(a) In all grievances other than those concerning disciplinary actions, the grievant has the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the grievance is meritorious.

(b) Where a grievant establishes that an evaluation contained falsely prejudicial material which may have been a substantial factor in an agency action, and the question is presented whether the agency would have taken the same action had the evaluation not contained that material, the burden will shift to the agency to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it would have done so.

(c) Where a grievant establishes that a procedural error occurred which is of such a nature that it may have been a substantial factor in an agency action with respect to the grievant, and the question is presented whether the agency would have taken the same action had the procedural error not occurred, the burden will shift to the agency to establish, by a preponderance of the evidence, that it would have done so.

[50 FR 31356, Aug. 2, 1985]

In grievances over disciplinary actions, the agency has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the disciplinary action was justified, provided, however, that in a grievance concerning suspension without pay pursuant to section 610(a)(3) of the Act, the Board's determination of the grievance shall be limited to:

(a) Whether the required procedures have been followed; and

(b) Whether there exists reasonable cause to believe a crime has been committed for which a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed and there is a nexus between the conduct and the efficiency of the Service.

For this purpose, reasonable cause to believe that a member has committed a crime for which a sentence of imprisonment may be imposed shall be defined as a member of the Service having been convicted of, and sentence of imprisonment having been imposed for, a job-related crime.

[56 FR 55459, Oct. 28, 1991]

In separation for cause cases, the agency has the burden of establishing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed separation is for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service.

[50 FR 31356, Aug. 2, 1985]