“To sustain an agency's construction of its authority, we need not find that its construction is the only reasonable one, or even that it is the result we would have reached had the question arisen in the first instance in judicial proceedings.”
How later courts described this case
- “To sustain an agency's construction of its authority, we need not find that its construction is the only reasonable one, or even that it is the result we would have reached had the question arisen in the first instance in judicial proceedings.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MILLER, Senior Circuit Judge,
dissenting in part.
The record shows that, in setting the COLA for appellants, “living costs” sub *1571 stantially higher than those in the District of Columbia were reduced to reflect commissary and exchange privileges of employees in Hawaii — without taking into account such privileges of otherwise similarly situated employees in the District of Columbia. Thus, any differential between “living costs” in Hawaii and those in the District of Columbia would have been understated. OPM’s interpretation of “living costs” in the District of Columbia under 5 U.S.C. § 5941 is arbitrary, and no rational basis for the flawed differential appears.
In all other respects, I am in agreement with the majority opinion.