Unpublished Dispositionlaserick A. Reed, Petitioner, v. United States Postal Service, Respondent, 826 F.2d 1071 (Fed. Cir. 1987)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit - 826 F.2d 1071 (Fed. Cir. 1987) July 13, 1987

Before MARKEY, Chief Judge, NICHOLS, Senior Circuit Judge, and BISSELL, Circuit Judge.

PER CURIAM.


DECISION

The decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (board), Docket No. CH07528610481, sustaining United States Postal Service's (agency's) removal of Laserick A. Reed (Reed) for (1) submission of false medical certificates to secure approved leave and (2) unauthorized curtailment of mail, is affirmed.

OPINION

Substantial evidence supports the board's determinations that Reed had admitted the agency's charges were true, that Reed raised alcoholism as an affirmative defense, and that the agency had previously suspended Reed for seven days.

The record does not support Reed's assertion that the board did not consider Reed's entire work record in upholding his removal. Substantial evidence supports the Administrative Judge's determination that the agency weighed relevant factors as prescribed in Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 MSPB 313 (1981), before proposing Reed's removal, and that an appropriate penalty was selected. We will not disturb a choice of penalty within the agency's discretion unless the severity of its action appears totally unwarranted in light of all relevant factors. See Yeschick v. Department of Transportation, 801 F.2d 383, 384-85 (Fed. Cir. 1986); DeWitt v. Department of the Navy, 747 F.2d 1442, 1445 (Fed. Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1074 (1985).

We affirm on the basis of the board's decision because we do not find that it was arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law, or that it was obtained without procedures required by law, rule, or regulation having been followed, or that it was unsupported by substantial evidence. 5 U.S.C. § 7703(c) (1982); see Hayes v. Department of the Navy, 727 F.2d 1535, 1537 (Fed. Cir. 1984).