmental Research at the department, Loudermilk produced an email in which Weatherwax instructed Metting’s supervisors to use a briefing with Senate staffers to dissuade them from introducing a companion bill reauthorizing the Low Dose program.
He said that’s exactly the kind of lobbying that the department fired Metting for.
“There was, indeed, an intention to persuade Congress to go and do something, which is the definition of lobbying,” he said, “which is what Dr. Metting was fired for. I think there’s some hypocrisy here.”
The fact that the department had overstepped in firing Metting was a rare point of agreement in the usually divided House Science, Space and Technology Committee.
Rep. Don Beyer, D-Va., the only Democrat in attendance for vast swaths of the hearing, said the department was “overzealous” in firing her. He said Democratic staffers were not invited to the briefing in October 2014, so he couldn’t attest to exactly what happened, but he said he was disappointed that a scientist would be fired for answering questions about her own program.
“I’d really expect more from DOE leadership on this front,” he said.
Weatherwax, who was not at the briefing and not directly involved in the decision to fire Metting, was the only witness the department provided for the hearing. The two supervisors present in the briefing, Todd Anderson and Julie Curruthers, declined to testify in front of the committee.
Weatherwax did not provide an alternative reason for Metting’s dismissal, aside from alluding to “other issues” that she did not discuss.
Instead of providing specifics on Metting’s case, Weatherwax mostly acted as a sounding board for lawmakers’ complaints about how the Energy Department handled Metting’s dismissal. She was slammed for being aware of an effort to lobby the Senate through committee briefings and defended the process the department went through in deciding to fire Metting.
“I feel it’s not my position to make the determination on what course of action should be taken,” Metting said when asked by Beyer if the department overreacted.
