Opinion ID: 212000
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Board Regulations

Text: 31 Board regulations provide that if there is a hearing, [i]n cases in which the agency has taken an action against an employee, the agency will present its case first. 5 C.F.R. § 1201.57(a) (2002). If the appellant waives the right to a hearing, the record will close on the date the judge sets as the final date for the receipt or filing of submissions of the parties. Id. § 1201.58(b). Once the record closes, no additional evidence or argument will be accepted unless the party submitting it shows that the evidence was not readily available before the record closed. Id. § 1201.58(c). 32 Because Schucker waived her right to a hearing, 5 C.F.R. § 1201.58(b) governs. Under that regulation, the Administrative Judge sets the final date for the receipt of submissions. In this case, the Administrative Judge set two dates. Specifically, the Administrative Judge ordered that the record remain open until November 13, 2002 for receipt of evidence and argument from both parties and until November 20, 2002 for receipt of final argument from both parties. Submission Order. The order made clear that after November 20, 2002, the record would be closed. Id. Despite the warning that [o]nce the record closes, no additional evidence or argument will be accepted unless the party submitting it shows that the evidence was not readily available before the record closed, 5 C.F.R. § 1201.58(c), both parties attempted to submit evidence after November 13, 2002 without a showing. 33 On November 19, 2002, with its final argument, the Agency filed two supplemental affidavits and requested in writing that the Administrative Judge accept the evidence because it was unable to anticipate or address, in its prior submissions Schucker's evidence. The Agency characterized this evidence as rebuttal evidence but did not argue that the evidence was not readily available before November 13. 34 On November 20, 2002, Schucker submitted the Taft affidavit and declaration as attachments in support of her final argument. Schucker did not request in writing that the Administrative Judge accept the evidence, nor did Schucker contend that the evidence was not readily available before November 13, 2002. On November 22, 2002, in a written response to the Agency's motion to strike her November 20, 2002, submission, Schucker described Taft's affidavit and declaration as rebuttal evidence. 35 In the Initial Decision, the Administrative Judge did not consider either party's purported rebuttal evidence. Neither the Administrative Judge nor the Board explained the Board's policy on accepting rebuttal evidence and how that policy affected the decision to ignore the parties' rebuttal evidence. Because the Administrative Judge ruled in favor of the Agency, only Schucker appealed this evidentiary decision.