C.F.R. » Title 5 » CHAPTER XCVII—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY—OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT) › PART 9701—DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT SYSTEM › Subpart F—Adverse Actions

5 C.F.R. § 9701.607

Mandatory removal offenses

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

(a) The Secretary has the sole, exclusive, and unreviewable discretion to identify offenses that have a direct and substantial adverse impact on the Department's homeland security mission. Such offenses will be identified in advance as part of the Department's implementing directives, publicized via notice in the Federal Register, and made known to all employees on an annual basis.

(b) When a mandatory removal action is proposed under this section, employees will have the right to advance notice, an opportunity to respond, a written decision, and a review by the Mandatory Removal Panel as set forth in subpart G of this part.

(c) Prior to the issuance of a notice to the employee in question, the Secretary or designee will review and approve a proposed notice of removal on the grounds that the employee has committed a mandatory removal offense.

(d) The Secretary has the sole, exclusive, and unreviewable discretion to mitigate the removal penalty.

(e) Nothing in this section limits the discretion of the Department or any component thereof to remove employees for offenses other than those identified by the Secretary as mandatory removal offenses.

(f) Nothing in this subpart limits the discretion of the Department or any component thereof to remove an employee based on the revocation of that employee's security clearance.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2005–2005 · leading case: Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Chertoff, 385 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2005).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nat'l Treasury Employees Union v. Chertoff, 385 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2005). “5 C.F.R. § 9701.607 (b). That decision would be subject to review by the Mandatory Review Panel, which would conduct a hearing and issue a written decision binding on DHS.”
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.