Opinion ID: 4471463
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: june 2018: proposed removal

Text: In June 2018, the agency proposed to remove Ms. Knowles from federal employment based on two charges. The first charge was “failure to cooperate” and was supported by two specifications which both relate to Ms. Knowles’s failure to address questions and issues from the agency’s Privacy Office. The second charge was “failure to safeguard confidential information.” The second charge was supported by eleven specifications alleging that Ms. Knowles sent confidential veteran information to her personal email address. With respect to the first Carr factor, the Board’s findings of strong evidence to support both charges are amply supported by the evidence. The record contains a copy of the Privacy Office’s confirmation memorandum, listing all of the steps Ms. Knowles should take with respect to the confidential information she sent to her personal email address, which Ms. Knowles did not sign. J.A. 127. The record in front of the Board also contained copies of several email messages containing the confidential information Ms. Knowles sent to her personal email account. J.A. 27. Ms. Knowles did not deny the facts alleged in the specifications. Id. As to the second Carr factor, the Board found no evidence in the record that the officer proposing the removal suffered negative consequences as a result of Ms. Knowles’s disclosure nor any other evidence suggesting that such a disclosure motivated her to issue the notice of removal. J.A. 27–28. For the reasons provided earlier, we find that the Board made appropriate credibility determinations and substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. Because Ms. Knowles’s arguments and the Board’s finding as to the third Carr factor are no different than what was KNOWLES v. DVA 11 presented for the other personnel actions discussed above, we affirm the Board’s findings here as well. We have considered Ms. Knowles’s remaining argu- ments and find them unpersuasive.