C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER I—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT › SUBCHAPTER B—CIVIL SERVICE REGULATIONS › PART 339—MEDICAL QUALIFICATION DETERMINATIONS › Subpart B—Medical Standards, Physical Requirements, and Medical Evaluation Programs

5 C.F.R. § 339.203

Physical requirements

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An agency may establish physical requirements for individual positions without OPM approval when such requirements are considered essential for performance of the duties of a specific position. Physical requirements must be clearly supported by the actual duties of the position, documented in the position description, and supported by a study(ies) or evaluation(s) establishing physical requirement(s) is job-related to the occupation(s).

(b) An applicant or employee may not be disqualified arbitrarily on the basis of physical requirements or other criteria that do not relate specifically to performance of the duties of a specific position.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2011–2024 · leading case: David Atkins v. Ken Salazar, Sec'y, 677 F.3d 667 (5th Cir. 2011).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
David Atkins v. Ken Salazar, Sec'y, 677 F.3d 667 (5th Cir. 2011). “” 5 C.F.R. § 339.203 . Similarly, “[a]gencies may establish periodic [medical] examination .”
Reynaldo Alvara v. Dep't of Homeland Sec., 2014 MSPB 77 (MSPB 2014). “In so holding, the Board relied on 5 C.F.R. § 339.203 , which authorizes agencies to “establish physical requirements for individual positions without [Office of Personnel Management (OPM)] approval when such requirements are considered essential for successful job performance .”
Celso Maldonado v. Dep't of the Air Force (MSPB 2024). · cites it 2× “PFR File, Tab 1 at 21 (citing 5 C.F.R. § 339.203 ). This is the first time that the appellant is raising a claim of harmful error; below, he withdrew his retaliation affirmative defense, and he only raised this claim of error as a challenge to the first charge, IAF, Tab 20 at…”
David Atkins v. Ken Salazar, Sec'y (5th Cir. 2012). “” 5 C.F.R. § 339.203 . Similarly, “[a]gencies may establish periodic [medical] examination .”
Lisa M. Davenport v. Dep't of the Navy (MSPB 2015). “Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Board have long-standing precedent governing the adjudication of an adverse action based on a charge of physical or medical inability to perform.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.