Opinion
October 31, 1994
Adjudged that the determination is confirmed and the proceeding is dismissed on the merits, with costs.
There was substantial evidence in the record to support the respondents' findings of fact (see, Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222). The petitioner, by all accounts, appeared to be impaired and unable to perform the duties of his employment without a risk of injury to himself and to those whose safety he was employed to safeguard. In light of the sensitive nature of the petitioner's employment and the fact that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that the urine test would turn up evidence that the petitioner was impaired, the Deputy Chief's order that the petitioner submit to a drug test was reasonable (see, Matter of Caruso v. Ward, 72 N.Y.2d 432; Matter of Longo v Dolce, 192 A.D.2d 157; Matter of Barretto v. City of New York, 157 A.D.2d 116). Accordingly, the petitioner's failure to comply with this order properly served as a ground for disciplinary action pursuant to Department of Public Safety, White Plains Fire Bureau Rules and Manual of Procedure § 126.
Further, the penalty of dismissal, when considered in light of all of the circumstances of this case, was not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one's sense of fairness (see, 300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v. State Div. of Human Rights, 45 N.Y.2d 176; Matter of Pell v. Board of Educ., 34 N.Y.2d 222, 223, supra). In this regard, we note that a high degree of deference is to be accorded to an agency's determination of the appropriate penalty to be imposed (see, Matter of Berenhaus v. Ward, 70 N.Y.2d 436).
We have examined the petitioner's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.